54 6 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



have long been maintained in the Popu- 

 lar Science Monthly." 



"We have heard a great deal of Mr. 

 Spencer's materialism. The charge has 

 become stereotyped. It is said that 

 this is a materialistic age ; that life 

 is materialistic ; that science is mate- 

 rialistic, and that Spencer is the arch- 

 materialist who works the doctrine up 

 into a philosophy for universal gratifi- 

 cation. We have always denied the 

 truth of this accusation, and held that 

 it has been made either in ignorance 

 or dishonesty. We have maintained 

 not only that Spencer is explicitly 

 opposed to materialism, but that he 

 has written with great power against 

 it. And we have, moreover, main- 

 tained that, in the future emergencies 

 of theological thought which are sure 

 to result from the further progress of 

 science, the value of Spencer's anti- 

 materialistic logic will be better appre- 

 ciated. All this has been regarded as 

 sufficiently amusing, but how is it now 

 with the experts of the Victoria Insti- 

 tute? The Bev. Mr. Ground says: 

 " The existence and the immateriality 

 of mind is a cardinal doctrine of Mr. 

 Spencer's philosophy. It is one of the 

 last and most certain deliverances of 

 his philosophy that mind and matter 

 both exist, and that between these two 

 there is a chasm which no effort of ours 

 enables us to cross. He exhausts the 

 resources of language to declare that 

 this is the one fact which transcends 

 in absolute certainty every other fact. 

 Somehow, this seems to have escaped 

 the notice of many who have criticised 

 his writings, and he is commonly be- 

 lieved to uphold something like mate- 

 rialism. Greater error, how T ever, there 

 can hardly "be. Materialism has never 

 before had such a powerful and uncom- 

 promising opponent, and it is hardly 

 probable that it can ever again make 

 head against his attacks. The doctrine 

 of the absolute immateriality of mind 

 is a structural part of his philosophy, 

 and one which is simply invaluable to 



those w r ho see the spiritual aspect of 

 things." 



In the discussion which followed 

 the reading of the paper, there was 

 not a word of protest against this state- 

 ment. Various things were objected, 

 to, but this avowal, so directly in the 

 teeth of current prejudice, provoked 

 not the slightest criticism. It was, in 

 fact, indorsed by the unanimous ap- 

 proval of Mr. Ground's argument, 

 which was based upon the idea that 

 Spencer is not a materialist, and de- 

 rived its whole force from this assump- 

 tion. Mr. Ground makes numerous 

 citations from Spencer w T hich incon- 

 testably prove his position ; and this 

 portion of his argument may be fairly 

 put against the whole mass of criticism 

 which aims to convict Spencer of mate- 

 terialism. 



But there was one part of Mr 4 

 Ground's essay for which the society 

 was not prepared : his estimate of the 

 character of Spencer's work startled 

 his audience. He began by saying: 

 "The system of philosophy associated 

 with the name of Herbert Spencer has 

 now been nearly twenty years before 

 the philosophical world, and it has 

 slow T ly made its way until it has won a 

 place in the first rank of such produc- 

 tions. "Whatever we may think of it, 

 it is not easy to withhold our intellect- 

 ual homage. It is the last and proba- 

 bly the greatest attempt ever made to 

 present a true philosophy of the kos- 

 mos; it is imbued with the modern 

 scientific spirit ; it claims to be strictly 

 in accord with scientific principles; it 

 displays a breadth of generalization 

 and a w r ealth of energy such as we find 

 only in the greatest works of all time; 

 and it is by many believed to be one of 

 the worthiest triumphs ever achieved 

 by the unaided intellect of man. It is 

 never easy to estimate justly any con- 

 temporary work we stand too near it 

 to see its true proportions but it 

 seems to not a few that Mr. Spencer 

 may fairly claim a place in the front 



