attire he resumes his former nature, and all his old thoughts and
feelings and impulses come flooding back. Such an experience is of
considerable psychological interest. It exemplifies the
interpenetration of different states of thought and activity. The
contrasts bring home to a man the fact that his spirit is a synthesis
of heterogeneous elements. They force him back on himself. They rouse
in him the dormant sense of personal being. It is the apprehension of
strong contrast in his experience of himself, the apprehension of the
plurality of his being, that accentuates the deep-lying unity. The
more violent the change in the walks of life, the clearer becomes the
concept of the continuity. Civilian or soldier, the man, the person is
the same.

Personality is thrown into relief not only by change of occupation, but
also by moral contrasts. Conflicting passions, opposing motives and
internal debate serve to make a man realise himself. Strong
personalities are often those in whom the conflict between good and
evil is most acute. It is the very opposition of natures which brings
out the personal element into the full light of conscious recognition.

We must now examine human personality in greater detail; we must
indicate its functions and show how it differs from human nature. Only
by coming to grips with this psychological problem is it possible to
appreciate the points at issue in the Christological question and to
judge between catholic and monophysite.

KANT AND THE DUAL CHARACTER OF THE EGO

Kant distinguished the noumenal from the phenomenal ego. The former he
regarded as an idea, the latter as a reality in time. The distinction
corresponds roughly to that between person and nature. The phenomenal
ego is the nature of man. It bears the brunt of the struggle of life.
The noumenal ego is the transcendent personality of the individual--an
idea which pure reason necessarily forms and which practical reason
establishes. Though the Kantian philosophy no longer carries
conviction, it is interesting to see that Kant felt and admitted a
double current in man's being. He recognised that the superficial self
is not the true being of the man. It is not necessary, however, to go
as far as Kant went. We need not with him relegate the core of
personal being to the realm of idea. Granted that personality is not
part of our normal experience as nature is, there are times when the
depths of being are stirr