« 



A PROPHET OF THE SOUL" 



II 



The reception of Bergson's philosoi)hy by differ- 

 ent types of mind has, of course, been very diverse. 

 He conquers easily the higher class of his general 

 readers — the lovers of good literature — because 

 of the superb literary style of his work; his philo- 

 sophical readers do not succumb quite so readily, 

 though many of these are enthusiastic, and all are 

 interested; but he has a hard fight with many of his 

 scientific readers. I have noted but one man of sci- 

 ence, the eminent physicist Sir Oliver Lodge, who 

 is in accord w^ith the main drift of his work. It is 

 probably the philosophical, not to say theological, 

 strain in Sir Oliver, and his love of good literature, 

 that make him respond so cordially to Bergson, 

 especially to his conception of life as a primordial 

 creative impulse pervading matter. He declares 

 that the work is "peculiarly acceptable and inter- 

 esting to men of science.'* 



Professor Poulton disputes his doctrine of instinct 

 as a form of sympathy, and argues forcibly and fairly 

 against it. Sir Edwin Ray Lankester, an eminent 

 Darwinian biologist, in introducing and endorsing 

 H. S. R. Elliott's attack upon " Creative Evolution," 

 expresses his dissent with angry and insulting epi- 

 thets. Mr. Balfour and our own William .James 

 express deep sympathy and admiration for the work 

 of the French philosopher. Most of our university 



201 



