So that the social theory of reality, far from being incompatible with tychism, inevitably leads up to that form of philosophy. Socialistic, or as I prefer to term it, agapastic ontology seems to me likely to find favour with many minds at an early day, because it is a natural path by which the nominalist may be led into the realistic ways of thought, ways toward which many facts and inward forces impel him. [—] Thus it is that the agapastic ontologist who endeavours to escape tychism will find himself “led into” that “inextricable confusion” which Dr. Carus has taken a contract to show that I am led into.