FOOTNOTES:
[44] W. James, ’09, p. 21.
[45] See Danysz, ’21.
[46] See Danysz, ’21.
[47] See Haldane, ’21; Thouless, ’23.
[48] A confusion of thought easily arises here. It may be absolutely true that 2 and 2 make 4; we may be absolutely right in certain cases to tell a lie; or may find an expression of absolute beauty in some one lovely thing. But we may grow to find that same thing aesthetically unsatisfying; we can imagine a state of society in which it would never be right to lie; while our correct knowledge of elementary arithmetic is something very partial and incomplete considered in relation to mathematical truth as a whole.
[49] It is interesting to note that a scientific treatment of the problem may force an author almost unwittingly to similar conclusions. For instance, in Jevons’ book (’10) the term “God” hardly occurs at all, whereas the phrase “the idea of God” is to be found on nearly every page. If, as we are urging, God as efficient agent in the world and as reality in contact with human beings is outer world organized as idea, the reason for such periphrasis at once appears.
[50] See Prince, ’06 and ’16; Freud, ’22; Jung, ’19; Rivers, ’20; Brown, ’22.
[51] See Trotter, ’19.
[52] See Turner, ’16.
Transcriber’s Note:
Obvious typographic errors have been corrected.