“A PROPHET OF THE SOUL” 
Il 
The reception of Bergson’s philosophy by differ- 
ent types of mind has, of course, been very diverse. 
He conquers easily the higher class of his general 
readers — the lovers of good literature — because 
of the superb literary style of his work; his philo- 
sophical readers do not succumb quite so readily, 
though many of these are enthusiastic, and all are 
interested; but he has a hard fight with many of his 
scientific readers. I have noted but one man of sci- 
ence, the eminent physicist Sir Oliver Lodge, who 
is in accord with the main drift of his work. It is 
probably the philosophical, not to say theological, 
strain in Sir Oliver, and his love of good literature, 
that make him respond so cordially to Bergson, 
especially to his conception of life as a primordial 
creative impulse pervading matter. He declares 
that the work is “peculiarly acceptable and inter- 
esting to men of science.” 
Professor Poulton disputes his doctrine of instinct 
as a form of sympathy, and argues forcibly and fairly 
against it. Sir Edwin Ray Lankester, an eminent 
Darwinian biologist, in introducing and endorsing 
H.S. R. Elliott’s attack upon “Creative Evolution,” 
expresses his dissent with angry and insulting epi- 
thets. Mr. Balfour and our own William James 
express deep sympathy and admiration for the work 
of the French philosopher. Most of our university 
201 
