As I have said, that conclusion itself is completely reversed.

What he thought indisputable is disputed; and what he thought impossible is possible.
Instead of Christian morals surviving in the form of humanitarian morals, Christian demonology has survived in the form of heathen demonology.
But it has not survived by scholarly traditionalism in the style of Gladstone, but rather by obstinate objective curiosity according to the advice of Huxley.

We in the West have "followed our reason as far as it would go," and our reason has led us to things that nearly all the rationalists would have thought wildly irrational.
Science was supposed to bully us into being rationalists; but it is now supposed to be bullying us into being irrationalists.
The science of Einstein might rather be called following our unreason as far as it will go, seeing whether the brain will crack under the conception that space is curved, or that parallel straight lines always meet.

And the science of Freud would make it essentially impossible to say how far our reason or unreason does go, or where it stops.

For if a man is ignorant of his other self, how can he possibly know that the other self is ignorant?
He can no longer say with pride that at least he knows that he knows nothing.