v.} " MODERN SYMPOSIUM." 59 



heeded this obvious maxim of philosophic caution. 

 Loose talk about " materialism " is apt to imply 

 loose thinking as to the manner in which the meta- 

 physical relations of body and soul are to be appre- 

 hended. Perhaps Mr. Harrison, as a positivist, will 

 say that he has nothing to do with apprehending 

 the metaphysical relations between body and soul; 

 but, however that may be, there is some laxity of 

 thought exhibited in charging Professor Huxley 

 with " materialism " because he speaks of " build- 

 ing up a physical theory of moral phenomena." 

 To try to explain conscience, with metaphysical 

 strictness, as a result of the grouping of material 

 molecules, is something which I am sure Professor 

 Huxley would never think of doing ; but, unless I 

 am entirely mistaken on this point, there is no ground 

 for Mr. Harrison's charge of materialism. 



To see Professor Huxley charged with materialism, 

 and in a reproachful tone withal, by a positivist who 

 does not acknowledge the existence of a soul, save in 

 some extremely Pickwickian sense, is a strange, not to 

 say comical, spectacle. " What next ? " one is inclined 

 to ask. Positivists are apt to have, indeed, an eccle- 

 siastical style of expression, and one would almost 

 think, from his manner, that Mr. Harrison was making 



