s _not_ seen,
seem to stand on the same ground as to the exercise of his faith. Things
worldly and religious, simple and profound, plain and mysterious,
practical and theoretical, human and divine, personal and relative,
present and future, near and afar off,--all seem to crowd around him
with a hazy appearance, and he has no definite or certain knowledge
respecting them of which to speak. All the things he has ever read or
heard he seems to have forgotten, or to hold them with a vague and
uncertain tenure. There is nothing within him to rely upon but doubts,
fears, and _may bes_. He lives, moves, and has his being in
uncertainties. He will not positively affirm whether his face is black
or white, his nose long or short, his own or some other person's. He
"guesses" that two and two make four, and that four and three do not
make eight. He "guesses" that blue is not red, and that green is
neither blue nor red. He "guesses" that the earth is globular, but would
not like to assert that it is not a plain. He "guesses" that the sun
gives light by day and the moon by night; but as for affirming either
the one or the other, he would not like to commit himself to such
positiveness. His talk is full of "hopes," "presumes," "may bes,"
"trusts," "guesses," and such-like expressions. He is certainly a
_doubtful_ man to have anything to do with in conversation. I do not say
he is _dangerous_. Far from this, for he has not confidence enough in
your actual materiality to make an assault upon your person; and he has
not _certain_ knowledge sufficient to contend with your opinions, so
that there is no need of apprehension upon either the mental or physical
question. It is difficult to acquire any information from him, for who
likes to add that to his stock of knowledge which is shrouded in doubts,
and to which the communicator will not give the seal of his affirmation?
Of course some knowledge must be held and communicated problematically.
Such we are willing to take in its legitimate character. But our Dubious
talker appears to destroy all distinction and difference, and to arrange
all knowledge in the probable or doubtful category, and hence he has
nothing but doubtful information to impart, which in reality is no
information. To enter into conversation with _Dubious_, therefore, is no
actual benefit to the intellect or the faith. It is harassing,
perplexing, provoking to the man who possesses belief in the certainty
of things. It is to