The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1869-09-15
and sometimes the whole Of the life-tme OF a.
otnd INF of auan amipant ability.

best advantage, yet the actual amount OF that
energy. or what I may call its specific value,
renamed the same. The material FOR study
|. constantly growing in bulk and complexlty,
the capacity for study remained almost un-
changed, except in the improvement OF its
methods: and it was finally found impractica-
bic for the average ability OF the distinguished
inteIlects Of our race to conquer the whole
domain Of physical knowledge. Nor will we
wonder at this. when we call to mind the In
finite diversity in the unity of nature. and that
the service she exacts Of her followers ls IN.
tellectual labor, OF which Humboldt is one Oh
the most remarkable representatives; klna
OF labor so intense that it has been sclentln-
cally estimated that two hours OF such exer-
ton exhausts the vital energy OF man as mucp
as whole day Of manual labor.
These difficulties IN the pursuit Oh posltlVe
knowledge Of nature gradually, and indepen.
IDENTIFY Of the voltion of man, wrought out
their own result IN the wellhown form OF
"division OF labor" by which the idea OF .
single individuals attaining to the mastery Of
the whole field was finally abandoned: ana
each worker selected and devoted himself 70 O
single branch OF research. .e-oa.. lL
The concentration OF individual energy upon
specalties sooC produced IN sclence enectS
similar to those it has given birth to IN COM
merce and to industrial arts, namely, ancreas-
ed production with less expenditure OF time.
But it is easy TO understand that the more sne
study OF the Cosmos became thereby dlvded
into separate channels, and the more the de-
tails of the separate branches were multlpneo.
the less was it possible to retain the links OF
connection which, in nature, bind all these To-
gether into one great whole, animated oy Wnab
we may call a single life. The difficulty OF 40.
ing so was. moreover, Increased by the fact that
such cosmical principles Of unity as were par
tialy revealed from time to time to observers
were sect to involve VIII 1lly new conceptions,
suoh as the human mind could not have fore
seen. A little reflection will disclose to us the
reason of this new difficulty in the great dlf-
ference there is between the perception OF
truth and the mature conception OF II. -.
A notional perception OF the unity OF creation
men had had from the earliest epochs, ana
though practically obscured to greater OF
less degree in past ages, by the prevalence OF
polytheisn, we may say that this perception
has always existed, either in latent form OF
with that degree of distinct vitality which it
pahifests in the pages OF our Bibles; vltahsy
to which our present knowledge can add
nothing.
Now, our modern science began its career
with this perception and has always retained
it, and modern science has never yet attained
to rational conception OF the unity OF naspre'
In making such distinctions as these, compar1-
sons often help Us. Let US attempt such an
one here.
It has for example always been perceived by
mankind that the light aud heat OF the sun are
essential to the well-being OF ANIMALS ana
plants; and so greatly at times has that percep-
tion influenced human thought, thot religious
systems have been formed upon or modified py
it. Yet 80 far as is known, it was not until
within q few years past that science came to
understand that light and heat once consldereds
as fluids, are really forces, which, in the lumi-
nous splendor of our central orb, are combined
with other forces, such as actinlsm and mag-
netism, and that the operation OF these forces
from the sun produces upon earth that endless
internal movement OF matter which is the es-
sentia condition Of the exercise OF vital activity.
Thus, though men have always perceioed that
sunlight is essential to organic life, they have
never, until quite recently, approached to
clear conception OF the mutual relation between
these two things.
always perceived the unity Of the Cosmos, but
has pever yet arrived at rational conception
OF it. Always, however, aspiring to such
conception, many and varied have been the
speculative attempts in philosophical systems
TO discover some principle ofunicstion. which,
derived from pure theory, might supply @ the
means of reaching that conception without the
protracted labors OF the inductive method.
Such were nearly all the physical doctrines Oh
the Greeks and OF the Middle Ages. Ihey,
with others of more modern birth, lie scattered
along the roadside OF history like the ruins by
which we sometimes trace the migration
of races. Notwithstanding the germs OF
truth, which many OF them contain, they
have each in turn been found insufn-
cient, and have demonstrated the great
truth that man cannot preconceiye-th mys-
teries OF creation. Experiment and observation
alone, by we'll directed and unceasng LABOR, can
gradually bring us to O nearer view. OF these
mysteries. The rational conception OF the
unity of the Cosmos not only has not yet been
foip hu
attained, because it may, aud probably does,
involve one of those apparent contradictions
which constitute the limits ofhuman thought.
''We are still. y says Humboldt, very far from
The time when it will be possible for us 10 re-
duce by the operation OF thought all that We
perceive by tie senses. to the unity OF o Ia-
tional principle. 1t may even be doubted"
he continues, 'it such victory could ever be
achieved IN the field OF Natural Philosophy.
yet" he concludes, "e7en partial solution
of the probIem-the tendency towards the
comprehension OF the phenomena OF the uni
verse-wil not the less remain the eternal and
sublime aim ofevery investigation OF nature"
Such, then, being the problem towards the
solution Of which all real progress in physical
science must tend. and such as we have seen
being the natural laws and conditions which
make rnat progress wnat II 10 10, wve are. hope:
Ill position to understand the reIatlon Oh
Humboldt to the Advancement OF huclas
knowledge, and the magnitude OF me task
which he seems to have been specially design
ed to accomplish.
The infinite diversity Of the special phenon-
ena OF nature which had compelled men tacitly
to adopt system of division OF labor, had un-
avoidably led at the same time to virtual
neglect Of the problem of the unity OF nature.
The study of special adaptations to special
ends, seemed to engage the whole attention Of
scientific men, aHd though out OF such re-
searches often grew the most splendid gene
ralizltions of the last importance to science,
yet these were for the most part limited by
their nature to the special departments In
which they had originated. The task Of COM
bining all the results Of all Of the many fields
Of systematic research. into one whole, pre-
serving at the SINE time their true relations
to each other, seems to have beer quietly pass
ed by as an impraeticable undertaking.
To any other man than Humboldtlt proba-
bly, would have been so. he who should at
tempt this work must first make himself prae-
tically and critically famiii,r with every branch
ofphysical science. No encyclopedia, no COM
piler, no mere bookworm could be the author
OF the Cosmos. He who would put the problem
Of the unity Of creation into distinct and
tangible form, by bringing to one focus all the
manifold lights derived from the researches Of
innumerab.e observers IN the most varied fields
of research, must be by nature Q critic and q
Judge of other mems labors, and must, more
over, qualify himself by culture for the exer-
else Of his functions. We all know the great
distance between these two things. Every
one recognizes that to be judge
of what other men have done TIA very differ
ent thing from being the mere narrator OF