mind of man to reduce to comprehension nature's infinite details; and as such it stands opposed, first, to the mythological spirit of those ancient times; secondly, to the ascendancy of the senses; and, thirdly, it proves that the cogency of necessary truth was now beginning, although obscurely, to be appreciated.
12. I shall say a few words on each of these points separately. First, the spirit of generalisation, or the tendency to carry up the phenomena of nature to the unity of one principle, or to the simplicity of a few principles; this tendency is directly opposed to those old poetical dreams respecting nature, which gave birth to the Greek mythology. Mythology ran riot in a plurality or multitude of powers which it invoked, and to which it assigned the government of the universe; but philosophy, on the contrary, aimed at a unity of agency or causation in all things. In the old Greek mythology the number of divine agents (or celestial powers, greater and lesser) was infinite. While there was one general patron-god for woods and forests, each grove had, moreover, its presiding divinity; even each particular tree had its tutelar protector. There was one patron-god who presided over seas, rivers, and fountains; but each river and fountain had also its particular nymph, and I believe that I speak within the limits of the mythological spirit when I say that each individual wave floated its tiny god. The same may be said of every mountain and cave, and of every other natural object.
