Another work of importance is the still more “dangerous” treatise， De la Nature， by Robinet. In it there reigns quite a different and a deeper spirit； one is frequently struck by the depth of earnestness which the writer displays. He begins thus： “There is a God， i.e.， a cause of the phenomena of that Whole which we call Nature. Who is God？ We know not， and we are so constituted that we can never know in what order of things we have been placed. We cannot know God perfectly， because the means of doing so will always be lacking to us. We too might write over the doors of our temples the words which were to be read upon the altar which the Areopagite raised， 'To the unknown God.'” The very same thing is said nowadays： there can be no transition from the finite to the infinite. “The order which reigns in the universe is just as little the visible type of His wisdom， as our weak mind is the image of His intelligence.” But this First Cause， God， is according to Robinet a creative God， He has brought Nature into existence； so that for him the only possible knowledge is that of Nature. “There is only One Cause. The eternal Cause， who so to speak had sown (engrainé) events one in the other， in order that they might without fail follow one upon another as He chose， in the beginning set in motion the endless chain of things. Through this permanent impression the Universe goes on living， moving and perpetuating itself. From the unity of cause there follows the unity of activity， for even it does not appear as something to be more or less admitted. By virtue of this single act all things come to pass. Since man has made Nature his study， he has found no isolated phenomenon， and no independent truth， because there are not and cannot be such. The whole sustains itself through the mutual correspondence of its parts.”(5) The activity of Nature is one， as God is One.
This activity， more particularly regarded， signifies that germs unfold themselves in everything：
everywhere there are organic Beings which produce themselves； nothing is isolated， everything is combined and connected and in harmony. Robinet here goes through the plants， the animals， and also the metals， the elements， air， fire， water， &c.； and seeks from them to demonstrate the existence of the germ in whatever has life， and also how metals are organised in themselves. “The example of the polypus is convincing as to the animal nature (animalité) of the smallest portions of organised matter； for the polypus is a group of associated polypi， each of which is as much a true polypus as the first. It stands proved that from the same point of view the living consists only of the living， the animals of minute animals， every animal in particular of minute animals of the same kind， a dog of dog-germs， man of human germs.” In proof of this Robinet states in a “Recapitulation”
that “animal sperm swarms with spermatic animalcules.” Since he then connects every propagation properly so-called with the co-operation of both sexes， he alleges that every individual is inwardly or also in the external organs a hermaphrodite. Of the minerals he says： “Are we not compelled to regard as organic bodies all those in which we meet with an inward structure such as this？ It presupposes throughout a seed， seed-granules， germs， of which they are the development.” In the same way the air must have its germ， which does not come to reality until it is nourished by water， fire， &c. “The air， as principle， is only the germ of the air； as it impregnates or saturates itself in varying degrees with water and fire， it will gradually pass through different stages of growth： it will become first embryo， then perfect air.”(6) Robinet gives the name of germ to the simple form in itself， the substantial form， the Notion. Although he seeks to prove this too much from the sensuous side， he yet proceeds from principles in themselves concrete， from the form in itself.
He speaks also of the evil and good in the world. The result of his observation is that good and evil balance each other； this equilibrium constitutes the beauty of the world. In order to refute the assertion that there is more good than evil in the world， he says that everything to which we reduce the good consists only in an enjoyment， a pleasure， a satisfaction； but this must be preceded by a want， a lack， a pain， the removal of which constitutes satisfaction.(7) This is not only a correct thought empirically， but it also hints at the deeper idea that there is no activity except through contradiction.
3. IDEA OF A CONCRETE UNIVERSAL UNITY.
The result of the French philosophy is that it insisted on maintaining a general unity， not abstract， but concrete. Thus Robinet now propounded the theory of a universal organic life， and a uniform mode of origination； this concrete system he called Nature， over which God was set， but as the unknowable； all predicates which could be expressed of Him contained something inapplicable.
