40 



The Irish Naturalist. 



February, 



CORRESPONDENCE. 



LAMARCK'S " ZOOLOGICAL PHILOSOPHY. " 



Permit mu to thank the Editors of the lYish Naturalist for the review^ 

 of my translation of Lamarck's " Philosophic Zoologique." The reviewer, 

 who signs himself G.H.C.," writes with such conspicuous ability and 

 fairness that I have no sort of ground for complaint. But there is one 

 point in his article, which seems to me to be so important as to justify 

 me in seeking a small corner of the magazine's valuable space. G.H.C. 

 criticizes me for stating that the rise of materialism is proportionate to the 

 advance of civilization : and he considers that the autumn of 1914 was an 

 unfortunate time for the promulgation of such an opinion. 



Now I wish to point out that I did not use the word "materiahsm " 

 in the sense given to it by shallow journalists, but in its correct sense. 

 So far from the present war being a product of materialism, it arises, in 

 my opinion, from a complete overthrow of all materialistic principles ; for 

 it necessarily involves a heavy diminution of material prosperity to all 

 the nations concerned in it. Almost without exception, the philosophic 

 and scientific materialists of the past have been extreme pacificists ; and 

 the smallest study of the subject is sufficient to show clearly the powerful 

 opposition which has always existed, and still exists, between materialistic 

 beliefs and all forms of militarism or war. I need scarcely remind 

 G.H.C. that in German history, it is the spiritualistic philosophers like 

 Fichte who have most ardently upheld the gospel of militarism : nor need 

 I dilate upon the fact that the present Kaiser unites military and aggressive 

 ideals with a spiritualistic philosophy of the most extravagant and con- 

 temptible kind. Those responsible for the present war are as far removed 

 from scientific materialism as they can well be. 



Our lower-grade journalists have apparently decided that "material- 

 ism " is a suitable brick to throw at anyone who misuses his power, and 

 breaks moral laws. They have ordained that materialism shall be 

 synonymous with selfishness and immorality : and they do so doubtless 

 because they have not the slightest notion what materialism means, or 

 what its doctrines are. Any history of materialism or philosophy (such 

 as that of Lange) would show that materialism has ever been far divorced 

 from crime and physical force. In correcting this misapprehension, 

 permit me once again to thank G.H.C. for the courtesy and insight of his 

 review. 



Hugh Elliot. 



With my co -editors, 1 willingly afford " a small corner " of the Irish 

 Naturalist for Mr. Eliot's courteous protest. The attitude that I intended 

 to attack, by the sentence to which he takes exception, was that of 

 complacency in our modern civilization wdiosc progress, in Mr. Elliot's 

 opinion, has been accompanied by the rise of materialism, as a philosophic 

 system. The war that has burst upon Europe seems to me to demand 

 from us all an abandonment of this complacency, and an acknowledgment 



^ /. Nat., voL xxii., p. 251. 



