582 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
is at odds with himself. There was never anything more absurd in the dialectic philosophies than we have seen over and over again under the rubric "exact scientific method." Two thousand years before modern science, " cobbler, stick to your last " was proverbial wisdom, but modern scientists have frequently to be told that a micro- scope does not lend telescopic vision, and a test-tube is not a pair of calipers to measure infinity. If somebody should decompose hydrogen, it is not at all unlikely that he would thereupon invite the world to accept his authority on cosmic philosophy. M. Metchnikoff seems to have contributed his quota to the humors of science by doing substantially this very thing. In the first eleven chapters of the book he either traverses familiar history of thought, or dis- cusses quite special topics in biology, mostly exploiting facts notori- ous among biologists. In the twelfth chapter, entitled "Summary and Conclusions," he slips his anchor, discharges his ballast and soars. Instead of summarizing and concluding, he speculates and dogma- tizes. The processes of the brain are " incompatible with the exist- ence of an immortal soul" (p. 286). It would have been more modest and more scientific if he had said "I cannot understand how these processes can be compatible," etc. So far as any evidence or argument appears in the previous discussion, the dictum, even thus brought within the limits of good taste and good logic, would still be wholly gratuitous. A stranger to the author is at a loss to decide how far he takes himself seriously in this chapter, or wishes to be so taken by his readers. As a specimen of pseudo-scientific license it is spectacular, but as a digest of premises contained in the book it is ridiculous. Perhaps he assumes that biologists will understand him as merely indulging in a dream, but they are not the market which the present version is likely to supply.
It is to be hoped that M. Metchnikoff will continue to make dis- coveries in the field where he is eminent. It is possible that he might successfully emulate Jules Verne, if his ambition should run in that direction. The present volume does not encourage the hope that he will contribute much to general philosophy. The serious element in the book is set forth with just enough stage business to charm the gal- leries. It will not be surprising if the flights of Metchnikoff's fancy presently pass into the bric-a-brac of popular science, but really there is no immediate occasion for a new cult.
A. W. S.
