Page:The Conception of God (1897).djvu/173

136 of my friendly opponents by limiting myself to a hand-to-hand contest with their theses. In particular (to refer here to one of these theses), the antithesis between Monistic Idealism and Ethical Individualism, upon which Professor Howison, in his important paper, has laid such stress, reveals, as a fact, a very deep and instructive antinomy of Reason; an antinomy which, as I believe, we must all recognise before we can hope to solve it or transcend it. In my own former paper, I made no mention of this antinomy, — not because I failed to recognise it, but because I conceived that I had there no space for it. Professor Howison has given it the first place in the discussion. To me it has always been a problem that, despite its vast importance, is secondary to the central problem of philosophy. On the other hand, I have profited greatly by Professor Howison’s brilliant vindication of Ethical Individualism, and I hope to show, before I am done, that I have thus profited. To be sure, I am still unable to alter either the thesis or the essential process of reasoning expounded in my original discussion. Both can be stated in countless ways. But in their essence, I must still hold each to be valid. Accordingly I also have still to maintain that every estimate of the place of the Individual in the universe must be made subject to the validity of some such argument for the Absolute, and subject to the supremacy, the unity, and the all-embracing sole reality of the Absolute as defined by this argument. But on the other hand, an argument concerning the grade of reality possessed by ethical individuals has its place in the