COSMIC PHILOSOPHY 



plete, would be an Organon of Discovery ; the 

 latter, of Proof." Now I call this an admirable 

 definition ; but it is not the definition of Phi- 

 losophy, it is the definition of Logic. If we 

 were to accept it as a definition of philosophy, 

 we might admit that Comte constructed a phi- 

 losophy ; as it is, we can only admit that he 

 constructed a logic, or general theory of methods. 

 In the present chapter we have seen how valu- 

 able were his contributions to the logic of in- 

 duction. We may admit, with Mr. Mill, that 

 he treats this subject "with a degree of per- 

 fection hitherto unrivalled," — save (I should 

 say) by Mr. Mill himself. But an Organon of 

 Methods is one thing, and a Synthesis of Doc- 

 trines is another thing ; and a system of phi- 

 losophy which is to be regarded as a compre- 

 hensive theory of the universe must include 

 both. Yet Comte never attempted any other 

 synthesis than that wretched travesty which, 

 with reference to the method employed in it, 

 is aptly entitled " Synthese Subjective." 



Not only does Comte thus practically ignore 

 the conception of philosophy as a Synthesis of 

 the most general truths of science into a body 

 of universal truths relating to the Cosmos as a 

 whole, but there is reason to believe that had 

 such a conception been distinctly brought be- 

 fore his mind, he would have explicitly con- 

 demned it as chimerical. In illustration of this 



90 



