312 
very learned paper, from which many of us must have derived much 
information. 
Mr. Savile. — Respecting Mr. Row’s objection to my implied opinion of 
Aristotle, I would point out that it is not mine, but that of Justin Martyr, 
whose opinion of that famous philosopher is given at length, in the work to 
which I have referred in § 26. There are reasons why I must still prefer the 
opinion of Justin respecting him to that of Mr. Row ; inasmuch as he 
was a Grecian, and not an Englishman ; he lived seventeen centuries nearer 
the time of Aristotle, and was therefore more likely to understand him 
aright. Moreover, he was himself an eminent philosopher ; which can scarcely 
be said of any of the early Christian Fathers, with the exception of Clement 
of Alexandria in the second century. I must, therefore, still believe that 
Justin Martyr has correctly interpreted the opinion of Aristotle, whose 
philosophy, I venture to think, will not be much enhanced, when we hear of 
his grave and numerous errors of detail ; e.g. he affirmed that only in man 
we had the beating of the heart, that the left side of the body was colder 
than the right, that men had more teeth than women, and that there is an 
empty space at the back of every man’s head ! (See Professor Tyndall’s 
“ Address to the British Association at Belfast in 1874,” p. 15.) In reference 
to what is said in note to § 48, about the way in which Genesis i. 1 has been 
interpreted by those who in former days attempted to explain the Mosaic 
cosmogony without any knowledge of geology, I have recently discovered 
that Dr. James Anderson, in his work on the Royal Genealogies, considered 
a very learned work at the time of its publication, 150 years ago, explains 
the teaching of Moses iu the following way : — “ In the beginning of Time, 
God Almighty made out of nothing the Heavens and the Earth on October 
23rd in the afternoon, B.C. 4004 ; and the All-wise God thought 
fit to perform Creation gradually in the space of six days ! ” As 
regards the quotation from Herbert Spencer referred to in § 51, I gave 
it on the authority of Dr. Irons, but have recently been favoured with a 
letter from Mr. Spencer on the subject, and am obliged to own that I 
think Dr. Irons’s interpretation of Mr. Spencer’s opinions is, to say the 
least, certainly “misleading,” as Mr. Spencer expresses it.* And inas- 
much as Mr. Herbert Spencer, in the chapter on “ Reconciliation,” admits 
“ the Creative Power,” though d 5 vested of all anthropomorphisms, I do not 
see how any one can be warranted in asserting that he thus teaches, — “ I do 
not affirm that there is no God. I am simply between the two statements. 
Some say there is a God ; some say there is not. I only say that I am not 
aware of it.” In a similar manner I cannot help thinking that Professor 
Tyndall has been much misunderstood ; for though it is true that he has 
“as little fellowship with the atheist who says there is no God, ns with the 
theist who professes to know the mind of God ” (Use and Limit of the 
Dr. Irons has since written to say that he considers the quotation 
faithfully represents Mr. IT. Spencer’s statements in First Principles. — Ed. 
