cosmic origin and validity
to such ideals? If these ideals are not this, then, as Eucken points
out, they are the most tragic illusions conceivable.

When they are acknowledged as cosmic realities, man is in the midst of a
religion of a _universal_ kind. But the acknowledgment of these as
cosmic realities is something more than a concept. The men who have come
to this conclusion required something more than logical arguments in
order to establish this truth. The conclusions were based upon a
_specific (characteristic)_ religious experience of their own. And such
a religious experience was larger and more real than anything that could
be established in the form of concepts concerning it. As we shall notice
in a later chapter, it is somewhat on this account that Eucken
differentiates between _universal_ and _specific (characteristic)_
religion.

It becomes evident that such contents of the new spiritual world cannot
be utilised by man without effort. These realities have to pass from the
region of ideas to the region of actual experiences. In other words,
they must become man's own religion. Man has now become convinced of the
reality of a universal spiritual life as constituting, in a measure, the
[p.53] foundation of the evolution of the soul, and as the goal towards
which he must for ever move. Eucken is unwilling to speculate as to the
origin or the goal of this. The centre of gravity of life must be laid
in what may be known and experienced between these two poles. There is
a certainty which is _intermediate_ between man and the Godhead. It is
when this certainty is realised as an actual portion of the soul that
man becomes competent to carry farther--backward and forward--the
implications of this certainty. And implications of a new kind of
_Weltanschauung_ result from the spiritual experiences of the
_Lebensanschauung_ of the spiritual life. On this matter we shall touch
at a later stage in the inquiry.

At present let us confine our attention to the _intermediate_ reality
which presents itself in a form that is over-individual. It is only when
we pass out of the psychology of the subject--a matter that deals with
the _history_ of mental processes--that we are able to view the meaning
of the realities which are over-individual. As already pointed out,
these realities are not the creations of man's fancy or imagination
after reason has been switched off. They are non-sensuous realities
which have moulded and sha