control of a Supreme Intelligence. That this is the fact is
shown by the denial of free-will in man and of the
superintending providence of God; of the efficacy of prayer and
of the forgiveness of sin; and by the prominence given in their
writings to the absolute control of all things by undeviating,
unchanging law.

(_c_) A third view affirms that while there is a distinction
between the Ego and the non-Ego (the me and the not-me), it is
impossible to know anything about either in its essence. That
they exist and that they are different are facts within our
knowledge, but as to the absolute nature of mind and matter we
can discover and believe nothing. The ultimate or absolute is
beyond our reach, as is the infinite and unconditioned. We can
have no knowledge of First Causes, or of the Ultimate Cause, or
of the Absolute Cause. The infinite cannot even be apprehended,
and those who undertake to learn or to speculate regarding the
infinite engage in a task beyond their powers. Such knowledge is
not practical. The term "God" is merely an expression for a mode
of the unknowable, conveying no meaning to those who use it. The
view thus expressed originated in concessions unhappily made by
certain writers, as Sir William Hamilton and Dean Mansel, who,
thinking to defend revealed religion, taught that reason cannot
know the Infinite, and that therefore the Infinite must reveal
Himself. Herbert Spencer took advantage of this concession, and
carried it to a logical conclusion, when he argued that, if
reason could not know or apprehend the Infinite by reason,
neither could it by revelation.

(_d_) Another class hold the view which is termed cosmogonies