ntically and entire throughout diverse material masses； but each several manifestation of them is as distinct from every other as the mass is from the mass。 The magnitude present in any mass is definitely one thing； yet its identity from part to part does not imply any such community as would entail common experience； within that identity there is diversity； for it is a condition only； not the actual Essence。 The Essence； very near to the impartible； which we assert to belong to the Kind we are now dealing with； is at once an Essence and an entrant into body； upon embodiment； it experiences a partition unknown before it thus bestowed itself。 In whatsoever bodies it occupies… even the vastest of all； that in which the entire universe is included… it gives itself to the whole without abdicating its unity。 This unity of an Essence is not like that of body； which is a unit by the mode of continuous extension； the mode of distinct parts each occupying its own space。 Nor is it such a unity as we have dealt with in the case of quality。 The nature； at once divisible and indivisible； which we affirm to be soul has not the unity of an extended thing： it does not consist of separate sections； its divisibility lies in its presence at every point of the recipient； but it is indivisible as dwelling entire in the total and entire in any part。 To have penetrated this idea is to know the greatness of the soul and its power； the divinity and wonder of its being； as a nature transcending the sphere of Things。 Itself devoid of mass； it is present to all mass： it exists here and yet is There； and this not in distinct phases but with unsundered identity： thus it is 〃parted and not parted；〃 or； better； it has never known partition； never become a parted thing； but remains a self…gathered integral； and is 〃parted among bodies〃 merely in the sense that bodies； in virtue of their own sundered existence； cannot receive it unless in some partitive mode； the partition； in other words； is an occurrence in body not in soul。 2。 It can be demonstrated that soul must； necessarily； be of just this nature and that there can be no other soul than such a being； one neither wholly partible but both at once。 If it had the nature of body it would consist of isolated members each unaware of the conditions of every other； there would be a particular soul… say a soul of the finger… answering as a distinct and independent entity to every local experience； in general terms； there would be a multiplicity of souls administering each individual； and； moreover； the universe would be governed not by one soul but by an incalculable number； each standing apart to itself。 But； without a dominant unity； continuity is meaningless。 The theory that 〃Impressions reach the leading…principle by progressive stages〃 must be dismissed as mere illusion。 In the first place； it affirms without investigation a 〃leading〃 phase of the soul。 What can justify this assigning of parts to the soul； the distinguishing one part from another？ What quantity； or what difference of quality； can apply to a thing defined as a self…consistent whole of unbroken unity？ Again； would perception be vested in that leading principle alone； or in the other phases as well？ If a given experience bears only on that 〃leading principle；〃 it would not be felt as lodged in any particular members of the organism； if； on the other hand； it fastens on some other phase of the soul… one not constituted for sensation… that phase cannot transmit any experience to the leading principle； and there can be no sensation。 Again； suppose sensation vested in the 〃leading…principle〃 itself： then； a first alternative； it will be felt in some one part of that ＇some specifically sensitive phase＇； the other part excluding a perception which could serve no purpose； or； in the second alternative； there will be many distinct sensitive phases； an infinite number； with difference from one to another。 In that second case； one sensitive phase will declare 〃I had this sensation primarily〃； others will have to say 〃I felt the sensation that rose elsewhere〃； but either the site of the experience will be a matter of doubt to every phase except the first； or each of the parts of the soul will be deceived into allocating the occurrence within its own particular sphere。 If； on the contrary； the sensation is vested not merely in the 〃leading principle；〃 but in any and every part of the soul； what special function raises the one rather than the other into that leading rank； or why is the sensation to be referred to it rather than elsewhere？ And how； at this； account for the unity of the knowledge brought in by diverse senses； by eyes； by ears？ On the other hand； if the soul is a perfect unity… utterly strange to part； a self…gathered whole… if it continuously eludes all touch of multiplicity and divisibility… then； no whole taken up into it can ever be ensouled； soul will stand as circle…centre to every object ＇remote on the circumference＇； and the entire mass of a living being is soulless still。 There is； therefore； no escape： soul is； in the degree indicated； one and many； parted and impartible。 We cannot question the possibility of a thing being at once a unity and multi…present； since to deny this would be to abolish the principle which sustains and administers the universe； there must be a Kind which encircles and supports all and conducts all with wisdom； a principle which is multiple since existence is multiple； and yet is one soul always since a container must be a unity： by the multiple unity of its nature； it will furnish life to the multiplicity of the series of an all； by its impartible unity； it will conduct a total to wise ends。 In the case of things not endowed with intelligence； the 〃leading…principle〃 is their mere unity… a lower reproduction of the soul's efficiency。 This is the deeper meaning of the profound passage ＇in the Timaeus＇； where we read 〃By blending the impartible； eternally unchanging essence with that in division among bodies； he produced a third form of essence partaking of both qualities。〃 Soul； therefore； is； in this definite sense； one and many； the Ideal…Form resident in body is many and one； bodies themselves are exclusively many； the Supreme is exclusively one。 THIRD TRACTATE。
PROBLEMS OF THE SOUL （1）。
1。 The soul： what dubious questions concerning it admit of solution； or where we must abide our doubt… with； at least； the gain of recognizing the problem that confronts us… this is matter well worth attention。 On what subject can we more reasonably expend the time required by minute discussion and investigation？ Apart from much else； it is enough that such an enquiry illuminates two grave questions： of what sphere the soul is the principle； and whence the soul itself springs。 Moreover； we will be only obeying the ordinance of the God who bade us know ourselves。 Our general instinct to seek and learn； our longing to possess ourselves of whatsoever is lovely in the vision will； in all reason； set us enquiring into the nature of the instrument with which we search。 Now even in the universal Intellect ＇Divine Mind＇ there was duality； so that we would expect differences of condition in things of part： how some things rather than others come to be receptacles of the divine beings will need to be examined； but all this we may leave aside until we are considering the mode in which soul comes to occupy body。 For the moment we return to our argument against those who maintain our souls to be offshoots from the soul of the universe ＇parts and an identity modally parted＇。 Our opponents will probably deny the validity of our arguments against the theory that the human soul is a mere segment of the All…Soul… the considerations； namely； that it is of identical scope； and that it is intellective in the same degree； supposing them； even； to admit that equality of intellection。 They will object that parts must necessarily fall under one ideal…form with their wholes。 And they will adduce Plato as expressing their view where； in demonstrating that the All is ensouled； he says 〃As our body is a portion of the body of the All； so our soul is a portion of the soul of the All。〃 It is admitted on clear evidence that we are borne along by the Circuit of the All； we will be told that… taking character and destiny from it； strictly inbound with it… we must derive our souls； also； from what thus bears us up； and that as within ourselves every part absorbs from our soul so； analogically； we； standing as parts to the universe； absorb from the Soul of the All as parts of it。 They will urge also that the dictum 〃The collective soul cares for all the unensouled；〃 carries the same implication and could be uttered only in the belief that nothing whatever of later origin stands outside the soul of the universe； the only soul there can be there to concern itself with the unensouled。 2。 To this our first answer is that to place certain things under one identical class… by admitting an identical range of operation… is to make them of one common species； and puts an end to all mention of part； the reasonable conclusion