I.—LOGICAL NATURE OF THE THEISTIC ARGUMENT. (P. 7 Of TEXT.)

We believe that in every argument there is both a subjective and objective element. There is the one as well as the other of these alike in the a priori and the a posteriori argument in behalf of the existence of God. In the a priori argument of Clarke there is a fact assumed, the existence of space and time. In the a priori argument of Descartes, there is also a fact assumed, that the mind has an idea of the limited and imperfect, implying, it is argued (we think inconclusively), not merely the idea, but the existence of the infinite and the perfect. Again, in the a posteriori argument, there are certain intuitive mental principles proceeded on, such as the necessary connexion of cause and effect. “Un élément a posteriori,” says M. Cousin, “intervient comme condition de la démonstration a priori. De meme, si on y pense, la preuve par l'éxperience ou a posteriori implique un élément purement rationel ou a priori. En effet, à quelle condition concluez vous de la nature à Dieu? à cette condition que vous admettiez ou que du moins vous employiez le principe de causalité; car si vous êtes dépourvus de ce principe, vous contemplerez, vous étudierez eternellement le monde, vous adorerez éternellement l'ordre et la sagesse qui y regnent, sans vous élever jamais à cette supposition que tout cela doit avoir sa càuse.”