PREFACE. xi 



characterizing that entire method or habit of philosophizing 

 of which Mr. Spencer's system is in our day the most 

 conspicuous product. In this sense I have contrasted 

 ,f Cosmism ,, with ^ Anthropomorphism " as two different 

 fashions or habits of interpreting phenomena, the contrast 

 being more specifically carried out, in the concluding 

 chapters of this work, between "Cosmic Theism" and 

 " Anthropomorphic Theism." For further justification and 

 elucidation I must refer to the body of the work, where 

 these terms are introduced and defended as occasion 

 requires. In view of all that is thus from time to time 

 brought forward, I think it will appear that a more 

 strikingly characteristic terminology would be hard to 

 find, or one in which so great a number of kindred dis- 

 tinctions are expressed by so small a group of terms. 



But while it is incumbent on me to declare Mr. Spencer's 

 disapproval of this terminology, it should be added that, 

 so far as I know, the question at issue between us is purely 

 a question of nomenclature, and is not implicated with any 

 essential differences of opinion as to the character and 

 position of the system of thought to which .the nomenclature 

 is applied. Without implying that Mr. Spencer should be 

 held responsible for everything that is maintained in the 

 following pages, I believe that the system here expounded 

 is essentially his, and that such supplementary illustrations 

 as I have added are quite in harmony with the fundamental 

 principles which he has laid down. 



Much of the new critical matter thus appears to be 

 concerned with questions of nomenclature and other ques- 

 tions which hinge, directly or remotely, upon these. And 

 considering how important are the "counters of thought," 

 and how often they are made to do duty as its hard money, 

 it will perhaps be felt that too much emphasis has not been 

 laid upon these points. The rest of the new critical matter, 



