The Cape Girardeau Democrat. (Cape Girardeau, Mo.) 1876-1909, 1891-05-09
A HARD NUT.
The Difference Between Appre-
bend and Comprehend.
Our Reason Tells Us One Thing and the
Senses FIatIy Contradict
Facts Which Are Not Al
ways Facts.

Facts Which Are Not Al
ways Facts.
The difference between experimenting
athing and comprehending it is famil-
lar distinction. We apprehend a thing
when we seize on to it and feel its real
ity: we comprehend it when we have
encompassed it, defined it, and made it
our own. | can comprehend the fact
that if the law of gravitation be true, n
body at the center of the earth will
have no weight. and l can apprehend
the fact that at that point there would
be no up and no down, but | cannot
comprehend it Our senses, our expert
encc say that in digging through the
earth, if this were possible, we would
be going dorm all the way; but our
senses and our experience are upset the
moment we emerge from the surface on
the other side, for we see we should be
standing on our heads. We cannot COM
prchend this puzzle; we cannot adjust
our minds to this fact. We are turned
around, and we cannot tell how it hap
pcncd. The man who reaches the north
pole will have abolished all direction
west are gone, only south remains. He
"a move in no direction but toward
the equator. We say the sun rises in
the east and sets in the west, and we
think we are en~unciating a universal
law. But if the discovcrer of the north
pole ~ere to see the sun, he would see
it rise and set in the south. and the man
at the south pole would see it rise and
set in the north. Thus is so much of
our knowledge merely relative.
Just SO with regard to up and down
OF in absolute space. in fact with re-
gard to all direction; we apprehend the
fact that we should lose direction. but
mind. in some way, under this law Or
necessity of the earthly sphere, SO that
he can see and admit certain contra
G~ictionS. without ever being able to
reconcile them? Are all his views.
notions and distinctions as relative as
and down or aS east and west? Is it
sn even in mathematics? Is there no
absolute truth? The contradictions of
the sphere seem to come into all our
thinking. To say there is no absolute
truth would involve just this contra
diction. | am affirming such Il truth
in the very denial. To the senses, to
the experience. the earth is an unlimit-
Is and can be no other side. We see
the people at the south pole walking
inverted. like flies upon the ceiling:
yet a~bstractiy as an indication of
we know the world to be Il
but never as a concrete expert
cnce. In our view of every question we
are SO apt to think our own Judgment
as final, that we are upon a plane, and
that there can be no other side, or if
there is the people there are ~willfully
walking inverted.
Both sides may be equally true how
hard to learn this fact. We cannot
it; we may admit it as an abstract
proposition. but we can never realize it
as a concrete reality. We are under the
bondage of the law of the sphere. We
by no means agree from what point
in the moral or intellectual sphere lon
yitude shall be reckoned. Every man
reckons from his own doorstep. Great
thinkers impose their point of view
upon us for awhile, but we are always
back to our own doorstep. This
contradiction of the sphere
'uns through all our thinking. We
must admit. abstractly at least, that
peoples relation to the earth and sky
nay be just as normal and proper as
mr. own, who hold to just the opposite
# what we do. Probably one of our
would hold good away from
he earth in absolute space, or in the spir-
sphere. We may expect to enter
heaven Invested of all our earthly
and preferences. A line alb
horizontal would soon leave
he earth. and absolute right would
Don carry us away from this s~elf-con-
radictory sphere.
The same in regard to space. We
an apprehend that space is limit
ess, that there are no bounds to
he material universe; but the eff
to comprehend it sets the
in the whirl. 1t is like trying to
onceive of a stick with only one end.
,fter we have fixed our limit. what is
here beyond? With time it is the same. |
We can conceive of neither beginning
or ending of time. Indeed. is not the
,eginning of anything unthinkable?
t is experience and not reason that
ellis us that there are beginnings.
When | was a boy | read a or
'amphlet by Rev. John Pierpont that
ombated the notion that matter was
out of nothing. He said if mat
er began absolutely then no time could
lapse between its being and non being.
t would have to be something and
at the same time, which is an
bsurdity. But do we not find our
elves in the same dilemma about the |
'eginning of anything, the beginning
f the clock to strike or the fire to |
urn? The clock begins to strike; but
he beginning occupies no time; hence
t must strike and not strike at the same
ime. The moments touch, there is 10
pace between them. The sun rises,
'ut "Htrc Cdn tHouSuI Rcb III pttNceh |
he moment 1t is below the horizon and
he moment it is above? The two mo-
lents are one.
The old, sophists used to prove that a
ody cannot move. 1t cannot move
here it is, and it cannot where
is not; but experience proves that it
move, as it were, on the line be
the two. In thought matter is
Infinitely divisible, time is infinite
Y Invisible; therefore bodies can
OF touch, therefore things cannot
cgin. etc. But experience corrects
MS reasoning and shows us bodies do
love, and do touch. and do begin
We can conceive of degrees and diff
,rences, but limits, for the most part,
afie us. We cannot conceive of any
hing so hot but that it might be hot
.r, nor so cold but it might be colder;
so high or big but that it
light be higher or bigger; nothing so
Nv or small but it might be lower or
Yet we can conceive of abso-
ate darkness and absolute silence. N