I884.J 
Analyses 0 f Books. 
161 
and in what it consists. He says, indeed (p. 9), concerning the 
dogma of animal and human automatism “ This conclusion 
from which so many Materialists have shrunk, was boldR ac’ 
3il h :t? rofes T T ciiff f' and 1 - coUSto 
Xr outcome" m T rrans > ured Realism, I can see no 
t r ine of£ Spencer ’ indeed > has disavowed the doc- 
l 0f bu ™ an ^tomatism, and has promised to show in a 
as quoTed in°Jhe hat ‘IT f t0 be avoided * He sa ^ s ’ however, 
space Ind u • ^ ° re US ’ “ Crude Realism holds that 
pace and time are objective realities, forms of things known 
apostenon Transfigured Realism holds that space and rime 
nrL f ° rm ^ ° f whlch have become forms of thought through 
organised and inherited experience of things.” According 1 o 
“ H ,? l0 d deali . sm teaches tha ‘ sp a “ and time 
are thinks, sense-objedts, arising from stimulus plus response 
therefore, for us, as much ob&b as tables! 
t ees, or men. These considerations will, we trust, enable the 
candid— though perhaps not the captious— reader to seize the 
difference between Mr. Spencer and Dr. Lewins 
tW« WI " S la / S d ° Wn as one of h^ fundamental propositions 
word, TV® thC " leaSUre 0f the Averse for man / the two 
the oriffiliaWn 6 ltaIlc V Se p bein ^ a necessa ry corrective addition to 
the origmal formula of Protagoras. The fundamental, and b v 
that ™ aU 8 ouJT mi ‘ wi aSSUmption of Transfigured Realism is 
that all our knowledge is based upon and bounded by expe- 
nence, and that outside or beyond himself man cannot go,” wfih 
the saving clause that the term experience means not alone the 
experience of the individual, but the colledtive experience of the 
z\,^2:z phes the so - ca,led “ *£*• 
We must now glance at the two conflicting systems which 
S tW nVi Und ^ rtak , es [° rec °ncile. Materialism is here defined 
as that philosophy which constructs the universe in its widest 
SDh-it’it rn Ught and e ™ 0t , I0n included, out of matter only. For 
and on of itT en ^ , n ° r °° m - U tdls US that in brain 
“man bMn^in^ but ener §T and matter. Hence 
action n I a t i T bodll f y tlssue ’ ln evei T desire > thought, and 
adtion only the resultant of all the conditions of his environment 
ammal automatism, -human automatism must result Here 
cfusinn eaS h° ni i n fi ° glC f ly up0n acce P ted fafts, we come to a con’ 
elusion which the author holds to be subversive of all morality. 
its^hd SS f" WG W ° Uld fal1 int ° Sce Pticism (using the word in 
philosophic sense, and not as is done at the tea-tables) and 
tu n^^l/br trUth mi iS n0n - exist ent or undiscoverable we 
turn to the Idealists. They tell us that “ There is but one exist 
ence mind. Analyse the concept matter, and you will discern 
sZm\T S b r a Synthesis of finalities (Materie ist Eigen- 
mentafr Hnttn' h are f ensations ’ and the synthesis is 
mental. But to what does this ultimately lead us ? To abso- 
