Page:Mind (New Series) Volume 6.djvu/257

 VI CRITICAL NOTICES. The Principles of Sociology. By HERBERT SPENCER. Vol. iii. London : Williams & Norgate, 1896. Pp. 635. THE present volume of Mr. Spencer's Principles of Sociology is not an entirely new book. It is cut up into three divisions, and two of these have already been placed before the public. The first division, dealing with Ecclesiastical Institutions, appeared a good many years ago in a separate form as an independent book. The second division, dealing with Professional Institutions, has also been previously published in the form of articles in reviews. The only portion of the book which is entirely new is the third part, which deals with Industrial Institutions. Objec- tions have been raised by purchasers of the first division of the present volume on the ground that they cannot obtain the two concluding divisions without purchasing the first a second time. The author, and not the purchaser, is the supreme judge as to the manner in which he shall publish his works. On the other hand, intending purchasers may be deterred, and probably are deterred, from carrying their intentions into effect when they find that they have to buy a second time a publication which is already in their possession. This, however, is a detail, offering it is true an inviting field for the exercise of casuistry, but of no import what- ever as far as the contents of the present volume are concerned. Ecclesiastical Institutions, according to Mr. Spencer, are the outcome of religious ideas, and on this point there is unanimity of opinion among all writers who have devoted attention to the subject. But when Mr. Spencer proceeds to say that the origin of religious ideas is to be found in ancestor worship he at once raises an issue on which there is the widest difference of opinion. An explanation, to be satisfactory, must take account of all the facts, and it can hardly be said of the ghost theory of the origin of religion that it is a theory which fulfils this condition. As a t matter of fact we know exceedingly little about the religious con- sciousness of primitive man. We may, if we like, assume that lis religious consciousness is somewhat similar in character to the religious consciousness of the modern savage, or to the religious jonsciousness of the progressive races of antiquity, or to the religious consciousness of the child. But after all we cannot "