131 LAY SERMONS, ESSAYS, AND REVIEWS. [vm. 



speculations as to what I do not teach. Nor do I feel called 

 upon to give any opinion as to M. Comte s merits or demerits as 

 regards sociology. Mr. Mill (whose competency to speak on 

 these matters I suppose will not be questioned, even by Mr. 

 Congreve) has dealt with M. Comte s philosophy from this point 

 of view, with a vigour and authority to which I cannot for a 

 moment aspire ; and with a severity, not unfrequently amounting 

 to contempt, which I have not the wish, if I had the power, to 

 surpass. I, as a mere student in these questions, am content to 

 abide by Mr. Mill s judgment until some one shows cause for its 

 reversal, and I decline to enter into a discussion which I have 

 not provoked. 



The sole obligation which lies upon me is to justify so much 

 as still remains without justification of what I have written 

 respecting Positivism namely, the opinion expressed in the 

 following paragraph : 



&quot; In so far as my study of what specially characterises the Positive Philo 

 sophy has led me, I find therein little or nothing of any scientific value, and 

 u great deal \vhich is as thoroughly antagonistic to the very essence of 

 science as anything in ultramontane Catholicism.&quot; 



Here are two propositions : the first, that the &quot; Philosophie 

 Positive &quot; contains little or nothing of any scientific value ; the 

 second, that Comtism is, in spirit, anti-scientific. I shall endea 

 vour to bring forward ample evidence in support of both. 



I. No one who possesses even a superficial acquaintance with 

 physical science can read Comte s &quot; Lemons &quot; without becoming 

 aware that he was at once singularly devoid of real knowledge on 

 these subjects, and singularly unlucky. What is to be thought 

 of the contemporary of Young and of Fresnel, who never misses 

 an opportunity of casting scorn upon the hypothesis of an ether 

 the fundamental basis not only of the undulatory theory of 

 light, but of so much else in modern physics and whose con 

 tempt for the intellects of some of the strongest men of his 

 generation was such, that he puts forward the mere existence cf 

 night as a refutation of the undulatory theory ? l What a won- 

 1 &quot; Philosophic Positive,&quot; ii. p. 440. 



