VII. 

 A REPLY TO HAECKEL. 



The revolt against '"authority" has been car- 

 ried to ridiculous extremes. The Manchester 

 school individualist, Herbert Spencer, and the 

 metaphysical egoist, Max Stirner, would alike 

 agree to the reduction of all authority to the 

 smallest possible residue. The most reckless 

 of their disciples, having shut out from their 

 thoughts all communication with the world 

 of reality^ would make it impossible for six 

 men to pull effectively on a rope because five 

 of them would be obliged to recognize the 

 authority of the sixth, when he, at the proper 

 moment, should call "Heave, ho." 



To thinkers of this order, music would be 

 impossible. Who could imagine a radical in- 

 dividualist bowing to a waved stick and rec- 

 ognizing the highly centralized authority of 

 the "leader." The music of the logical, au- 

 thority-repudiating individualist, would be the 

 haphazard beating of the tom-tom of the East 

 Indian, and not the highly regulated strains of 

 a modern orchestra. 



This folly is equalled, if not out-done, by 

 those who refuse to recognize authority in 



115 



