Essays: Scientific, Political, & Speculative; Vol. 3 of 3: Library Edition (1891), Containing Seven Essays not before Republished, and Various other Additions.Spencer, Herbert
Philosophy
Essays: Scientific, Political, & Speculative; Vol. 3 of 3: Library Edition (1891), Containing Seven Essays not before Republished, and Various other Additions.
Spencer, Herbert
Philosophy; Political science; Science
“‘To ascertain better and better what the will of the Eternal was
and is with us, what the laws of the Eternal are, all Parliaments,
Ecumenic Councils, Congresses, and other Collective Wisdoms, have
had this for their object. . . . . Nevertheless, in the inexplicable
universal votings and debatings of these Ages, an idea or rather a
dumb presumption to the contrary has gone idly abroad; and at this
day, over extensive tracts of the world, poor human beings are to be
found, whose practical belief it is that if we “vote” this or that,
so this or that will thenceforth _be_. . . . . Practically, men have
come to imagine that the Laws of this Universe, like the laws of
constitutional countries, are decided by voting. . . . It is an idle
fancy. The Laws of this Universe, of which if the Laws of England are
not an exact transcript, they should passionately study to become
such, are fixed by the everlasting congruity of things, and are not
fixable or changeable by voting!’
“But I find that, contemptuously disregarding all such protests, the
English legislators persevere in their hyperatheistic notion, that an
Act of Parliament duly enforced by State-officers, will work out any
object: no question being {307} put whether Laws of Nature permit.
I forgot to ask whether they considered that different kinds of food
could be made wholesome or unwholesome by State-decree.
“One thing that struck me was the curious way in which the members of
their House of Commons judge of one another’s capacities. Many who
expressed opinions of the crudest kinds, or trivial platitudes, or
worn-out superstitions, were civilly treated. Follies as great as that
but a few years since uttered by one of their ministers, who said that
free-trade was contrary to common sense, were received in silence. But
I was present when one of their number, who, as I thought, was speaking
very rationally, made a mistake in his pronunciation—made what they
call a wrong quantity; and immediately there arose a shout of derision.
It seemed quite tolerable that a member should know little or nothing
about the business he was there to transact; but quite intolerable that
he should be ignorant on a point of no moment.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account