Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 26.djvu/136

126 claims leave little room, of course, for the recognition of the merits of other men; all who came since are but followers and imitators of Comte. It was supposed that Mr. Spencer had done some important original work in philosophy, psychology, and sociology, but Mr. Frederic Harrison says he has given the world nothing "but a very unsuccessful attempt to re-edit Comte's work on a plan of his own."

Such a charge as this could not assuredly be suffered to pass; and it is well that it was thus sweepingly made while Mr. Spencer is living and able to deal with it. The publication of Harrison's address opened a controversy at once in the leading London newspapers. We have room for only a part of it, and we select the most important part. We reprint two letters by Mr. Spencer, which are of interest as throwing light upon the true origin of his system. It will not be denied that Mr. Spencer knows more about it than anybody else; and when attacked by this imputation of wholesale plagiarism, the alternative of incompetence to judge where his leading conceptions came from, it is desirable to know what he has to say, both as a question of the history of thought and as a matter of justice to himself. We have a vast apparatus of legislatures and courts to secure to men their material possessions; but, when it comes to property in ideas, nothing remains for thinkers but to lose it or to defend it themselves.

of Yale, has lately made answer, in the "Princeton Review," to the argument of President Eliot, of Harvard, in the "Century," entitled "What is a Liberal Education?" At the close of his paper. Dr. Porter refers to the Appendix to the third edition of "A College Fetich," in which Mr. Adams has included the chief portion of the paper of Professor James on "The Classical Question in Germany," and some other matter from "The Popular Science Monthly."

We are glad to observe that Dr. Porter admits the essential justice of Professor James's case. The "Berlin Report "had been translated and widely circulated to show that, by long and extensive German experience in the trial of two school systems, it was settled that classical education is superior to scientific education; and that this was admitted even by the most eminent scientific men. Professor James proved that the "Report" settles no such question, and Dr. Porter so far acknowledges this as to say, "It may certainly be conceded to the critic that the 'practical trial' of the two systems of study—the classical and the non-or less classical—was not in all respects fair or decisive." If Dr. Porter had said it was not in any respect fair or decisive, we believe he would have been still nearer the truth.

But we are just now more concerned with another point of his statement in relation to the validity of the contrast, for important educational purposes, between the study of words and the study of things. Dr. Porter refers to this matter as follows:

The long extracts from Professor E. L. Youmans, taken from "The Popular Science Monthly," are significant as urging the point made by President Eliot, that classical is essentially inferior to scientific culture because "it trains the verbal memory and the reason so far as it is exercised in transposing thought from one form of expression to another, . . . while the new method cultivates the powers of observation and the faculty of reasoning upon the objects of experience so as to educate the judgment upon the problems of life. . . . The problems of life, as we understand them, are to a very large extent those which concern human relations, and these are quite as important as those which are commonly called facts or phenomena. To a large extent they are not material relations, and are not subjects of sensible experiment or verification. The facts and the reasoning must also be stated in language clearly, forcibly, and convincingly, in order to convince the