Franklin Merrell-Wolff continues his analysis of the nature of our scientific enterprise and the possibility of reconciling it with another way of viewing the whole of this world, this universe, and the system of our consciousness. He begins by outlining the development of a worldview that starts with early Greek philosophy rooted in the animistic sense of everything being alive, through the emergence of the “idea” with Thales, the development of the mathematical concept by Archimedes, and the aesthetic component of observation contributed by Galileo. He contrasts this worldview with the animistic view that remains highly developed in East Indian thought, and suggests that this difference makes it difficult for us to understand how a substance may be brought into the world by entities capable of changing the forms of our consciousness and our attitudes. Next, Wolff notes two aspects of scientific methodology; namely, the principle of abstraction and the assumption that there are only two organs of knowledge—sense perception and conceptual cognition. He considers the divorce of this methodology from our sense of religious feeling, our moral sense, and our sense of beauty to be a flaw that may render the knowledge achieved by it a curse rather than a blessing. In regard to the principle that our cognition is limited to sense impression and conceptuality, Wolff asserts that knowledge based solely on these two modes of cognition alone is incomplete and essentially a maya or illusion. Next, he addresses the question of the nature of the world about us and its relation to conceptual cognition; toward this end, he examines theses developed by the Buddhist logicians Dignaga and Dharmakirti. Wolff makes a case for viewing the conceptual process as, in part, essentially creative, and he suggests that powerful thinkers legislate, rather than discover, the possible forms of our experience. Wolff then contends that since the idea and the thing are of the same “Suchness,” it is possible to manipulate the idea through the apparent thing, and vice versa. He concludes by pointing out that from this point of view it is also possible to understand how an impingement of energy-substance from without our world-field upon that world-field can produce a change in the attitudes and procedures of the consciousness of this humanity.