put it to use, but we shall never really solve the mysteries of its
formation and growth. These lead of course to very interesting
speculations, but their solution seems to be as far off as ever. We can
know little but that which we require for life. The making of life and
action the basis of truth rather than trusting to the intellect alone,
is the great new departure in modern philosophy.

One of the theories of knowledge that springs from laying emphasis upon
life and action is that of _Pragmatism_, of which the late Professor
William James was one of the greatest exponents. Pragmatists contend
that the test of truth is its value for life--if the fact obtained is
the most useful and helpful for life, then it is the true one. Suppose
we are endeavouring to solve the great question, "Is there a God?" We
weigh the arguments for and against, but find it difficult to arrive at
a definite conclusion, because the arguments on both sides seem equally
plausible. How are we to decide? We cannot postpone the decision
indefinitely--we are forced to make a choice, for upon our decision
depends our aim and ideals in life. We are faced with a "forced option,"
and must choose one or the other. We ask ourselves the question, "Which
will be of the greatest help to our lives--to believe that there is, or
that there is not a God?" and we decide or will to believe the option
that will help life most. It is a striking theory, but space forbids our
discussing it in detail.

The position Eucken adopts is that of _Activism_. In common with
pragmatism it makes truth a matter of life and action rather than of
mere intellect, and considers fruitfulness for action a characteristic
of truth. He differs from the pragmatic position in that he contends
that truth is something deeper than mere human decision, that truth is
truth, not merely because it is useful, that reality is independent of