EVOLUTION AND SOCIOLOGY. 43 



this hour ; and friend and foe alike agree in warning 

 us against her. But a further reading of Nature may 

 decide not that we must discharge the teacher but beg 

 her mutinous pupils to try another term at school. 

 With Nature studied in the light of a true biology, or 

 even in the sense in which the Stoics themselves em 

 ployed their favorite phrase, it must become once 

 more the watchword of personal and social progress. 

 With Mr. Huxley s definition of what the Stoics 

 meant by Nature as &quot; that which holds up the ideal of 

 the supreme good and demands absolute submission of 

 the will to its behests. . . which commands all men 

 to love one another, to return good for evil, to regard 

 one another as citizens of one great state,&quot; 1 the 

 phrase, &quot; Live according to Nature,&quot; so far from hav 

 ing no application to the modern world or no sanc 

 tion in modern thought, is the first commandment of 

 Natural Religion. 



The sociologist has grievously complained of late 

 that he could get but little help from science. The 

 suggestions of Bagehot, the Synthetic Philosophy of 

 Herbert Spencer, the proposals of multitudes of the 

 followers of the last who announced the redemption 

 of the world the moment they discovered the &quot; Social 

 Organisms,&quot; raised great expectations. But somehow 

 they were not fulfilled. Mr. Spencer s work has been 

 mainly to give this century, and in part all time, its 

 first great map of the field. He has brought all the 

 pieces on the board, described them one by one, de 

 fined and explained the game. But what he has 

 failed to do with sufficient precision, is to pick out the 

 King and Queen. And because he has not done so, 

 1 Evolution and Ethics, p. 27. 



