COSMIC PHILOSOPHY 



based upon the utter rejection of anthropo- 

 morphism and the adoption of none but sci- 

 entific doctrines and methods. I have already 

 pointed out how great are our obligations to 

 him for this important work, and I need not 

 repeat the acknowledgment. For this reason it 

 is obvious that whenever the theological thinker 

 encounters a system which as far as possible 

 rejects anthropomorphic interpretations, and 

 whenever the metaphysician encounters a sys- 

 tem which denies the validity of his subjective 

 method, both the one and the other will quite 

 naturally regard this system as some phase of 

 Positivism. For the same reason, when we re- 

 member how strong is the tendency to " read 

 between the lines " of any system of thought 

 and thus to interpret it in accordance with our 

 preconceptions, we shall see how easy it is for 

 those who first derived from Comte their no- 

 tions of scientific method and of the limits of 

 philosophic inquiry, to " read into " his system 

 all the later results of their intellectual experi- 

 ence, and thus to persist in regarding the whole 

 as Positive Philosophy. Of this tendency it 

 seems to me that we have an illustrious example 

 in Mr. Lewes, the learned historian of philoso- 

 phy and acute critic of Kant, who in the latest 

 edition of his " History " still maintains that 

 the agreement between Comte and Spencer is 

 an agreement in fundamentals, while the differ- 

 104 



