ORGANIZATION OF THE SCIENCES 



than the more complex and special phenomena ; 

 but the other things have not been equal. And 

 consequently scientific evolution has not pro- 

 ceeded uniformly in a straight line, but rhyth- 

 mically, in a plexus of curved lines. 



As a representation of the logical order of 

 subordination among the different sciences, the 

 Comtean series is equally faulty. While it cor- 

 rectly formulates sundry of the minor relations 

 of dependence, as well as one relation of great 

 importance, — that of the dependence of organic 

 upon inorganic science, — it incorrectly formu- 

 lates the grand distinction of all, — the distinc- 

 tion between abstract and concrete, between an- 

 alytic and synthetic science. It mixes together 

 sciences formed by the analysis and synthesis 

 of concrete phenomena, and a science which is 

 purely abstract. It strives to represent, by a 

 linear series, relations which are so complex 

 that they can be adequately represented only in 

 space of three dimensions. 



It is therefore indisputable that the Comtean 

 classification, viewed absolutely, is a failure. 

 The advance of science has refuted instead of 

 confirming it. It has become rather an en- 

 cumbrance than a help to the understanding of 

 the true relations among the sciences. Shall 

 we then, with Professor Huxley, say that the 

 classification, and with it the whole Comtean 

 philosophy of science, is " absolutely worth- 

 61 . 



