: 3 MR. DARWIN’S CRITICS 171 
— 
_and eternal law of human nature that “ ginger is 
‘hot in the mouth,” the assertion has as much 
foundation of truth as the other, though I think 
‘it would be expressed in needlessly pompous 
‘language. I must confess that I have never been 
able to understand why there should be such a 
_ bitter quarrel between the intuitionists and the 
‘utilitarians. The intuitionist is, after all, only a 
utilitarian who believes that a particular class of 
_ pleasures and pains has an especial importance, by 
reason of its foundation in the nature of man, and 
its inseparable connection with his very existence 
as a thinking being. And as regards the motive 
_ of personal affection: Love, as Spinoza profoundly 
says, is the association of pleasure with that which 
is loved! Or, to put it to the common sense of 
mankind, is the gratification of affection a pleasure 
ora pain? Surely a pleasure. So that whether 
the motive which leads us to perform an action 
is the love of our neighbour, or the love of God, it 
_isundeniable that pleasure enters into that motive. 
Thus much in reply to Mr. Mivart’s arguments. 
-Tecannot but think that it is to be regretted that 
he ekes them out by ascribing to the doctrines of 
the philosophers with whom he does not agree, 
logical consequences which have been over and 
over again proved not to flow from them : and when 
reason fails him, tries the effect of an injurious 
? **Nempe, Amor nihil aliud est, quam Letitia, concomitante 
idea cause externe.”—Fthices, IIT. xiii, 
