2 SCIENCE PROGRESS 



in which Dr. Mercier makes an unsparing attack on logicians 

 in general, and on many particular individuals among them. 

 If radical contempt of authority were the sole mark of scientific 

 value, then this book would be a very important work indeed. 

 In point of fact its daring criticism and vigorous originality are 

 likely to alienate many who would gain much from a perusal of 

 it ; for all the cobwebs of pedantry and tradition are here swept 

 away as by a fresh breeze, or as we might perhaps more truly 

 put it, by a raging gale. Yet, valuable as many of Dr. Mercier's 

 criticisms appear, we are by no means disposed to agree with 

 them all. In particular we take objection to his argument that 

 the relation of cause and effect is one in which the conception 

 of force or power is necessary. That there is in the cause an 

 active principle, compelling the effect to ensue, appears to involve 

 a metaphysical assumption, akin to that of a " vital principle " 

 in physiology. The present writer has had occasion formerly 

 in this review to comment on a fallacy to which Dr. Mercier 

 is still somewhat prone ; and he thinks that here at least the 

 logicians have the advantage of Dr. Mercier. 



This subject is treated more widely, though far less scientific- 

 ally, in M. Emile Boutroux' The Contingency of the Laws of 

 Nature. 1 We note with satisfaction the statement of M. 

 Boutroux in the Preface that philosophy " should be grounded 

 on the sciences " ; we only regret that M. Boutroux, having 

 rendered lip-service to science, does nothing further to carry 

 it into reality. Indeed as early as page 2 he seems to regret 

 his own admission in the Preface, for he there states that purely 

 descriptive science " perverts the relations of things." As in 

 nearly all modern philosophy, he oscillates round the old 

 question of liberty and necessity, of free-will and determinism. 

 But he moves on the old and discredited planes of thought ; he 

 has not attained the more hopeful outlook furnished by physio- 

 logy. He talks about the faculties of the soul, about their 

 relative dignity, etc., as though philosophy were a branch of 

 ethics. The experience of centuries has taught us the futility 

 of this mode of reasoning ; nor will philosophy ever advance, 

 so long as philosophers occupy themselves with the moral 

 bearing of their subject. They must adopt the attitude of 

 science, and survey their facts with cold impartiality ; they 



1 Translated by Fred Rothwell. (Chicago and London : Open Court Publishing 

 Co., 1916.) 



