EVOLUTION 35 



results of value, the scientific investigator who has 

 grasped the Spencerian conception in its complete signifi- 

 cance receives the additional stimulus derived from the 

 knowledge that his labours will result in a contribution 

 to that universal Science which constitutes Philosophy. 



The recognition that there is one universal Science is 

 in fact tantamount to the admission that our divisions and 

 subdivisions into special sciences are artificial and do not 

 correspond with the reality of Nature ; they are con- 

 venient but arbitrary divisions necessitated by imperfect 

 knowledge and by the hmitation of human faculty. It 

 must, I think, be admitted that the consoUdation of 

 natural knowledge under the influence of the evolutionary 

 idea marks a real advance in our conception of Nature as 

 a consistent whole ; it will not be denied that for that 

 advance Science and Philosophy in the nineteenth century 

 are mainly indebted to Herbert Spencer. 



A system of Philosophy based upon Science might by 

 virtue of its origin be expected to be capable of being 

 used as a means for promoting further scientific progress. 

 As in the narrower domain of each special science we are 

 justified in using, .and do in fact use, our generalizations 

 deductively in order to test their soundness by appl3dng 

 them to particular cases, so the broader and more com- 

 prehensive philosophical principles should, if valid, be 

 capable of being wielded deductively in every department 

 of Science, since, in the Spencerian sense, a science, as now 

 understood, is simply a subdivision of Philosophy created 

 by human agency for purposes of expediency. The 

 method which is vahd in Science in detail cannot logically 

 be denied to Science in its totality. The question how far 

 Spencer's deductions are valid thus resolves itself into 

 a question of the same order as that relating to the 

 soundness of scientific conclusions in general. To exact 

 a standard of infallibility from a philosophical system 

 based upon Science is as unscientific as the imposition of 

 finality upon the conclusions of Science. The validity of 

 Spencer's conclusions derived from the appUcation of the 



