SPENCER AND EVOLUTION. 45 



the logical processes of science, and to decry mere theorizing and spec- 

 ulation. They forget that facts of themselves are not science, and 

 only become so by being placed in true relations, and that the function 

 of the thinker is therefore supreme ; while the work of organizing 

 facts and establishing general truths is, after all, just as much a spe- 

 cialty as that of observation or experiment in any branches of inquiry. 

 The prevalence of these narrow views has been unfavorable to the 

 recognition of Mr. Spencer's work by a large class of the cultivators 

 of science ; and the more so, as he has been mainly occupied in the 

 highest spheres of generalization. For this reason it is only by the 

 comparatively small number of scientific men, who possess marked 

 philosophic power, that his labors have been justly appreciated. 



But, while considerations of this kind are not to be overlooked in 

 assigning the responsibilities of criticism, neither are they to be con- 

 strued into excuses for prejudiced opinions, or crude and hasty judg- 

 ments. It is the business of critics to inform themselves on impor- 

 tant matters of which they speak, or to hold their peace. And, where 

 there is peculiar difficulty or liability to error, they are all the more 

 bound to caution, and to refrain from injurious interpretations. Re- 

 verting:, now, to the criticisms cited at the outset of this discussion as 

 typical of a class, we are prepared to rate them at what they are 

 worth. 



From what has been stated, I think it will be sufficiently evident 

 that Mr. Spencer is no follower of Comte, Darwin, or any other man, 

 and that he has pursued his own independent course in his own way. 

 As to M. Taine's statement that " Mr. Spencer has the merit of ex- 

 tending to the phenomena of Nature and of mind " Mr. Darwin's 

 principle of Natural Selection, the facts given show how mistaken 

 was his view of the case. Strange to say, M. Taine, who claims to 

 be a psychologist, puts forth this idea in a review of Mr. Spencer's 

 "Principles of Psychology," a work which treated the subject of mind 

 throughout, and for the first time from the point of view of Evolution, 

 and this years before Mr. Darwin had published a word upon the 

 subject. 



As this error of M. Taine is frequently repeated, 1 and indicates a 

 gross misapprehension of the subject, it is desirable to add a word or 

 two regarding Mr. Darwin's relation to the question. While he has 

 contributed immensely toward the extension and establishment of a 

 theory of organic development, he has never made even an attempt to 

 elucidate the law of Evolution as a general principle of Nature. His 

 works do not treat of this problem at all, and nothing has tended 



1 Another example of it has just been furnished by the Saturday Review, which, in 

 commenting upon Prof. Tyndall's late address, remarks : " What Darwin has done for 

 physiology, Spencer would do for psychology by applying to the nervous system partic- 

 ularly the principles which his teacher (!) has already enunciated for the physical sys- 

 tem generally." 



