6i8 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



of natural phenomena. In the social 

 sphere the principle rests upon observed 

 effects, and is an induction from the facts 

 belonging to that sphere, just as strictly 

 as the law of organic evolution is de- 

 rived from facts in the biological field. 

 This is abundantly shown in " First 

 Principles," where the law, as applied 

 to society, rests upon its own inde- 

 pendent basis, and not upon the analogy 

 of the social to the individual organism. 

 So far, indeed, from proceeding by the 

 method stated by Prof. Cairnes, Mr. 

 Spencer actually proceeded by the re- 

 verse method : instead of beginning with 

 biology and carrying out his conclusions 

 to be applied to society, he began first, 

 and early in life, the direct study of 

 social phenomena, and pursued that line 

 of inquiry many years before taking up 

 biology. With Prof. Cairnes's criticism 

 of the "analogy" we have nothing to 

 do; nor is it of any importance that 

 Huxley and Spencer had a controversy 

 about it. The question is as old as 

 Plato, and both Cairnes and Huxley ad- 

 mit that the analogy has some value 

 Mr. Spencer never claimed for it any 

 thing more. We only say that the 

 use the reviewer makes of it proves 

 that he has taken but little pains to 

 inform himself of Mr. Spencer's real 

 doctrines. 



Let us now consider Prof. Cairnes's 

 main ground of attack upon Spencer's 

 theory of social evolution. Calling at- 

 tention to the fact that the social con- 

 dition of the largest portion of the 

 human race is stationary, and that 

 there are numerous examples of social 

 retrogression, he charges Mr. Spencer 

 with ignoring these facts because they 

 have no place in his theory of evolution. 

 We have now, he says, three thousand 

 years of history, and " surely, before 

 propounding his speculation as a law 

 of human society, from which he is at 

 once justified in deducing consequences 

 of the largest kind bearing upon human 

 conduct, Mr. Spencer was bound to 

 consider what amount of countenance 



or support it received from the evidence 

 derivable from such fields of research ; 

 but from the application of this test he 

 has wholly abstained" (the italics are 

 ours). And, after referring to the back- 

 ward movement of human affairs in 

 Europe, for many centuries, he adds 

 that " the verdict of history, as now 

 understood by its most competent in- 

 terpreters, is distinctly opposed to the 

 theory of social evolution enunciated by 

 Mr. Spencer. Now, this is a fact that 

 has been completely ignored by that dis- 

 tinguished writer : he has simply passed 

 it by as not concerning his argument ; 

 and, in doing so, has, as I contend, set 

 at naught one of the best-understood 

 canons of the inductive method." These 

 passages, and the whole argument in 

 which their thought is expanded, simply 

 show (if we may be allowed to speak 

 plainly) that Prof. Cairnes does not 

 know what he is talking about. His 

 statements are squarely against all the 

 facts. So far is it from being true that 

 Mr. Spencer ignores history in his social 

 theories, that he has made the most 

 elaborate and extensive preparations in 

 this direction for future use in working 

 out the principles of sociology. Nor 

 were these preparations mere projects 

 yet to be executed. The facts of the 

 sociological history of England, on a 

 most comprehensive plan, had been col- 

 lated, and organized, and published a 

 year and a half, when Prof. Cairnes 

 comes forward to charge him with 

 neglecting history. The professor, in- 

 deed, seems not to have the faintest 

 idea of Mr. Spencer's real attitude 

 toward his subject. Had he examined 

 the work just referred to, which was 

 his bounden duty as a reviewer, he 

 would have discovered that, so far from 

 ignoring history in social affairs, Mr. 

 Spencer is doing more than any other 

 man to bring it forward and give it its 

 true place in the scientific study of so- 

 ciety. He would have found that, of 

 the three great social groups into which 

 the human race is divided by Mr. Spen- 



