THE CAREER OF HERBERT SPENCER 9 



instability of the homogeneous/' " the rhythm of motion," " the mul- 

 tiplication of effects," and such single terms as " aggregation," " segre- 

 gation," " equilibration," " dissolution," are all fraught with profound 

 significance, and most of the processes described by them take place in 

 all departments of nature. The introduction and illustration of these 

 terms and the description of the processes of nature of which they are 

 the names, would alone make " First Principles " an immortal work. 



It is true that Spencer failed to see the essential distinction be- 

 tween cosmic and organic evolution, and when it was pointed out in 

 1877,^ as it was not his own idea, he characteristically ignored it. He 

 also missed the principles of creative synthesis, cosmic, organic and 

 social synergy and sjTnpodial development, which are quite as important 

 as those set forth in " First Principles." But he is to be judged for 

 what he did rather than by what he did not do. There is, however, 

 one omission, which, deliberate and intentional though it was, has not 

 been condoned by his readers. This is his failure to elaborate these 

 fundamental principles of inorganic nature in a manner proportionate 

 to that in which he elaborated the principles of biology, psychology, 

 sociology and ethics. Uniform regret has been expressed by his read- 

 ers, including his warmest admirers, that he should have abandoned 

 this great work so auspiciously begun, and hurried on to the more 

 special and complex sciences before laying an adequate foundation for 

 them. The present writer was among those to express this regret and 

 to maintain that his excuse for omitting the two volumes upon which 

 the " Synthetic Philosophy " would and should have rested, viz., that 

 the scheme would have been too extensive for him to complete it, and 

 that " the interpretation of Organic Nature after the proposed method 

 is of more immediate importance," was not a sufficient or valid excuse. 

 It is generally felt that if these two volumes had been written, which 

 might have borne the title of " Principles of Cosmology," it would be 

 small matter whether the " Principles of Ethics " ever saw the light 

 or not. 



The world was even left in the dark as to how and in what order 

 he would have treated inorganic nature had he written the omitted 

 volumes. It is true that in the opening paragraph of the first volume 

 of the " Principles of Sociology " he says : 



Of the three broadly-distinguished kinds of Evolution, we come now to 

 the third. The first kind, Inorganic Evolution, which, had it been dealt with, 

 would have occupied two volumes, one dealing with Astrogeny and the other 

 with Geogeny, was passed over because it seemed undesirable to postpone the 

 more important applications of the doctrine for the purpose of elaborating 

 those less important applications which logically precede them. 



The bare names, therefore, which he would have given to the two 

 *P0PULAB Science Monthlt, October, 1877, Vol. XI., pp. 672-682. 



