ne simple
evolution graduelle, l'essor final de l'esprit positif deviendrait
scientifiquement incomprehensible, si, des l'origine, on n'en
concevait, a tous egards, les premiers rudiments necessaires.
Depuis cette situation primitive, a mesure que nos observations se
sont spontanement etendues et generalisees, cet essor, d'abord a
peine appreciable, a constamment suivi, sans cesser longtemps
d'etre subalterne, une progression tres-lente, mais continue, la
philosophie theologique restant toujours reservee pour les
phenomenes, de moins en moins nombreux, dont les lois naturelles ne
pouvaient encore etre aucunement connues."

Compare the propositions implicitly laid down here with those contained
in the earlier volume. (a) As a matter of fact, the human intellect
has _not_ been invariably subjected to the law of the three states, and
therefore the necessity of the law _cannot_ be demonstrable _a priori_.
(b) Much of our knowledge of all kinds has _not_ passed through the
three states, and more particularly, as M. Comte is careful to point
out, not through the first, (c) The positive state has more or less
co-existed with the theological, from the dawn of human intelligence.
And, by way of completing the series of contradictions, the assertion
that the three states are "essentially different and even radically
opposed," is met a little lower on the same page by the declaration that
"the metaphysical state is, at bottom, nothing but a simple general
modification of the first;" while, in the fortieth Lecon, as also in the
interesting early essay entitled "Considerations philosophiques sur les
Sciences et les Savants (1825)," the three states are practically
reduced to two. "Le veritable esprit general de toute philosophie
theologique ou metaphysique consiste a prendre pour principe, dans
l'explication des phenomenes du monde exterieur, notre sentiment
immediat des phenomenes humains; tandis que au contraire, la philosophie
positive est toujours caracterisee, non moins profondement, par la
subordination necessaire et rationnelle de la conception de l'homme a
celle du monde."[21]

I leave M. Cointe's disciples to settle which of these contradictory
statements expresses their master's real meaning. All I beg leave to
remark is, that men of science are not in the habit of paying much
attention to "laws" stated in this fashion.

The second statement is undoubtedly far more ratio