COSMIC PHILOSOPHY 



ingly dispense with this proof, as our point will 

 be quite sufficiently established .by an examina- 

 tion of the third and fourth propositions above 

 alleged as cardinal alike to Positivism and to 

 Cosmism. 



And first, as regards the fourth proposition, 

 the preceding chapter showed that Comte's con- 

 ception of the scope and functions of philosophy 

 was by no means the same as that which lies at 

 the bottom of the present work. We have seen 

 that he treated philosophy as merely an Orga- 

 non of scientific methods, and totally ignored 

 the conception of philosophy as a Synthesis of 

 truths concerning the Cosmos. Now in order 

 to comprehend the full purport of this, we must 

 ask what was Comte's aim in constructing a sys- 

 tem of philosophy ? To what end was this 

 elaborate Organon devised? It was not devised 

 for the purpose of aiding the systematic explo- 

 ration of nature in all directions, for we have 

 seen that Comte began by discouraging and 

 ended by anathematizing a large class of most 

 important inquiries, chiefly on the ground of 

 their " vainness " or " inutility." To under- 

 stand the purpose of all this admirable treat- 

 ment of philosophy as an Organon, we must 

 take into account the statement of Dr. Bridges 

 that Comte's philosophic aims were not differ- 

 ent in his later epoch from what they had been 

 in the earlier part of his career. From the very 

 1 08 



