tory defence of the faith, and not a mere repetition of the common tradition of modern Idealism, but the expression of an individual experience of the problems at issue. I do not want to make mere disciples; but I hope that I have helped some fellow-students toward a clearer knowledge of God and of themselves. Such knowledge, however, they can never get by merely accepting my views. They must use their own labor.
My further acknowledgments are still due to many helpers. First, I must here remember my own pupils, whose criticisms have frequently aided me, — in particular, my friend, Dr. Richard Cabot, who for years has stood by me with counsel, encouragement, and criticism, even while, from time to time, he has found room, amidst the duties of his own medical profession, for some continuance of his philosophical studies in connection with my Seminary at Harvard; and Mr. Reginald Robbins, who, while also an occasional member of my Seminary, has written several closely reasoned criticisms of my work, by which I have profited more than he knows. My indebtedness to the influence of Mr. Charles Peirce continues in the present volume, remote as my views often are from his. And in closing the task that for two years gave me an official relation to the University of Aberdeen, I must especially acknowledge my indebtedness to my colleagues there, and to colleagues in the other Scottish Universities with whom I came in contact during my two visits. In particular, Professors W. R. Sorley (now of Cambridge, England) and W. L. Davidson, not only brightened my stay by their kindness, but aided me, by their counsel, in adapting especially this second course of lectures to its
