ThisbookisasequeltomyHistoryofEnglishThoughtintheEighteenthCentury。ThetitlewhichIthenventuredtousewasmorecomprehensivethantheworkitselfdeserved。Ifeltmyinabilitytowriteacontinuationwhichshouldatallcorrespondtoasimilartitleforthenineteenthcentury。I
thought，however，thatbywritinganaccountofthecompactandenergeticschoolofEnglishUtilitariansIcouldthrownsomelightbothuponthemandtheircontemporaries。Ihadtheadvantageforthispurposeofhavingbeenmyselfadiscipleoftheschoolduringitslastperiod。Manyaccidentshavedelayedmycompletionofthetask；anddelayedalsoitspublicationafteritwaswritten。Twobookshavebeenpublishedsincethattime，whichpartlycoverthesameground；andImustbecontentwithreferringmyreaderstothemforfurtherinformation。TheyareTheEnglishRadicals，byMrC。B。RoylanceKent；andEnglishPoliticalPhilosophyfromHobbestoMaine，byProfessorGraham。
INTRODUCTORY
TheEnglishUtilitariansofwhomIamabouttogivesomeaccountwereagroupofmenwhoforthreegenerationshadaconspicuousinfluenceuponEnglishthoughtandpoliticalaction。JeremyBentham，JamesMillandJohnStuartMill，weresuccessivelytheirleaders；andIshallspeakofeachinturn。ItmaybewelltopremiseabriefintroductionofthemethodwhichIhaveadopted。Ihavedevotedamuchgreaterproportionofmyworktobiographyandtoconsiderationsofpoliticalandsocialconditionsthanwouldbeappropriatetothehistoryofphilosophy。Thereasonsforsuchacourseareveryobviousinthiscase，inasmuchastheUtilitariandoctrineswereworkedoutwithaconstantreferencetopracticalapplications。Ithink，indeed，thatsuchareferenceisoftenequallypresent，thoughnotequallyconspicuous，inotherphilosophicalschools。ButinanycaseIwishtoshowhowIconceivetherelationofmyschemetotheschememoregenerallyadoptedbyhistoriansofabstractspeculation。
Iamprimarilyconcernedwiththehistoryofaschoolorsect，notwiththehistoryoftheargumentsbywhichitjustifiesitselfinthecourtofpurereason。Imustthereforeconsiderthecreedasitwasactuallyembodiedinthedominantbeliefsoftheadherentsoftheschool，notasitwasexpoundedinlecture-roomsortreatisesonfirstprinciples。IdealnotwithphilosophersmeditatinguponBeingandnot-Being，butwithmenactivelyengagedinframingpoliticalplatformsandcarryingonpopularagitations。Thegreatmajorityevenofintelligentpartisansareeitherindifferenttothephilosophiccreedoftheirleadersortakeitforgranted。Itspostulatesaremoreorlessimpliedinthedoctrineswhichguidetheminpractice，butarenotexplicitlystatedordeliberatelyreasonedout。Notthelessthedoctrinesofasect，politicalorreligious，maybedependentupontheorieswhichforthegreaternumberremainlatentorarerecognisedonlyintheirconcreteapplication。
Contemporarymembersofanysociety，howeverwidelytheydifferastoresults，areemployeduponthesameproblemsand，tosomeextent，usethesamemethodsandmakethesameassumptionsinattemptingsolutions。Thereisacertainunityeveninthegeneralthoughtofanygivenperiod。Contradictoryviewsimplysomecommonground。Butwithinthiswiderunitywefindavarietyofsects，eachofwhichmaybeconsideredasmoreorlessrepresentingaparticularmethodoftreatingthegeneralproblem：andthereforeprincipleswhich，whetherclearlyrecognisedornot，arevirtuallyimpliedintheirpartycreedandgiveacertainunitytotheirteaching。
Oneobviousprincipleofunity，ortacitbondofsympathywhichholdsasecttogetherdependsupontheintellectualidiosyncrasyoftheindividuals。
ColeridgewasaimingatanimportanttruthwhenhesaidthateverymanwasbornanAristotelianoraPlatonist。1*Nominalistsandrealists，intuitionistsandempiricists，idealistsandmaterialists，representdifferentformsofafundamentalantithesiswhichappearstorunthroughallphilosophy。Eachthinkerisapttotakethepostulatescongenialtohisownmindastheplaindictatesofreason。Controversiesbetweensuchoppositesappeartobehopeless。
TheyhavebeenaptlycomparedbyDr。Venntotheerectionofasnow-banktodamariver。Thesnowmeltsandswellsthetorrentwhichitwasintendedtoarrest。Eachsidereadsadmittedtruthsintoitsowndialect，andinfersthatitsowndialectaffordstheonlyvalidexpression。Toregardsuchantithesesasfinalandinsolublewouldbetoadmitcompletescepticism。Whatistrueforonemanwouldnotthereforebetrue——oratleastitstruthwouldnotbedemonstrable——toanother。Wemusttrustthatreconciliationisachievablebyshowingthatthedifferenceisreallylessvitalandcorrespondstoadifferenceofmethodsorofthesphereswithinwhicheachmodeofthoughtmaybevalid。Toobtainthepointofviewfromwhichsuchaconciliationispossibleshouldbe，Ihold，onemainendofmodernphilosophising。
Theeffectofthisprofoundintellectualdifferenceiscomplicatedbyotherobviousinfluences。Thereis，inthefirstplace，thedifferenceofintellectualhorizon。Eachmanhasaworldofhisownandseesadifferentsetoffacts。WhetherhishorizonisthatwhichisvisiblefromhisparishsteepleorfromSt。Peter’satRome，itisstillstrictlylimited：andtheoutsideuniverse，knownvaguelyandindirectly，doesnotaffecthimlikethefactsactuallypresenttohisperception。Themostcandidthinkerswillcometodifferentconclusionswhentheyarereallyprovidedwithdifferentsetsoffact。Inpoliticalandsocialproblemseveryman’sopinionsaremouldedbyhissocialstation。Theartisan’sviewofthecapitalist，andthecapitalist’sviewoftheartisan，arebothimperfect，becauseeachhasafirst-handknowledgeofhisownclassalone：and，howeveranxioustobefair，eachwilltakeaverydifferentviewoftheworkingofpoliticalinstitutions。Anapparentconcordoftencoversthewidestdivergenceundertheveilofacommonformula，becauseeachmanhashisprivatemodeofinterpretinggeneralphrasesintermsofconcretefact。
This，ofcourse，impliesthefurtherdifferencearisingfromthepassionswhich，howeverillogically，gosofartodetermineopinions。HerewehavethemostgeneralsourceofdifficultYinconsideringtheactualhistoryofacreed。Wecannotlimitourselvestothepurelylogicalfactor。Allthoughthastostartfrompostulates。Menhavetoactbeforetheythink：before，atanyrate，reasoningbecomesdistinctfromimaginingorguessing。Toexplaininearlyperiodsistofancyandtotakeafancyforaperception。Theworldoftheprimitivemanisconstructednotonlyfromvagueconjecturesandhastyanalogiesbutfromhishopesandfears，andbearstheimpressofhisemotionalnature。Whenprogresstakesplacesomeofhisbeliefsareconfirmed，somedisappear，andothersaretransformed：andthewholehistoryofthoughtisahistoryofthisgradualprocessofverification。Webegin，itissaid，byassuming：weproceedbyverifying，andweonlyendbydemonstrating。Theprocessiscomparativelysimpleinthatpartofknowledgewhichultimatelycorrespondstothephysicalsciences。Theremustbeacertainharmonybetweenbeliefsandrealitiesinregardtoknowledgeofordinarymattersoffact，ifonlybecausesuchharmonyisessentialtothelifeoftherace。Evenanapemustdistinguishpoisonousfromwholesomefood。Beliefsastophysicalfactsrequiretobemadearticulateanddistinct；butwehaveonlytorecogniseaslogicalprinciplesthelawsofnaturewhichwehaveunconsciouslyobeyedandillustrated——toformulatedynamicslongafterwehaveappliedthescienceinthrowingstonesorusingbowsandarrows。Butwhatcorrespondstothisinthecaseofthemoralandreligiousbeliefs?Whatistheprocessofverification?
Menpracticallyaresatisfiedwiththeircreedsolongastheyaresatisfiedwiththecorrespondingsocialorder。Thetestoftruthsosuggestedisobviouslyinadequate：forallgreatreligions，howevercontradictorytoeachother，havebeenabletosatisfyitforlongperiods。Particulardoctrinesmightbetestedbyexperiment。Theefficacyofwitchcraftmightbeinvestigatedliketheefficacyofvaccination。Butfaithcanalwaysmakeasmanymiraclesasitwants：anderrorswhichoriginateinthefancycannotbeatonceextirpatedbythereason。Theirformmaybechangedbutnottheirsubstance。Toremovethemrequiresnotdisproofofthisorthatfact，butanintellectualdisciplinewhichisrareevenamongtheeducatedclasses。Areligiouscreedsurvives，aspoetryorartsurvives，——notsolongasitcontainsapparentlytruestatementsoffactbut——solongasitiscongenialtothewholesocialstate。Aphilosophyindeedisapoetrystatedintermsoflogic。Consideringthenaturalconservatismofmankind，thedifficultyistoaccountforprogress，notforthepersistenceoferror。Whentheexistingorderceasestobesatisfactory；
whenconquestorcommercehasweldednationstogetherandbroughtconflictingcreedsintocohesion；whenindustrialdevelopmenthasmodifiedtheoldclassrelations；orwhenthegoverningclasseshaveceasedtodischargetheirfunctions，newprinciplesaredemandedandnewprophetsarise。Thephilosophermaythenbecomethemouthpieceoftheneworder，andinnocentlytakehimselftobeitsoriginator。Hisdoctrineswerefruitlesssolongasthesoilwasnotpreparedfortheseed。Aprematurediscoveryifnotstampedoutbyfireandswordisstifledbyindifference。IfFrancisBaconsucceededwhereRogerBaconfailed，thedifferencewasduetothesocialconditions，nottothemen。Thecauseofthegreatreligiousaswellasofthegreatpoliticalrevolutionsmustbesoughtmainlyinthesocialhistory。Newcreedsspreadwhentheysatisfytheinstinctsorthepassionsrousedtoactivitybyothercauses。
Thesystemhastobesofartrueastobecredibleatthetime；butitsvitalitydependsuponitscongenialityasawholetotheaspirationsofthemassofmankind。
Thepurelyintellectualmovementnodoubtrepresentsthedecisivefactor。
Theloveoftruthintheabstractisprobablytheweakestofhumanpassions；
buttruthwhenattainedultimatelygivesthefulcrumforareconstructionoftheworld。Whenasolidcoreofascertainedandverifiabletruthhasoncebeenformedandappliedtopracticalresultsitbecomesthefixedpivotuponwhichallbeliefsmustultimatelyturn。Theinfluence，however，isoftenobscureandstillindirect。Themorecultivatedrecognisethenecessityofbringingtheirwholedoctrineintoconformitywiththedefinitelyorganisedandestablishedsystem；and，atthepresentday，eventheuneducatedbegintohaveaninklingofpossibleresults。yetthedesireforlogicalconsistencyisnotonewhichpressesforciblyuponthelesscultivatedintellects。Theydonotfeelthenecessityofunifyingknowledgeorbringingtheirvariousopinionsintoconsistencyandintoharmonywithfacts。ThereareeasymethodsofavoidinganytroublesomeconflictofbeliefThephilosopherisreadytoshowthemtheway。He，likeotherpeople，hastostartfrompostulates，andtoseehowtheywillwork。Whenhemeetswithadifficultyitisperfectlylegitimatethatheshouldtryhowfartheoldformulacanbeappliedtocoverthenewapplications。Hemaybeledtoaprocessof’rationalising’or’spiritualising’
whichisdangeroustointellectualhonesty。Thevaguenessofthegeneralconceptionswithwhichheisconcernedfacilitatestheadaptation；andhiswordsslideintonewmeaningsbyimperceptiblegradations。Hiserrorisintakingalegitimatetentativeprocessforaconclusivetest；andinferringthatopinionsareconfirmedbecauseanon-naturalinterpretationcanbeforceduponthem。This，however，isonlytheviciousapplicationofthenormalprocessthroughwhichnewideasarediffusedorslowlyinfiltratetheoldsystemstillthenecessityofathoroughgoingreconstructionforcesitselfuponourattention。Norcanitbedeniedthatanoppositefallacyisequallypossible，especiallyintimesofrevolutionarypassion。Theapparentirreconcilabilityofsomenewdoctrinewiththeoldmayleadtothesummaryrejectionoftheimplicittruth，togetherwiththeerrorinvolvedinitsimperfectrecognition。
Hencearisesthenecessityfortakingintoaccountnotonlyaman’sintellectualidiosyncrasiesandthespecialintellectualhorizon，butalltheprepossessionsduetohispersonalcharacter，hissocialenvironment，andhisconsequentsympathiesandantipathies。Thephilosopherhashispassionslikeothermen。