nite, be sure that
within it you will find some one aspect of God. But to continue.

"You have appropriated to yourself a place in the Infinite of Number;
you have fitted it to your own proportions by creating (if indeed you
did create) arithmetic, the basis on which all things rest, even your
societies. Just as Number--the only thing in which your self-styled
atheists believe--organized physical creations, so arithmetic, in the
employ of Number, organized the moral world. This numeration must
be absolute, like all else that is true in itself; but it is purely
relative, it does not exist absolutely, and no proof can be given of its
reality. In the first place, though Numeration is able to take account
of organized substances, it is powerless in relation to unorganized
forces, the ones being finite and the others infinite. The man who can
conceive the Infinite by his intelligence cannot deal with it in its
entirety; if he could, he would be God. Your Numeration, applying to
things finite and not to the Infinite, is therefore true in relation to
the details which you are able to perceive, and false in relation to
the Whole, which you are unable to perceive. Though Nature is like unto
herself in the organizing force or in her principles which are infinite,
she is not so in her finite effects. Thus you will never find in Nature
two objects identically alike. In the Natural Order two and two never
make four; to do so, four exactly similar units must be had, and you
know how impossible it is to find two leaves alike on the same tree,
or two trees alike of the same species. This axiom of your numeration,
false in visible nature, is equally false in the invisible universe of
your abstractions, where the same variance takes place in your ideas,
which are the things of the visible world extended by means of their
relations; so that the variations here are even more marked than
elsewhere. In fact, all being relative to the temperament, strength,
habits, and customs of individuals, who never resemble each other, the
smallest objects take the color of personal feelings. For instance, man
has been able to create units and to give an equal weight and value to
bits of gold. Well, take the ducat of the rich man and the ducat of the
poor man to a money-changer and they are rated exactly equal, but to
the mind of the thinker one is of greater importance than the other; one
represents a month of comfort, the other an ephemeral caprice. Two