Yet although the phenomena of so-called inanimate nature, be they motions of celestial bodies or physical and chemical processes, are non-mental, there is in every one of them present that grand feature which is as it were the breath of God. This feature appears in all the phenomena of nature, but in none of them more gloriously than in the soul of man. Even the cosmical events of marvellous sublimity appear as a mere prelude to the appearance of soul-life, for in soul-life is focused all the divinity of nature. Reason is the reflex of the world-order and thus a rational being is made in the likeness of God. [Illustration] Professor Romanes presents the problem of the subjectivity of existence by the adjoined diagram, which he explains as follows: “Following Clifford, I will call these inferred subjectivities by the name of ‘ejects,’ and assign to them the symbol _Y_. Thus in the following discussion _X_ = the objective world, _Y_, the ejective world, and _Z_, the subjective world. Now, the theory of monism supposes that _X_, _Y_ and _Z_ are all alike in kind, but presents no definite teaching as to how far they may differ in degree. We may, however, at once allow that between the psychological value of _Z_ and that of _X_, there is a wide difference of degree, and also that while the value of _Z_ is a fixed quantity, that of _Y_ varies greatly in the different parts of the area _Y_.” The deep shading of _Z_ indicates consciousness, and consciousness is that form of subjectivity which constitutes our mind. _Z_ is not, as Professor Romanes asserts that it is, a fixed quantity; it varies greatly, as every one knows from his own experience. It is lowest in trance or swoon or profound sleep. It is highest in the state of concentrated attention. The ejective element, which we assume to be present as a correlative concomitant in the objective world, we assume, with Professor Romanes, varies greatly in the different parts of the area _Y_. Like Professor Romanes, we also do _not_ assume the existence of any unshaded _X_. There is no objectivity without its subjective correlate. But, according to the theory of monism, the nature of the concomitant subjectivity is not unknowable: it can be inferred from the nature of objective existence. The subjectivity of the falling stone is most elementary, and _not mental_; its action is not prompted by meaning. That something which impels the stone to fall, and which science calls gravity, does not possess any representative element. There is no symbolism involved in gravity. There is no soul in the stone. The stone is not incited to falling by any purpose; it has no end in view. Purpose originates with and through the presence of representative symbols. According to the theory of monism the shading of the surrounding zones is not a matter concerning which we have to suspend our judgment. If monism is true, we know very well how deeply we have to shade the different