sophy of religion by Comte's positive philosophy. Whereas Feuerbach conceived religion as the religion of humanity, agreeing here with the later developments of Comte's philosophy, Plehanov divorced humanity from religion. Religion for him was purely ephemeral, and he could not agree with Feuerbach and Schleiermacher in the view that there exists a natural need for religion.
Plehanov shares the prejudice of Comte and the positivists when he represents religion as a lower stage of evolution. How can religion be replaced by the positive philosophy if it be completely different from the positive philosophy? Comte confused theology or myth with religion, and it was upon the basis of this confusion that he formulated his three stages, which conflict with history and with the idea of evolution and progress. A priori it is extremely improbable that religion will now cease to exist and will leave science victor on the field, seeing that religion has continued to develop since the very beginning of history. Mankind has already existed for thousands of years, perhaps for hundreds of thousands of years, and throughout this long period religion has unceasingly developed. Will it now pass away entirely? Is it not more probable, above all from the evolutionist standpoint, that religion will continue in the future to develop side by side with science, just as science has hitherto developed side by side with religion?
Plehanov follows the views of Engels, who (in the before-mentioned critique of Carlyle) declared that all the possibilities of religion have been exhausted, and maintained that no other form of religion could come into existence in the future. This contention was a presumptuous one, and was the outcome of a false philosophy of religion and of history, of an epistemological confusion of religion with myth.
Lunačarskii, who would like to combine his Marx with Avenarius and others, likewise follows Comte and Feuerbach, but comes to conclusions differing from those of Plehanov, for in his view the positivistic phase of evolution is likewise religious. Atheism, says Lunačarskii, is religious; man is put in God's place, and we have the Comtist religion of humanity; God disappears, or, à la Feuerbach, he is transformed into man; "homo homini deus" repeats Lunačarskii after Feuerbach. To put the matter otherwise, democracy is not merely a political system but also a religious system; the aspirations
