584 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY 



have so treated the Christian religion, thereby creating schisms, sec- 

 tarianism, and that intolerant party spirit " which blights and cankers 

 the truth itself." "Whatever Christianity may be now, primarily it 

 was a method of living, a principle of life — not a creed or dogma. 



For us, in this day and time, to repeat this blunder would simply 

 be indefensible and unpardonable. However desirable unity may be, 

 it should never be purchased at the expense of truth and freedom. 

 Dr. Schiller says : 



Two men, therefore, with different temperaments, ought not to arrive at 

 the same metaphysic, nor can they do so honestly ; each should react individually 

 on the food for thought which his personal life affords, and the resulting differ- 

 ences ought not to be set aside as void of ultimate significance. . . . No two 

 men ever think (and still less feel) alike, even when they profess allegiance 

 to the self-same formulas. 



Consequently, the pragmatic method will not prevent the forma- 

 tion of different systems of philosophy, which may be expected to 

 " abound as before, and be as various as ever." They will still " have 

 their day and cease to be," in the future as in the past, being necessarily 

 only " broken lights," but pragmatism will not fall with them, for the 

 reason that it will be " more than they " and, therefore, not identified 

 with any of them. 



That pragmatism should have encountered bitter opposition was 

 what might have been expected. Has it not been so with every great 

 movement in human thought from the time of Protagoras, with his 

 famous dictum, " man is the measure of all things," down to the present 

 time? It seems inevitable that all must run the gauntlet of criticism. 

 Perhaps, this helps to determine " the survival of the fittest." Pro- 

 fessor James E. Angell has recently said: 



Signs are not wanting that the asperity of its critics is already softening — 

 especially those who come out from behind the screen of anonymous reviews. 



This would seem to be true, since even Mr. Bradley has said of 



Professor James's last book : 



While reading the lectures on Pragmatism, I, doubtless like others, am led 

 to ask myself, " Am I and have I been always myself a Pragmatist ? " This 

 question I still find myself unable to answer. 



However, the distinguished author of " Appearance and Eeality " 

 may have made this statement in a Pickwickian sense. If it be true, 

 as has been somewhat sneeringly said, that pragmatism has made com- 

 paratively few converts among the professional philosophers, but has 

 made its strongest appeal to the men in the street, it may be fittingly 

 replied that this has been likewise true of the greatest movements in 

 the world's history. That the common people have heard its teachers 

 gladly may prove to be, not its reproach, but its honor and its glory. 

 Again and again it has happened that " not many wise men after the 



