This series of ideas was perhaps that which gave to Kant’s philosophy its immediate and immense effect upon the minds of men wearied with the endless strife and insoluble contradiction of the dogmatic and sceptical spirits.  We may disagree with much else in the Kantian system.  Even here we may say that we have not two reasons, but only two functionings of one.  We have not two worlds.  The philosophical myth of two worlds has no better standing than the religious myth of two worlds.  We have two characteristic aspects of one and the same world.  These perfectly interpenetrate the one the other, if we may help ourselves with the language of space.  Each is everywhere present.  Furthermore, these actions of reason and aspects of world shade into one another by imperceptible degrees.  Almost all functionings of reason have something of the qualities of both.  However, when all is said, it was of greatest worth to have had these two opposite poles of thought brought clearly to mind.  The dogmatists, in the interest of faith, were resisting at every step the progress of the sciences, feeling that that progress was inimical to faith.  The devotees of science were saying that its processes were of universal validity, its conclusions irresistible, the gradual dissolution of faith was certain.  Kant made plain that neither party had the right to such conclusions.  Each was attempting to apply the processes appropriate to one form of rational activity within the sphere which belonged to the other.  Nothing but confusion could result.  The religious man has no reason to be jealous of the advance of the sciences.  The interests of faith itself are furthered by such investigation.  Illusions as to fact which have been mistakenly identified with faith are thus done away.  Nevertheless, its own eternal right is assured to faith.  With it lies the interpretation of the facts of nature and of history, whatever those facts may be found to be.  With the practical reason is the interpretation of these facts according to their moral worth, a worth of which the pure reason knows nothing and scientific investigation reveals nothing.

Here was a deliverance not unlike that which the Reformation had brought.  The mingling of Aristotelianism and religion in the scholastic theology Luther had assailed.  Instead of assent to human dogmas Luther had the immediate assurance of the heart that God was on his side.  And what is that but a judgment of the practical reason, the response of the heart in man to the spiritual universe?  It is given in experience.  It is not mediated by argument.  It cannot be destroyed by syllogism.  It needs no confirmation from science.  It is capable of combination with any of the changing interpretations which science may put upon the outward universe.  The Reformation had, however, not held fast to its great truth.  It had gone back to the old scholastic position.  It had rested faith in an essentially rationalistic manner upon supposed facts in nature