Page:Mind (New Series) Volume 9.djvu/252

 238 S. TOLVEB PRESTON : preceding transfiguration or transformation. How can we know that a space relation of an object (its form) presents a change in kind or quality undergone in the mere procedure of investigating what exists ? Mr. Spencer however appears to consider he can demonstrate that existences in themselves are without form : l although to our measurements they present form. The contrary view that form is absolute, is one of ancient standing. Antiquity is no proof. But in any case, since it is important that a state- ment should be free from obscurity before any proof (for or against) is attempted, it may be in the interests of truth to have pointed out what appears to be a confusing ambiguity in the wording of the proposition above quoted : not to insist further on the ques- tionableness of the method adopted in support of the proof offered, as expressed in the words" We are forced to the conclusion " etc., To summarise the main point. It is certain that a " transfigura- tion " or transformation cannot occur without a physical cause, i.e., without the interaction of physical forces. It is certain that Space can neither be acted on by forces nor itself influence by means of forces. Therefore it appears impossible to conceive Space to be the result of any transfiguration (to be a phenomenon or "phenomenal order"). On the other hand, it is certain that Matter is both acted on by forces and can react by forces. Therefore (contrariwise) it is easily conceivable that an observed attribute of Matter (say inertia) may be the result of some accomplished transfiguration. In other words, the attribute inertia, as it appears to us, need not be the same as that which exists. It is not demonstrable that there is a difference ; because the relative and the absolute may be conceiv- ably identical. The same applies to form. But it is demonstrable that with no forces to act, there can be no change effected. More- over to suppose Space to be a consequence of an accomplished transfiguration would be to imagine Space to be capable of varying or of being different from what it appears to us which it is impossible to imagine. Form (viewed as absolute) can be easily conceived to become a perception in brain-consciousness. Nothing would be gained by a transfiguration here. Vibrations at the rate of several billions per second cannot be impressed numerically on brain-consciousness without transfiguration into Colour, graduated with the rate of vibration : as, for instance, the observed position of a line in the spectrum instantly gives the period numerically. But, if, on the other hand, a square or a triangle exist absolutely, there is no difficulty in imagining it to be impressed on brain-consciousness without foregone transfiguration. In any case, it is not difficult to conceive that (say by natural selection, etc.) there may be a, mechanism in the brain to prevent such transfiguration from 1 In the Principles of Psychology, vol. ii., p. 494, may be found a parallel statement on this head, viz : " No relation in consciousness can resemble, or be in any way akin to, its source." (The italics are mine.)