Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 37.djvu/244

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

It appears, then, from an examination of the accompanying correspondence and quotations, that in two of the most important provinces of human thought, religion and philosophy, there is no proper and accepted English word to designate the supreme principle and element of the systems; that the universally accepted word to designate the same in one of them is, and for many years has been, known to be utterly insufficient if not false, by many among the leaders, and that in the other province such a word is much to be desired.

It is no part of our purpose to discuss the appalling disclosure of an only plan of salvation offered to the world, and yet concealed from it for ages of agony through want of a word by which to make it known; nor to discuss the effects of that disclosure upon the "common people" when it shall be finally made clear to them. After the publication of this article it can no longer be said that no attempt has been made to supply the missing word, and it will be for those whose function it is to decide such matters either to slowly adopt it, to supply a better, or to allow us to drift without it. But at this moment the word here proposed as adequate, and advocated as especially fit in view of its tendency to unite and harmonize both domains of human thought, interest, and activity concerned, has not been accepted by the leading authorities of either religion or philosophy, so far as it has been submitted to them.

However, Dr. Abbott seems to admit that, etymologically, philosophically, and scripturally, the proposed word implies, if it does not convey, the desired meaning.

As to the suggested word hupernoia, the fact that the preposition huper was not used in the New Testament becomes a striking negative argument in favor of our word. Moreover, huper evidently relates to quantity or proportion, and means excess, while meta relates to space or position, and means universally—according to Webster—in composition, beyond, over, after, etc.

Much remains to be said, but enough has already been said to open the discussion of the subject, and to put the responsibilities of the situation upon the leaders of religious and philosophic thought, to whom they properly belong.


The objects of anthropometry, according to Mr. Francis Galton, are to define the individual or the race, and to show in what way and to what extent he or it differs from the others. By taking measurements the individual is taught to know his own relative powers at any given time, and we are helped to watch over the development during the period of growth, and to give it direction if it does not proceed normally. Measurements of the head are designed to show how much and up to what age the brain continues to grow, and to aid in comparing the educated with the uneducated classes.