For an examination of the ground principle of Induction, the reader must be referred to our next chapter. But it is at once clear that no human _experience_ can possess the attribute of universality, otherwise it would cease to be human. We have then in this present appeal to the veracity of Experience, no _absolute_ knowledge to deal with, only knowledge as relative to mankind. Nay, we must go a little further still in our limitation, and say to the _generality_ of mankind. For our eyes do not all see perfectly alike--a North-American Indian sees what a Cockney cannot discover; the trained eye discerns differently from the untrained. On the differences of power in eye and ear rest the differences in many kinds of theorising--amongst which art-perceptions yield an obvious and familiar set of examples. And if we try for a more precise estimate of the value of our limited human relativity, and proceed by way of comparison between _our own_ diverse endowments, who shall venture to say that the eye of our body interpreted by our understanding, tells our inmost self more truly than the eye of our human soul, informing us directly of the facts of its intuitive vision? So far as our actual means of valuing these two modes of beholding can go, there is no knowledge so perfect as the product of pure intuition, the glorious fabric of Mathematical Science. And to pure Science it matters not whether the requisite Schematism is drawn upon a sheet of white paper or on the clear tablet of the imagining faculty of a philosopher. The purely inward view is in truth generally the farthest reaching, and the most unclouded. When, therefore, it is, and has been for centuries, apparent to the inmost eye of the generality of our race that there _really_ exists a spiritual world within themselves--above them, and in the far distant future beyond us all, permanent while we change, and the evidence of our own ultimate permanency,--such knowledge may undeniably be human, the very flower and distinction of our human nature; and it may on that account be received by us as true. If, again, our ordinary human soul is so far a Christian as to exclaim with Tertullian, "O good God," by what logical process shall we confute its utterance, while we maintain the utterance of our commonest sense-perceptions? That we all see in frames, that we all think in frames, no rational thinker or perceiver will deny. If, however, any of us chooses to be an Idealist or Nihilist, let him at least be consistent;--if he will assert the necessity of Doubt, let him maintain its empire by doubting his own assertion. But let no man think that Doubt leads him any whither except to an abnegation of thought, a mistrust alike of Sense and Soul, and an abdication of every human prerogative:-- "Thy hand, great Anarch, lets the curtain fall, And universal Darkness buries all."