viii INTRODUCTION

against theology and against metaphyaifti, against
monarchy and against molly-coddling Icgblatiiw, agiuiwt
classical education and against «adtli««» against wur
and against Weismann. So that wt« can hardly pkturt*
the man who has not some crow to pick with Sfu'mttr.
It is not to be wondered at, then, that wr Jhtd
extraordinary difference of opinion aa to tht* value *»t
the great Dissenter's deliverances. In f%«f» Prwf,
Henry Sidgwick spoke of Herbert Spencrr as ««our
most eminent living philosopher," «tni in flu* ««»<*
sentence described him m ** an impressive survival «»!'
the drift of thought in the first half of the ttttu.net'ttth
century," Some have likened him to a wctim! Ari»-
totle, while others assure us that the aiiihar ut thf
Synthetic Philosophy was not n philosopher at ail,
Similarly there are scientists who ttll i» that »H|wnct»r
may have been a great philosopher, bw that ht?
too much of an a prim thinker to be of great
in science. Many critics. Indeed, devote »« much
time and ability to demonstrating Spencer** iticum-
petence, in this or that field of thoughtt that itir
reader is left with the impression that it mutt* br «
tower of strength which require* so many amauhx.
And there are others, neither philcnoplicri ttor
scientists, who are content to dismias Spencer with
saying that the least in the Kingdom of I leaven U
greater than he, Yet this much b conceded by
most, that Herbert Spencer wa« in unusually keen
intellectual combatant, who took the cvolutton-
formula into his strong hands *» « maattr-k«yt atid
tried (teaching others to try better) to open
with all the locked doors of the oniverae—a)! the
immediate, though none ©f the ultimate, Hddlea,