for Stepniak's motivation by vengeance; but when terrorism has become an accomplished fact he recognises it as inevitable, and finds himself "logically" compelled to rally to its support. Mihailovskii was ever fearless in the way he devoted his pen to the awakening of political consciousness and of the vengeful feeling of honour.
§ 127.
MIHAILOVSKII'S attitude towards the religious problem was peculiar. He was favourable to religion, ascribing to it the greatest value alike for the individual and for society; but his treatment of the matter was never more than casual, and he frequently apologised for being altogether the layman in relation to theology.
This avoidance of the religious problem was not wholly dependent upon his fear of the censorship.
Mihailovskii's distinctive outlook upon this field is displayed in his studies of Tolstoi and Dostoievskii. He does not analyse the attempts they made to solve the religious problem, and merely reports that they considered it. He shows a similar reserve in his analysis of European writers. In 1873, penning a critique of Strauss's The Old Faith and the New, he merely takes occasion, apropos of the theory that the gods are anthropomorphic constructions, to throw light upon the contrast between an ideal and an idol; and he demands that idealistic and realistic idols (in the addition of the "realistic idols" he is inspired by his antagonism for Pisarev's realists), that is to say, mythical and anthropomorphic idealisations of men and things, shall yield place everywhere to ideals.
None the less, in 1901, Mihailovskii published Fragments concerning Religion. Here, in reference to the greater literature on the topic, the existence of the new "science of religion" is recognised, and its justification is admitted; but at most he is willing to allot the vague name of "teachings concerning religion" to this domain of enquiry. He inveighs against economic materialism, with its endeavour to make light of the significance of religion (in socialism and elsewhere); but thereafter he is content to refer to recent works upon the evolution of religion and to make special mention of certain theories concerning the origin of religion—those of Comte, Spencer, Tylor, Lubbock, Feuerbach, Guyau, etc.,
