Page:Philosophical Review Volume 3.djvu/631

615, however, to convince himself that the moral code enjoined by an enlightened science of ethics is identical with that in which secularism must result, and widely at variance with that of theology.

The volume is well made up. The style is gratifyingly clear. The order of arrangement is so well judged as to constitute the entire book one continuous argument. The author is evidently a careful and fair-minded scholar. He is thoroughly persuaded that religion is not a good thing, and that it neither can be nor should be so modified as to survive the attacks of science. This conviction leads him to take an extreme view of the speculative weakness of the philosophy of religion, a view from which the most important errors of the book result. If one bears this in mind, the volume constitutes a very satisfactory representative of science in the contest against dogmatic theology. Its scientific air and general cogency of argument render it highly interesting and readable. One questions whether it will hasten the departure of religion from the world, but it may well aid in destroying dogmatism.