being is embracing space in all directions, and time— past, present and future; the eternity of space and the eternity of time are both within his thought. No one can conceive of space and time as having either beginning or end; time is eternity-duration without beginning or end. The permanent in all time and space is, then, thought or spirit, which, to use the words of Paul, is 'All in all.' Infinite time and infinite space are now present in human thought, without which any human experience would be impossible. The eternity of time and the eternity of space would have no meaning apart from the eternity of thought. It does not, of course, follow that every separate individual has these thoughts consciously in his experience, but they are implicitly present, and only so is man a person-a being of infinite worth. Man is only a person because he thinks the infinite thought of God. This infinite thought now present in man did not begin with the empirical birth of an individual, neither will it perish at his death. There is nothing better or greater than thought; God is the best, therefore God is thought, and without thought He could not be God.

Ego is the body, soul and spirit of infinite space, which is infinite extension, just as ego is the term of greatest extension and greatest intension; it is at once infinite quality and infinite quantity, for quality is the essential nature of quantity; measure consists in the substantial unity of quality and quantity. In speaking of matter, Leibnitz remarks: It is not at all improbable that matter and quantity are really the same thing'; and Hegel adds: In effect these notions differ only in this-that quantity is pure notion, while matter is the same thing in outward existence.' Ego is thus infinite space and infinite time, since it includes both; infinite space contains

6

all finite spaces, and infinite time includes all finite times, just as infinite thought contains all finite thoughts; thus it is that infinite thought, infinite space and infinite time as such are permanent, and are only known by reason-thought, which transcends all finite limitations. But as known to us in their particular or transitory manifestations, thought, space and time are objects of sense-perception as creations in time. Hegel's 'Daseyn' is applied to the transitory forms of being-the finite changeable forms which belong to finite time-Being as being is permanent, while therebeing' is transitory.

This brings us to the consideration of what Kant terms his dogmatic slumber.' He had evidently become deeply interested in Newton's theory of universal gravitation, with its opposing forces of attraction and repulsion, otherwise named centripetal and centrifugal forces, which were conceived by Newton to act independently. These two forces gave to Kant the idea of a possible metaphysical construction of matter, from which he developed the nebular hypothesis to explain the origin of the universe. These forces he called the metaphysical elements of the construction of matter; but an examination of Kant will show that he simply accepted the two forces of gravitation. He did not in reality construct matter from these forces, but accepted matter as being already there, and used them after his fashion to explain the various motions of the heavenly bodies. For His construction of the universe Kant assumes the existence of a nebulous matter. This explains why Hegel says that with Kant God is only an Architect, not a Creator, for with Kant both matter and forces are assumed; they are not logically or scientifically developed. Kant's acceptation of this construction of the universe constituted what

he calls his state of dogmatic slumber. He conceived that he had demonstrated metaphysically the construction of the universe from these two forces, but when Hume claimed to show, in dealing with the relation of cause and effect, that we had not the slightest knowledge of the tie between the two-that in the effect we cannot discern the tie which binds it to the cause, or vice versa, then Kant woke from his dogmatic slumber. Hume declared that the supposed necessary tie was only known to us by custom. Kant saw that Hume's reasoning resulted in scepticism. As Kant could not rest philosophically on mere custom, he was driven to the à priori basis of his transcendental philosophy, for by à priori Kant meant universal necessity. This à priori he found in his categories and in his original transcendental unity of apperception, for he held that the categories had their source in the transcendental unity of apperception. His inquiry began with the question, 'How are synthetic judgments à priori possible?' He endeavoured to attain synthetic judgments à priori by the analogy which he held to exist between the succession in time and the necessary sequence involved between cause and effect. (All sequence in cause and effect takes place in time, hence the idea arises of the necessary connexion between these.) To show by analogy the identity of the two sequences, Kant constructed a huge machinery-his schemata. Mere analogy, however, does not show the universal necessity, which indeed can only be found in the Absolute Infinite Reason-thought of man, that is, in the living thought of God manifested alone in this world in the finite self-consciousness of man. The principle of absolute identity can only be found in the immanent logical dialectical process of reason, and in this form of evolution alone can be found the principle

of demonstrated science. Kant's theory excluded a knowledge of the universality of thought, and therefore, as we could not know the thing-in-itself, the existence of God was necessarily unknowable. If logic as the realm of pure thought, of logical thought, fails as a demonstrated science to prove the existence of God as universal concrete reason, then all moral reflection about what ought to be, or about the moral categorical imperative, is a mere makeshift. With Hegel the demonstrated science of logic is what he calls the logic of the 'pure self-evolving consciousness.' Nay, the Logic, he tells us, is to be understood as the realm of pure thought-as God' (Stirling's Categories, p. 61). This realm is the Truth as it is without or veil or hull-absolute; and so it may be said that this is the Darstellung Gottes; the expression of God as He is in His Eternal essence before the creation of Nature and a finite soul.' Thus Hegel says: From the logical Idea the concrete Idea is distinguished as Spirit, and the absolutely concrete Idea as the Absolute Spirit.' Kant used his reason to show that while we cannot prove by reason the existence of God, yet the atheist cannot prove his nonexistence; thus, God remains unknowable. The aim of Hegel's Philosophy, on the contrary, is to demonstrate that we possess a real knowledge of God, and this is expressed by Stirling when he says: 'It (the Ego) alone is the middle term that is the entire secret of the universe.' He who grasps fully the science of the notion of the ego has obtained the fundamental principle of personality, for only because God and man are egos are they persons. The real and essential nature of man consists in his intellectual capacity of consciously thinking the infinite. Man is therefore at once finite and infinite, because in thought he transcends all limitations and thinks and

knows God. Thought is at once intuitive, reflective and logical, and the philosophy of personality, selfconsciousness, ego, spirit, and thought reveals the fact that thought in man is infinite, and so far demonstrates substantially the identity of Divine and human personality. The Ego or I not only thinks, but the I itself is Thought as Spirit thinking itself as infinite. Now man is absolutely certain that thought as infinite did not come into existence at his birth. Infinite thought is one with the eternal, therefore the essential principle of human personality is one with the personality of God. Only so can man transcend the limits of his finite existence and know consciously in his thought that there is an infinite past, present, and future. Such thought is an infinite eternal 'now in man. This thought is the unity of man's personality in the personality of God. So there is only one infinite-the Finite I in the infinite I-at once Absolute and Relative. It is only a confusion of thought to say that this implies two infinites,' and it is also quite illogical to think that the idea of infinite thought in man is equivalent to saying, 'Be man no more; be thyself God.' It is the thought of the infinite in man that distinguishes him from the animal. Green says that to know God we must be God; on this mode of reasoning it would be as correct to argue that to know an animal we must be an animal, or that to know a tree we must be a tree. Every man, woman and child is a person or ego; fundamentally the nature of every human being is identical, but even to the most superficial observer great differences can be seen between one person and another. What is it that constitutes the difference? They differ in personality to the degree in which they have attained to the experiential and theoretical knowledge of God. No man has a true knowledge