EVOLUTIONARY ETHICS. 497 



EVOLUTIONARY ETHICS.* 



By HERBERT SPENCER. 



ril HE following letter, published in the Athenceum, for August 5, 

 1893, was drawn from me in response to certain passages in the 

 Romanes Lecture, delivered by the late Prof. Huxley at Oxford in 

 the Spring of 1893.f These passages were supposed to be directed 

 against doctrines I hold (see Athenceum, July 22, 1893); and it 

 seemed needful that I should defend myself against an attack coming 

 from one whose authority was so great. My justification for includ- 

 ing this letter among these fragments is that since the Romanes 

 Lecture referred to exists in a permanent form, it is proper that a 

 permanent form should be given to my reply. 



If it is not too great a breach of your rules, will you allow me 

 space for some remarks suggested by the review of Prof. Huxley's 

 lecture on " Evolution and Ethics," contained in your issue of the 

 22nd inst.? 



The incongruity between note 19 of the series appended to the 

 lecture, and a leading doctrine contained in the lecture itself, is 

 rightly pointed out by your reviewer. In the lecture Prof. Huxley 

 says : — 



" The practice of that which is ethically best — what we call 

 goodness or virtue — involves a course of conduct which, in all re- 

 spects, is opposed to that which leads to success in the cosmic struggle 

 for existence. In place of ruthless self-assertion it demands self- 

 restraint." — P. 33. 



But in note 19 he admits that — 



"strictly speaking [why not rightly speaking?], social life and the 

 ethical process, in virtue of which it advances towards perfection, 

 are part and parcel of the general process of evolution, just as the 

 gregarious habit of innumerable plants and animals, which has been 

 of immense advantage to them, is so." 



* From Various Fragments, by Herbert Spencer, in press of D. Appleton and Company. 



f As the Romanes Lecture was published in the Monthly (November and December, 

 18^)3), it seemed fitting that this reply to some of the more important points raised by Pro- 

 fessor Huxley should also be given to our readers. We accordingly put the letter in type 

 soon after it appeared in The Athenaeum, but at the request of Mr. Spencer it was with- 

 drawn. He having now given it permanent form, we feel at liberty to carry out our original 

 intention. — The Editor, 

 vol. lii.— 37 



