quality in all intelligence; that man, through his participation in this common nature, is, so far, a pure—that is, a non-particular or universal—intelligence, and hence is, so far, capable of cognising universal or unconditioned truth. That Schelling has worked out this doctrine explicitly, or even intelligibly, is not to be maintained. But "the intellectual intuition" which he ascribes to man is undoubtedly his expression for the mind considered as a pure intelligence, and as having something in common with all other intelligences, whether actual or possible. The "intellectual intuition" is opposed to the sensational intuition, the latter denoting that part of the mental economy which is more peculiarly man's own, or human. Schelling's opponents, on the other hand, must be prepared to hold and to show that there is no nature common to all intelligence—that the different orders of minds (supposing that there are such) have no point of unity or agreement—that their difference is absolute and complete. This is the only logical ground on which they can deny to the mind of man all cognisance of the unconditioned truth. Such seem to be the grounds on which the famous question respecting the philosophy of the unconditioned has to be debated. We have offered no opinion on the merits of the case. But the victory is Schelling's if he has succeeded in showing, or if it be admitted, that every intelligence has something in common, some point or points of resemblance, with every other intelligence
