The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1882-12-10

rance. Is 1t an ignorance that merely lies upon
tho surface, and does but mask profound
knowledge? Waving. however. this frivolous.
though scarcely irrelevant question. we hear
tily concur with Dr. Porter In dccming 1t OF
little use to inquire whether the indignant full
limitations of unscientilc and ignorant re-
ligionists or the contemptuous asseveratons
OF unphllosophical and one-sided scientists do
the greater harm.
One OF the papers collected In this volume Is
an analysis OF the opinions OF the late Prof
Clifford. whom DIR. Porter calls the enJdnt ter
rible OF tho agnostic household. The re-
viewer insists. indeed. that Prof Clifford. al
though commonly classcd with the champions
OF agnosticism. cannot properly be described
rs an agnostic. According to DR.. Porter. he
differs from Spencer. Tyndall. and Darwin
and all those who contend that while science
admits that there ia an absolute. she aiflrms
that the absolute can never be so known by
man as to be formulated in thought or phrased
in words that consequently positive'revela-
ton. scientific or philosophical faith. ra-
tonal worship Is impossible. As against these
men Clifford asserts that. at present, science
finds not the slightest reason to believe there Is
any entity not finite and that In all probabili-
ty she will soon be able to demonstrate that no
such being exists. DIR. Porter declares that In
this position Clifford is by no means alone
among the negative thinkers. although he is
more courageous in his avowals. and that many
OF Mr. Spencer's adhorents regard the latter's
elaborate attempts to mediate between science
and religion as irrational excrescences upon
the philosophy OF evolution.
in respect. on the other hand. to the nature
OF the soul. its possible survival OF tho body
and the nature and authority Of conscience
Dr. Porter does not deny that Clifford held
the doctrines common to the agnostic school,
but he thinks the enJdnt terrible differed
from his associates by the more pointed
and effective way in which no stated the
common creed. and the more fearless de-
duction Of tho logical conclusions to which 1t
leads. and the more offensive phraseology in
which he characterizes the opposite opinions
What DR.. Porter means by offensive phraseol-
ogy is illustrated by an extract from Clif-
ford's essay on the ethics OF religion. In
the course Of this essay Clifford who. 1t will
be remembered. was High Churchman before
he became an Agnostic. bethinks himself with
q certain pathetic regret OF such Il comrade-
ship with the Great Companion as had once
fired his youth" But the relapse is only for a
moment Shaking off the spell. Clifford con-
cludes with nm utterance which evon DIR. Por-
ter feels himself constrained to describe as Ii
tanic: But after such helper OF men. out
side OF humanity the truth will not allow us to
seek. The dim and shadowy outlines OF the
superhuman Deity fade slowly away from be-
fore US; and rs the mist OF His presence floats
aside we perceive with greater clearness the
shape Of q yet grander and nobler ilgure-of
Him who made all gods and shall unmake
them. From tho dawn Of history. and from the
Utmost depth OF every soul. tho face Of our
Fathcr-man looks out upon us with the fire OF
eternal youth in His eyes. and says. Before
Jehovah was l am"
In his examination OF Herbert Spencer's
theory Of sociology. DR.. Porter pronounces the
Spenceran methods OF inquiry sophistical and
shallow. SO far as he has observed. converts
to the Spencerian philosophy are not recruited
in the legitimate method OF beginning with
their authors theory of knowledge and q care
full scrutiny OF his First Principles" Accord
ing to DR.. Porter those who begin at this fun
damental point rarely desire to so further.
The logic is so incoherent. the definitions are
so vacillating. and tho inductions SO ventures
some. that they neither wish nor dare to follow
so untrustworthy q leader" DIR. Porter thinks
that the men commonly attractedby Mr.. Spen-
Ger are those who begin with q specially.
either in politics. or physiology. or
history and who being little versed
in philosophy. are prepared in their later days
Of ambitious and manifold reading to accept
with an easy faith almost any specious general
lZationS winch stimulate the Inauguration ana
seem to supply ground for daring hypothesis.
I'VE believe" says Dr. Porter. that most Of
the currency and FEASIBILITY which Spencer's
materastic evolutions and anti-theistc ag-
Mysticism have gained with his conflding and
admiring disciples has been reflected back from
the imposing array OF facts and instances which
he has marshalled from his enormous reading
and the brilliant hierarchies Of his gcneraiza-
ton" The President of Yale College. in short
considers Mr.. Spencer admirably fitted to
addie the weak and empty headed. and even to
intoxicatc heads which are strong and self
confident"
In concluding his survey Of the Spencerian
theory of sociology. DR.. Porter finds 1t difficult
to suppress his Indignation at its authors half
contemptuous allusion to men like Mr.. Glad
stone. with whom the belief in divine interpo-
| sition goes along with and by no means OK
! cludes. the belief in natural production OF ef-
| fccts by natural agencies. DIR. Porter is not
pleased that Mr.. Spencer should have pro-
| nounced any compatibility Of the two agen-
cies wholly illogical. and should have illustrnt-
| ed the absurdity of combining them by an al
! fusion to the resort to public prayer in the case
| of the illness of the Prince OF Wales on whose
| recovery providcntal aid and natural causa-
| ton were unitedly recognized by thanksgiv-
| ing to God and n baronetcv to the DOCTOR"