394 



NA TURE 



[August 25, 1904 



naturalists as peculiar to the British Islands, with the 

 sole exception of Mus sylvaticus wintoni. One of the 

 worst omissions of this nature is the absence of any 

 reference to the marked distinctness of the British 

 squirrel and its remarkable seasonal colour-changes. 

 As regards nomenclature in general, we observe that 

 while the author avoids such objectionable alliterations 

 as Vulpes vulpes and Lutra Intra, he is in many 

 respects — notably in the case of the bats — out of date. 



In addition to existing types, the author also records 

 extinct forms, but since the amount of descriptive 

 matter allotted to these is very brief, the lists of genera 

 and species are dismal and uninteresting. Nor are 

 they free from error, Hyracotherium, for instance, 

 being described as tapir-like, while Microchoerus is 

 classed as an insectivore instead of as a lemur. Equally 

 glaring are the errors in the list of fossil reptiles, 

 where we find Ornithostoma among the crocodiles, 

 the sauropod Bothriospondylus among the theropods, 

 the theropod Palseosaurus in the sauropods, and many 

 other errors of a similar type, in addition to numerous 

 misprints. 



The coloured illustrations, although not perhaps 

 very artistic, are sufficient in most cases to enable the 

 reader to identify the various species without difficulty, 

 while the excellent glossary of technical terms should 

 prove useful to the beginner. While welcoming this 

 little volume as an honest attempt to popularise a 

 knowledge of the British mammals and reptiles, we 

 cannot but regret that the author did not seek 

 specialist advice and assistance before going to press. 



R. L. 



PHILOSOPHY OF LIFE AND DEATH. 

 The Nature of Man: Studies in Optimistic Philosophy. 

 Bv E. Metchnikoff. English Translation edited by 

 P. Chalmers Mitchell, M.A., D.Sc. ■ Pp. xviii-l-309. 

 (London : \V. Heincmann ; New York : G. P. 

 Putnam's Sons, 1903.) Price 12s. 6d. 



PROF. METCHNIKOFF'S work is already known 

 to many ; it has been widely read in previous 

 editions, and, now that it is offered in an English 

 version, will become still more widely known. The 

 great merits of the work have already been appreci- 

 ated. The author is an acknowledged master of his 

 subject, and no more fruitful source of valuable ideas 

 could be imagined than a mind which combined with 

 philosophical breadth and acumen an accurate and far- 

 reaching knowledge of every grade of organism. 

 One sees from the apt choice and effective use of 

 examples how thoroughly the author has his materials 

 at command. 



If we might characterise with a word the central 

 problem of the book, ethical would seem the term 

 most appropriate. The key-words are harmony and 

 disharmony ; w'e ask sometimes, Why should we be 

 moral? Prof. Metchnikoff 's question is rather, Why 

 do we need morality? The answer lies in the exist- 

 ence of disharmonies. The first part of the work deals 

 with these disharmonies as a matter of scientific dis- 

 covery; they are shown to exist in the structure of 

 NO. 181 7, VOL. 70] 



organisms throughout the vast scale of nature ; not 

 least do we find in man disharmonies of digestion, of 

 reproduction, and of self-preservation; the whole dis- 

 cussion forms a chapter of extreme interest and 

 importance. The second part reviews the attempts 

 of religion and philosophy to account for or alleviate 

 these disharmonies. The polemic is severe ; religion 

 especially is arraigned for failing in its own efforts 

 and hindering those of science; belief in immortality 

 is an illusion with which we soothe a mind conscious 

 that it has been cheated of its due. Old age and death 

 form the topic of greatest interest to the author. The 

 principle underlying the third and closing section of 

 the work is that no natural process should be pro- 

 ductive of pain ; death as the natural end of life 

 should therefore be normally accompanied by a desire 

 for the end ; desire depends on physical conditions, 

 and this harmony can only be produced if life is so 

 far prolonged that the desire to live wanes with the 

 physical strength. This, our author thinks, is a 

 harmony which science can in time secure for us ; the 

 details must be left for the reader to discover ; at any 

 rate, he will find a topic of great interest excellently 

 treated. 



Prof. Metchnikoff's reputation in the scientific 

 world is unique ; he comes before us here as some- 

 thing more than a man of science, rather as a prophet, 

 one might almost say, as a high priest. Faith, dis- 

 illusioned, is to leave its old temples and take sanc- 

 tuary in laboratories. If progress dictates this course, 

 no prejudice should hinder it. Meanwhile the opposi- 

 tion of the second and third parts of this book aft'ords 

 an interesting view of the prospects. Take, for 

 example, the contrast of the philosophic question and 

 the scientific answer. The question propounded is. 

 Can I hope for immortality? Science replies that the 

 proper term of life is, say, 150 years. The spirit cries 

 out to be saved from the prospect of annihilation ; 

 science replies that if you live properly you will some 

 day want to die ! Clearly one question is asked, but 

 the answer is the answer of another and a different 

 problem. The materialistic bias of a scientific posi- 

 tion, accepted uncritically, seems to have left the re- 

 futed philosophy and the triumphant science in a kind 

 of asymptotic relation. At the best it would seem that 

 the theory cannot remove the mental disharmony which 

 the' realisation of finitude coexisting with the purpose 

 to live must always produce. It is only in the more 

 limited sphere that science succeeds in being optimistic, 

 and the optimism of this book is conditioned upon our 

 ability to regard the spiritual as a subordinate aspect 

 of the material, a point that the disciple may delight 

 to accept but the unbeliever desires to have demon- 

 strated. 



The translation of this book seems to have been care- 

 fully done, with only an occasional divergence from 

 accuracy. Why have we three distinct spellings of 

 Buddha (p. 120)? cp. Bhuddhism (p. 120), and 

 Bouddha (p. 148). Meringitis (p. 132) requires correc- 

 tion, while the sentence " so there were only 

 Tourg^neff . . . and me " (p. 121) might be improved 

 in its grammar. G. S. B. 



