viously given, an analysis of the formal law itself does
not yield these elements. They belong to a certain class of values
assigned it, not to the law itself; hence it is only when deity is
conceived under the conditions of numerical oneness that the tripartite
constitution of a whole number makes itself felt, and is applied to the
divine nature.
The essence of a logical unit is identity, of a mathematical,
difference. The qualities of the latter are limitations--_so much of a
thing_; those of the former are coincidences--_that kind of a thing_.
To be sure it is no easy matter to free ourselves from the habit of
confounding identity and individuality. We must cultivate a much greater
familiarity with the forms of thought, and the character of universals,
than every-day life requires of us, before the distinction grows facile.
The individual, not the species, exists; our own personality, our
thinking faculty is what we are most certain of. On it rests the reality
of everything, the Unknown as well. But the rejection of a mathematical
unity does not at all depreciate the force of such an argument.
Individuality regarded as mathematical unity rests on the deeper law of
logical identity from which the validity of numbers rises; it is not
the least diminished, but intensified, in the conception of a Supreme
Intelligence, as the font of truth, though the confinements and
limitations of the mathematical unit fall away, and all contrasts
disappear.
The reverse conception, however, has prevailed in religious systems,
polytheistic or monotheistic. Man has projected on the cloudy unknown
the magnified picture of his own individuality and shuddered with terror
at the self-created plantasm,[TN-9] like the peasant frightened by the
spectre of the Brocken, formed by the distorted image of himself. In his
happier moments, with his hopes gratified, the same vice of thought,
still active, prevented him from conceiving any higher ideal than his
better self. "Everywhere the same tendency was observed; the gods,
always exaggerations of human power and passions, became more and more
personifications of what was most admirable and lovable in human nature,
till in Christianity there emerged the avowed ideal man." What could it
end in but anthropomorphism, or pantheism, or, rejecting both, a
Religion of Humanity, with a background of an imbecile Unknowable?
Is it necessary to point out how none of these conclusions can satisfy
the enli
|