FORMAL LOGIC. 163 



I have mentioned my husband's early interest in 1847 

 Berkeley's philosophy, and Mr. J. S. Mill's opinion of the 

 manner in which some of Berkeley's arguments were 

 affected by Mr. De Morgan's enunciation of the principle 



therefore but announce it. Biology means the Science of Life. As to what con- 

 stitutes life, we expected to have to remain in the dark. Schelling says it is ' the 

 tendency to individuation.' Richarand says, 'Life is a collection of phenomena 

 which succeed each other during a limited time in an organised body : ' a very good 

 definition. But is champagne alive as long as it fizzes, and a top as long as it 

 spins ? De Blainville says, ' Life is the twofold internal movement of composition 

 and decomposition, at once general and continuous.' Mr. Spencer formerly defined 

 life as ' the co-ordination of actions.' Mr. Lewes says, ' Life is a series of definite 

 and successive changes, both of structure and composition, which take place 

 within an individual without destroying its identity.' Mr. Spencer ends with 

 ' The definite combination of heterogeneous changes, both simultaneous and 

 successive.' We have heard other definitions. Time was when life, bon ton, and 

 the thing, were synonymous terms ; and, according to the City lady, it consisted 



in 



Drinking tea, on summer afternoons, 

 At Bagnigge Wells, with china and gilt spoons. 



All the definitions we have given apply to the life of organised material beings. 

 Thus restricted, our definition is, that life is that state of a material being in which 

 structure which performs functions is maintained by matter which the living being 

 has power to draw from without, and which, when a man and an Englishman, he 

 calls nutriment. 



In a later edition of the Sociology Mr. Spencer has, in answer to 

 remonstrance, added a note of self-justification. This note is to the 

 purpose so far as that it will enable readers to discern the real 

 gravamen of Mr. De Morgan's offence. Whether Mr. Spencer had 

 just cause for annoyance in his reviewer's evident want of respect 

 for the science of Biology (that is, so far as it undertakes to define the 

 nature of life) may be an open question. But with respect to the 

 misquotation, a reading of Mr. Spencer's chapter containing his defini- 

 tion will show that it was the result of a simple oversight. It appears 

 that the quotation should have stood ' the definite combination of 

 heterogeneous changes, both simultaneous and successive, in corre- 

 spondence with external co-existences and sequences.' I do not pre- 

 sume to enter here into any discussion of the definition, and therefore 

 only cite it that those who understand- it (which I do not profess 

 to do distinctly) may know the nature and extent of the injustice 

 done to it in the review. I abstain from expressing an opinion as to 

 the propriety of Mr. Spencer's mode of presenting his case, preferring 

 to leave the decision to my readers. 



It is proper to add that Mr. Spencer has in private correspondence 

 disclaimed all intention of imputing unconscientiousness. All that 

 can be said of this is, that better ways of not imputing unconscien- 

 tiousness might be suggested. 



M 2 



