in inferences from the former to the latter and vice versa; and, so far as I know, he nowhere offers any other principle to justify such inferences, though he has a theory of their origin.
Let us now remind ourselves, once again, that our fellow-beings’ inner experiences are among the facts never directly presented to us. When a man speaks to us, we hear his words, but merely infer his thoughts; when another cries out or writhes in pain, we hear the cry or see the writhing, but the pain, once more, is only inferred. And in like manner, aspiration, hope, doubt, despair, — the whole of the inner life of others, is reached indirectly only. Add to this, that his inner life completely exhausts and fathoms what we mean by our fellow-being, and we see that in failing to offer any principle that justifies inferences from observed facts to inner experiences Professor Royce fails to give any philosophic reason for belief in the existence of our fellow-beings. Let us suppose, now, that the outer or physical universe, in which according to Professor Royce the principle of Causality does obtain, — and whose facts are therefore attainable, — let us suppose, for argument’s sake, that its reality is not destroyed by the philosophic annihilation of other beings. What sum-total of firmly established facts is left over to us? At best, the whole outer world and so much inner experience as the present moment affords. Just now you can at the utmost assert — and all assertion is in some now — that Reality is composed of so much outer fact as science establishes, plus your present feelings, thoughts, puzzles, and aspirations.
