29 
formally their thanks to Dr. Irons for his exceedingly valuable paper. (Hear, 
hear.) It is a paper that I am sure cannot be properly discussed by those 
who have simply heard it for the first time. The true value of this paper 
will be found when it is taken home and calmly read and considered. The 
subject of which it treats is one of the greatest importance in its bearing 
upon philosophy, and upon all English and even all European thought. And 
I am sure that those who know what course that thought has taken will 
appreciate the good service Dr. Irons is doing in bringing the question fully 
before this Society. The paper just read is, I conceive, one which could 
only properly be brought before a Society like this ; and if this Institute had 
not been established, a paper like the present could not have been read in 
any other Society in London. (Hear, hear.) It is now my duty to call upon 
any gentleman who may have any remarks to make, either in accordance or 
disagreement with the paper, to do so, for here we invite the fullest and 
widest discussion of every subject, and with the most perfect freedom. 
Eev. Dr. Kigg. — I will venture, Mr. Chairman, to open the discussion by 
a few remarks. We must all of us have felt the truth of your remarks as to 
the exceeding ability and great value of this paper. In fact there are some 
parts of it which rise far beyond the mere level of ethical discussion, for they 
rise to the height of ethical apophthegms, and have an eloquence of an exceed- 
ingly impressive order. We must have felt some of the later passages to be 
especially of this description. There was also one passage in the earlier part 
of the essay which struck me exceedingly. I am not, however, going to 
occupy the time of the meeting in dilating upon all the excellencies of the 
paper, because, if I did so, I might take up the whole evening ; but this one 
particular passage greatly struck me : — 
“ For to go on without a philosophy is to build without a foundation. 
And more than this : if it be done long and deliberately, it is practically to 
dispense with conscience — a danger by no means remote. To form an 
opinion, or to take a side, without feeling bound to the utmost of our power 
to form the right opinion and to take the right side, (as if to know right and 
to be right were unimportant or indifferent), must be demoralizing.” 
I think that strikes a chord which needs to be sounded with very great 
distinctness at the present time. I think, also, that the remarks which Dr. 
Irons has made in regard to mere “ thinking in masses,” and the necessity 
of conscious individuality in principles and convictions, are exceedingly im- 
portant. We must all agree that, even as regards the foundation of our 
religious observances and worship, there is very great danger lest we should 
be content to have no basis whatever on which to rest our faith. At the 
same time, Sir, I venture to think that Dr. Irons, when he comes into con- 
tact with metaphysical problems, is not so happy ak when he is dealing with 
problems of moral philosophy. Dr. Irons will excuse the freedom of any 
remarks I have to make on that point. In fact, he has himself set us an 
example of a very happy freedom in the remarks which he has offered 
himself upon other papers which have come before us from time to time. I 
