-. x/ .-ate- % 
 
 
 
 
.•*©«* 
 
 
 
 5***8. 
 
 ;• > v ^ . '^WV .^ v *. 
 
 J?-* 
 
 A v ^a - •• ■ x' ^** 
 
 .• f°* 
 
 <: iP'VVi 
 
 V ; ^'V'' C V^ T *>' "V'^'V <V^^ 
 
 dte. v** .-^k*. %.^ /dte v** :^k*. *w 
 
 
 • » • *G 
 
 fro* 
 
 * ** •-!«*»* . * v "«• 
 
 *. .<*" .YSftf. t*. at .VAra* **. <T .**aftf. *e. ^ 
 
 
 "o^ 
 
 
 W v .' 
 
 
 '- w 
 
 
 .• 
 
 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 
 * °* o 
 
 •"^ 
 
 
 
 
 >* .•*••' 
 
 
THEORIES OF 
 MACROCOSMS AND MICROCOSMS 
 
 IN THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
 BY 
 GEORGE PERRIGO CONGER 
 
 Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for 
 
 the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, in the Faculty 
 
 of Philosophy, Columbia University 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS 
 
 1922 
 
 All rights reserved 
 
• ■<-.:zm*:r:-« 
 
THEORIES OF MACROCOSMS AND MICROCOSMS 
 IN THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
Columbia WLnibmity pxt** 
 
 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 
 
 NEW YORK CITY 
 
 SALES AGENTS 
 LONDON 
 
 HUMPHREY MELFORD 
 Amen Corner, E. C. 
 
 SHANGHAI 
 
 EDWARD EVANS AND SONS, Ltd. 
 30 North Szechuen Road 
 
THEORIES OF 
 MACROCOSMS AND MICROCOSMS 
 
 IN THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
 BY 
 GEORGE PERRIGO CONGER 
 
 Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for 
 
 the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, in the Faculty 
 
 of Philosophy, Columbia University 
 
 NEW YORK 
 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS 
 
 1922 
 
 All rights reserved 
 

 COPYRIGHT, 1922, 
 
 By COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS 
 
 Printed from type. Published July, 1922 
 
 rS5wST0F5wQRE98 i 
 RECEIVED 
 DEC 141922 
 
 i oOCUMtNTS DIVISI ON 
 
AUTHOR'S NOTE 
 
 In the preparation of this monograph I have been especially helped 
 by the suggestive criticisms of Professor F. J. E. Woodbridge and Pro- 
 fessor John J. Coss, of Columbia University, and Professor Sterling P. 
 Lamprecht, formerly of Columbia, now of the University of Illinois. 
 Professor Richard Gottheil, of Columbia University, has given me some 
 valuable references. Miss Margaret Jackson, of the University of 
 Minnesota, has been of much assistance in reading the proofs. 
 
 GEORGE P. CONGER. 
 
CONTENTS 
 INTRODUCTION 
 
 PAGE 
 
 i. Purpose and Title of this Study xiii 
 
 2. Topical and Geographical Restrictions xiv 
 
 3. Derivation of Terms xiv 
 
 4. Summary of Previous Works in this Field xv 
 
 1. Meyer's Monograph xv 
 
 2. Chapters and Sections on Special Periods xv 
 
 3. Briefer References xvi 
 
 4. References in Dictionaries and Encyclopaedias xvii 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 THE EMERGENCE OF MICROCOSMIC THEORIES IN THE GREEK AND 
 GR^CO-ROMAN WORLD 
 
 i. Greek Philosophy Prior to Plato 1 
 
 1. Methods Available for Reconstruction 1 
 
 2. Criticism of Certain Statements about Thales 2 
 
 3. Earliest Trace of Microcosmic Theory in Anaximenes 2 
 
 4. Related Views among the Pythagoreans 2 
 
 5. Attempts to Construe Microcosmic Views in Heraclitus 3 
 
 6. Suggested Interpretation of Some Empedoclean Fragments ... 4 
 
 7. Alleged Influence of Hippocratean Wi kings 5 
 
 8. On the Ascription of the Term "Microcosm" to Democritus. . . 6 
 
 9. The Older Microcosmic Theories Eclipsed by Humanistic In- 
 
 terests at Athens 6 
 
 10. The Pre-Platonic Period in Retrospect 7 
 
 2. The Writings of Plato and Aristotle 7 
 
 1 . Functions of Microcosmic Theories in Plato 7 
 
 2. Parallelism between Man and the State 7 
 
 3. Plato's Cosmology 8 
 
 4. Relations of Metaphysics and Ethics in the "Philebus" 9 
 
 5. Comparison of Plato and Aristotle 10 
 
 6. First Authentic Occurrence of the Term "Microcosm" 11 
 
viii Contents 
 
 PAGE 
 
 3. The Teachings of the Stoics 11 
 
 1. Criticism of View of Some Investigators in this Field 11 
 
 2. The Interests of the Stoics 12 
 
 3. Stoic Theories, according to the Fragments 12 
 
 4. Relation of Microcosmic Theories to Stoic Ethics and Religion 15 
 
 4. Jewish Philosophy in the Gileco-Roman Period 16 
 
 1. The Beginnings of the "Sefer Yezirah " 16 
 
 2. Philo's Theories of Man as the "Brachycosm" 16 
 
 5. Neo-Pythagoreans and Eclectics 19 
 
 1. The Persistence of Pythagoreanism 19 
 
 2. Eclectics: Reference of Galen to Possible Lost Sources 20 
 
 6. The Neo-Platonists 20 
 
 1 . The Place of Microcosmic Theories in the " Enneads " of Plotinus 20 
 
 2. Traces of Microcosmic Theories among the Successors of Plotinus 23 
 
 7. Mystery and Magic in Greek and Gr^eco-Roman Philosophy 24 
 
 1. Mystery and Magic not Confined to the Period of Decline. ... 24 
 
 2. Topical Arrangement of these Writings 24 
 
 3. Use of the Term "Microcosm" or its Equivalent 25 
 
 4. Relations between Parts of the Human Body and Gods, or Parts 
 
 of the Universe 26 
 
 5. Relations of Parts of the Universe other than Man 26 
 
 6. Relation of Microcosmic Theories to Astrology 27 
 
 8. Summary: Microcosmic Theories in Ancient Philosophy 27 
 
 CHAPTER II 
 
 MICROCOSMIC THEORIES IN THEOLOGICAL TRADITIONS 
 
 i. Characteristics of Theological Traditions 29 
 
 2. Microcosmic Theories in Christian Traditions 29 
 
 1. Survivals of Greek Thought 29 
 
 2. Controversies of Orthodoxy with Heresy and Paganism 30 
 
 3. Microcosmic Theories as an Offset to Origen's Doctrine of the 
 
 Body 31 
 
 4. Summary of Greek Views as Repeated without Essential Modi- 
 
 fications 31 
 
 5. Some Developments More Distinctively Christian 35 
 
 6. Possible Influence of Jewish and Arabian Thought upon Christian 
 
 Microcosmic Theories 36 
 
 3. Microcosmic Theories in Medieval Jewish Philosophy 37 
 
 1. General Characteristics of Jewish Works in this Period 37 
 
 2. Theories Emphasizing Physical Resemblances between the Uni- 
 
 verse and Man 38 
 
Contents ix 
 
 PAGE 
 
 3. Theories Emphasizing Metaphysical Resemblances between the 
 
 Universe and Man 40 
 
 4. Microcosmic Theories with Psychological and Ethical Emphasis: 
 
 Bahya Ibn Paquda, Joseph Ibn Zaddik 41 
 
 5. Maimonides 43 
 
 6. Microcosmic Theories in the " Cabala " 45 
 
 4. Microcosmic Theories in Mohammedan Philosophy 46 
 
 1. Two Streams of Greek Tradition 46 
 
 2. The "Brethren of Sincerity" 46 
 
 3. The Setting of the Microcosmic Arguments of the "Encyclo- 
 
 paedia " 47 
 
 4. The "Encyclopaedia's" Parallelism between the Universe and 
 
 Man 48 
 
 5. The Cumulation of Natural Processes in Man 50 
 
 6. The Place of the "Encyclopaedia " in the History of Microcosmic 
 
 Theories 50 
 
 7. Related Views of Other Arabian Philosophers 51 
 
 5. Summary; Microcosmic Theories in Theological Traditions 52 
 
 CHAPTER III 
 
 MICROCOSMIC THEORIES IN EARLY MODERN REACTIONS FROM 
 SCHOLASTICISM 
 
 i. New Applications of the Theory that Man is a Microcosm 53 
 
 2. Nicholas of Cusa 54 
 
 1 . Microcosmic Theories in the " De docta ignorantia " and the " De 
 
 conjecturis" 54 
 
 2. The "De ludo globi" 54 
 
 3. Paracelsus 55 
 
 1. Statements of Paracelsus regarding Man as a Microcosm 55 
 
 2. Applications of Microcosmic Theories to Medicine 57 
 
 3. Place of Paracelsus in the History of Microcosmic Theories 59 
 
 4. Giordano Bruno 60 
 
 1. Bruno's Modifications of Older Views 60 
 
 2. Bruno's Monadism 62 
 
 5. Campanella and Boehme 63 
 
 1. Settings of the Microcosmic Theories of Campanella and Boehme 63 
 
 2. Views of Campanella 63 
 
 3. Views of Boehme 64 
 
 6. Trend from Rationalism toward Empiricism in this Period 65 
 
 1. Microcosmic Theories of Writers Less Important 65 
 
 2. Decline of Microcosmic Views among the Great Scientists 66 
 
x Contents 
 
 PAGE 
 
 7. The Microcosmic Theory or Metaphor of Hobbes 68 
 
 1. The Conception of the State as a Leviathan 68 
 
 2. Function of Microcosmic Theories for Hobbes 69 
 
 8. Summary: Microcosmic Theories in the Early Modern Period. . . 69 
 
 Appendix I. Microcosmic Theories and Alchemy in the Early Mod- 
 ern Period 69 
 
 Appendix II. Use of the Term " Microcosm " to Denote Man in Eng- 
 lish Literature from 1400 to 1650 71 
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 
 MICROCOSMIC THEORIES IN PHILOSOPHY FROM DESCARTES TO SPENCER 
 
 i. The Span of this Chapter 73 
 
 2. The Metaphysical Systems of Spinoza and Leibnitz 73 
 
 1. The Pantheism of Spinoza 73 
 
 2. The Monadism of Leibnitz 74 
 
 3. The Critical Philosophy: From Locke to Fichte 75 
 
 1. Decline of Interest in Microcosmic Theories 75 
 
 2. Microcosmic Theories Stated in Hume's Dialogues 76 
 
 4. The French Enlightenment: Rousseau 77 
 
 1. Evidences of Decline of Microcosmic Views in France 77 
 
 2. Rousseau's Theory of Society 78 
 
 5. Reactions from Subjectivism: From Herder to Schopenhauer. . . 78 
 
 1. Herder's Philosophy of History 78 
 
 2. The Microcosmic Theories of Schelling 79 
 
 3. Theories Held by Some of Schelling's Friends '. 82 
 
 4. The Attitude of Hegel Toward Microcosmic Theories 85 
 
 5. Microcosmic Theories Used by Other German Philosophers of 
 
 the Period 86 
 
 6. The Panpsychism of Fechner 88 
 
 1. General Statement regarding Fechner's Theories 88 
 
 2. Fechner's Use of the Method of Analogy 89 
 
 3. Theories of Resemblance between the Earth and the Human 
 
 Organism 89 
 
 4. Explanations for Obvious Differences between the Earth and the 
 
 Human Organism 91 
 
 5. Other Differences between Earth and Organism, Left Unex- 
 
 plained 92 
 
 6. Analogies between Earth and Organism Extended to the Uni- 
 
 verse 92 
 
Contents xi 
 
 PAGE 
 
 7. Use of these Analogies as Basis for Christian Doctrines 93 
 
 8. The Influence of Fechner 95 
 
 7. The "Microcosmus" of Lotze 96 
 
 1. General Position of Lotze 96 
 
 2. Lotze's Strictures on Older Microcosmic Theories 96 
 
 3. Lotze's Use of the Term "Microcosm" 97 
 
 8. Microcosmic Theories and the Theory of Evolution 98 
 
 1. Spencer's "First Principles" 98 
 
 2. Spencer's "Principles of Sociology" 99 
 
 3. The Term "Microcosm" Used by Darwin and Huxley 101 
 
 9. Summary: Microcosmic Theories from Descartes to Spencer 101 
 
 Appendix. Microcosmic Theories in the Works of Swedenborg 102 
 
 CHAPTER V 
 traces of microcosmic theories in recent science and philosophy 
 
 1. Recent Microcosmic Theories Isolated and Scattered 104 
 
 2. The Theory of Recapitulation in Biology 104 
 
 1. Definition 104 
 
 2. Early History of the Theory 105 
 
 3. Differences of Opinion among Authorities since 1866 105 
 
 3. The Theory of Recapitulation in Psychology 107 
 
 1. Recapitulation and "Culture Epoch" Theories 107 
 
 2. Early History of these Theories 107 
 
 3. Later Opinions concerning these Theories 108 
 
 4. Organismic Theories of Society and the State no 
 
 1. Early History of Organismic Theories ^ no 
 
 2. Bearing of Microcosmic Theories upon the Work of Lilienfeld.. 112 
 
 3. Organismic Theories of Other Writers 114 
 
 4. Critique of the Organismic Theories 118 
 
 5. Microcosmic Analogies Employed in Contemporary Science 119 
 
 1. Possible Implications of Current Analogies 119 
 
 2. Analogies between Structures Studied in Physics, Chemistry and 
 
 Astronomy 119 
 
 3. Attempts to Interpret Astronomy in Terms of Biology 120 
 
 4. Attempts to Interpret Geology in Terms of Anatomy and Physi- 
 
 ology 121 
 
 5. The Views of A. J. Herbertson 121 
 
 6. Attempts to Interpret Biology in Terms of Sociology 122 
 
 7. Attempts to Interpret Psychology in Terms of Biology 123 
 
 8. Attempts to Interpret Logic in Terms of Biology 123 
 
xii Contents 
 
 PAGE 
 
 6. Microcosmic Theories in Recent and Contemporary Philosophy 124 
 
 1. General Characteristics of this Period 124 
 
 2. Paulsen's Restatement of Fechner 125 
 
 3. The "Nouvelle Monadologie " of Renouvier and Prat 125 
 
 4. Affiliations of Royce with Microcosmic Theories 126 
 
 5. Some More Explicit Microcosmic Theories among the Idealists 128 
 
 6. Bergson's Doctrine that Organisms Imitate the Universe 129 
 
 7. Present Emphasis upon Differences between Universe and Man 130 
 
 8. Traces of Microcosmic Theories in Sheldon's "Productive Dual- 
 
 ity" 131 
 
 7. Summary: Traces of Microcosmic Theories in Recent Science and 
 
 Philosophy 132 
 
 CHAPTER VI 
 
 conclusion; general estimate of microcosmic theories 
 
 1. General Survey of the History of Microcosmic Theories 133 
 
 1. Diversity of Theories Considered, and Their Unity 133 
 
 2. Widespread Occurrence of these Theories 133 
 
 3. Philosophies Unfavorable to Microcosmic Theories 133 
 
 4. Philosophies Favorable to Microcosmic Theories 134 
 
 5. Motivations of Microcosmic Theories 134 
 
 6. Affiliations which Microcosmic Theories Have Survived 135 
 
 7. Affiliations which Still Afford Ground for Criticism 135 
 
 2. The Present Value of Microcosmic Theories 135 
 
 1. Criticisms at Present Forcing Modifications of Theories 135 
 
 2. Present Esthetic Value of Microcosmic Theories 136 
 
 3. Present Noetic Value of Microcosmic Theories 136 
 
 4. Present Ethical Value of Microcosmic Theories 137 
 
 5. Present Religious Value of Microcosmic Theories 137 
 
 6. Summary of These Estimates of Microcosmic Theories 138 
 
 7. Indications of Recrudescence of Microcosmic Theories 138 
 
 Index of Authors 141 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 i. Purpose and Title of this Study 
 
 The purpose of this monograph is to trace throughout the history of 
 philosophy the motivations, contents and effects of a number of views 
 which may be grouped under the title "Theories of Macrocosms and 
 Microcosms." According to these theories, portions of the world which 
 vary in size exhibit similarities in structures and processes, indicating 
 that one portion imitates another or others on a different scale. Most 
 prominent among the theories are those to the effect that man is a mic- 
 rocosm, or "little world," in one way or another epitomizing a mac- 
 rocosm, or "great world" — i. e., the universe, or some part thereof. At 
 the outset it should be noted that the definition of the field of investi- 
 gation is a matter of some difficulty — one is likely to conceive it in terms 
 either too inclusive or too restricted. On the one hand, it may be urged 
 that all philosophy is a discussion of the relations of man and the universe, 
 and that every particular philosophy may be stated in terms of a com- 
 parison between the two; thus the field of investigation would be broad- 
 ened to embrace the whole history of philosophy, and, if explored, 
 would distort that history by presenting it as approached from one angle. 
 On the other hand, one is likely to think of the subject solely with refer- 
 ence to man and the universe, neglecting related views such as the atom- 
 isms and monadisms, which deal specifically with portions of the universe 
 apart from man. Any criterion which indicates an avoidance of both 
 these extremes is difficult to formulate; but it may be said that, within 
 the field of broader philosophical generalizations, it is the more special 
 characteristic of the views with which we are concerned, that they base 
 conclusions with reference to the nature of the universe and the relations 
 of its parts, including man, to one another, upon parallelisms and anal- 
 ogies describing in more or less detail the structures and processes of 
 those parts. These views attain their most pronounced development 
 in the work of Fechner; in the works of other philosophers they range 
 all the way from detailed parallelisms like those of the mediaeval Jewish 
 and Arabian thinkers to the great metaphysical generalizations of Des- 
 cartes and Spinoza and the epistemological achievements of Kant. 
 
xiv Introduction 
 
 While in the writings of these men last named and others of their kind 
 there are often traces of a feeling of peculiar kinship between man and 
 the universe, there is not the attempt at a descriptive parallelism indi- 
 cating, point by point, that one portion of the universe imitates another 
 or others on a smaller scale — which is the clearest mark of the group of 
 views with which we are concerned, and to which the term " theories 
 of macrocosms and microcosms" is here applied. 1 
 
 2. Topical and Geographical Restrictions 
 
 Since the subject-matter is closely related to that of a number of other 
 philosophical topics, it is well to indicate briefly that, while no exact line 
 can be drawn, this study is not primarily concerned with animistic 
 projections, or "collective representations," in primitive societies; nor 
 with forms of theism which maintain, uncritically, that man is the image 
 of God; nor, as partially indicated above, with systems of speculative 
 metaphysics which trace the operation of highly abstract principles 
 throughout the world or portions of it; nor with any form of the copy- 
 theory of ideas; nor with metaphors and poetic expressions. 
 
 There is also a geographical restriction; for, although similar theories 
 are found elsewhere, our consideration is usually confined to the philos- 
 ophies of the Mediterranean and Atlantic regions. 
 
 3. Derivation of Terms 
 
 The words " macrocosm "and" microcosm," which are found in Latin, 
 French, German, Italian and English forms, are equivalents for the 
 inferred Greek term nanpos koo>ios, 2 "great world," and the early Greek 
 term pa,Kpos koctjuos, "little world." Possibly the adjective iiaupbs 
 was first intended to refer to the long duration of the universe as com- 
 pared with man. 2 Aristotle, in place of this, uses a form of the adjective 
 neyas; 3 the word " Megacosmus " is found in Latin, and its equivalent 
 sometimes in English. The term punpos noapos has been ascribed, upon 
 doubtful authority, to Democritus; 4 its first indisputable occurrence is 
 in Aristotle. 3 
 
 1 In the following pages, the term "microcosmic theories," or " theories of epitomiza- 
 tion," in the plural, is used to indicate the general field of investigation, while the 
 term "microcosmic theory," in the singular, is used for the view that man, rather than 
 any other portion of the universe, epitomizes the whole. 
 
 2 New Engl. Diet., "macrocosm." 3 Phys. VIII, 2, 252 b. * See below. 
 
Introduction xv 
 
 4. Summary of Previous Works in this Field 
 
 1. Meyer's Monograph. Of previous works in this field, the only 
 monograph is by Adolf Meyer — Wesen und Geschichte der Theorie votn 
 Mikro- und Makrokosmos, in Berner Studien zur Philosophie und ihrer 
 Geschichte, volume 25, pages 1 to 122 (1900). After a review which 
 covers many of the historical theories, Meyer distinguishes four types — 
 the mythological-physical, the psychical, the metaphysical, and the 
 sociological. 1 In his final estimate they are all dismissed as lacking 
 scientific confirmation and depending too much upon reasoning from 
 analogy. Acknowledgment is due to this work as the pioneer in the field, 
 but attention should be called to a number of defects, especially omis- 
 sions. 
 
 2. Chapters and Sections on Special Periods. Several other works, 
 some of which will be referred to later, contain chapters or sections on the 
 history of these theories during special periods. C. A. Lobeck, in his 
 famous Aglaophamus (Berlin, 1829), volume II, chapter IX, "De Mac- 
 rocosmo et Microcosmo," discusses various obscure aspects of the 
 theories in connection with the Greek mystery religions. A. Jellinek's 
 edition of Joseph Ibn Zaddik's Olam Katan {Der Mikrokosmos, Ein. 
 Beitrag zur Religionsphilosophie und Ethik. . . Leipzig, 1854) contains 
 an introduction with a section (4), giving a summary of the theory among 
 Jewish writers. Jellinek thinks that the theory helps to explain some 
 points otherwise difficult to interpret. B. Beer's review of the foregoing 
 in FrankePs Monatsschrift fur Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums y 
 volume III, pp. 159 fi\, 197 ff. (1854), contains additional suggestions. 
 F. Dieterici, referring to the theory as a "Jahrtausende beherrschende 
 Gedanke," 2 familiar in his day, divides the general introduction and 
 resume of his translations of the encyclopaedic treatises of the mediaeval 
 Arabian Brethren of Sincerity {Die Philosophie der Araber im IX-ten und 
 X-ten Jahrhunderten. . . , Books I and II — Berlin, 1875-6) into two 
 parts, one entitled "Einleitung und Makrokosmos," and the other % 
 "Der Mikrokosmos." L. Stein, who suggested the work of Meyer, has, 
 in the first volume of his Psychologie der Stoa {Berliner Studien fur clas- 
 sische Philologie und Archceologie, III, 1 — 1886), a supplement entitled 
 "Mikro- und Makrokosmos der Stoa." He thinks that in the Stoa we 
 have the first clearly expressed microcosmic theory and that as soon as it 
 is established that a philosopher had the conception of man as a micro- 
 
 *p. 104. 2 Op. cit. } vol. I, p. 162. 
 
xvi Introduction 
 
 cosm, one is justified in supposing that wherever there are striking analo- 
 gies between man and the world there is an intended reference to the 
 theory. W. Windelband in his History of Philosophy (English transla- 
 tion by Tufts, New York, iqoi) devotes a section (29) to the theory dur- 
 ing the humanistic period. He says that the revival of this " Peripatetic- 
 Stoic " l doctrine helped to offset other tendencies. There is a valuable 
 article by I. Broyde in the Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. VIII, page 544 
 (1904), reviewing the development of the theory in Jewish philosophy. 
 J. Kroll, in Die Lehren des Hermes Trismegistos {Beitrage zur Geschichte 
 der Philosophic des Mittelalters, XII, 1 — Minister, 1914), has a brief 
 chapter on "Der Mensch als der ixwpbs kogiios" noteworthy for some 
 of its references. 
 
 3. Briefer References. Attempts, sometimes misleading, to deal with 
 the history of the theory that man is a microcosm are made in paragraphs 
 and footnotes of other works, some of which will also be cited later. In 
 T. Gataker's edition of Marcus Aurelius's De rebus suis (1652), there is a 
 note (on IV, 27), with quotations from ancient writers. S. Munk, in his 
 translation of Maimonides's Moreh Nebuchim (Le guide des egares, Paris, 
 1856) says that the theory has its source with Pythagoras and Plato 
 rather than with Aristotle. 2 M. Joel, in Ibn GebiroVs Bedeutung fur die 
 Geschichte der Philosophic (a supplement to vol. I of Beitrage zur Ge- 
 schichte der Philosophic — Breslau, 1876), says that the microcosmic theory 
 is more influential in the Neo-Platonic philosophers than in Plato, but 
 that the Arabians elaborated it most thoroughly. 3 P. E. M. Berthelot, in 
 Les origines oValchimie (Paris, 1885) says that the theory of correspond- 
 ence between the parts of the macrocosm and the microcosm is of Baby- 
 lonian origin. 4 J. Guttmann, in Die Philosophic des Salomon Ibn Gabirol 
 (Gottingen, 1889), corrects Joel by tracing the expression for " micro- 
 cosm" to Aristotle, and gives references to Jewish writers. 5 M. Stein- 
 schneider, in Die Hebraischen Ubersetzungen des Mittelalters (Berlin, 
 1893), traces the theory through obscure Jewish sources which he thinks 
 not dependent upon the Arabian Brethren. 6 M. Baumgartner, in his 
 Die Philosophic des Alanus de Insulis {in Beitrage zur Gesch. der Philos. 
 des Mittelalt., II, Minister, 1898), p. 88, has a note with references, 
 especially to twelfth-century sources. A. Bouche-Leclercq, in his 
 L'astrologie grecque (Paris, 1899) devotes unusual care to the analysis of 
 the theory. He says that practically every ancient system of philosophy 
 
 1 P. 369. 2 Note on I, 72. 3 P. 29. 4 P. 51. 5 P. 117, n. 3. 6 P. 997, n. 1. 
 
Introduction xvii 
 
 contributed something to it; that the Neo-Pythagoreans, Orphics, Neo- 
 Platonists, hermetics and Christian Platonists insisted most upon it; 
 but that the theory was greatly misused in astrology. The modicum of 
 truth in the theory, according to him, is that man, being able to conceive 
 only the human, has made God or the gods in his own image, and there- 
 fore finds everywhere the analogies of which he is the unconscious and 
 sole author. 1 S. Horovitz, in Die Psychologie bei den judischen Religions- 
 philosophen des Mittelalters (in Jahresbericht des Judischen Theologischen 
 Seminars zu Breslau, 1900), follows Siebeck in ascribing the theory to 
 Heraclitus and has a note with references, notably one to Xenophon. 2 
 M. De Wulf, in his History of Mediceval Philosophy (1900; English 
 translation by Coffey, N. Y., 1909), says that Gundisallinus modified 
 this " Alexandrian conception." 3 S. Karppe, in Etudes sur V origin et la 
 nature du Zohar (Paris, 190 1), finds the theory, although not the term, in 
 Plato, and says it was familiar among the Neo-Platonists from the time of 
 Jamblichus, and known among the Neo-Pythagoreans, as well as in 
 Philo. 4 F. Cumont, in Les religions orientates dans le paganisme romain 
 (Paris, 1906), says that the theory goes back to an animistic doctrine of 
 "sympathy" common to all primitive peoples. 5 D. Neumark, in his 
 Geschichte der judischen Philosophic des Mittelalters (Berlin, 1907), says 
 that the theory among the Greeks had a psychological (i. e., an animistic) 
 background, but that Plato, Aristotle and the Neo-Platonists did not 
 work it out in detail as did the Arabians. 6 E. V. Arnold, in Roman 
 Stoicism (Cambridge, 19 11) says that the doctrine, of unknown antiquity, 
 is apparently implied in Heraclitus. 7 E. Underhill, in Mysticism (New 
 York, 19 1 2), emphasizes the part which the theory has played in occult 
 speculations. 8 R. M. Jones, in Spiritual Reformers in the Sixteenth and 
 Seventeenth Centuries (London, 19 14), calls attention to the many strains 
 of thought — ancient Greek and Graeco-Roman philosophy, mediaeval 
 mysticism, Persian astrology, Arabian philosophy, and the Jewish 
 Cabala — which were blended in and with the theory at the period with 
 which he deals. 9 E. O. von Lippmann, in his Entstehung und Ausbreitung 
 der Alchemie (Berlin, 1919), thinks the theory bears witness to an oriental 
 origin, and calls it a Babylonian idea, 10 the first clear expression of which 
 is to be found in the later works of Plato. 11 
 4. References in Dictionaries and Encyclopedias. Works of reference 
 
 *Pp. 77-78. 2 Anmerkung no. 3 Eng. transl., p. 273. 
 
 4 P. 452, n. 1. 5 P. 207. 8 Vol. I, pp. 61-62. 7 P. 240. 
 
 8 P. 191. 9 P. 134. 10 Pp. 196, 666. n P. 188. 
 
xviii Introduction 
 
 which, under the word " microcosm" or "macrocosm," contain useful 
 citations and summaries are W. Fleming's Vocabulary of Philosophy 
 (1857); Larousse's Grand dictionnaire universel (1874); Eisler's Worter- 
 buch; Baldwin's Dictionary of Philosophy; The New English Dictionary. 
 Their wide variations show how fragmentary is investigation in this field. 
 One of the most noteworthy of such articles is that in F. Mauthner's 
 Wbrterbuch der Philosophic (Leipzig, 1910; vol. II, pp. 88, ff.). He points 
 out that the word " macrocosm" is artificial, probably constructed more 
 for alliteration than for content, and that it would be more accurate to 
 substitute the term " makranthropos " for it. He says the term "micro- 
 cosm" is at bottom a mechanistic conception applied to man, while the 
 term '' makranthropos" is a panpsychic conception applied to the world. 
 Of the two, the latter ascription, although not the term, is doubtless 
 older. From the modern point of view the idea of a macrocosm is only a 
 poetic fancy, and the conception of a microcosm only a mechanistic 
 inversion of it. 
 
CHAPTER I 
 
 THE EMERGENCE OF MICROCOSMIC THEORIES IN THE 
 GREEK AND GR^CO-ROMAN WORLD 
 
 i. Greek Philosophy Prior to Plato 
 
 i. Methods Available for Reconstruction. The elaborate collections and 
 interpretations of quotations from early Greek philosophers are likely to 
 give the impression that their thinking was cast in the form of philosoph- 
 ical systems, but such system as is found is often traceable to the collec- 
 tion and discussion rather than to the content of the fragments. In 
 connection with the subject before us, however, two considerations help 
 to fix the significance of the fragments. In the first place, we need not 
 suppose that the world of these philosophers was as full of lacunae as are 
 their literary remains; and if it is ever justifiable to attempt the recon- 
 struction of a ''background" for early Greek philosophy, such a recon- 
 struction is almost certain to indicate a place for the development of 
 microcosmic theories. Thus, according to J. Burnet l and F. M. Corn- 
 ford, 2 the word koctijlos was first applied to the order observed in 
 human society, and afterward extended to the physical world. If this is 
 the case, countless interests of the social group as opposed to the forces of 
 nature would cause the two types of order to be distinguished — at first, 
 perhaps, implicitly, in attitudes and practices, and at length explicitly by 
 adjectives and phrases. But one need not follow Burnet or Cornford in 
 detail; one can say in general, and in agreement with accepted views of 
 social origins, that wherever a social group, with a limited supply of facts, 
 begins to distinguish order in the physical environment with which their 
 social order has to contend, the way is open for a natural development of 
 microcosmic theories. That it was the individual, animal or man, which 
 later, as order came to be distinguished in this case also, was regarded as 
 preeminently the microcosm, is quite in accord with the fact that in other 
 respects developing individuality tended to force social considerations 
 into the background. In the second place, there are some passages in the 
 
 1 Early Greek Philosophy (London, 1908), p. 32. 
 
 2 From Religion to Philosophy (London, 191 2), p. 53. 
 
2 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 fragments which, especially when compared, appear to be of significance 
 for microcosmic theories, even though great allowance has to be made for 
 mutilations, uncritical transmission, and biased interpretations. 
 
 2. Criticism of Certain Statements about T hales. In the case of Thales, 
 the meagre evidence is not convincing. A. Weber says that Thales held 
 that the earth derives nourishment from the water surrounding it; 1 but 
 this view is traceable not to a citation from Thales, but to a conjecture of 
 Aristotle. 2 If Thales, reasoning from the behavior of magnetic stones, 3 
 taught that the cosmos is e^xpvxos, 4 this is an instance of animistic, 
 rather than of microcosmic theory. 5 
 
 3. Earliest Trace of Microcosmic Theory in Anaximenes. The first 
 instance of recognition of a similarity of structure and process in the 
 universe and in man is found in a fragment ascribed to Anaximenes. As 
 preserved by Stobaeus, 6 it is as follows: 
 
 "Just as our soul which is air holds us together, so it is breath 
 
 and air that encompasses the whole world.' ' 
 
 On the basis of this fragment, C. Baeumker 7 and Meyer 8 have agreed 
 
 that Anaximenes is to be credited practically with having founded the 
 
 theory of macrocosm and microcosm. Burnet says that he was influenced 
 
 by the analogy. 9 
 
 4. Related Views among the Pythagoreans. It is obvious that the 
 Pythagorean doctrine of numbers, implying basic resemblances in all 
 things, might easily be elaborated into a theory of epitomizing relations. 
 Nor is it strange that Pythagoras, who, according to several ancient 
 writers, was the first to call the world by the term Koffftos, 10 should be 
 interpreted in accordance with microcosmic theories. 11 But " Pythagoras " 
 is the name of a corporation even more than of an individual; passages 
 
 1 History of Philosophy (Eng. transl., Thilly, N. Y., 1908), p. 21. 
 
 2 Met. I, 3, 983 b 21. 3 De An., I, 2, 405 a 19. 4 Diog. Laert., I, vi, 27. 
 6 Cf. R. D. Hicks, Stoic and Epicurean (N. Y., 1910), p. 20. 
 
 8 Stob., Eclogoe, I, x, 12, ed. Meineke (Leipzig, i860). 
 
 ''Das Problem der Mater ie in der Griechischen Philosophie (Minister, 1890), p. 15. 
 
 8 Op. cit., p. 99. 
 
 9 Greek Philosophy, Part I. From Thales to Plato (London, 1914), p. 25. 
 
 10 E. Zeller, History of Greek Philosophy, Eng. transl. Alleyne (London, 1881), vol. I, 
 p. 472, n. 2. 
 
 "Meyer, op. cit., p. 6, "Menschliche Ordnung . . . weitet er makrokosmisch aus." 
 On p. 7 Meyer says that Erdmann ascribes the germ of the theory to Pythagoras and 
 the Pythagoreans; but Erdmann (Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophie, 4te Auflage, 
 Berlin, 1896, p. 32) ascribes it to Platonic circles. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Greek and Grceco-Roman World 3 
 
 such as may be cited from Photius l and other writers undoubtedly 
 belong to later periods. 2 Some features of the later Pythagorean teach- 
 ings were quite microcosmic — for example, the view that there was a 
 process of inhalation, whereby breath was drawn into the heavens from 
 outside; 3 that the /cocjuos had a right side and a left side; 4 that the 
 heavens constituted a body, of which the sun, moon, stars and heavenly 
 elements formed the eyes and other members, "as in man"; 5 and a more 
 curious theory, attributed to Philolaus, 6 that the brain, heart, navel and 
 genital organs, with their functions, corresponded to or represented man, 
 the animals, the plants, and the ensemble, respectively. 
 
 5. Attempts to Construe Microcosmic Views in Heraclitus. According to 
 the Heraclitean fragments, there is continual flux in the world, particu- 
 larly between opposing forces; 7 such a flux is also observable in man and 
 human affairs; 8 and there are direct connections between the world 
 process and the soul. 9 Thus all the elements necessary for the construc- 
 tion of a microcosmic theory are here; there is lacking only a definite 
 word from Heraclitus, fitting them together. Burnet has attempted to 
 bridge this gap; his attempt is more conspicuous than that of Meyer, 10 
 although resting upon the same general principles. Burnet develops the 
 comparison between the world and man; he thinks that Heraclitus ex- 
 plains the former by the latter. 11 
 
 "Night and day, summer and winter, alternate in the same way 
 as sleep and waking, life and death, and . . . the explanation is to 
 be found in the successive advances of the wet and the dry, the cold 
 and the hot. . . . ' The way up and the way down are one and the 
 same ' ... for the microcosm and the macrocosm." 12 
 E. V. Arnold thinks that 
 
 "The doctrine that man is a representation or reflection of the 
 universe . . . seems to be clearly implied by the teaching of Her- 
 aclitus, in so far as he lays it down that both the universe and man are 
 vivified and controlled by the Logos." 13 
 
 1 Bibliothecon, codex 249 (ed. Bekker, Berlin, 1824, II, 440-a). 
 
 2 Cf. Lobeck, op. cit., vol. II, pp. 918-920. 
 
 3 Cf. Aristotle, Phys. IV, 6, 213 b. 4 Stobaeus, Eclog., I, xv, 6. 
 
 5 Epiphanius, Advers. hares., I (1), haer. 5, ord. 7; Migne, Pair. Gr., vol. XLI, col. 205. 
 
 6 H. Diels, Fragmente der Vorsokratiker (2nd edition, Berlin, 1906-10), vol. I, p. 244 — 
 Philolaus, frgt. 13. 
 
 7 Ibid., pp. 61 ff. Heraclitus, frgts. 10, 51, 59, 60, 76, 80, 90, 103, 126. 
 
 8 Ibid., frgts. 58, 88, in. 9 Ibid., frgts. 36, 77. 10 Op. cit., p. 10. 
 
 11 Early Gr. Phil, p. 168. u Gr. Phil. I, pp. 60, 61. ™ Rom. Stoicism, p. 240. 
 
4 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 Yet it must be remembered that all these views are made out of the 
 fragments, rather than found in them. At one time it seemed possible 
 that more definite evidence of microcosmic views might be obtained from 
 Heraclitus. According to Meyer, 1 an attempt was made by P. Schuster, 
 in a work called Heraklit von Ephesus (1873), to show that Heraclitus 
 saw a parallelism between the universe and man. This work was recog- 
 nized and cited by H. Siebeck, 2 but according to Meyer is unreliable, 
 because it ascribes to Heraclitus the famous treatise De diceta. Gomperz 
 ascribes this treatise to the Hippocratic school; 3 Diels prints part of it 
 with the Heraclitean fragments as an "imitation"; 4 Burnet calls it 
 pseudo-Hippocratean, but thinks that part of it is " almost certainly of Her- 
 aclitean origin." 5 In the treatise one finds the characteristic Heraclitean 
 doctrine of a periodic flux, especially an interaction of fire and water. 6 
 There is a more explicit comparison between the processes of nature and 
 those of man. 7 The crucial passage, for the documentation of a definite 
 microcosmic theory, runs: 
 
 " In a word, the fire has ordered everything in the body in its own 
 
 way, (an) imitation of the Whole, (setting) small over against great 
 
 and great over against small; the . . . belly . . . (having the) power 
 
 of the sea, nourisher of living creatures . . . imitation of the earth, 
 
 transforming all things falling upon it." 8 
 
 If this passage could be proved to have come from Heraclitus, one 
 
 would need no further evidence; but it is worked out in fantastic detail 
 
 which suggests a later period and a commentator. In general, however, 
 
 one may say that it is strange if a relation between various portions of 
 
 his teachings which has been so clear to the commentators was missed by 
 
 the master. 
 
 6. Suggested Interpretation of Some Empedoclean Fragments. The 
 same remark, that a relation between doctrines which is so clear to others 
 might well have been clear to their author, applies to Empedocles. One 
 is tempted to surmise that just as Newton is said to have had his apple, so 
 Empedocles had his " klepsydra " ; for it may be noted that, just as air and 
 
 1 Op. cU., pp. 8, ff. 
 
 2 Geschichte der Psychologic (Gotha, 1880), vol. I, p. 43. 
 
 * Greek Thinkers, Engl, transl. Magnus (London, 1901), vol. I, p. 286. 
 
 4 Fragmente, vol. I, pp. 81 ff. 
 
 6 Early Gr. Phil., p. 167. 
 
 6 De diata 1, 3, quoted by Burnet, Early Gr. Phil., p. 183, n. 1. 
 
 7 De diata, I, 6, ff. Diels, Fragmente, vol. I, pp. 81-2. 
 
 8 De diceta, I, 10; Diels, p. 83. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Greek and Grceco-Roman World 5 
 
 water alternately penetrate the klepsydra, 1 so Love and Strife alternately 
 penetrate the great Sphairos. 2 Again, the klepsydra illustrates the 
 process of breathing. 1 And once more, although the fragments in this 
 case are not so clear, one may say that the principle observed in the 
 klepsydra is not altogether absent from what might be called Empedo- 
 cles's psychology. The eye is equipped with pores, 3 recalling those 
 which function in breathing and, also, the perforations of the klepsydra; 4 
 the fire has concealed itself in the interior of the eye, and comes out 
 through the pores. 3 Empedocles may very well have seen this resem- 
 blance between the various processes mentioned; and if he did, the 
 famous doctrine that "like perceives like" 5 may belong in a microcosmic 
 setting rather than in that of a theory about the subjectivity of sense- 
 data. 6 According to one of the fragments, 7 Empedocles declared that he 
 had made an important discovery; Burnet implies that this discovery was 
 in the nature of a microcosmic theory. 8 Weber speaks according to the 
 spirit rather than the letter of the evidence when he says that according 
 to Empedocles "man is the image of the Sphairos. The four radical 
 elements are represented in him. " 9 
 
 7. Alleged Influence of the Hippocratean Writings. According to 
 Burnet, the rise of medicine in the fifth century B. C. made biological 
 arguments popular. 10 The dates of the Hippocratean treatises are not 
 precisely known; but some of them may have been early enough to figure 
 in this period. Besides the De diata, there was one On the Number Seven, 
 which Gomperz discusses in connection with this period. According to 
 this, animals and plants have a constitution resembling that of the uni- 
 verse; the earth resembles the bones; the air, the flesh around them; the 
 river waters, the blood, and so on. 11 Gomperz thinks that the theory of 
 the microcosm was "a grand idea in itself," but "bound to lead to fanci- 
 ful interpretations" and, then as later, "to darken rather than illumine 
 the path of natural research." 12 In this case, the comparisons, carried to 
 ludicrous extremes, were, according to Gomperz, calculated to produce a 
 reaction, which, when it ensued, marked the dawn of Greek science. 13 
 
 1 Diels, sub Empedocles, frgt. 100. 
 
 2 Ibid., frgts. 17, ai, 22, 35. Cf. Bumet, Gr. Phil., I, pp. 72-3. 
 
 3 Diels, Fragmente — Empedocles, frgt. 84. 4 Ibid., frgt. 100. 
 6 Ibid., frgt. 109. 
 
 6 Cf. Gomperz, op. tit., vol. I, pp. 235-6. 
 
 7 Diels, frgt. 17, lines 25-6. *Gr. Phil., I, p. 73. 
 
 9 Op. cit., p. 47. w Early Gr. Phil. (1908), p. 49. 
 
 11 Gomperz, op. cit., vol. I, pp. 294-5. 12 Ibid., p. 289. " Ibid., p. 295. 
 
6 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 Whatever truth there may be in this statement should not be allowed to 
 obscure the fact that there were many other influences which were at 
 work to produce a more empirical and matter-of-fact science among the 
 Greeks. 
 
 8. On the Ascription of the Term "Microcosm" to Democritus. Before 
 considering these other influences we turn to Democritus, who was at any 
 rate Pre-Platonic by birth. It is easy to construct microcosmic theories in 
 an atomism, just as it is in a number-philosophy — each atom may be 
 regarded as an image of every other. But the evidence that Democritus 
 held any microcosmic theory is very faulty. The assertion is made by 
 David of Nerken, an Armenian philosopher who flourished about 490 
 A. D., that Democritus called man the microcosm; 1 but the assertion 
 remains practically unsupported. 2 
 
 g. The Older Microcosmic Theories Eclipsed by Humanistic Interests at 
 Athens. According to Xenophon, Socrates once developed an argument 
 from analogy to sustain an Anaxagorean view of the world-soul ; in it, he 
 pointed out some relations between the composition of the world and that 
 of the human body, as well as between the larger soul and the human 
 soul. 3 But — assuming that the Platonic writings have more of the pupil 
 than of the teacher — the Athenians, in the brilliant period marked by the 
 visits of the earlier Sophists, were more interested along other lines. It 
 mattered little to them what might transpire in the world outside the city 
 walls, or beyond the reach of city policies; the question of possible re- 
 semblance of the greater world to the lesser lost its importance. The 
 Athenians were not merely skeptical; 4 they were preoccupied. The 
 ancient views were left high and dry, or relegated to groups like the 
 Pythagoreans. There seems to be no allusion to microcosmic theories in 
 the great dramatists, nor even in the historians. Everything centers 
 around social and political questions. Men laugh at Socrates for an 
 alleged interest in meteorology. No one thinks of interpreting the 
 saying of Protagoras, that man is the measure of all things, with any 
 
 1 Prolegomena, chap. XII (Commentaria in Aristotelem grceca, vol. 18 — ed. A. Busse, 
 Berlin, 1904). Diels, Fragmente — Democritus, frgt. 34. On the terms /w-cyas 
 SiaKOoyxos and fUKpos SuiKoa-fios, see Diels, Leucippus, frgt. 1; Diog. Laert IX, 
 45-49, in Diels, p. 357; Burnet, Early Gr. Phil. (1908), p. 381. Cf. Porphyry; Stob. Flor. 
 XXI, 27. 
 
 2 Democritus is credited with the saying that the wise man is at home in the whole 
 cosmos (Diels, frgt. 247). 
 
 3 Memorabilia, I, 4. 
 
 4 Cf. Meyer, op. cit., pp. 17, ff. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Greek and GrcBco-Roman World 7 
 
 emphasis on the "all things." And, when Plato begins to write, even the 
 theory of macrocosm and microcosm begins to take a sociological form. 
 10. The Pre-Platonic Period in Retrospect. Unless the late Pythagorean 
 and Hippocratean writers can be called Pre-Platonic, the evidence does 
 not allow us to ascribe microcosmic theories definitely and explicitly to 
 any of these thinkers, except Anaximenes, and in his case the one frag- 
 ment is hardly sufficient for the foundation of a theory. But much of the 
 evidence in the cases of Heraclitus and Empedocles points in the direction 
 of a theory. When one considers not merely the literary evidence, but 
 also the general conditions out of which philosophy, in common with 
 other features of early civilization, developed, the probability is strength- 
 ened that microcosmic theories were familiar to the Greek thinkers who 
 preceded Plato. 1 
 
 2. The Writings of Plato and Aristotle 
 
 1. Functions of Microcosmic Theories in Plato. The interests of Plato 
 were sc varied that his works defy systematization in accordance with 
 any one of them. In the dialogues in which the life of Socrates is dram- 
 atized, or those in which Plato displays his flashes of poetic genius, or 
 those in which, attempting to answer the questions raised by the Sophists 
 he strikes hither and thither in search of precise ethical and logical 
 definitions, there is no trace of theories of epitomization. But wherever 
 Plato the philosopher appears, to answer questions which Plato the 
 dramatist has suggested or Plato — if not Socrates — the dialectician has 
 elaborated; wherever, that is, Plato's work begins to be systematic and 
 constructive, there, without using the term, he employs one or another of 
 the microcosmic theories. It is always naive — the work of a man who is 
 trying to be systematic, but who is obliged to draw largely on his imagina- 
 tion for materials; and it is often obscured by his use of myth and allegory. 
 It is chiefly apparent in his political, ethical, and cosmological views. 
 
 2. Plato's Parallelism between Man and the State. In the Republic 
 there is the familiar comparison between the tripartite ideal state and the 
 tripartite individual soul — to the effect that justice, in individual char- 
 acter, consists in a hierarchical relationship between reason, enthusiasms 
 and appetites; and, in the state, in a similar relationship between the 
 ruling, military, and producing classes. 2 Plato realizes, however, that 
 
 1 Cf. references to passages in Philo, Macrobius, Galen and Chalcidius, below. 
 
 2 Republic, 434-435, 441, 580 D, E. Since the Greeks, the northern barbarians, and 
 the Phoenicians exhibited the qualities of the three classes, respectively, Plato's tri- 
 
8 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 the relationship between individual and state is not so simple as it ap- 
 pears from this parallelism. His conception is not merely structural, 
 that of an individual soul considered as a combination of three qualities 
 and a state considered as a combination of three social classes; his con- 
 ception is also, and even predominantly, what we may call functional, 
 that of a comparison between what might now be termed individual and 
 social psychology. In this latter aspect of his doctrine, the facts become 
 conspicuous that the state gets its qualities and habits from the individ- 
 uals which make it up, 1 and that individuals, in turn, partake of the 
 qualities of the states in which they live. 2 But these structural and 
 functional aspects are not regarded as out of all relation to one another; 
 for it is said that the members of various classes in the state will manifest 
 individual qualities which, in the scale of qualities, are comparable to the 
 positions of those classes in the state. 3 There are some other indications, 
 too, of Plato's interest in questions of structure, traceable in his com- 
 parisons of a troubled city and a diseased organism, 4 and in the curious 
 prototype of later organismic theories, found in the Laws, acco r ding to 
 which the city is to be compared to a trunk, the younger guardians to 
 eyes, and the old men to a memory. 5 On the whole we may say that in 
 his political philosophy Plato used structural comparisons to render more 
 articulate those recommendations upon which he was intent; but it must 
 be remembered that his chief interest here was not a biological parallel- 
 ism, but a psychological description; not organism, but organization. 
 3. Plato's Cosmology. The complicated machinery of the Timceus 
 contains so many wheels within wheels that it lends itself easily to 
 microcosmic interpretations. One must note, however, that some of the 
 processes of imitation which it portrays are those by which, in accordance 
 with the Platonic doctrine, the created and visible world forms a copy of 
 an uncreated world (whatever Plato may have meant by this) and its 
 contents. 6 The visible universe is thus "most like" its original; 6 it is 
 spherical 7 and self-sufficient — it has no use for eyes, or breathing ap- 
 paratus, or food from outside. 8 The visible universe is composed of the 
 
 partite division and parallelism might be extended to include a larger instance. Plato 
 says (576 C), "As state is to state in virtue and happiness, man is to man." 
 
 1 Republic, 435 E, 544 D, E. 
 
 2 /&«/., 441 C, D, 576 C, 577 D. 
 
 Ubid., 431 B-D, 433 C. 
 
 4 Republic, 462 C, D, 464 B, 556 E; Laws, 628 D, 636 A, 735 D, 829 A, 906 C, 945 C. 
 
 5 Laws, 964 D— 965 A. *Timaus, 30 C. 7 Ibid., 33 B. *Ibid., 33 C, D. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Greek and Grceco-Roman World g 
 
 world-soul 1 and the world-body. 2 The world-soul is composed of u the 
 Same," "the Other," and an intermediate "Essence" x — thus exhibiting 
 a tripartite division, which mayor may not have been meant to recall that 
 of the individual soul in the Republic. 3 Within the world-body there 
 are four kinds of beings, copies of those in the uncreated world 4 — these 
 four kinds of beings are, first, the gods or stars, and then the animals of 
 the air, water, and land, respectively 5 — perhaps designed to suggest the 
 four elements. The gods, or stars, are shaped like the All, and are thus 
 circular. 5 Among these the earth is included. 6 The animals of the air, 
 water and land were created by the gods, who in forming man imitated 
 the shape of the universe in the formation of the head, 7 and localized in 
 the body the tripartite division of the soul. 8 Of the physiological proc- 
 esses, the movement of the blood, which is enclosed within the animal 
 "as if under a sky," imitates the periodic processes of the universe. 9 
 Moreover, man should learn to imitate the harmonies of the universe, as 
 the way to health and happiness. 10 Some passages in other dialogues are 
 similar to portions of the Timceus; for instance, part of the myth of the 
 charioteer in the Phcedrus, 11 the curious speech of Aristophanes in the 
 Symposium, 12 the story of the creation in the Statesman™ and the com- 
 parison of the movements of the heavens and those of the mind, 14 as well 
 as the question raised about the body and soul of the sun, 15 in the Laws. 
 The Timceus does not stand quite alone among the dialogues; its apparent 
 isolation is due to the fact that Plato, like so many other Athenians, was 
 not primarily interested in cosmology. Doubtless this very lack of vivid 
 interest in such subjects helped to make him uncritical, and left him open 
 to Pythagorean and other influences to which Aristotle, for example, was 
 almost immune. 
 
 4. Relations of Metaphysics and Ethics in the "Philebus." Of all the 
 dialogues, the Philebus perhaps goes farthest in the direction of Plato's 
 ideal of a correlation of the various branches of knowledge. 16 The argu- 
 ment rests upon the fact that Socrates divides all things into four classes — 
 (1) the finite, (2) the infinite, (3) a mixture of the two, resulting in the 
 world as we have it, 17 and (4) the world-soul, or cause of the mixture. 18 
 
 I Timceus, 35 A. 2 Ibid., 36 D, E. 3 Cf. Gomperz, op. cit., vol. Ill, p. 207. 
 4 Timceus, 39 E. 5 Ibid., 40 A. * Ibid., 40 B. 7 Ibid., 44 D. 
 
 8 Ibid., 69 D-70 E. 9 Ibid., 81 A-B. 10 Ibid., 88 D, E, 90 D; cf. Republic, 588 A. 
 
 II Cf. Phcedrus, 247 C. 12 Cf. Symposium, 189 D, E. 
 
 13 Statesman, 269 C, ff., esp. 274 A. 14 Laws, 897 C. 15 Ibid., 898 E. 
 "Republic, 531 C, D, Laws 967 D, E. 17 Philebus, 23 C, D; 26. 
 18 Ibid., 30, A, B. 
 
io Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 Socrates's argument for the world-soul is similar to that related by 
 Xenophon; our bodies are made up of the four elements; the cosmos is 
 made up of the four elements, and may be considered to be a body; our 
 bodies have souls; the larger mixture of the elements in the cosmos must 
 have a soul also. 1 The good life consists, too, in a mixture 2 of finite and 
 infinite, 3 or wisdom and pleasure, 4 in a harmony which realizes the good 
 in man and in the All. 5 
 
 5. Comparison of Plato and Aristotle. Thus Plato's works made use of 
 a number of microcosmic arguments, without employing any definite 
 term for them. It can almost be said that Aristotle employed the term, 
 but not the arguments. There are only a few passages which suggest 
 such views. Like Plato, Aristotle compared the state to an individual 
 organism; 6 but the comparisons have behind them no concrete con- 
 ception, sustained as in the Republic. Their background is rather that of 
 the Metaphysics, or the Ethics, an abstract system for which they serve as 
 illustrations; and while of course such a system of universally applicable 
 principles exhibits the parts of the world as similar to one another, the 
 system is so abstract and so general that microcosmic structures do not 
 stand out with any prominence. Like Plato, again, Aristotle ascribes 
 life, and action like that of plants and animals, to stars. 7 He thinks that 
 the interior of the earth grows and decays like the body of a plant or 
 animal; 8 he even ascribes "a kind of life," with generation and decay, to 
 air and water in motion. 9 The planets do not move themselves; 10 they 
 have each an "unmoved mover," sometimes according to Erdmann, 11 
 called a soul. But the De ccelo is not as picturesque as the Timceus and 
 does not invite the elaboration of its comparisons at the hands of a later 
 age in the same way. 12 
 
 1 Philebus, 29-30. 2 Ibid., 61 B. 3 Ibid., 32 A, B. 4 Ibid., 60. 
 
 5 Ibid., 63 E. 
 
 6 Politics, I, s, 1254 a 28; III, 4, 1277 a 5; IV, 4, 1290 b 23; V, 3, 1302 b 34; V, 9, 
 1309 b 23; VI, 6, 1320 b 33; VII, 3, 1325 b 23. Nic. Eth., VII, 10, 1152 a 20; IX, 8, 
 1168 b 31. 
 
 7 De ccelo, II, 12, 292 a, b. 8 Meteorol., I, 14, 351. 
 9 De gen. an., IV, 10, 778 a. 10 De ccelo, II, 8, 290 a. 
 
 11 History of Philosophy, Eng. transl. Hough (London, 1891), vol. I, p. 157. 
 
 12 Dieterici (op. cit., I, 163), citing Zeller (cf. Aristotle and the Earlier Peripatetics, 
 Eng. transl. Costelloe and Muirhead [London, 1897], vol. II, pp. 24-28), thinks that 
 microcosmic theories begin to be grounded scientifically in Hist, an., VIII, 1, 588 b 4, 
 in Aristotle's teaching concerning the gradual transitions between the species, and 
 the analogies (homologies) between them. Many later versions of the theory centered 
 round the fact that, as Aristotle says, man has in him at their best qualities which the 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Greek and Grceco-Roman World 1 1 
 
 6. First Authentic Occurrence of the Term "Microcosm." In spite of the 
 fact that Aristotle does not make much use of such arguments, it is in his 
 writings that the expression which afterward become the term "micro- 
 cosm " is used, so far as we know, for the first time. In the Physics, Book 
 VIII, chapter II, he considers objections to his theory of the eternity of 
 motion; among them is the objection that animate beings seem to rouse 
 themselves from a state of repose. He says : 
 
 "If this can happen in the living being, what hinders it from 
 
 happening also in the All? — for if it happens in the little world 
 
 (it happens) also in the great, [el 7ap kv jtu/cpw Koajicc yiveTcu,, /cat 
 
 iv /iCYaXw,] and if in the world, also in the Infinite, if it is possible 
 
 for the Infinite to move itself." 1 
 
 His answer is that there are hidden motions, both in things inanimate 
 
 and in animals, which the objections fail to take into account. The 
 
 character of the above passage, together with the fact that Aristotle does 
 
 not use the term again throughout all his writings, leads one to suppose 
 
 that he is here quoting the term from some opponent. For himself, he 
 
 was too empirical in his biology and too abstract in his cosmogony to care 
 
 for such a view. 2 
 
 3. The Teachings of the Stoics 
 
 1. Criticism of View of Some Investigators in this Field. It has been 
 maintained by several writers that microcosmic theories were prominent 
 among the Stoics; 3 the implication usually is that the Stoics were agreed 
 among themselves, and were explicit and systematic in their use of the 
 theories. The chief support of this view is found in the work of Stein, 4 
 who thinks that the Stoic psychology, with its metaphysical and cosmo- 
 logical affiliations, afforded a broad and firm foundation upon which to 
 
 lower animals manifest less completely. But in these cases, as in his comparison of 
 male and female with motion and matter (De gen. an., II, 1, 731 b 24), or with form 
 and matter (Metaph., I, 6, 988 a 5) and in his view that the sense organs correspond 
 to the four elements (De sensu et sensili, II, 437 a, 438 b), Aristotle's interests are quite 
 remote from microcosmic theories. This is the case also in De anima, III, 8, 431 a, 
 when he says that "in a manner the soul is the things which are." 
 l Phys., VIII, 2, 252 b. 
 
 2 Windelband is inaccurate when he says (op. cit., p. 187) that the Stoics took the 
 theory of man as a microcosm from Aristotle; even if the passage in Aristotle is meant 
 to reflect his own views, it concerns animated beings in general rather than man. 
 
 3 Windelband, Hist, of Phil., pp. 14, n., 187; Bouche-Leclercq, Uastrologie grecque, 
 p. 78; Arnold, Rom. Stoicism, p. 240; R. D. Hicks, Stoic and Epicurean (N. Y., 1910), 
 p. 30. 4 Psych, der Stoa, I, 206 fit. 
 
12 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 work out a comparison between the universe and man, and that the whole 
 rested within the general setting of Stoic pantheism. 1 But the method 
 which Stein uses to support these views is open to criticism. He finds, 
 among the fragments from the writings of the older Stoics, various 
 passages about the world and, again, about man; a number of these he 
 sets in parallel, showing that the two series exhibit a number of resem- 
 blances in the processes which they describe; and these he calls the Stoic 
 teachings about macrocosm and microcosm. But the method disregards 
 temporal, geographical and individual differences. In a case where 
 writings are preserved only in scattered and fragmentary form, it is per- 
 missible, as we held in the case of the Pre-Platonic writings, to attempt to 
 reconstruct a background, or to compare the fragments one with another; 
 but either method alone, and the combination of both, must always be used 
 with reserve, particularly when the fragments come from different authors. 
 
 2. The Interests of the Stoics. Judging from their product as we find 
 it, one would say that the interests of the Stoics were predominantly 
 moral and religious. As befitted philosophers, they discussed astronomy, 
 physics and biology, and some of them had a more or less evident interest 
 in logic and psychology; but, either because they wrote more ethical 
 works, or else because their ethical writings seemed better worth pre- 
 serving, we see them chiefly as moralists whose teachings verge upon 
 those of a religion. 2 If this estimate of them is accurate, we might expect 
 to find them sometimes content with statements less precise than a closer 
 study of the universe would have suggested. Their interests were so 
 predominantly ethical that their work differed from more exact sci- 
 ences; and on the other hand their religion did not impose upon the 
 individual writers the conformity required by, a cult. Accordingly we 
 should expect to find not merely a certain looseness of statement, but also 
 differences of opinion between the various men. 
 
 3. Stoic Theories, according to the Fragments. It cannot be denied that 
 the Stoic fragments show marked agreements between some of the 
 writers, and doubtless more agreements than can be explained by the 
 selecting or emendating operations of the doxographers. Most of the 
 Stoics probably agreed that the world was an animate and rational being; 
 it is asserted of Zeno, 3 Chrysippus, 4 Apollodorus and Posidonius, 5 and 
 
 1 Psych, der Stoa, pp. 206, 208, 214. 2 Arnold, Roman Stoicism, p. 17. 
 
 3 For several references, see J. von Arnim, Stoicorum veterum fragmenta (Leipzig, 
 1905) vol. I — Zeno, frgts. 110-114. 
 
 4 Ibid., vol. II,^Chrysippus, frgts. 633-645. 5 Diog. Laert. VII, lxx, 143. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Greek and Grceco-Roman World 13 
 
 indirectly of Cleanthes; l apparently only Boethus of Sidon denied that 
 the world was animate. 2 Diogenes Laertius says that Zeno, Cleanthes, 
 Chrysippus and Posidonius all taught that the world was subject to genera- 
 tion and corruption; 3 Stobaeus has a passage asserting that Zeno, Cleanthes, 
 and Chrysippus thought that the world would be reduced by fire to its pri- 
 meval germinal state, from which it would at length arise again — an esti- 
 mate of the S toic teachings which was widespread in antiquity. 4 It is quite 
 likely that these men agreed, again, that on general principles the human 
 body and the universe must each have its rjyenovucov, or guiding prin- 
 ciple; 5 but they differed when it came to a question of locating this 
 principle, both in the body and in the universe. With regard to the body, 
 Zeno thought, according to Plutarch, that the guiding principle was in 
 the head; 6 Chrysippus was said by others to have located it in the 
 breast, 7 or heart. 8 With regard to the universe, Cleanthes thought that 
 the guiding principle was the sun; 9 Chrysippus said once that it was the 
 sky, and, again, the aether. 10 In general, once more, the Stoics held 
 pantheistic views; but they differed in details here also. Zeno is variously 
 reported as having called the whole universe God, in agreement with 
 Chrysippus, 11 and, again, as having called the aether God; 12 Cleanthes, 
 according to Cicero, had no less than seven different views; 13 Diogenes of 
 Babylonia said that God penetrates the universe as man's soul penetrates 
 his body; 14 Posidonius said practically the same. 15 It is evident that the 
 presence in the Stoic fragments both of such agreements and such 
 differences — and the list of either might be lengthened — must affect our 
 estimate of the Stoic position with regard to microcosmic theories. On 
 the one hand, the agreements show that such theories were, if nothing 
 more, at least implicit in the views of the Greek Stoics. The fact, for 
 
 1 Cf. Cicero, De natura deorum, I, xiv, 37; II, ix, 24. 
 2 v. Arnim, op. cit., vol. Ill, Boethus, frgt. 6. 
 
 3 Op. cit., VII, lxx, 142. 
 
 4 Stob., Eclogce, in v. Arnim, op. cit., vol. II, frgt. 596. Also 597-632. 
 
 6 Plutarch, Epitome, IV, 21, in Diels, Doxographi grceci (Berlin, 1879), p. 410. Cf. 
 Cicero, De nat. deor., II, xi, 29. 
 
 6 Plut., Epit., in Diels, p. 411. 
 
 7 Philodemus, De pieta, 16, in Diels, p. 549. 
 
 8 Diog. Laert., VII, lxxxvi, 159; this may refer to other Stoics; v. Arnim prints it 
 with those from Chrysippus (op. cit., vol. II, frgt. 837). 
 
 9 Diog. Laert, VII, lxx, 139. 10 Ibid., 1. c. » Ibid., VII, lxxii, 148. 
 12 Cicero, De nat. deor, I, xiv., 36. 13 Ibid., I, xiv, 37. 
 
 14 Philodem., De piet., 15, in Diels, Doxog., pp. 548-549. 
 
 15 Diog. Laert., VII, lxx, 138. 
 
14 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 example, that the universe was so generally regarded as animate left the 
 way open for anyone interested in describing it further to express views of 
 its origin and processes which would of course resemble the views held 
 concerning embryology and physiology. 1 Similarly, the fact that it was 
 regarded as rational led to psychological comparisons. But unless the 
 comparison is made explicitly, or unless the fragments on which it is 
 based come from the same author, one should not jump to the conclusion 
 that the Stoics developed the theory of man as a microcosm. 
 
 Sometimes, indeed, the comparison does lie very near the surface — as 
 
 when Zeno is said to have taught that, just as in the cosmos, man's 
 
 " guiding principle" was in his head, which is of spherical form; 2 or as 
 
 when Posidonius is cited to the effect that the vovs of the cosmos enters 
 
 as e£is into our bones and sinews, and as vovs into the guiding principle; 3 
 
 or as when, again, he is said to have ascribed iradrj to the earth. 4 Among 
 
 the Roman Stoics, Seneca put the matter most clearly when he said 
 
 "The whole art of nature is imitation. . . . The place which God 
 
 has in the world, the soul has in man; that which in the former is 
 
 matter, is in us body." 5 
 
 In his Qucestiones naturales he speaks of it as his own view that nature 
 has organized the earth somewhat after the pattern of our bodies, 6 so 
 that veins may be compared to water courses, arteries to air passages, 7 
 various fluids of the body to geological substances, 8 and injuries of the 
 body to earthquakes. 9 Again, in connection with the doctrine of a world- 
 conflagration, he says that whether the world is soul or body, everything 
 that is to happen in it is bound up in its primordial condition, as is the 
 case with the human embryo. 10 Of course Seneca may have taken such 
 views from older Stoic sources; but it is obvious that in the present state 
 of the sources we have in Seneca's explicit and consistent comparisons 
 
 1 For some of these views, see Stein, op. cit., vol. I, pp. 209 ff . 
 
 2 Plut., Epit., IV, 21, in Diels, Doxog., p. 411. The word k6<t/x<o is an emendation. 
 3 Diog. Laert., VII, lxx, 138-139. 
 
 4 Stob., Eel., in Diels, Doxog., p. 383. 
 
 5 Epist., 65, 24. Stein (op. cit., I, 208) says that this brief formulation of the theory- 
 is also found in Cornutus. Cicero in the "Dream of Scipio" makes Africanus argue for 
 the divinity of the individual soul, which controls the body, just as God is the ruler of 
 the world (De republica, VI, viii, 2). It is in connection with this passage that Ma- 
 crobius, about 400 A. D., says that certain pliiiusophers called the world a large man 
 and man a short (-lived?) world (physici mundum magnum hominem et hominem 
 brevem mundum esse dixerunt — Comment, in Somn. Scip., II, xii, n). 
 
 6 Quasi, nat., Ill, xv, 2. 7 Ibid., Ill, xv, 3, 5; VI, xiv, 2. *Ibid., Ill, xv, 4. 
 9 Ibid., VI, xxiv, 1-4. 10 Ibid., Ill, xxix, 2. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Greek and Grceco-Roman World 15 
 
 evidence for microcosmic theories more trustworthy than that afforded 
 by the Greek fragments. Marcus Aurelius argued for the existence of a 
 universal order from the fact that in man there is " a kind of world " ; l this 
 passage may also have reference to older sources. Whatever those 
 sources may have contained, in the way of definitely expressed microcos- 
 mic views, one can say that in the fragments the views are implicit; 
 their general agreements are enough to show this. On the other hand, 
 their many differences, and the untrustworthy character of many of the 
 sources make it a pointless task to try to weave a few of the fragments 
 into a consistent and unified microcosmic theory which can be used as a 
 measure for estimating fragments that remain outstanding. 2 In a word, 
 so far as the evidence goes, the Greek Stoics were in much the same 
 position as Plato; microcosmic arguments were used, but the theories 
 were not very definitely elaborated. The term ' ' microcosm, " so far as one 
 can find, was unknown. 
 
 4. Relation of Microcosmic Theories to Stoic Ethics and Religion. There 
 is, as we intimated, reason to suppose that considerations of things 
 physical were for the Stoics subordinate to ethical and religious interests. 
 According to Diogenes Laertius, Zeno was the first to teach that " the end 
 is to live according to nature, which is to live according to virtue." 3 
 Cicero says that Chrysippus held that man was placed here 
 
 "to contemplate and imitate the world; in no wise perfect, he is a 
 
 kind of particle of the perfect"; 4 
 Arnold thinks that in this microcosmic conception Chrysippus found a 
 foundation for ethics. 5 The pantheistic views of some of the Stoics have 
 been indicated. A passage attributed to Zeno suggested to Cicero that 
 
 "the universe displays all impulses of will and all corresponding 
 
 actions just like ourselves when we are stirred through the mind and 
 
 the senses. " 6 
 The two views are blended in the hauntingly beautiful words of 
 Marcus Aurelius: 
 
 "Whatever is satisfactory to thee, O World, is satisfactory also to 
 
 me. Nothing is too early or too late for me which to thee is in season. 
 
 Like fruit to me, O Nature, is all that thy seasons bring." 7 
 
 1 De rebus suuyVf, 27; cf. Gataker's note. 
 
 2 Cf. Stein's procedure, vol. I, p. 211. 3 Diog. Laert. VII, liii, 87. 
 4 De natura deorum, II, xiv, 37. 5 Rom. Stoicism, p. 240. 
 
 • De nat. deor., II, xxii, 58; transl. Arnold, op. cit., p. 240. 
 7 De rebus suis, IV, xxiii. Cf. V, xxi. 
 
1 6 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 This saying typifies the Stoic ethics of submission to the order of 
 nature, and the Stoic religion of contentment in one's relations to a uni- 
 verse regarded as quasi-personal. Such ethical and religious views are 
 closely related to microcosmic theories, but they do not depend upon 
 them in any definite way. One could say perhaps that the Stoic pan- 
 theism was an attitude rather than a system, and that the Stoic ethics 
 was not solid, but fluid. Microcosmic theories did not enter into them 
 much; it is more accurate to say that in the Stoic writings microcosmic 
 theories begin to crystallize out of them. 
 
 4. Jewish Philosophy in the Gr^eco-Roman Period 
 
 1. The Beginnings of the "Sefer Yezirahr Other influences besides 
 Stoicism were making for more definite microcosmic views. Perhaps 
 from the second century B. C. date the beginnings of the Jewish Sefer 
 Yezirah, or "Book of Creation." ! According to this work in its later 
 form, there are ten principles in the world, corresponding to ten letters 
 and ten numbers. The letters of the alphabet, in groups of 3, 7, and 12, 
 are made to interpret the processes of nature, the seasons, and the human 
 body. 2 The origin of both the universe and man from permutations and 
 combinations of the mystic powers of the letters points in the direction of 
 a microcosmic theory. 3 But more definite indications appeared in the 
 great syncretism at Alexandria. 
 
 2. Philo's Theories of Man as the u Brachycosm." Typical of the period 
 of syncretism was Philo. His great aim was to harmonize Greek philos- 
 ophy and Hebrew religion, in such a way as to avoid anthropomorphic 
 conceptions of God. 4 All Jewish conceptions of man go back to the view 
 that God created man in his own image. 5 Philo had two ways of ex- 
 plaining away the apparent anthropomorphism, and both ways involved 
 the use of microcosmic theories. The first was to use the argument that 
 what God is to the universe, the soul is to man; the resemblance between 
 God and man, then, applies to the soul, not to the body. 6 This view is 
 amplified when it is said that both in the universe and in man the mind is 
 
 1 Jewish Encyc, XII, 602-603. 
 
 2 L. Goldschmidt, Sepher Jesirah (Frankfurt, 1894), pp. 21, 24. 
 
 8 Cf. Jewish Encyc, XII, 603. 
 
 4 C. Bigg, The Christian Platonists of Alexandria (Oxford, 1886), p. 7. 
 
 8 Gen., I, 26-27. 
 
 e Be tnundi opificio, XXIII, 69-71. Cf. Legutn allegoriarum, I, xxix, 91-92; De 
 monarchia y I, 1; De Abrahamo, XVI, 74; Ibid., XL VI, 272; De migratione Abraham^ 
 XXXIII, 184-186. 
 
 . 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Greek and Graco-Roman World 17 
 
 composed of two portions, a superior and an inferior; 1 and that both the 
 Logos in the universe and the reason in man divide and distribute all 
 things which are under them. 2 The second way of explaining the verse 
 in Genesis is to say that God made man, not in his image, but "after his 
 image"; the image thus becomes an intermediate portion of creation, a 
 copy of that which antedated it and a model of that which followed. 
 This intermediate portion, in strict parallelism with the human soul, 
 which is regarded as the undivided substratum of the six faculties, is 
 declared to be the sky, or heaven, the undivided substratum of the six 
 planets. 3 To reasoning in us corresponds the sun in the world. 4 The 
 introduction of the intermediate stage between God and man makes 
 possible the development of views that not merely is man's soul con- 
 nected with the Logos, but his body is also connected with the material 
 world 5 in an .epitomizing way. In the working out of these latter views 
 there seem to be two tendencies. There is first a Greek strain, according 
 to which the four elements are mingled in proportion, which proportion 
 extends to the differences between small and large, and makes man, as 
 some (eVioi) have declared, equal to the whole world; and these men, 
 " going from one thing to another, have called man a little world, and 
 the world a large man. ' ' 6 
 In another work, an argument for the existence of God is made on the 
 ground that if there were no providence and moving spirit in the universe 
 there could be no motion, and the psychical processes of man, who is 
 "made like a little world in the great world" would then be inexplicable. 7 
 
 1 De vita Mosis, III, xiii, 127. 
 
 2 Quis rerum divinarum hares sit, XL VIII, 234-236. 
 
 3 Quis rer. div. haer., XL VIII, 230-236. 
 
 4 Ibid., LIII, 263-264; cf. De posteritate Caini, XVI, 55-58. 
 
 6 De mund. opif., LI, 146. 
 
 • Quis rer. div. haer, XXIX-XXXI, 146-156. Bpa\vv fiev Koapov rov avdpuvov, 
 fteyov 6* av$p<i)vov t^xtxrav rov koctjwv £ivai. The words are remarkably like those 
 of Macrobius, quoted in a note on the preceding paragraph, and seem to point to lost 
 sources for explicit microcosmic theories. Perhaps the use of ppa\vv may contain a 
 trace of temporal comparison between the universe and man {cf. New Engl. Diet., art. 
 "Macrocosm," and the suggested translation of Macrobius, above). Philo called the 
 world "the largest man" in De migr. Abr., XXXIX, 220. Cf. De Abr., XV-XVI, 72-74. 
 Neumark (Gesch. derjud. Phil. . . , vol. II, p. 405) thinks that the Quis rer. div. har.> 
 especially in view of its treatment of man as the microcosm, may have been intended 
 by Philo as a somewhat systematic and comprehensive statement of his philosophy. 
 
 7 De providentia, I, 40. "tamquam parvus mundus in magno mundo factus est." 
 See C. Richter's edition of Philo's works (Leipzig, 1828-30), vol. VIII, p. 24, n. 
 
1 8 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 Again, we find the view that man is at once every kind of animal — ter- 
 restrial, aquatic, flying, and, thanks to his visual perception of distance, 
 celestial. 1 Besides these views, which exhibit more or less definite traces 
 of Greek influence, there is another strain which Philo himself attributes 
 to the " Chaldeans." He declares that just as Abraham left Chaldea, so 
 his readers should leave the speculations of the Chaldeans, and particu- 
 larly their notions of God; still he thinks it is allowable to accept the 
 doctrine of a sympathy existing between the parts of the universe. 2 Thus 
 the sky, or heaven, the intermediate " image" between God and man, was 
 the beginning of creation, and man was the end, and they belong to- 
 gether in a unified whole. Man is 
 
 "if one must speak the truth, a little sky [or, heaven], bearing 
 within him as images many natures star-formed, in his arts and 
 sciences and . . . speculations." 3 
 In a passage which may be either Greek or oriental it is said that in 
 the creation the number 7 attained importance in heaven and, in ac- 
 cordance with a certain natural sympathy, was extended also to men, 
 where its importance is pointed out in the seven divisions of the soul and 
 of the body, the seven motions, secretions, vowels, and notes of the 
 musical scale. 4 Another passage which is hardly Greek and hardly 
 Jewish in its affiliations is that with the elaborate description of the High 
 Priest's vestments, which constitute an imitation of the universe; the 
 High Priest is bidden 
 
 "if he can not be worthy of the Creator, to strive constantly to be 
 
 worthy of that world whose image he bears, ... be changed from the 
 
 nature of a man in a way into the nature of the world, and if it is 
 
 right to say — and it is right, not to be false in speaking about what 
 
 is the truth — to be a little world." 5 
 
 Microcosmic theories were also pressed into service to help Philo's 
 
 curious interpretations of the Scriptures by the allegorical method. Thus, 
 
 three cities of Egypt are taken as symbols of faculties of the soul, 6 and 
 
 1 De mund. opif., LI, 146; perhaps suggested by Aristotle, De hist, an., VIII, 1, 588 b. 
 
 *De migr. Abr., XXXII, 176-183. On the Babylonian origin or affiliations of 
 microcosmic theories, see works of Berthelot, Cumont and v. Lippmann, cited in the 
 Introduction, above. 
 
 * De mund. opif., XXVII, 82: Ppa\vv f « Set raXrjOks dir&v, ovpavov . . . 
 *Ibid., XXXV-XLIII, 104-128. 
 
 5 De vit. Mos., II (III), xiv, 133-135: *at ct 0e/ut? cwrav — 0€/xts 8' tyevfelv irepl 
 a\y]$tLa<; XeyovTa — Ppaxys *ooy*os eivai. 
 
 • De poster. Caini, XVI, 55-58. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Greek and Gmco-Roman World 19 
 
 the verse, "He that planted the ear, shall he not hear?" 1 is cited as 
 support of the view that the senses in man are to be compared to trees; 2 
 and in both these passages, man is called the (Spaxvs k6<t/xos. It is this 
 repeated use of a term for the theory, and of this term in particular, some- 
 times with his curious half-apologetic phrase about speaking the truth 
 in the matter, that constitutes the chief difference between Philo and 
 those who preceded him, so far as their works are known to us. Its use 
 means that the theory of such a relation between the universe and man 
 is no longer merely implicit in philosophy, but is beginning to be com- 
 monly recognized. In general, it may be said that in the works of Philo the 
 chief function of the theory was to help to harmonize the Hebrew and 
 the Greek views of the world and of man. And linked in, as it were, 
 between these two great bodies of thought, microcosmic theories re- 
 mained in Jewish philosophy for centuries. 3 
 
 5. Neo-Pythagoreans and Eclectics 
 
 1. The Persistence of Pythagoreanism. The sequences of history are 
 often traceable to the writing rather than to the living of it. It is not 
 quite accurate to speak of a revival of Pythagoreanism; for one must not 
 suppose that in a world so easily capable of being fascinated as was that 
 of the Graeco-Roman period, Pythagoreanism ever died out. If it did, 
 either the Greek mystery religions or the Babylonian number specula- 
 tions or Egyptian magical formulae slipped imperceptibly into its place. 
 But as time went on Pythagoreanism, like the other philosophies of the 
 period, began to develop more definite microcosmic theories. It is im- 
 possible to fix the dates of the writings, but it may be taken for granted 
 that they do not belong to the periods of the men whose names they bear. 
 Thus the view ascribed to Pythagoras, 4 that man is a microcosm because 
 he has in him the four elements, and all the powers of the cosmos as they 
 are found in plants and animals, and, crowning the whole, the divine 
 power of reason, is more like the Alexandrian than the Athenian way of 
 stating the theory. Of the other pseudonymous works, the De anima 
 mundi et natura of the so-called Timaeus Locrius emphasizes the role of 
 
 l Ps. XCIV, 9 . 
 
 2 De plantatione Noe, VII, 28. 
 
 3 References to traces of the theory in the Talmud in K. Pollak, Abot d. R. Natan. 
 (Frankfurt, 1905), pp. 109-110; in the Midrashim, in B. Beer's article (p. 160; cited 
 in Introduction, above). 
 
 4 Photius, Bibliothecon, codex 249 (ed. Bekker, II, 440-a). 
 
20 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 numbers, proportions, harmonies, 1 and the presence of the four elements 
 in the human foetus, 2 and says that a process similar to breathing goes on 
 in inorganic things. 3 In a work called De universi natura, which comes to 
 us under the name of Ocellus Lucanus, it is said that man is a part of a 
 household, and of a city, "and this, which is the greatest thing, of the 
 world. " 4 In a fragment of another work there is the view that life holds 
 the body together, and the cause of this is the soul; harmony holds the 
 world together, and the cause of this is God; peace holds families and 
 states together, and the cause of it is the law. 5 Another application of an 
 argument from analogy to a social problem is found in what remains of a 
 work of Sthenidas, who believed that the world and its parts are alive, 8 
 that the peace of a city ought to imitate the concord of the world, and 
 that the relation of a king to bis subjects is like that of God to the world. 7 
 2. Eclectics: Reference of Galen to Possible Lost Sources. The ancient 
 eclectics were in a more favorable position for the study of sources of the 
 microcosmic theories than later generations have been. In the case of 
 Galen, who may be grouped with the eclectics, although he was notable 
 on his own account, there is one passage which, taken together with those 
 of Philo and Macrobius, and even David of Nerken, noted above, again 
 strengthens the probability that some more ancient writers, perhaps Pre- 
 Platonic, spoke definitely about microcosms. In this passage, which 
 occurs in a teleological argument, Galen says that men of old time, who 
 were proficient in the study of nature, said that a living being was a kind 
 of little world. 8 
 
 6. The Neo-Platonists 
 
 i. The Place of Microcosmic Theories in the "Enneads" of Plotinus. The 
 fairest product of the great syncretism at Alexandria was Neo-Platonism. 
 For Plotinus, the terms of any possible comparison between the universe 
 and man were likely to be lost in the metaphysical unity of the First 
 
 1 F. Mullach, Fragmenta philosophorum gracorum (Paris, 1881), vol. II, p. 34; 
 section 3. 
 
 2 Ibid., p. 41, sec. 5. 3 Ibid., p. 42; sec. 7. 
 
 4 Mullach, op. cit., vol. I, p. 402; IV, 3. Eng. transl. by T. Taylor (London, 183 1). 
 By a slight emendation of to fieytcrrov Koa-fxov to read rov fxeyia-rov Koafiov, this pas- 
 sage could be relieved of a rather awkward construction, and be made to refer to 
 the microcosmic theory. 
 
 6 Mullach, I, p. 407. *Ibid., p. 536. ''Ibid., pp. 537-8. 
 
 8 De usu partium, III, x, 241. To £ak>v otov /xucpov riva koV/aov €?vat tfxunv 
 avfy>€? iraAatoi irtpl <£voriv IkovoI. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Greek and Grceco-Roman World 21 
 
 Being, or dissolved in his mystical absorption in the Highest. But, 
 whatever might be the ultimate truth, the doctrine of emanations implied 
 that there were certain more or less transitory resemblances between these 
 stages of the world process. The resemblance is such that the cosmos 
 may fairly be called an image, always moulding itself. 1 In the case of a 
 living being, under a single apxn, one can learn of one part from an- 
 other; and the comparison is suggested between our members as parts of 
 our bodies, and us as parts of the world. 2 The parts of the universe may 
 be regarded even as wholes. 3 Just as the parts of a living body contribute 
 to its life, and just as man is moved by animated powers within him, so 
 the things contained in the universe, each living its own life, make 
 up the life of the whole. 4 The universe is a single living being, 5 but 
 lives differently in each of its parts. 6 Sometimes, as in the body, the 
 parts are antagonistic one to another. 7 The resemblances between 
 the universe and living beings are not merely biological, or physiological; 
 they are also psychological. The world has no external objects nor 
 organs of sensation, but has what might now be called a kind of pro- 
 prioceptive system — for, says Plotinus, just as we apprehend one part by 
 means of another, what hinders the All from seeing the planetary region 
 by means of that region which is fixed, and from seeing the earth and 
 what is contained in it by means of the planetary region? 8 Although it 
 is declared that the world-soul differs from ours in some respects, 9 the 
 parallelism of world-soul and individual soul is repeatedly employed. 
 The world-soul directs the All according to reason, like the ap\V in each 
 living being, from which each of the parts of the living being is fashioned, 
 and by which they are coordinated with the whole, of which they are 
 parts. 10 Both the world-soul and the individual soul are represented as 
 divided into higher and lower parts. 11 Again, it is said that to the three 
 principles from which the world has been produced — the One, the Intel- 
 ligence, and the world-soul — must correspond three principles in us. 12 
 Of our soul, one portion remains in the highest region, another descends 
 to the world of mundane affairs, and a third remains in an intermediate 
 
 1 Enneods, II, iii, 17, 148 C. (Creuzer's text.) 2 II, iii, 7, 141 A. 
 
 3 II, iii, 7, 141 C. 
 
 4 IV, iv, 36, 431 C; cf. IV, iv, 45, 439 A. 6 IV, iv. 35, 429 B. 
 
 • IV, iv, 36, 431 A, B. 7 IV, iv, 32, 426 D. 
 
 8 IV, iv, 24, 417 B, C. 9 II, ix, 7, 205 B. 
 
 "II, iii, 13, 143 F; cf. Ill, i, 2, 229 D, E; IV, iii, 7, 376, E, F; III, i, 8, 233 F, G; 
 III, v, 3, 294, C, D. 
 
 11 IV, iii, 4, 375 A, B; cf. II, iii, 9, 142 D, E. 12 V, i, 10, 491 A-E. 
 
22 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 region. 1 Once more, the rank of some living beings in the universe is 
 compared to that of the second power of the soul and the lowest parts of 
 the soul in man, 2 respectively. 
 
 In this general setting of physiological and psychological analogies 
 between the universe and living beings, Plotinus gives expression to one 
 or two views which are quite definitely microcosmic. In one passage of 
 the Enneads one is reminded of the opinion which as we saw was ascribed 
 by Galen to certain men of antiquity, and which was alluded to by 
 Aristotle — Plotinus says that just as the world-soul elaborates the cos- 
 mos, so "the reasons in the seeds fashion and form the living beings 
 [or, animals], as, in a way, little worlds." 3 In another passage, Plotinus 
 has a phrase which marks the point at which a new application of the 
 microcosmic theory begins to emerge. Aristotle, in reflecting upon the 
 fact that we have experience of the world, had said that the soul is, in a 
 way, the things that are, and that knowledge and sensation are sub- 
 divided (into potential and actual) to correspond to the things. 4 Plotinus 
 has a view which is in itself similar, but which, placed in the Neo-Platonic 
 setting, appears in a different aspect. He says that our soul has an inter- 
 mediate position between things superior and things inferior; that the 
 soul "is many things, or rather, all things"; 5 and, he adds, "We are 
 each an intelligible world." 6 Thus the way was opened for what may be 
 called epistemological microcosmic theories. And when he says in 
 another passage that we should so arrange that the apxa>t> within us shall 
 be both ends and wholes, and this according to the best in our nature, 7 
 the way is almost open for a microcosmic theory in ethics. In one or two 
 less important and more fantastic ways, also, Plotinus suggests some of 
 the theories that developed later. More than Plato, he emphasizes the 
 parallelism between living beings and the earth. Since so many living 
 beings are seen to arise from it, why not, he asks, say that it is a living 
 being? 8 He thinks it is not absurd to suppose-that the earth has a soul. 9 
 It is not necessary that the earth's organs should be like ours; even 
 among the living beings on the earth all organs are not the same. 10 The 
 earth is sensitive to great things, not small, and can hear and nod assent 
 
 1 II, ix, 2, 201 A, B. * II, iii, 13, 144 C, D. 
 
 3 IV, iii, 10, 379-380. ra £<oa olov lUKpovs Tiras koV/aovs. 
 
 4 De anima, III, 8, 431 b. 5 Enneads, III, iv, 3, 285 A, 284 G. 
 
 e Ibid., 284 G. KCU €<Tfl€V CKaCTTOS KO(TfXO<; VOlfTOS . . . 
 
 7 III, ix, 2, 357 C. « IV, iv, 22, 414 C. * IV, iv, 26, 419 B. 
 
 10 IV, iv, 26, 419(1) A. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Greek and Grceco-Roman World 23 
 
 to prayers, although not in the way we would do. 1 Finally, Plotinus 
 verges upon astrology in his use of the doctrine of sympathy. The parts 
 of the universe are sympathetic, like the parts of a living being. 2 All 
 things are coordinated, and there are analogies which make divinations 
 possible. 3 Souls in their ascents and descents conform to the universal 
 order, and there are signs of their fates in the positions of the stars. 4 
 Altogether, microcosmic theories were more explicit in the new Platonism 
 than in the old. Although, judged from his works, particularly in their 
 present arrangement, Plotinus himself was not very systematic, he was 
 consistent enough so that it was not difficult to construct philosophical 
 systems along the lines which he laid down. His use of microcosmic 
 theories made these systems more concrete and definite than they might 
 otherwise have been. As the vast influence of Plotinus widened, other 
 features of his teachings were more prominent; but the fact that his 
 mysticism was the consummation rather than the contradiction of the 
 processes observable in things concrete and definite accommodated micro- 
 cosmic theories and carried them along with it. 
 
 2. Traces of Microcosmic Theories among the Successors of Plotinus. 
 The immediate successors of Plotinus reflect his views, with slight 
 changes and additions. According to Stobaeus, Porphyry called man 
 liiKpbv BiaKocfjiOv. 5 Jamblichus, by the introduction of triadic formulas 
 and elaborate speculations, 6 helped to crystallize the Neo-Platonic teach- 
 ings, although they often crystallized in strange colors. Chalcidius, in 
 his commentary on the Timceus, repeats the familiar doctrines that man 
 is formed from the elements which compose the world; that his soul is of 
 the same nature as the world-soul; and that he was called "mundum 
 brevem" by the ancients (veteribus). 7 For Proclus, the first triad is 
 Being, fwij, and vovs; and fcoij is a 5id/coo>os, and gives rise to a new 
 triad. 8 It is said of him that he placed his dialectic at the service of the 
 microcosmic theory; 9 he says that the division of the genera is like the 
 demiurgic division of the cosmos into factors which are related to one 
 another as contradictories. The ideal city of Plato, if it is to be ordered 
 
 1 IV, iv, 26, 418 (2) B, C. 2 IV, iv, 32, 426 A, B; cf. IV, iv, 35, 429 B. 
 
 3 III, iii, 6, 276 C, D, E; cf. II, iii, 5, 140 C; II, iii, 7, 141 A. 
 4 IV, iii, 12, 381 E, F. 6 Stob., Florileg., XXI, 27. 
 
 fl Erdmann, Hist, of Phil.., vol. I, p. 248. 
 
 7 Commentarius in Timceum Platonis (in Mullach, op. cit.> vol. II), CC. Cf. 
 
 ccxxx. 
 
 8 Erdmann, op. cit., vol. I, p. 251. 
 
 9 Bouchg-Leclercq, Uastrologie grecque, p. 77, n. 1. 
 
24 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 after the model of the cosmos, ought to be divided into higher and lower, 
 or heavenly and earthly portions. The polities of the good are like the 
 order of the heavens. 1 Proclus thought that in a theory of the world the 
 nature of man ought to be discussed completely — for man is a microcosm, 
 and all the things which the world contains are, as was said in the Philebus, 
 contained partially in him; he has a rational soul akin to the world-soul, 
 and a terrestrial body derived from the four elements. 2 Again, various 
 mental and bodily functions were coordinated with divinities and heav- 
 enly bodies. 3 Hierocles of Alexandria taught that the nature of the visible 
 world is everywhere conformable to itself by analogy. The "upper 
 part" is enamelled with stars and filled with intelligent beings, while the 
 lower part has vegetables and animals endowed only with sense. Man 
 is intermediate, partaking of the nature of each. 4 Thus Neo-Platonism 
 offered a framework such as was used by some mediaeval and also some 
 modern systems; and the microcosmic theories helped to make the 
 framework articulate and intelligible. 
 
 7. Mystery and Magic in Greek and GRiECO-RoMAN Philosophy 
 
 1. Mystery and Magic not Confined to the Period of Decline. We have 
 noted in the case of the Neo-Pythagoreans that, along with the more 
 prominent movements in Greek philosophy, there persisted a strain of 
 speculations similar to those of Babylon and Egypt. It is impossible to 
 fix definite dates and origins for many of its documents; one gets the 
 impression that as the great thinkers pass into silence the lesser voices 
 are heard more frequently, but this is in part an illusion due to the ar- 
 rangement of historical materials. Enough can be determined concern- 
 ing dates and places to show that mystery and magic formed a kind of 
 background or undercurrent for the philosophy of the whole period. 
 
 2. Topical Arrangement of these Writings. The obscurity of most of 
 these writers will justify a topical rather than a biographical and chron- 
 ological treatment. By grouping them in this way it is not meant to 
 imply that all held the same views or that similar words used by two or 
 more writers had the same implications. Such a grouping shows, in 
 
 1 Proclus, Commentarius in Platonis Timceum, I, 11 C; I, 62 D. 
 
 2 Ibid., I, 2 B, C; cf. V, 292 A. s V, 348 A. 
 
 4 Hierocles, Commentarius in Aurea Carmina . . . ed. P. Needham (Cambridge, 
 1709), pp. 178-181. W. K. Clifford, in his Lectures and Essays (London, 1879; vol. II, 
 pp. 267-268), appears to have read into Hierocles a more definite microcosmic theory 
 than the sources warrant. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Greek and Grceco-Roman World 25 
 
 general, that microcosmic views pervaded not merely the great schools 
 of philosophy, which we have considered, but also the obscure circles of 
 the cults. 
 
 3. Use of the Term "Microcosm" or its Equivalent. Considering first 
 the writers who are explicit in their use of the term " microcosm" or a 
 similar expression, we find that they belong toward the close of the period, 
 rather than in the pre-Alexandrian days. Thus Manilius (first century 
 A. D.) says that man has a world in himself, and is the image of God. 1 
 Solinus (third century) calls man a "lesser world" — minorem mundum. 2 
 Firmicus Maternus (fourth century), who may have used the same 
 source as Manilius, says that man, conformed to the nature of the world, 3 
 made in imitation of it, 4 and ruled by the same forces, is sustained by the 
 sun, moon and stars as a kind of little world. 3 Microcosmic theories are 
 found in several of the writings ascribed to Hermes Trismegistos, which 
 may perhaps be dated during the third and following centuries. 5 In a 
 formula of the "Emerald Table," important for this school, it is declared 
 that "that which is beneath is like that which is above." 6 In the 
 Poimandres, one of the principal works, appears a symbolic cosmic 
 figure, "Man-Shepherd, Mind of All Masterhood," 7 who acts as inter- 
 preter of the mysteries. It is declared that the world is the son of God, 
 and man the son of the world, 8 or the "second world." 9 According to 
 Berthelot, Olympiodorus (fifth century) says that Hermes Trismegistos 
 says that man is a microcosm, possessing all the attributes of the great 
 world. 10 In a hermetic work edited by Ideler, it is said that the wise 
 men say that man is a world. 11 In the Virgin of the World, another her- 
 metic work, there is the view that the earth lies in the midst of the cos- 
 mos with parts of the earth-body oriented with reference to the cosmos. 
 
 1 Manilius, Astronomica, IV, 888 ff. 
 
 2 Quoted by Lobeck, II, 921. 
 
 3 Firmicus Maternus, Matheseos Libri VIII, book III, pref . 
 *Ibid., Ill, 1, 15; cf. Ill, 1, 10 and 16. 
 
 6 Encyc. Brit, (nth ed.), vol. XIII, art. "Hermes Trismegistus." 
 
 6 The Hermetic Museum, Eng. transl. Waite (London, 1893) vol. II, pp. 320-321. 
 Cf. E. Underhill, Mysticism, p. 191. 
 
 7 Thrice Greatest Hermes, Eng. transl. Mead (London, 1906), vol. II, p. 3. 
 
 8 Quoted by J. Kroll, Die Lehre des Hermes Trismeg., p. 233. 
 'Quoted by Bouchg-Leclercq, Uastrol. grecque, p. 77, n. 1. 
 
 10 Berthelot, cited by v. Lippmann, Entstehung und Ausbreitung der Alchemic, p. 101. 
 
 11 J. Ideler, Physici et medici grceci minores (Berlin, 1841), vol. I, p. 387. A micro- 
 cosmic theory is also found in the work of an anonymous writer, printed in vol. I, 
 P. 303. 
 
26 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 In the midst of the earth is the sacred place (of the cult) just as the heart, 
 the seat of the soul, is in the central part of the body — and for this reason, 
 that man should not only have all other things, but be in addition 
 intelligent and wise, as if he were born and sustained in the heart (of 
 things). 1 
 
 4. Relations between Parts of the Human Body and Gods, or Parts of the 
 Universe. Along with the general theory to the effect that man is a 
 microcosm should be mentioned the more fragmentary related views that 
 various separate parts of the human body, traits of human character, or 
 periods of human life correspond to the position or function of various 
 gods or various portions of the universe. These include the Orphic 
 view that sky, stars, water, sun, etc., make up the parts of the body of 
 Zeus, who is at once ruler of the world and the world itself. 2 Views some- 
 what similar are found in Varro 3 and Plutarch. 4 According to many 
 writers, the universe has a right and a left side. 5 Among those who 
 assert a correspondence between parts of the human body and various 
 planets or divinities are Melampus (third century B. C), who thus 
 assigns the fingers. 6 Fulgentius (fifth century A. D.) ascribes to Democri- 
 tus such a distribution of the various parts of the body. 7 One of the 
 hermetic writings assigns parts of the body to regions of the Zodiac, 8 as 
 does Manilius; 9 this very old view persisted for centuries. Among those 
 who assert on their own account, or report others as asserting that human 
 characteristics and qualities are in correspondence with certain stars or 
 divinities are Macrobius and Servius, in their commentaries on Cicero 
 and Vergil, respectively; 10 the view is also found in the Poimandres. 11 
 Vitruvius (first century, B. C.) compared the symmetry of the human 
 body not only to the universe, but also to a temple. 12 The view that the 
 different periods of man's life were in relations to planets or divinities was 
 widespread in the period of Graeco-Roman decline. 13 
 
 5. Relations of Parts of the Universe Other than Man. Again it is 
 
 1 Stob., Eclog., I, 41-45, 990-992. Cf. Kroll, op. cit., p. 159. 
 
 2 Quoted by Lobeck, op. cit., II, 912. Cf. E. B. Tylor, Primitive Culture (London, 
 1913), vol. I, p. 350. 
 
 'Quoted by Lobeck, II, 920. *Ibid., II, 914. 
 
 8 For references, see Lobeck, II, 915-920. 
 
 6 Ibid., II, 927. 7 Ibid., II, 926. Cf. the view of Servius. 
 
 8 Ideler, op. cit., I, 387; Lobeck, op. cit., II, 926. 
 
 9 BoucheVLeclercq, op. cit., p. 319. 10 Lobeck, II, 932-933. 
 11 Ibid., 934. 12 Architecture III, I, 10, 15. 
 
 13 v. Lippmann, op. cit., p. 219. Cf. Lobeck, II, 937-938. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Greek and Grceco-Roman World 27 
 
 declared that portions of the universe, quite apart from man, are related 
 to one another in significant ways. Thus, according to Quintilian (first 
 century A. D.) each season of the year resembles an element, and each 
 corresponds to a number. 1 And very widespread was the Pythagorean 
 doctrine that the universe had some significant connection with the 
 strings of a lyre, although there were curious variations about the number 
 of strings concerned. 2 
 
 6. Relation of Microcosmic Theories to Astrology. All these supposed 
 correspondences between the universe and man either grew out of, or 
 naturally led to astrology, and various forms of divination. Such 
 practices were doubtless in some cases elements in situations which the 
 microcosmic theories attempted to rationalize; in other cases they were 
 possibly grotesque attempts to turn the microcosmic theories to practical 
 use. According to Bouche-Leclercq, the theory of man as the microcosm 
 helped in the astrological formulations of birth-lore. 3 The earth was 
 divided into regions belonging to the various planets, to the signs of the 
 Zodiac (i. e., the region of the fixed stars), or to both. The division could 
 apply to categories of things or to living creatures. And since man was 
 thought of as a microcosm, the division made of the world could be 
 repeated in him, and be evident in a distribution of astral influences 
 among his bodily organs and psychic powers. As compared with the 
 planets, the Zodiacal regions had the advantage of being fixed and of 
 offering a larger number of divisions; hence the latter, with the fixed 
 stars, were looked upon as responsible for permanent forms and relations, 
 while the planets were held to influence individual and changeable things. 
 And the method was reversible — for the physiology of the human micro- 
 cosm, as it came to be more and more studied, made possible an abridg- 
 ment of astrology, making that rambling pseudo-science a little more 
 definite and compact. 4 
 
 8. Summary: Microcosmic Theories in Ancient Philosophy 
 
 Theories that portions of the universe which vary in size imitate one 
 another in structures and processes, and particularly, the theory that 
 man is a microcosm, or little world, are implicit in the fragments of 
 some of the most important of the Greek philosophers prior to Plato, and 
 there is a probability that some of them expressed such views more 
 
 1 Lobeck, II, 945. 2 Ibid., II, 941-947. 
 
 3 Bouchg-Leclercq, op. cit. f p. 83. 4 Ibid., pp. 311-318. 
 
28 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 definitely in writings that are now lost. Such theories remain implicit in 
 the more systematic of Plato's dialogues, and, with the exception of a 
 single passage, in the writings of Aristotle. So far as the evidence goes, 
 we must say that even the Greek Stoics did not formulate such views in so 
 many words although it is quite likely that they shared the views and may 
 have expressed them in works no longer extant. The theory that man 
 is a microcosm becomes clearly explicit in the writings of Philo, after the 
 syncretism at Alexandria. Possibly the infusion of Babylonian or Egyp- 
 tian elements here precipitated the theory in this explicit form. Micro- 
 cosmic theories helped to render Neo-Platonism articulate. Throughout 
 the Graeco-Roman, and even the earlier Greek period, such views were 
 closely allied with the lore of the mystery cults, magicians, and astrologers. 
 In general, as the theories became more explicit, their effect and function 
 in the uncritical ancient world was to furnish a framework for incipient 
 philosophical systems and to concentrate attention upon man as a 
 distinguished and favored member of the universe. 
 
CHAPTER II 
 MICROCOSMIC THEORIES IN THEOLOGICAL TRADITIONS 
 
 i. Characteristics of Theological Traditions 
 
 The phrase " theological traditions" is here used to describe the period 
 in the history of philosophy usually referred to as mediaeval. Neither 
 designation is altogether suitable; but the general characteristics of the 
 period from our point of view are a dominance of theological interest and 
 a larger measure of conscious dependence upon the work of the past than 
 is countenanced in what we know as the humanistic or the modern 
 periods. It is easy to overestimate such conscious dependence, and the 
 method it suggests must be used with caution. Allowance must be made 
 in philosophy for individual creativeness; failure to do so would make 
 every historian a Diogenes Laertius or a Hegel. But if ever a continuity 
 of thinking and a sequence of influence is to be expected, it is within the 
 ecclesiastical organizations where there is a certain uniformity of back- 
 ground and where, in the works allowed to survive, a virtue has been 
 made of conformity to the faith that was in the men of old time. Under 
 theological traditions are to be included not only those of the Christians, 
 but also those of the Jewish and Arabian philosophers. At the risk of 
 some distortion of historical perspective, we shall consider these three 
 groups separately; this procedure appears to be the more justifiable in 
 view of the fact that, as we shall try to show, the influence of the three 
 traditions upon one another, so far as microcosmic theories are con- 
 cerned, was not as great as has sometimes been supposed. 
 
 2. Microcosmic Theories in Christian Traditions 
 
 i. Survivals of Greek Thought. The microcosmic theories, as we have 
 seen, had their roots in Greek thought, or in oriental strata which lay 
 near it. They did not belong among the ideas specifically Christian; 
 Christianity for the most part took over Hebraic ideas of the creation of 
 the world and of man, and threw most of its emphasis upon the destiny of 
 the world and upon man's salvation. In the writings of the Church 
 Fathers microcosmic theories sometimes appear, but they are of minor 
 
30 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 importance. Sometimes they occur along with other features evidently 
 absorbed from the Greeks; sometimes they are cited in order to be refuted; 
 sometimes they help to soften what otherwise stand out as harsh lines in 
 the Christian system; sometimes they provide almost a complete sum- 
 mary of the scientific views of these writers. But they never become 
 vital. They remain just enough in evidence so that the ideas do not quite 
 die out; one may say that they are latent or recessive throughout the 
 Christian mediaeval period. 
 
 2. Controversies of Orthodoxy with Heresy and Paganism. One early 
 Christian writer in an effort to win the Greeks took over in so many 
 words the view that man is a microcosm; the fact is the more remarkable 
 when one notes that this is done by Clement of Alexandria in his Horta- 
 tory Address, a work in which he urges the abandonment of many Greek 
 conceptions. He says that the "new song" of Christianity has made the 
 universe a harmony, and has brought harmony especially to man who, 
 composed of body and soul, is a little universe. 1 For a century or two 
 following the time of Clement, the controversies with various Gnostic 
 sects seem to have driven the Church Fathers to oppose microcosmic 
 theories rather than adopt them. Thus the view of one Monoimus, that 
 "man is the universe, the originating cause of all things," is combated by 
 Hippolytus; 2 and the speculation of the Basilidians, to the effect that 
 the " Abraxas," or Source of emanations, has produced 365 numbers, 
 corresponding to the number of days in the year, and the alleged number 
 of members of the human body, is attacked by Epiphanius. 3 The author 
 of the Disputation of Archelaus with Manes gives as the view of the latter 
 an account of creation which recalls that of the Tim&us, and says that 
 Manes believes that all men have roots which are linked beneath with 
 those above, and that the body of man is called a cosmos in relation to 
 the great cosmos. 4 In the midst of his conflict with the paganism of 
 Africa, Arnobius denounces men who think of themselves too highly, and 
 refutes the argument that the soul is immortal and that man is a micro- 
 cosm made and formed after the fashion of the universe, by pointing out 
 
 1 Cohort, ad Gentes, I; Migne, Patr. Gr., vol. I, col. 60. Clement's expression is 
 "tov a/unpov koct/mov." 
 
 2 Refutatio omn. heres. (ed. P. Wendland, Leipzig, 1916), VIII, xii, 2. 
 
 3 Adv. hceres., I, ii, 7; Migne, Patr. Gr., vol. X£I, col. 316. 
 
 4 Disputatio, 8; Migne, Patr. Gr., vol. X, col. 'i£i-2. On the Manichaean belief, see 
 F. Legge, Forerunners and Rivals of Christianity (^^^ridge, 1915), vol. II, pp. 307, 
 353ff- '%, 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Theological Traditions 31 
 
 that a man may be as senseless as a stone, and that it is only through 
 God's goodness that any soul becomes immortal. 1 
 
 3. Microcosmic Theories as an Of set to Origen's Doctrine of the Body. 
 As Christianity became more firmly established the Fathers apparently 
 had less dread of the microcosmic theories; some writers even found a 
 use for them within the Christian system. According to Harnack, 
 Origen's idea that the body was a prison of the soul was contrasted, during 
 the period of the development of dogma, with the view that man was a 
 microcosm, having received parts from the two created worlds, the 
 higher and the lower. Harnack thinks that this conception was the only 
 one which contained a coherent theory that formally could be considered 
 of equal value with that of Origen; but he points out that it could, after 
 all, remain only a theory, because in its implications it was out of harmony 
 with the dominant theology. 2 From the time of Clement of Alexandria to 
 that of Thomas Aquinas there are traces of microcosmic theories in 
 patristic and scholastic literature; a score or more of writers repeat 
 one or more of the Greek views, with only a few noteworthy modifica- 
 tions. In all these writings the theories impart a suggestion of naturalism 
 to what would otherwise be almost unmodified supernaturalism; they 
 direct the attention, for a moment, to the physical universe, and to man 
 as a member of it. 
 
 4. Summary of Greek Views as Repeated Without Essential Modifications. 
 Of course in their use of the microcosmic theories the Christian writers 
 had views of the origin and destiny of the world and of man which 
 differed from those of the Greeks; but they found it quite possible to 
 place in this setting some Greek views of the relations of man and the 
 universe. Most common was the view noted above, to the effect that in 
 the soul and body of man two worlds were mingled. Gregory Nazianzen 
 says that this makes man "a kind of second world, great in littleness." 3 
 Nemesius 4 and Cosmas Indicopleustis 5 emphasize the unifying function 
 of man, who binds together the two worlds. Other statements to the 
 effect that man combines the higher and the lower are found in the works 
 
 1 Adv. gentes, II, 25; Migne, Pair. Lat., vol. V, col. 851. 
 
 2 History of Dogma, Eng. transl. Buchanan (Boston, ' ^03), vol. Ill, pp. 
 258-9. ; 
 
 3 De pasch., Orat. LXV, vii; Migne, Pair. Gr. f vol. XXXVI, col. 632. 
 
 4 De nat. horn., I, 14; Migne, Pair. Gr., vol. XL, col. 512. 
 
 6 The Christian Topography of Cosmas . . ., VII, 289, Eng. transl. McCrindle, 
 (London, Hakluyt Society, 1897), pp. 284-285. 
 
32 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 of Gregory the Great, 1 Maximus the Confessor, 2 John of Damascus, 3 
 Arnold of Bonneval, 4 Gundisallinus, 5 and Thomas Aquinas; 6 thus the 
 view was incorporated into the two great doctrinal systems, in the East 
 and West, as well as in less important works. The view that man shares 
 the faculties and powers of all the lower species is also found in a number 
 of writers. Gregory of Nyssa, indeed, thought the opinion that man is a 
 little world, composed of the same elements as the universe, was unworthy 
 of the majesty of man, since the lower forms of life are also made of those 
 elements, and, according to the Church, the greatness of man consists 
 in his being in the image of the nature of the Creator. 7 But a fourth 
 century Christian liturgy of Alexandria calls man the KoanoTroXirriv, 
 containing the ko<t}iov Koafiov; 8 and later writers combined the es- 
 sentials of both views which Gregory of Nyssa had contrasted. Thus 
 Maximus, 9 and after him Scotus Erigena, called man the u workshop of 
 all things"; 10 the latter added that all things were contained in man as 
 smaller numbers are contained in a larger number. 11 John of Damascus 
 says that man has a body composed of the four elements; shares with the 
 plants the powers of nourishment, growth, and reproduction; shares with 
 the animals the senses and locomotion; shares with incorporeal and 
 intelligible natures his reason — hence man is a little world. 12 Such 
 views were held by men as widely separated as Gregory the Great, 13 
 Alain of Lille, 14 and Raymond of Sabunde. 15 Again, there are some 
 
 1 Dial., IV, 3; Migne, Pair. Lat., vol. LXXVII, col. 321. 
 
 2 Quoted by Scotus Erigena, De div. nat., V, 20; Migne, Patr. Lat., vol. CXXII, col. 
 893. 
 
 3 De fide, II, xii; Migne, Patr. Gr., vol. XCIV, col. 926. 
 
 4 De oper. 6 dierum; Migne, Patr. Lat., vol. CLXXXIX, col. 1528 b, ff . 
 
 6 De immort. anim., ed. G. Bulow {Beitrage zur Gesch. der Phil, des Mittelalt., vol. II, 
 Minister, 1897), pp. 24-26. 
 
 e Summa. theol., I, qu. 91, art. 1. 
 
 7 De horn, opific, XVI, 1, 2; Migne, Patr. Gr., vol. XLIV, col. 180; cf. In Psalmos, 
 I, iii — Migne, ibid., col. 440. 
 
 8 F. Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western (Oxford, 1896), pp. xxviii, 16. 
 
 9 De ambiguis XXXVII; quoted by Scotus Erigena, De div. nat., V, 20. 
 
 10 Op. cit., II, 4; Migne, Patr. Lat., vol. CXXII, col. 530. 
 
 11 Ibid., IV, 10, col. 782-785; cf. II, 4, col. 530, and III, 37, col. 733. 
 
 12 De fide, II, xii. 
 
 13 Homil. in Evang., II, 29; Migne, Patr. Lat., vol. LXXVI, col. 12 14. 
 
 14 De planctu noturoe; Migne, Pair. Lat., vol. CCX, col. 443; Distinctiones diet, theol., 
 Migne, ibid., col. 755. 
 
 16 Theol. nat., titles, 1, 104, 221, quoted by J. Scheuderlein, Raymond von Sabunde 
 (Leipzig, 1898), pp. 12-15. Cf. Erdmann, Hist, of Phil., I, pp. 528, 613. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Theological Traditions 33 
 
 comparisons between God, or world forces or processes, on the one hand, 
 and the faculties and powers of man on the other. Gregory of Nyssa, in 
 spite of his criticism of the view that man is a little world, thought that 
 from the fact of order in man one might, with the aid of the microcosmic 
 theory and its emphasis on inner knowledge, infer the existence of an 
 immaterial soul, just as from the fact of order in the world one inferred 
 the existence of God. 1 Augustine, also, had an implied criticism of the 
 theory that man is a microcosm, when he numbered among his con- 
 fessions the fact that he had once believed that God was a vast and bright 
 body, and that he himself was a fragment of that body; 2 but he, too, 
 veered in the direction of microcosmic theories in his views to the effect 
 that the human mind is an image of the Trinity — a more specifically 
 Christian doctrine, which will be considered in the next paragraph. 
 Nilus (d. about 430) urged one of his correspondents, as "mundus 
 mundi," to look within himself rather than upon the things of the outer 
 world. 3 David of Nerken divided the world into three categories — 
 beings which rule, those which both rule and are ruled, and those which 
 only are ruled; and found a similar division between human faculties — 
 all this in the passage in which he says that, according to Democritus, 
 man is a little world. 4 Scotus Erigena has a parallelism between the 
 order of the heavenly bodies and the modes of knowing. 5 Alain of 
 Lille thinks that the position of God, angels, and men in the world is 
 paralleled by that of wisdom, will, and pleasure, respectively, in man. 6 
 He says also that as the motion of the firmament is from east to west, 
 with reappearance in the east, so man's mind turns from divine to visible 
 things and back again to the invisible. 7 Again, the oppositions of the 
 planets are paralleled by conflicts of tendencies in man's moral struggles. 8 
 Godefroid of St. Victor (12th century) left a work entitled Microcosmus, 
 
 1 De anima et resurrec, Migne, Patr. Gr., vol. XL VI, cols. 25, 28. 
 
 2 Confessions, IV, xvi, 31. 
 
 3 EpisL, II, cxix; Migne, Patr. Gr., vol. LXXIX, col. 252. 
 
 4 Prolegomena, XII: ed. A. Busse (in Commentaria in Aristotelem greeca, vol. XVIII, 
 Berlin, 1904), p. 34. 
 
 6 De div. nat., IV, 10; Migne, Patr. Lat., vol. CXXII, col. 783. 
 
 6 De planctu natures; Migne, Patr. Lat., vol. CCX, col. 444. Dist. diet, theol; Migne, 
 ibid., col. 866. 
 
 7 Ibid., col. 866. 
 
 % De planctu nat.; Migne, ibid., col. 443. Dist. diet, theol., col. 866. For views of 
 Alain, see M. Baumgartner, Die Phil, des Alanus de Insul., in Beitrage zur Gesch. der 
 Phil, des Mittelalters, vol. II (Minister, 1898), pp. 88 ff. There are references to other 
 mediaeval writers, p. 88, n. 3. 
 
34 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 in which the four elements were compared to four faculties of the soul. 1 
 Theories to the effect that man's body or some part of it is similar in 
 structure to the universe or some part of it are found in Ambrose and 
 Synesius. The former says that the world is framed like man's body; as 
 in man the head, so in the world, the sky is the most excellent member; 
 and as the eyes in man, so are the sun and moon. 2 Synesius compared 
 man's spherical head to the stars, and thought that the heads of men, 
 the domiciles of their souls, were "in the world little worlds." 3 Several 
 writers held that to the four elements in the world corresponded the four 
 "humours," or bodily fluids, in man. Among these was Isidorus His- 
 palensis, who calls man " another world, created from the universality of 
 things in abbreviated fashion," 4 and interprets John I, 10 — "the world 
 knew him not" — as a reference to the microcosmic theory. 5 The Vener- 
 able Bede held that the correspondence between elements and humors 
 extended also to the four seasons. 6 Honorius of Autun (twelfth century) 
 thought that to the seven planets with their music corresponded the 
 seven notes of the scale and also man, with the four elements in his body 
 and the three powers of his soul! 7 Among the Christian writers, Sy- 
 nesius 8 and the author of the Dialogue concerning Astrology which comes 
 to us under the name of Hermippus, 9 thought that there was enough 
 correspondence between various portions of the universe to make divina- 
 tion or astrology possible. The latter thinks that the distribution of 
 planetary influences throughout the human body is in line with the 
 doctrine which says that man is a little world on earth. 10 
 
 1 J. Haureau, Hist, de la philos. scolastique (Paris, 1872), vol. I, p. 515. 
 
 2 Hexamoeron, VI, ix, 55; Migne, Pair. Lat., vol. XIV, col. 265. 
 
 ' De providentia, I. Quoted by Gataker on M. Aurelius, De rebus suis, IV, 27. Some- 
 thing similar is found in the De mundi creatione of Severian (5th century), Orat. I; 
 Migne, Pair. Gr., vol. LVI, col. 443. 
 
 4 Sententiarum, I, viii, 1, 2; Migne, Patr. Lat., vol. LXXXIII, col. 549. 
 
 6 De natura rerum, IX, 2; Migne, ibid., col. 978. The Greek term is here given as one 
 word, fJUKpoKoa-fios. Meyer (op. cit., p. 98) says that R. Eucken (Gesch. der philos. 
 Terminol., p. 35) traces this form to Bcethius. 
 
 8 De temporum ratione, XXXV; Migne, Patr. Lat., vol. XC, col. 458. In this passage 
 the transliteration "microcosmos" appears as one word. 
 
 7 De imagine mundi, I, lxxxii; Migne, Patr. Lat., vol. CLXXII, col. 140. In this pass- 
 age the Greek term is given as /wKpoKooyxo?. 
 
 *De insomniis, II, III. 
 
 9 W. Kroll and P. Viereck, in their (Teubner) edition (Leipzig, 1895) date this work 
 in the 5th-6th century (p. v). 
 
 10 Ibid., I, xiii, 81. Cf. Bouch6-Leclercq, Uastrol. grecq., p. 78, n. 1. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Theological Traditions 35 
 
 5. Some Developments More Distinctively Christian. In some cases the 
 Christian writers exhibit something more than a mere repetition of views 
 essentially Greek. First among these may be noted Augustine's doctrine 
 to the effect that in human nature is the image of the Trinity. He gives 
 various reasons for this view — because of the facts that we are, and know 
 that we are, and delight in our being and knowledge; l or, again, because 
 of the mind's possession of memory, understanding, and will. 2 He also 
 discerns an image of the Trinity in the threefold division of knowledge 
 into physical, logical and ethical branches. 3 After Augustine, Anselm 
 held that the mind, since it is capable of remembering and conceiving 
 and loving itself, is an image of the Trinity. 4 Augustine also has the 
 famous parallelism between the seven periods of human (Old and New 
 Testament) history 5 and the ages of man — given variously as six, 6 or 
 seven. 7 . Augustine sees one defect in the scheme, in that it makes Christ 
 come in a period of history which corresponds to old age in the life of an 
 individual, instead of that which corresponds to youth; but he says that 
 conditions differ somewhat in the race and the individual, and that 
 " youth" refers to the vigor of man's faith. 8 There is a suggestion of 
 microcosmic theories in the mystical writings of Pseudo-Dionysius, who 
 delineates the celestial and ecclesiastical hierarchies, each composed of 
 triads, 9 and declares that it is possible to find within each of the parts of 
 our bodies heavenly virtues which are images of the angelic. Analogies 
 and symbols are specified for the senses, the organs of the body, meteo- 
 rological processes, animal species, fire, and so on, in this connecting link 
 between Neo-Platonism and the later Christian mysticism. 10 Isidore of 
 Pelusium (about 450) interpreted the last verse of the Gospel of John in 
 terms of the microcosmic theory. 11 Another speculation which may have 
 served as a prototype of the work of some later thinkers is found in the 
 Policraticus of John of Salisbury, who declares that the prince is the 
 head of a state, 12 and the image of the Deity. 13 In obeying a prince we 
 follow the leading of nature which has placed all the senses of man, the 
 
 1 Civ. Dei, XI, xxvi; cf. De Trin., IX, iii and iv. 
 
 2 De Trin., X, xi, 17. 3 Civ. Dei, XI, xxv. « Monol., LXVII. 
 6 De Genes, contra Manich., I, xxiii, 35-41. 
 
 6 De vera religione, XXVI, 48. 7 De quant, anim., XXXIII, 70-74. 
 
 8 Retract., I, 26; cf. De div. qucest., LXXXIII, qu. 44. 
 
 9 See H. O. Taylor, art., Dionys. Areop., in Encyc. Brit. (11), vol. VIII, p.. 285. 
 
 10 Celestial Hierarchy, XV; Migne, Patr. Gr., vol. Ill, col. 326. 
 
 11 Epist., I, 259; Migne, Patr. Gr., vol. LXXVEII, col. 338. 
 
 12 Policraticus, V, vi. 13 Ibid., VI, xxv. 
 
36 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 microcosm, in the head, and subjected the other members to it. 1 The 
 senate constitutes the heart of a state; the guards of the provinces, its 
 eyes, ears, and tongue; 2 the army and judiciary, its hands; 3 and those 
 who do the menial tasks, its feet. 4 According to O. Gierke this was the 
 first attempt 5 to find some portion of the body which would correspond 
 to each portion of the state. Thus some of the microcosmic theories 
 persisted in later times in something of the form given them by the 
 mediaeval Christian thinkers; but they were not of great importance for 
 the Christian system. The data from the microcosmic theories may be 
 said, like the evidence from so many other fields, to indicate that the 
 interests of Christianity at this time were chiefly other-worldly, and 
 concerned more with escaping from the world than with picturing men 
 as members of it. 
 
 6. Possible Influence of Jewish and Arabian Thought upon Christian 
 Microcosmic Theories. So far as one can detect, the Christian writers 
 throughout the mediaeval period exhibit no marked dependence upon 
 the Jewish and Arabian writers who were, as we shall see, working out 
 microcosmic theories of their own. It is of course not possible to say that 
 the three developed in utter isolation; but on the other hand the occur- 
 rence of similar views in writers belonging to two different religions is not 
 to be taken offhand as evidence of an interchange of ideas. More often 
 such similarities point to common dependence upon philosophies older 
 than either. Certainly the Jewish and Arabic traditions are on broad 
 lines distinguishable from the Christian. As a trace of possible influence 
 of one tradition on another, it may be significant that at least one of the 
 earliest Christian writings which use the term corresponding to " micro- 
 cosm' f in their titles, and the earliest Jewish writing which uses a similar 
 term were written within a few years of "one another. The Christian 
 work is entitled De mundi universitate libri duo, sive megacosmus et micro- 
 cosmus; it was written by Bernard Silvestris (or, Bernard of Tours), 6 
 perhaps in the years 1145-1153. 7 It combines Christian, Neo-Pla tonic 
 and Pythagorean theories. 8 In the first book it is explained that matter 
 
 1 Policraticus, IV, 1. 2 Ibid., V, ix, xi. 3 Ibid., VI, 1. 4 Ibid., VI, xx. 
 
 6 Political Theories of the Middle Ages, Eng. transl. F. Maitland (Cambridge, 1900), 
 p. 24. Gierke interprets the political thought of the Middle Ages preeminently in 
 terms of macrocosm and microcosm (Sec. II). 
 
 6 See M. De Wulf , History ofMediceval Philosophy, Eng. transl. by Coffey (New York, 
 1909), p. 181. 
 
 7 Ueberweg et al., Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophic (10th edition, Berlin, 1915), 
 vol. II, pp. 313-314. 8 De Wulf, op. oil., p. 220. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Theological Traditions 37 
 
 received its form in the four elements through the effort of the world- 
 soul, which also placed the nine hierarchies of angels in heaven, fixed the 
 stars and the winds, and created the living forms in their environments. 
 In the second book man the microcosm is said to have been formed from 
 the four elements as the completion of creation. 1 The Jewish work is 
 entitled Sefer Olam Katan ("The Book of the Little World," "the 
 Microcosm"), and is by Joseph Ibn Zaddik of Cordova, who died in 1149. 2 
 There seem to be no striking resemblances between the contents of the 
 two books; the chief point of interest is in the resemblance of the titles. 
 Possibly both go back to some Arabic works 3 similarly entitled; or 
 possibly one imitated the other. Meyer thinks it possible that Ibn 
 Zaddik was influenced by Bernard; 4 but the fact that Bernard uses the 
 terms as a subtitle, and that the possible dates for his work fall partly 
 after the accepted date of the death of Ibn Zaddik may indicate an 
 influence in the opposite direction, if there was any influence at all. A 
 possible connection of another kind between Arabian and Christian 
 views has been noted by De Wulf , who says that for the great scholastics 
 psychology forms a chapter of physics, but the most important one, 
 because man is the microcosm and the central pivot of all nature. 5 He 
 thinks that Gundisallinus, a connecting link between the Arabian and 
 the scholastic philosophies, 6 gave a peripatetic meaning to the "Alexan- 
 drian" conception of man as a microcosm. 7 In his De immortalitate 
 animce, Gundisallinus says that the human soul is midway between 
 animal souls and angelic substances, and is partly dependent upon the 
 body and partly independent of it. 8 The incorruptible soul is not de- 
 stroyed by the severing of form from matter, i. e., by death. 9 The ques- 
 tion here appears to be, not so much one of peripatetic influence upon the 
 scholastics, as of whether De Wulf 's use of the term microcosm to de- 
 scribe their psychology does not tend to exaggerate the place which 
 microcosmic theories held among them. 
 
 3. Microcosmic Theories in Medieval Jewish Philosophy 
 
 1. General Characteristics of Jewish Works in this Period. The micro- 
 cosmic theories of the mediaeval Jewish writers frequently contain state- 
 
 1 De mundi universitate . . . ed. C. Barach and J. Wrobel (Innsbruck, 1876), 
 Breviarium. 
 
 2 See next section. 8 See sec. 4. 
 
 4 Op. cit., p. 50. 6 Op. ciL, p. 332. 5 Ibid., p. 270. 7 Ibid., p. 273. 
 8 Edition of G. Biilow, cited above, pp. 24-26. 9 Ibid., pp. 28-29. 
 
38 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 ments identical with, or similar to those of the Christians, but the Jewish 
 treatment differs in general in at least four respects. In the first place it 
 has a basis in more ancient writings— as we saw, in the Sefer Yezirah 
 and Philo, with scattered references in the Talmud and some of the Mid- 
 rashim. Secondly, microcosmic theories, while held, as in the case of the 
 Christians, by writers more or less obscure, are given more prominence by 
 the great Jewish than by the great Christian writers. Again, the theory 
 that man is a microcosm is developed much farther in the direction of 
 naive and crude comparisons between the world and man. Lastly, the 
 Jewish theories are if anything more closely related to the Arabian views 
 than are the Christian. 
 
 2. Theories Emphasizing Physical Resemblances between the Universe 
 and Man. We consider first a number of writers who emphasize a 
 physical interpretation of Genesis I, 26, the doctrine that man was made 
 in the image of God. This was early linked up with the microcosmic 
 theory; according to the old and valuable Midrash Bereshit Rabba, of the 
 sixth, or possibly the third century, 1 when God said, "Let us make man 
 in our image," it was with "the works of heaven and earth" that God 
 was taking counsel. 2 This is the earliest known source for a view after- 
 wards held by other writers. 3 According to the Pirkt of Rabbi Eliezer 
 (eighth century 4 ),man was created from four kinds of dust; from red 
 dust came the blood, from black the intestines, from white the bones, and 
 from yellow the nerves, in order that man might reunite all, and that, 
 wherever he might turn, he would remember that he was dust. Just as 
 the Creator supports the universe without fatigue, so the soul supports 
 the body without effort. 5 The first detailed exposition of the microcos- 
 mic theory in this period is that of the Abot of R. Natan (eighth or ninth 
 century). 6 Starting from an older view ascribed to R. Joseph the Gal- 
 ilean, to the effect that God had created in man everything that had been 
 created in the universe, the author of this work proceeds to a detailed 
 parallelism, covering about thirty items. For example, the forests 
 correspond to man's hair; slanderers in the world correspond to the ears 
 with which man hears slander; the wind corresponds to the nose with 
 
 1 See Encyc. Brit, (nth ed.), XVIII, 423. 
 
 3 Translation by August Wiinsche in Bibl.rabbinica (Leipzig, 1880), vol. T parascha 
 viii, p. 31. 
 
 3 A. Jellinek, Beitr&ge zur Geschichte der Kabbala (1852), vol. I, p. 7, Anmerk. 6. 
 
 4 Encyc. Brit., XVIII, 423. 
 
 6 S. Karppe, Ihudes sur . . . Zohar, pp. 135-136. e Jewish Encyc, I, 82. 
 
Microcostnic Theories in Theological Traditions 39 
 
 which man breathes; the sun, to the forehead; the sky, to the tongue — 
 and so on. 1 I. Broyde, in his article in the Jewish Encyclopaedia? 
 quotes a few of these, but in his selection fails to indicate how haphazard 
 and trivial is the list. The parallelisms, absurd as they are, have some 
 importance, since they suggest something of what may have been the 
 relations of various microcosmic traditions; they are fantastic enough to 
 show that they were not taken over from Greek sources, and on the other 
 hand are perhaps too early, as well as too crude, to have come from the 
 Arabian Brethren of Sincerity. About the ninth or tenth century, 
 David ben Mervan al Mokammez and Jepheth ben AH thought that man 
 united so many perfections in himself that he was superior even to the 
 angels. 3 The latter, in his commentary on Genesis I, 25, used a term 
 VJtfbK d!>N)6n, corresponding to the term "microcosm," which Stein- 
 schneider thinks was not first brought into Jewish literature through the 
 Brethren of Sincerity. 4 Saadia ben Joseph (892-942), who has been 
 called the greatest figure in the literary and political history of mediae- 
 val Judaism, author of a famous commentary on the Sefer Yezirah, 
 taught that God has in the universe the role of life in the living organism; 
 or, that God might be compared to human intelligence. 5 The earth is in 
 the center of the universe and is the goal of creation; and, since nothing 
 without reason can be the earth's goal, that goal must be man. 6 Saadia 
 has a curious triple parallelism of the universe, the tabernacle, and man, 
 according to which the sun and moon are typified in the candlestick, 
 and, again, in the human eyes; and the firmament, separating the waters 
 above it from the waters below it, has its analogues in the veil of the 
 temple, and again in the human diaphragm. 7 Shabbethai Donnolo (913- 
 965) wrote a work called Man as God's Image, repeating the old view that 
 
 1 Abot of R. Natan, XXXI, 3 (German translation by K. Pollak, Rabbi Nathans 
 System der Ethik und Moral (Frankfurt, 1905), pp. 109-110. 
 
 2 Article, " Microcosm," Jewish Encyc. VIII, 544. 
 
 3 S. Karppe, op. cit., p. 453, n. 
 
 4 Die Hebralsche Ubersetzungen des Mittelalters, p. 997, n. 1. Ahudhemme (d. 575) 
 wrote a treatise upon man considered as a microcosm; R. Duval, La litt. syriaque 
 (Paris, 1900), p. 250. 
 
 6 Commentary on the Sefer Yezirah, French transl. by M. Lambert (Paris, 1891), 
 IV, 1, pp. 91-95. 
 
 • J. Gul^tmann, Die Religions philosophic des Saadia (Gottingen, 1882), pp. 159- 
 160. 
 
 7 S. Karppe, op. cit., p. 171. Such a view occurs in one of the Midrashim; see A. 
 Jellinek's edition of Shabbethai (Schabtai Donolo, Der Mensch als Gottes Ebenbild, 
 Introduction), p. xii. 
 
40 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 God, in creating man in "our image," took counsel with the universe, 1 
 and made man not only with his body resembling the material universe, 
 but with his soul resembling God. Both kinds of resemblances are 
 described in detail, so that the work suggests not only structural parallel- 
 isms but also arguments for the immortality of the soul. 2 As the four 
 elements emanated from God, in the order air, water, fire, earth, so 
 man's body was created from four analogous humours — blood, phlegm, 
 black bile, and yellow bile; 3 we noted that such a view was held by 
 several Christian writers. For Shabbethai Donnolo, further, the process 
 of human generation also affords analogues to the four elements. More- 
 over, man has the power to produce the four elements; he breathes and 
 produces air; if the air meets a hard object, the latter becomes damp; 
 man can produce fire by means of a burning-glass; and man can produce 
 a solid mass by boiling a kettle of water a long time. Thus man can see 
 how creation proceeded, and can himself be like God. 3 Jellinek says that 
 this work was important, as the exegesis of Genesis I, 25 was in its main 
 outlines taken over by a number of later writers; and that it was of con- 
 siderable influence on the Cabala, since it opened the way now for spirit- 
 ual as well as corporeal interpretations of the ten powers present in man, 
 as well as for the concept of the Adam Kadmon, or typical, cosmic man. 4 
 But the last-named has affiliations with much older sources, like the 
 Poimandres. Before passing on to some of these other emphases, it 
 should be noted that in the Midrash of the Microcosm, the title of which 
 Jellinek traces to Arabic influences, the theory of physical parallelisms 
 between the universe and man is treated in a manner which recalls the 
 Abot of Rabbi Natan, although the detail of the parallelisms suggests 
 some independence on the part of the author. 5 
 
 3. Theories Emphasizing Metaphysical Resemblances between the 
 Universe and Man. Whether because of the influence of Shabbethai 
 Donnolo's twofold exegesis of the passage in Genesis, or because of the 
 influence of the Arabian philosophers now beginning to be felt, or as the 
 developments of independent views, there follow now a number of 
 writers who emphasize metaphysical rather than physical resemblances 
 between the universe and man. Of these, a notable figure is Solomon Ibn 
 
 jellinek, ibid., p. ix. 
 
 2 Ibid., p. x. 
 
 3 Ibid., pp. x, xi. 
 
 4 Ibid., p. xii. 
 
 6 A. Jellinek, Bet-ha Midrasch, 5-ten Teil (Vienna, 1873), Introduction, p. xxv. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Theological Traditions 41 
 
 Gabirol (Avicebron, 1021-1058). Like the Arabian Brethren, he declares 
 that if man wishes to know all things he must first know himself. 1 The 
 body of man and his form exemplify matter and form; his soul exemplifies 
 (cosmic) will; and his intelligence exemplifies the primal essence 2 — 
 "mundus minor exemplum est maioris mundi ordine." 3 The spiritual 
 substance which is said to contain the material universe is compared to 
 the spiritual substance which is said to contain the body. 4 In both 
 cases there is diffusion 5 and direction of movement, 6 although contamina- 
 tion of higher by lower is avoided by means of intermediaries. 7 The 
 individual soul follows the order of the world. 8 Karppe comments that 
 here is a metaphysical application of the doctrine of the microcosm 
 which, however, was only rarely maintained at this level; 9 in another 
 work of Ibn Gabirol there is the more usual view that man is midway 
 between two worlds, and that his four humours correspond to the four 
 elements. 10 After Ibn Gabirol, Moses Ibn Ezra had a theory that man 
 was a microcosm because he resembled the universe in composition, 
 derivation and creation; n Neumark says that he conceived the theory 
 more clearly than Ibn Gabirol, from whom he derived it. 12 For Abraham 
 Ibn Daud (d. about 11 80), the process of knowing shows that man is a 
 microcosm, since he contains in himself everything from the realm of the 
 substantial categories, and, in his grasp of intelligible forms, is like the 
 separate spirits. 13 
 
 4. Microcosmic Theories with Psychological and Ethical Emphasis: 
 Bahya Ibn Paquda, Joseph Ibn Zaddik. In the eleventh century, Bahya 
 Ibn Paquda of Saragossa, author of the work called The Duties of the 
 Heart, tried to combat the profane philosophy of Ibn Gabirol, 14 but he 
 too used the theory that man is a microcosm. In order to know the 
 universe, we must study man, in both body and soul; then much of the 
 mystery of the universe will become clear to us. This is the meaning of 
 
 1 Fons vitce (Latin transl. by Gimdisallinus, ed. C. Baeumker, in Beitr&ge zur Gesch. 
 der Phil, des Mittelalt., vol. I, Miinster, 1892), I, 2. 
 
 2 Ibid., I, 7. 3 Ibid., Ill, ii, 10; cf. IV, 16. 4 Ibid., II, 24. 
 
 » Ibid., Ill, 15. 6 Ibid., Ill, 58. 7 Ibid., II, 24; cf. Ill, ii, 10. 
 
 8 III, S 8. 9 Op. cit., p. 1S5. 
 
 10 J. Guttmann, Die Philosophic des Sal. Ibn Gabirols (Gottingen, 1889), p. 17. 
 
 11 Jewish Encyc, VIII, 546. 
 
 12 Gesch. derjud. Phil. . . ., vol. I, p. 508, n. 1. 
 1J Ibid., vol. I, p. 576. 
 
 14 1. Broydg, Resume des reflexions sur L'dme de Bahya . . . ibn Pakouda (Paris, 
 1896), pp. 3-7. 
 
42 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 Job when he says "And from my flesh I shall see God." 1 The minerals, 
 plants, animals and men are pictured as belonging in a series leading up 
 to the world of intelligences; gold, "rooted in the ground" is an inter- 
 mediate link between minerals and plants; palm trees, with their process 
 of fecundation, a link between plants and animals; many animal char- 
 acteristics a link between animals and man; and prophets are links be- 
 tween man and the world of intelligences. 2 Something of this kind occurs 
 in the work of the Arabian Brethren; and it is a question whether, in 
 view of their work, the parallels which Bahya draws between the nine 
 spheres of the universe, the twelve signs of the Zodiac, and the seven 
 planets, on the one hand, and various faculties and organs of the human 
 body, on the other hand, should be designated as " very original. ' ' Broyde 
 has made this statement; 3 but in another work has said that Bahya was 
 a faithful imitator of the Brethren. 4 We have noted in connection with 
 Bernard Silvestris the work of Joseph Ibn Zaddik (d. 1149), called 
 The Book of the Microcosm. 5 Against various forms of indifference and 
 materialism current in his day, he argues for the unity of God and the 
 way to true knowledge; 6 and the microcosmic theory serves him as a 
 convenient means to this end. 7 Man, representing as he does in his body 
 the entire material universe, and in his soul the entire world of spirits, 
 should know himself in order that he may know the will of God, and see 
 that God alone is truth. 8 In particular, he should know that God's act 
 of creating the world was immediate, and did not begin by a preliminary 
 creation of the divine will. 9 In the working out of the argument, the soul 
 of man is compared with the world-soul; the vegetable, animal, and 
 rational souls have their ground in three corresponding world-souls, and 
 the individualized intelligence has its ground in universal intelligence. 10 
 In his body, man has the properties of the four elements, for he goes from 
 heat to cold, from wetness to dryness. 11 The heavenly sphere corresponds 
 
 1 Duties of the Heart, Eng. transl. by E. Collins (Wisdom of the East series, London, 
 
 1905), PP- 40-41- 
 
 2 Broyd6, Resume, p. 12. 
 
 3 Broyd6, Jewish Encyc, VIII, 544. 4 Resume", p. 16. 
 
 8 . ♦ . ppn D5>W 1BD, edited by Jellinek (Berlin, 1854). On the Hebrew title, 
 cf. M. Doctor, Die Philosophic des Josef (Ibn) Zaddik ... (in Beitrage zur Gesch. der 
 Phil, des Mittelalt., vol. II, Minister, 1898), p. 3. 
 
 e B. Beer, p. 200 (article cited in Introduction, above). 
 
 ''Ibid., p. 163; cf. M. Doctor, op. cit., p. 19. 
 
 8 Beer, op. cit., pp. 163, 199; Doctor, op. cit., pp. 18-21. 
 
 9 Doctor, op. cit., p. 47. 10 Doctor op. cit., pp. 30-31. " Ibid., p. 20. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Theological Traditions 43 
 
 to man's head; l to the four elements correspond four senses. 2 In man 
 are accumulated the processes and powers observable in all mineral, 
 vegetable, and animal species. Man's hair is like grass, his veins and 
 arteries like rivers and canals, and his bones like mountains. In his 
 qualities also he resembles various animals, uniting all their qualities in 
 himself. 3 The parallels remind one strongly of the Arabian Brethren; 
 but Ibn Zaddik has some — e. g., the comparison of the days of the solar 
 month to the teeth! — which are apparently original. 4 There have been 
 a number of theories regarding the affiliations of Ibn Zaddik. Mai- 
 monides is read in one passage as having thought that he was one of the 
 Brethren of Sincerity. 5 Jellinek thinks there are traces of Bahya Ibn 
 Paquda's influence, 6 while P. Block thinks that Ibn Zaddik depended 
 upon Ibn Gabirol. 7 Doctor thinks that any direct dependence either 
 upon the Brethren or Ibn Gabirol is uncertain except that in his microcos- 
 mic views he must have used one or the other. 8 L. Weinsberg has 
 questioned the authenticity of the whole work, which he thinks appeared 
 in the thirteenth century. 9 According to De Wulf, Ibn Zaddik's book 
 marks a transition between the theological philosophy of the orthodox 
 Mohammedans (the Motakallimin) and the Jewish Aristotelianism of 
 Maimonides. 10 The book was used by a number of later Jewish writers. 11 
 5. Maimonides. The great Moses ben Maimun (1 135-1204) in his 
 Moreh Nebuchim, or " Guide for the Perplexed" — an effort to show by 
 philosophy the reasonableness of the faith — combined all these tenden- 
 cies, but with an emphasis upon physical resemblances between the 
 
 1 L. Weinsberg, Der Mikrokosmos: Ein angeblich in 12. Jahrhund. von J. Ibn Zaddik 
 verfasstes phil. System. (Breslau, 1888), p. 54, n. 3. 
 
 2 Beer, op. cit., p. 194. 
 
 3 Doctor, op. cit., p. 20. 
 
 4 Cf. ibid. , and Weinsberg, loc. cit. 
 
 5 Neumark, op. cit., I, 389; cf. Weinsberg. op. cit., p. 46. 
 8 Der Mikrokosmos, Introduction, p. vii. 
 
 7 Die Religions philosophie der Juden, in J. Winter and A. Wunsche, Gesch. der rabb. 
 Lit. wahrend des Mittelalt. (Leipzig, 1892-5), vol. II, p. 729. 
 
 8 Op. cit., pp. 16, 19. 
 
 9 Op. cit., pp. 46-48. Weinsberg bases his claim upon a statement of Maimonides 
 (p. 12), and upon the facts that "Ibn Zaddik," contrary to the implications of Mai- 
 monides, differs at various points from both Arabians (p. 14, ff.) and Aristotelians 
 (p. 27, ff.), and agrees with the orthodox Mohammedan theologians (p. 39, ff.). Weins- 
 berg has made a good study of the material, but depended too much upon statements 
 which might easily be otherwise construed, or even be erroneous. 
 
 10 Hist, of Mediaval Phil., p. 238. ll Jellinek, op. cit., Introd., p. viii. 
 
44 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 universe and man which was not blind to their limitations. For him, 
 as for Ibn Zaddik, microcosmic theories helped to demonstrate the unity 
 of God. 1 He gives a detailed parallelism between the universe and the 
 human body. Each is an individual; as the universe is composed of 
 spheres and their parts, primary and subordinate, the body is composed 
 of organs and their parts, primary and subordinate. The spheres have 
 life and soul, if not intellect. The outer sphere, enclosing the four 
 inner spheres of the elements, corresponds to the human heart — especially 
 in the fact that if it ceases to function, destruction ensues. The revolu- 
 tion of the spheres corresponds to the process of change in finite sub- 
 stance. Just as the universe has some parts without motion or life, so 
 the body has some parts devoid of motion and sensation. In each, we 
 find that one part cannot exist without other parts; there is in each a force 
 which unites and preserves the various parts. Again, in each, some parts 
 have special purposes, others are merely accessory; and, in each, it is 
 the latter only which may exhibit great variations in size. In each, there 
 is some substance — i. e., the "fifth element," — which exists permanently 
 in individuation; and in each there are other substances (i. e., the four 
 elements, the four humours), which are constant only in the species. 
 Just as the heavenly spheres, penetrating the combinations of elements, 
 may move them and at last by the same force cause their destruction, so 
 the same force which operates in the birth and temporal existence of the 
 human being operates in his destruction and death. In the universe, the 
 nearer the parts are to the center, the greater is the turbidness, inertness; 
 in the animals, the vital organs are nearest the center. 2 In a passage 
 suggesting the criticism by Gregory of Nyssa, Maimonides says that none 
 of the foregoing analogies justifies the calling of man a microcosm, any 
 more than of a horse. It is the intellectual faculty — which by the way is 
 pictured as socially elicited — which raises man to that dignity. The 
 force in man which directs him is the analogue of God in the universe. 
 One might say that the absolute intellect of man, acquired from without, 
 is the analogue of God, and that man's rational faculties represent the 
 intelligence of the spheres; but Maimonides thinks these latter com- 
 parisons involve too many disputed questions. 
 
 Maimonides is perhaps the first writer who clearly enumerates objec- 
 tions to the microcosmic theory. Whereas in man the benefits of organs 
 
 1 The Guide for the Perplexed, Eng. transl. by M. Friedlander (London, iqio), Part I, 
 chapter LXXII, p. 115. 
 
 2 Ibid., pp. 113-119. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Theological Traditions 45 
 
 subordinate to the heart also benefit the heart, in the universe that outer 
 sphere which bestows authority and distributes power does not receive 
 any benefit, but merely imitates the Most High. In man, again, the 
 heart is internal, and in the universe its analogue is the outmost sphere. 
 Moreover, the faculty of thinking is inherent in man's body, and in- 
 separable from it, while God is not inherent in the universe and may 
 exist apart from it. 1 Apart from man, the four spheres correspond to the 
 four elements — that of the moon, to water; of the sun, to fire; of the five 
 planets, to air; and of the fixed stars, to earth — and also to the four 
 powers of the sublunar world, the four causes of motion in the spheres — 
 i. e., Nature, Soul, Intelligence, and abstract Spirit— and the four stages 
 of Jacob's Ladder. 2 Thus, in spite of some objections in the matter of 
 physical parallelisms, microcosmic theories became an integral part of the 
 world- view of the greatest of Jewish philosophers. Of immense influence 
 within Judaism, Maimonides was also read in part by Christian school- 
 men. 3 
 
 6. Microcosmic Theories in the "Cabala." In the thirteenth century 
 microcosmic theories from the Sefer Yezirah and other sources were 
 gathered up and given a mystical direction in the Cabala. 4 According to 
 the Zohar, one of the two great cabalistic text-books, everything emanates 
 from the Ain Soph (Infinite) or Primal Spirit, whose first manifestation is 
 the prototypal cosmic man, Adam Kadmon. 5 From the latter emanates 
 the created universe in four degrees, or worlds. The first world consists 
 of the ten operative powers or qualities of the Adam Kadmon, combining 
 the sacred numbers 3 and 7. From this first world emanate the three 
 other worlds, those of life, spirit, and intelligence, 6 each divided into ten 
 subordinate spheres. 7 Everything which the Adam Kadmon contains 
 virtually, man contains actually; man participates in the three created 
 worlds, 8 to which the three powers of man's soul correspond. When man 
 was created, all the spheres cooperated; they could not exist, in fact, 
 without man to bind them together. 9 The human body is the model of 
 
 1 Ibid., pp. 1 1 7-1 19. 
 
 2 Ibid., chapter IX; cf. Neumark, op. cit. I, 601-602. 
 *Encyc. Brit, (nth ed.), XIII, 173. 
 
 *Encyc. Brit., XIII, 174; Karppe, op. cit., p. 452. 
 
 6 S. Munk, Milanges de philosophic juive et arabe (Paris, 1859), p. 492. 
 
 • J. Probst, Caractere et origine des idees de R. Lulle (Toulouse, 19 12), pp. 234-235. 
 
 7 E. Bischoff, Die Kabbalah (Leipzig, 1903), p. 55. 
 
 8 Munk, op. cit., p. 493. 
 
 9 Karppe, op. cit., pp. 455-456. 
 
46 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 all the creations. 1 The vault of heaven corresponds to man's skin; the 
 constellations to the skin's configuration; the four elements to man's 
 flesh, and the internal forces of the universe (i. e., angels and servants of 
 God), to man's bones and veins. 2 According to Beer, it was from the 
 Cabalists that the idea that man is the image of all things in the universe 
 passed to the Christian mystics and theosophists of the sixteenth and 
 seventeenth centuries; 3 but the latter certainly had much in their own 
 traditions. 
 
 4. Microcosmic Theories in Mohammedan Philosophy 
 
 1. Two Streams of Greek Tradition. We have seen that some of the 
 conceptions of Greek philosophy spread, by way of Alexandria, through 
 the west, where they were absorbed and carried along in the currents of 
 patristic and scholastic Christian thinking. There was another stream 
 of Greek tradition, which proceeded by way of Byzantium to the east, 4 
 where its teachings were absorbed by the Arabians in the days of Moham- 
 medan ascendancy, and conserved until, centuries later, they also came 
 to the west, by way of the Mohammedan dominions in Spain. In the 
 meantime, the Greek conceptions were modified by the Arabs; and one 
 of the chief modifications was in the direction of a more consistent and 
 more prominent theory of man as a microcosm. 
 
 2. The " Brethren of Sincerity. " This modification was effected chiefly 
 by the so-called " Ikhwan-al-Safa," or "Brethren of Sincerity," a religious 
 society formed at Basra about 950, 5 in a time of social and ethical up- 
 heaval, with the purpose of contributing some elements of stability to a 
 distressing national and religious situation. It was felt that nothing 
 could better serve this end than a unified world-view, a reconciliation of 
 science with the true faith. Accordingly," the Brethren prepared an 
 Encyclopedia, consisting of fifty-one treatises. 6 Dieterici says that the 
 work constitutes a kind of supplement to the Koran, and that it has 
 borrowed from various ancient schools of thought; the physics and logic 
 
 1 Broyd6, Jewish Encyc, VIII, 545. 2 Karppe, op. cit., p. 454. 
 
 3 Op. cit., p. 161. 
 
 4 F. Dieterici, Die Philosophie der Araber in IX-ten und X-ten Jahrhiinderten n. C. 
 (Leipzig, 1858-1895), I, 85. 
 
 5 On possible Indian influences involved, see Neumark, op. cit., I, 147; von Lipp- 
 mann, op. cit., p. 369. On political motives of the Society, see T. J. De Boer, Hist, of 
 Pkilos. in Islam, Eng. transl. E. R. Jones (London, 1903), pp. 81, S. 
 
 8 Dieterici, op. cit., I, pp. 85-88, II, 203. The treatises are listed in I, 131, ff. 
 
Microcostnic Theories in Theological Traditions 47 
 
 are chiefly Aristotelian; the psychology and anthropology depend mostly 
 upon Galen; the questions of the origin and development of the world 
 are answered in a way suggesting Neo-Platonism and Neo-Pythagorean- 
 ism; and the foundation of the astronomy and astrology is the teachings 
 of Ptolemy. 1 Two of the fifty-one treatises are entitled in terms of the 
 microcosmic theory — the twenty-fifth, on The Saying of the Wise, that 
 Man is a Little World, and the thirty-third, on The Saying of the Wise, 
 that the World is a Great, Good Man, Endowed with Spirit and Soul. 2 
 Throughout the Encyclopcedia the microcosmic theory is so prominent 
 that Dieterici divides his translation and commentary into two parts 
 called Makrokosmos and Mikrokosmos, devoted respectively to the 
 development of the world from Unity (God) to multiplicity (things), and 
 the reascent, in man, from multiplicity to Unity. 3 
 
 j. The Setting of the Microcosmic Arguments of the "Encyclopedia." 
 The general framework of the Encyclopedia's world-view is emanation- 
 istic. There is a well-defined attempt to express the relations between 
 successive emanations by means of the relations between numbers in the 
 decimal notation. The world-soul is like unity; the simple souls represent 
 digits; the souls of the genera, tens; those of species, hundreds, and those 
 of individuals, thousands. Since the nature of things corresponds to 
 numbers, the world can consist of only nine stages. 4 Of these the four 
 spiritual stages are God, Reason, Soul and Primary Matter. The inter- 
 mediate stages are Secondary Matter, and the World. The lower stages 
 are Nature; the Four Elements; and the "Products/' mineral, vegetable, 
 and animal. By the addition of an encircling sphere to the sphere of 
 the fixed stars, the spheres of the five planets and of the sun and the 
 moon, the world, in its turn, was made to consist of nine spheres, or 
 divisions; 5 but this arrangement gives way to others involving only the 
 
 1 Dieterici, op. cit., VIII, 208. 
 
 2 For the Arabic titles, see G. Fliigel, "tlber Inhalt und Verfasser der Arabischen 
 Encyclopaedic," in Zeitschr. d. Deutsch. Morgenldnd. Gesellsckaft, xiii, pp. 11 and 13, 
 Anm. 3. (Leipzig, 1859). 
 
 3 Op. cit., I, p. v, and p. 10. The Encyclopcedia does not hold strictly to the micro- 
 cosmic theory in the sense in which we have taken it; there are a number of passages 
 in which metaphorical and allegorical comparisons of man and other parts of the 
 universe are introduced — e. g., the twenty-second treatise (VII, 1 ff.) compares man 
 to a city, and even the treatises mentioned above include other comparisons than the 
 microcosmic. (See VII, 43 ff., VIII, 29 ff.) Dieterici's translation has been criticized 
 as fragmentary and inexact; see von Lippmann, op. cit., p. 369, n. 21 (370). 
 
 4 Dieterici, op. cit., 1, 163; VIII, 31. 5 Ibid., I, pp. 163-179. 
 
48 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 seven last-named. The spheres brood over the elements; l or, the world- 
 soul works through the motions of the stars upon the elements and 
 products; 2 by mixtures of the elements, minerals, plants, animals and 
 men are produced. 3 The fiftieth treatise gives an arrangement of min- 
 erals, plants and animals in the order of their appearance, with transition 
 stages between the three; it is declared that fungi are intermediate 
 between plants and minerals, and that date-palms are intermediate 
 between plants and animals. Again, the monkey has a body like that of 
 man, and the horse and elephant have traits of disposition like man. 4 
 This view of the world process is significant in relation to microcosmic 
 theories for two reasons: first, because parallels are pointed out between 
 various parts of the universe, especially between the universe and man, 
 and second because the essentials of the whole process are viewed as 
 concentrated in the end-product, man. 5 
 
 4. The " Encyclopedia? s" Parallelisms between the Universe and Man. 
 The parallelisms between the universe and man are worked out in much 
 more detail than in any previous works. Among them are the statements 
 that, as God knows the secrets of all worlds, so the human soul knows 
 what each of the senses separately knows. 6 As the spiritual powers 
 (angels, etc.) penetrate the universe, the powers of the soul penetrate the 
 human body. 7 As the world is divided into nine concentric spheres, so 
 the human body is divided into nine regions or substances, grouped in 
 concentric fashion. 8 The world is cone-shaped; the earth, as well as 
 most fruits and human products, being cone-shaped or round, repeats the 
 pattern. 9 There are twelve signs of the Zodiac, six northerly and six 
 southerly; there are twelve openings in the body, of which six are said to 
 be on the right side and six on the left. Again, there are seven planets 
 through which the determinations of heaven are communicated to the 
 earth; and there are seven creative powers through which the welfare of 
 the body is established. Or, as another parallel to the seven planets, there 
 are seven spiritual powers — the five senses, together with thinking and 
 reasoning. The relation which the moon sustains to the sun is sustained 
 
 1 Ibid., VIII, p. 16. 2 Ibid., I, p. 187. 3 Ibid., VIII, p. 16. 
 
 4 These views resemble those of Bahya Ibn Paquda, noted above. Ibn Paquda 
 modifies the statement about the date-palm, giving a better example of a characteristic 
 common to that and the animals. The Encyclopedia says that the date-palm, though 
 shaped like a plant, dies if one cuts its head off, and hence may be said to have an 
 animal soul. See Dieterici, IX, pp. 219 ff. 
 
 « Ibid., VIII, p. 16, ff. • Ibid., VII, p. 57. 
 
 7 VII, pp. 47, 57; cf. V, pp. 2, 4-8. 8 VII, p. 47. 9 IX, p. 216. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Theological Traditions 49 
 
 by the power of speech to that of reason — the moon's period of 28 days 
 corresponds to the 28 letters of the alphabet. 1 Once more, each of the 
 planets corresponds to an organ, as well as to an opening of the body. 2 
 And to each planet, further, corresponds a geographical region on earth, 
 with its characteristic race, 3 a class of angels, 4 a month in the life of the 
 human embryo, 5 a period of man's life, a human characteristic, 6 and a 
 color! 7 Another number which recurs over and over is that of the ele- 
 ments, four; it corresponds to the four principal divisions of the body, 8 
 and to four senses. 9 The four fundamental attributes, hot, cold, moist, 
 dry, correspond to four bodily secretions 10 and to the four temperaments. 11 
 Still more detailed is the long parallelism between the structure of the 
 earth and the structure of the human body; the mountains are said to 
 correspond to man's bones, the minerals to marrow, the sea to the in- 
 terior of the body, rivers to intestines, brooks to arteries, plants to the 
 hair, cultural centers to the front of the body, the wilderness to the back, 
 and so on. There are, further, detailed parallelisms between world 
 processes and periods and bodily processes and periods — the wind and 
 breathing, thunder and speaking, sunshine and laughter, rain and weep- 
 ing, sadness and night, death and sleep, spring and childhood, summer 
 and youth, autumn and middle life, winter and old age, the rising of 
 stars and birth, the setting of stars and death. 12 The parallelisms are 
 carried into social and ethical relationships when it is said that the regular 
 course of the stars corresponds to good standing on the part of men, and 
 retrograde motions to mistakes, and "stars standing still" to stagnation 
 in men's work, and stars rising or passing toward the horizon to the suc- 
 cess or failure of men. 12 Agreements and harmonies among the stars 
 are paralleled by human loves, 13 conjunctions by union of the sexes, 
 constellations by society, the breaking up of a star group by human 
 separations. 14 As the stars unite with the sun and receive light, so men 
 join with a king and receive honors; the relation of a king to his coun- 
 sellors is also paralleled by the relation of the soul to the powers of sensa- 
 tion and other powers, and by the relation of the sun to the planets. 15 
 There are one or two parallelisms specifically Mohammedan; it is de- 
 clared that just as the five separate senses have reference to the one soul,, 
 
 1 VII, pp. 48, 49. 2 VII, pp. 49 ff., 60 ff. 
 
 3 1, p. 208. 4 1, p. 188. 6 vn, p. 67 ff. 
 
 • VII, pp. 92-94. 7 V, p. 115. 8 VII, p. 50. 9 VII, p. 189. 
 
 » vn, pp. 50-51. n n, P . 90. 12 vn, p. 51. " viii, p. 7 ^ 
 
 14 VII, pp. 51-52. 16 VII, pp. 52, 55, 56. 
 
50 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 so the followers of the five prophets shall all be brought before the one 
 Allah/ and again, that the angels in the upper world correspond to the 
 readers of the Koran, since all that the latter hear is elevated and spirit- 
 ual. 2 
 
 5. The Cumulation of Natural Processes in Man. It is declared that if 
 the reasonable man will reflect upon the forces which the Encyclopedia 
 describes, and come to know them, this will all be to him evidence for 
 his own soul, and an indication of the nature of man. 3 In the composition 
 of man is the essence of everything which exists; 4 in body he is like the 
 universe, in soul he resembles the world-soul. 5 Man is short-lived, but he 
 can know the whole wor!4 in himself. 6 He shares the attributes of all 
 species; he has four natures and undergoes change like the four elements, 
 arises and disappears like the minerals, grows like the plants, has sensa- 
 tion and movement like the animals; "it is also possible that he is im- 
 mortal like the angels." The different animals have special ways of 
 seeking food and dealing with enemies, but man has all these ways 
 combined. It is declared that the characteristics of some thirty species of 
 animals are all found in man. 7 By reason of all this that has been noted, 
 11 the wonderful organization of man's body, the unique processes of his 
 soul, the arts and sciences which arise in connection with his structure, 
 taken as a whole, his characters, views, ways of teaching and of acting, 
 words and deeds, condition, and bodily and spiritual accomplishments," 
 it is fitting that man be called a little world. 8 One should think of man's 
 body as of a book filled with wisdom. If one does not know how to read 
 the book, one should ascertain from the Brethren the way to obtain this 
 true knowledge which leads to eternal life. About the teachings of the 
 Brethren there need be no doubt, "for the evidence is drawn from your 
 own soul." 9 
 
 6. The Place of the "Encyclopedia" in the History of Microcosmic 
 Theories. In spite of its naive and fantastic views, one may say that it is 
 in the Encyclopedia of the Brethren of Sincerity that the theory that 
 man is a microcosm first becomes imposing. It is no longer fragmentary, 
 but fundamental; and it is no longer isolated, but linked up with a com- 
 prehensive and correlated world-system. In particular, the Encyclo- 
 pedia is notable for its detailed parallelisms between the universe and 
 man; of all who have written on man as a microcosm, only Fechner has 
 
 1 VII, p. 54. 2 VII, p. 189. 3 VII, p. 57. 
 
 4 VII, pp. 41-42. 5 VII, p. 60. • VII, p. 46. 7 VII, pp. 58-59. 
 
 » VII, p. 60; of. VII, p. 41, VIII, p. 16. 9 VII, p. 60. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Theological Traditions 51 
 
 tried to point out more resemblances. It should be noted also that the 
 Brethren have something more than a mere mention of the universe as a 
 "large man." Most of the writers have estimated man in terms of the 
 universe, but have not gone far in describing the universe in terms of 
 man; even where the two have been set in parallel, the direction of 
 emphasis has been chiefly toward man rather than away from him. The 
 latter undertaking is even more precarious than the former, and it is not 
 surprising that in their treatise on the subject the authors of the En- 
 cyclopaedia presently wandered from macrocosmic constructions to 
 metaphors. Again, it was significant that terms signifying the micro- 
 cosmic theories had been used as titles, even though it cannot be def- 
 initely shown that the Jewish and Christian writers who use such titles 
 took them from this source. Steinschneider l thinks that the Jews had 
 the term, or one corresponding to it, among themselves; and certainly in 
 Jewish thought there are resemblances to Philo and the Sefer Yezirah 
 which should be taken into account. With these in mind it appears un- 
 necessary to assume any very direct influence of the Encyclopaedia upon 
 the Cabala. The Encyclopaedia is, rather, a striking formulation of ideas 
 that, as we have seen, were more or less common to Alexandrian, Chris- 
 tian, Jewish, and Mohammedan writers. 
 
 7. Related Views of Other Arabian Philosophers. Apart from the 
 Brethren of Sincerity, the microcosmic theories are not conspicuous in 
 mediaeval Arabian philosophy, although the peripatetic theory of 
 spheres and sphere-spirits, particularly as applied to psychology, 2 can 
 easily be regarded as implying something of the kind. In metaphysics, 
 also, there are some affiliations not very remote, as when El Farabi 
 taught that to the six non-corporeal principles correspond the six kinds 
 of bodies — the heavenly bodies, man, animal, plant, mineral, and the 
 four elements. 3 The Spirit which stands above us and which has lent to 
 all earthly things their forms, seeks to bring those scattered forms to- 
 gether that they may become one in love, and first collects them in man. 4 
 Avicenna is more Platonic; he draws a comparison between the miracu- 
 
 1 Die Hebr. Ubersetz ... p. 997, n. 1. Cf. A. Jellinek, Bet-ha Midrasch, 5-ten Teil 
 (Vienna, 1873), P- xxv, and Broyde, in Jewish Encyclopedia, VIII, 544. 
 
 2 Neumark, op. cit., I, 566. Traces of microcosmic views are found in a number of 
 obscure writers. Cf. Sharastani, Religions partheien . . . (transl. T. Haarbrucker, 
 Halle, 1850), I, 169, 210. 
 
 3 Neumark, op. cit., I, 157. 
 4 De Boer, op. cit., p. 120. 
 
52 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 lous effects of the world-soul and the exceptional effects of passionate 
 forms of excitement in the human soul. 1 
 
 5. Summary: Microcosmic Theories in Theological Traditions 
 
 The mediaeval Christian writers transmitted, while the Jewish and 
 Mohammedan writers elaborated in some fantastic details, the ancient 
 views of man as a microcosm. In the two traditions first named the 
 theory was usually linked up with the sacred literature and made easier 
 the comparison between God and man. 2 For the Christians, chiefly 
 interested in other doctrines, the microcosmic theory is hardly more 
 than a survival; for the Jewish writers it has somewhat more importance, 
 especially as a means to the unification of knowledge and the edification 
 of faith. Among the Mohammedans the theory achieved importance in 
 one sect, the Brethren of Sincerity, who as early as the tenth century held 
 it as an integral part of a great system of philosophy. The three tradi- 
 tions apparently developed in considerable independence of one another, 
 although some cases of interaction, especially between Jewish and 
 Arabian writers, are fairly evident. In general, during the middle ages 
 the microcosmic theory served as a convenient and uncritical method 
 of reconciling religion with the natural sciences, which even then were 
 beginning to raise questions and difficulties for the faithful. 
 
 1 De Boer, op. cit., p. 138. 
 
 2 See D. Kaufmann, Gesch. der Attributenlehre . . . (Gotha, 1877), p. 210. 
 
CHAPTER III 
 
 MICROCOSMIC THEORIES IN EARLY MODERN REACTIONS 
 FROM SCHOLASTICISM 
 
 i. New Applications of the Theory that Man is a Microcosm 
 
 It is only when measured over considerable periods, or in the works of 
 very great men, that marked differences between mediaeval and modern 
 philosophy are to be distinguished. The reaction against scholasticism 
 in the early modern period was not sharp, but gradual; particularly in 
 their views of man as a microcosm, some of the "modern" men differed 
 but little from their mediaeval, or even their ancient predecessors. 1 
 Even the men who were opening new lines of thought did not altogether 
 forsake the old; moreover, the theory that man is a microcosm fitted well 
 with the importance which the humanists were inclined to ascribe to 
 man. These circumstances, combined with the fact that the chief char- 
 acteristic of the period may be said to have been its curiosity, its restless 
 seeking here and there along all lines of interest and activity, led some of 
 the thinkers to develop new applications for the microcosmic view. Thus 
 Nicholas of Cusa attempted to combine it with Christology, Paracelsus 
 with empirical medicine, Bruno with symbolic logic and monadism, 
 Campanella with a spiritualistic ontology, Boehme with mysticism, and 
 others with new theories in the natural sciences. Some writers of the 
 period, even while they criticized the older microcosmic theories, were 
 not able to break entirely away from them, but incorporated portions of 
 them at one point or another in their new estimates of the world. 
 
 1 Among those who restated the older theories with little or no change were Agrippa 
 of Nettesheim, in his compendium of magical and astrological lore called De occulta 
 philosophia. Man contains everything in himself (II, 27, 36); the world is an inter- 
 mediate image between God and man (II, 36); the parts of the soul have the relations 
 of a musical harmony (II, 28); the motions of the heart correspond to those of the 
 sun, and, diffused through the body, signify years, months, etc. (II, 17). Pico della 
 Mirandola in his De arte cabalistica (Basle, 1572) held that man is the acme of creation, 
 composed of two worlds (lib. Ill, 3145) and more fitted than the animals to be called 
 a microcosm (lib. VII, chap. vi). On the work of Trithemius, see F. Hartmann, The 
 Life of Paracelsus . . . (London, 1887), p. 164, n. On Pietro Pomponazzi, see A. 
 H. Douglas, The Philosophy of . . . Pomponazzi (Cambridge, 1910), p. 127. 
 
54 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 2. Nicholas of Cusa 
 
 i. Microcosmic Theories in the "De docta ignorantia" and the u De 
 conjeduris." The first outstanding figure of this period is Nicholas of 
 Cusa. He holds that God is the absolute unity who reconciles all distinc- 
 tions and contradictions. 1 The universe consists of three "worlds" — a 
 central, spiritual world, the center of which is God and the characteristic 
 of which is truth; a middle world, the center of which is intelligence, and 
 which exhibits similarities or likenesses; and an outer world, the center of 
 which is understanding, and which contains shadows. Sensation, or 
 sensibility, is the thick shell around the last-named world. These three 
 worlds are related to God as the numbers are related in decimal notation 
 (the sum of the serial order i, 2, 3, and 4 being equal to ten 2 ); each 
 world contains three orders, and each order contains three "choruses," 
 all related as the tens, hundreds, and thousands. Man is organized in 
 body and soul according to this pattern, with twenty-seven regions; so 
 man comprises, in humanly limited fashion, the universe — his unity is 
 infinity contracted in a human way. 3 It was reasonable, then, for the 
 ancients to call man a microcosm. 4 In a relative sense it may be said that 
 man is God, and a universe; he is likewise in a sense an angel, and an 
 animal. But after all it is possible for only one man to stand, as it were, 
 at the apex of humanity, at the point of completion of the universe, the 
 point of union between God and man; and this man must be Christ, 
 through whom salvation is attained for the rest of mankind. 5 Since 
 man contains so much in himself, he can develop everything from his 
 own nature; but his thoughts correspond to the forms in the divine 
 mind. 6 
 
 2. The "De ludo globi." If the De ludo globi stood alone, it might be 
 difficult to separate microcosmic theories from illustrations and analogies; 
 but when taken in connection with the works just considered, its meaning 
 becomes more apparent. The globe before the persons of the dialogue is 
 compared to the body, and its circular motion to the motion of the soul, 
 
 1 De doct. ignor., II, iv. God can thus be at once the greatest and the least. 
 Ibid., I, ii. 
 
 2 Erdmann, op. cit., I, 539. 
 
 3 De conjectures, II, xiv. 
 
 4 De doct. ignor., Ill, xiii. For other references see R. Falckenberg, Grundzilge der 
 Philosophic des Nicolaus Cusanus (Breslau, 1880), p. 37, nn. 
 
 6 De conj., II, 14. 
 
 6 Ibid. Cf. Erdmann, op. cit., I, p. 540. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Reactions from Scholasticism 55 
 
 especially in introspection. 1 The whole soul is in every part of the body, 
 just as the Creator is in every part of the world; man is declared to be a 
 microcosm because his soul corresponds to the world-soul. The soul is an 
 image of the Trinity. 2 Into the mouth of the inquirer, but not that of the 
 cardinal, is put the suggestion that the world is threefold — that the 
 smallest world is man, the greatest, 3 God, and the great, or middle world, 
 the universe; the cardinal contents himself here with saying that the 
 whole is reflected in every part, and that the universe is reflected better 
 in man than in anything else. There is a further analogy between the 
 relation of man to the universe and that of Bohemia to the Roman Em- 
 pire. 4 Doctrines like those considered in the preceding paragraph appear 
 when it is said that God stands as unity, at the head of nine orders of 
 angels; that, since 1+2+3+4 = 10, this order is reconciled with that 
 of the four elements, the four seasons, etc., and that, just as God has the 
 form of everything in Himself, so that He may form everything, so our 
 soul has the idea of everything in it, and thus may know everything. 5 
 Here, again, Christ is represented as the microcosmic center of the 
 universe. 6 
 
 3. Paracelsus 
 
 1. Statements of Paracelsus regarding Man as Microcosm. Of all who 
 have held that man is a microcosm, no one has been more thoroughgoing 
 and insistent than Paracelsus. His various views all point in that direc- 
 tion. He has the ancient theory that the world is composed of four 
 elements, 7 but also the alchemistic view that everything comes from 
 mercury, sulphur, and salt, 8 which once are said to antedate the elements. 9 
 It is declared that man is made in the image of God, rather than of the 
 
 1 De ludo globi, German transl. by F. Scharpff, Des Nicolaus v. Cusa Wichtigste 
 Schriften (Freiburg i. Br., 1862), pp. 220-226. 
 
 2 Ibid., pp. 224-229. 
 
 3 For this, Meyer (op. cit., p. 54), has coined the word " Megistokosmos." 
 
 4 Scharpff, op. cit., pp. 229-230. 
 6 Ibid., pp. 247-8. 
 
 6 Ibid., p. 245. In another work, in an elaborate comparison of the State and an 
 organic body, Nicholas declares that Christ is the heart; the church is Christ's body. 
 Its soul, diffused and differentiated, is the priestly hierarchy. Gierke, op. cit., pp. 
 23-27, 132. 
 
 7 Interp. totius astron., in the Geneva folio edition of the works of Paracelsus (1658; 
 copy in New York Public Library), vol. II, p. 664 a. Unless otherwise noted, cita- 
 tions in this section refer to this edition. 
 
 8 De mat. rer., viii; vol. II, p. 101 b. 
 
 9 Phil, ad Ath., quot. by Erdmann, op. cit., I, p. 619. 
 
56 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 world, 1 but man's resemblance to the world comes in for a great deal of 
 emphasis. He is said to have been created from the "mass," 2 a handful 
 of the concentrated essence of the world, 3 and sometimes is regarded as 
 having been born from the universe. 4 The universe and man resemble 
 each other — heaven has the figure of a man, not, to be sure, corporeally, 
 but the figure of man himself. 5 Both the universe and man have the 
 same reason behind them; 6 each is self-governing; 7 heaven is essentially 
 a sphere, and man a globe; 8 the circle of heaven is like man's skin. 9 
 Man's body contains the four elements in modified forms; 10 he desires 
 to eat because he is from the earth, to drink because he is from the water, 
 to breathe because he is from the air, and to be warm because he is from 
 the fire. 11 Again, man's body, like the universe, is composed of mercury, 
 sulphur, and salt. 12 Outside man, mercury becomes lightning; sulphur, 
 oil; and salt, alkali; 13 and, in the greater world, the ocean separates 
 Europe, Asia, and Africa, as a prefigured separation of the three princi- 
 ples. 14 The world is divided into sensible (corporeal) and insensible, 
 superior (sidereal) regions; the former is composed of mercury, sulphur, 
 and salt, the latter of mind and wisdom and knowledge. 15 From the 
 mass, two bodies, the sidereal and the elemental, are produced, 16 and man 
 contains a " magnet" from each. 17 Man's psychic powers are of sidereal 
 origin; 18 his imagination corresponds to the sun. 19 The result is that man 
 contains everything found in either sidereal or elemental regions 20 — 
 
 I Inter p. tot. astron.; vol. II, p. 664 b. 2 Ibid., p. 664 a. 
 
 3 Explic. tot. astron.\ vol. II, p. 649 a. 
 
 4 De pestilitate, tract. I; vol. I, p. 358. 
 
 5 De icteritiis seu morbis tinct., vol. I, p. 597 b. 
 
 6 Chirurg. mag., part IV {De tumoris), I, vi; vol. Ill, p. 105 b. 
 
 7 Paramirum, tract. I, parenth. after ch. xiii; vol. I, p. 17 b. 
 
 8 De cutis apertionibus, viii; vol. Ill, p. 63 b. 
 
 9 De colica (first recens.); vol. I, p. 598 a. 
 
 10 Inter p. tot. astron.', vol. II, p. 664 b. 
 
 II Paragranum, tract. II; vol. I, p. 201 b. 
 
 n Paramir. aliud. {De orig. morb. invis); vol. I, p. 34 b. De colica (second recens.); 
 vol. I, p. 631 b. 
 
 13 Chirurg, mag., part III, book III; vol. Ill, p. 86 b. 
 
 14 De nat. rer., book VIII; vol. II, p. 101 b. 
 
 15 Philosophia sagax, book I, chap. 1; vol. II, p. 527 a. 
 
 18 Phil, sag., I, ii; vol. II, p. 533 a. 
 17 Ibid., p. 532, a, b. 
 
 n Interp. tot. astron.; vol. II, p. 665 b. 
 
 19 De virt. imaginat., iv; vol. II, p. 471 a. 
 
 20 Paramirum, book IV; vol. I, p. 103 a and passim. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Reactions from Scholasticism 57 
 
 the characters of the four elements, fruits, metals, constellations, winds, 
 trees, gems, 1 minerals, 2 sun, moon, planets, chaos, milky way, the two 
 poles, and the zodiacal number; the universe of planets has in man its 
 similar image and signature. 3 Man contains more than a thousand 
 species of trees, minerals, manna, and metals, 4 and has the qualities of 
 all animals. 5 Paracelsus employs a number of new phrases to character- 
 ize man — he is "limbus minor," in which the universe of creatures 
 exists; 6 "punctum eoeli et terrae," 7 "juvenile ccelum," 8 "extractum 
 totius machinae mundi" 9 and "Alius totius mundi." 9 The term 
 "microcosmus" or its equivalent is used by Paracelsus more often than by 
 any other writer — perhaps as much as by all the writers up to his time 
 taken together. He was perhaps the originator of the term "macro- 
 cosmus." 
 
 2. Applications of Microcosmic Theories to Medicine. The distinctive 
 feature of the work of Paracelsus is his absurd attempt to turn the micro- 
 cosmic theories to practical account in medicine. He uses them to ac- 
 count for the origin of diseases and to indicate methods of treatment. 10 
 There is a pulse in the firmament, physiognomy in stars, chiromancy in 
 minerals, spirits in winds, fevers in motions of the earth. 11 The stars have 
 received from God the power of punishing men by inflicting diseases upon 
 them. 12 Just as there are four elements, there are four chief kinds of 
 diseases; diseases are produced in the body by salt, just as gems are 
 produced in the earth by salt. 13 That which causes ulcers is found in each 
 of the four elements. 14 A fever is an inner storm. 15 Just as the earth dries 
 
 1 De caus. morb. invis., Ill; vol. I, p. 124 a. This is an enumeration which Meyer 
 {op. cil., p. 61), neglecting Jewish and Arabian sources, calls the first detailed elucida- 
 tion of the term microcosm. 
 
 2 Paramirum, book IV; vol. I, p. 99 a. 
 
 3 Paragranum, tract. II; vol. I, p. 197 b. Paragran. alterius, tract. II; vol. I, p. 236, 
 a, b. 
 
 4 De causis et orig. luis gallica, book V, chap, x; vol. Ill, p. 198 b. 
 
 6 Defund. sci. et sap., tract. Ill; vol. II, p. 517 a. 
 
 8 Duo alii lib. de podagricis morbis; vol. I, p. 651 b. 
 
 7 Phil, sag., book I, chap, vii; vol. II, p. 567 b. 
 
 8 Paragran. alt., tract. II; vol. I, p. 236 a. 
 
 9 Phil, sag., I, ii; vol. II, pp. 532 b, 533 b. 
 
 10 Cf. Chirurg. mag., part IV, book IV, iii; vol. Ill, p. 119 b. 
 
 11 Paragran., I; vol. I, p. 191 b. 
 
 12 De pestilitate, tract. II; vol. I, p. 380. 
 
 13 Chirurg. mag., part IV, book IV, ii; vol. Ill, p. 119 a. 
 "Ibid., part III, book III; p. 86 a. 
 
 16 Quot. by Erdmann, op. cit., I, p. 621. 
 
58 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 up, so the human body has varying rates of drying up; a parallel is drawn 
 between rain and food and drink — it is declared that man is sustained by 
 invisible rains. 1 There is a kind of cavity or emptiness in the world, 
 among the four elements, where man lives, and man has in his body a 
 corresponding cavity; 2 colic is due to wind which comes from the sidereal 
 region; there are four directions for colic, corresponding to the four 
 winds; the inner winds differ from the outer in that they can be moved by 
 external forces, and can cause pain. 3 There are as many kinds of planets, 
 stars, and pestilences as there are "virtutes." 4 Paracelsus emphasizes 
 the bearing of the microcosmic theories upon diseases of the womb, saying 
 that such an emphasis will prevent mistakes. 5 The womb, separated 
 from the rest of the body as the body itself is from the external world, is 
 a world by itself — "mundus omnium minimus," 6 "mundus minor," 
 "mundus alter." The world is in a relation to man comparable to that of 
 man to the womb. Just as a fcetus lives in the firmament of the womb, 
 so man lives beneath the external firmament; and just as a microcosm 
 lies in the womb, so Adam lay in the womb of the four elements. Since 
 the womb is a world, its paroxysms resemble thunders, earthquakes, and 
 winds. 7 Paracelsus is not content with holding the microcosmic theory 
 himself; he is continually urging it upon the physicians. Since the 
 sidereal world and man are alike, and even inseparable and continuous, 
 surely a knowledge of astronomy will help the physician in diagnosis; 8 in 
 fact, a cure depends on it. 9 How can a physician hope to know man if 
 he does not know the world, the elements, the firmament? 10 He should 
 study the anatomy of external man — i. e., the constitution of the uni- 
 verse — and learn anatomy from astronomy; n one thing is altogether to 
 be compared and explained by reference to another. 12 When it came to 
 
 1 De aridura, second recens.; vol. I, pp. 625 b-626 a. 
 
 2 De colica, first recens.; vol. I, p. 598 a. 
 
 3 De colica, second recens.; vol. I, pp. 630 b-631 a. 
 
 4 De peste libri tres, tract. Ill; vol. I, p. 428 a. 
 6 De caduco matricis, II, iii; vol. I, p. 682 a. 
 
 6 Paramir., IV; vol. I, p. 86 a. 
 
 7 De caduc. matr., II, ii-vi; vol. I, pp. 678 a-688 b. 
 
 8 Ibid., I, ii; vol. I, p. 663 b. 
 
 9 De aridura; vol. I, p. 626 a. 
 
 10 Paratnir., IV; vol. I, p. 103 a. 
 
 11 Paragran., I; vol. I, p. 196 a — also Modus pharmacandi, tract. Ill; vol. I, p. 814 
 a, b. 
 
 12 De colica (second recension); vol. I, p. 632 b. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Reactions from Scholasticism 59 
 
 remedies, Paracelsus believed in general that "like cures like," l through 
 the release of natural forces. 2 Various metals, 3 and balsam, 4 he thought 
 to have curative properties. Although many of his writings may 
 be described as alchemical, 5 and he held various notions about panaceas, 
 etc., which approximated those of the alchemists, 6 he was greatly inter- 
 ested in developing what would now be called specifics. 7 
 
 3. Place of Paracelsus in the History of Microcosmic Theories. Para- 
 celsus marks a transition stage in the history of microcosmic theories, 
 exhibiting a unique combination of ancient and modern tendencies. In 
 his reaction against blind allegiance to the works of older medical writers, 
 he erected the theory that man is a microcosm into a position of central 
 importance. But he attempted to hold and promulgate the theory in the 
 face of, and even along with, what have since proved to be some of the 
 chief forces which oppose it — namely, experimental methods. For 
 Paracelsus, medicine is primarily an art, and an art proves itself, without 
 needing experiments. 8 Experiments may sometimes extend the bounds 
 of theory, but are often useless there; 9 Paracelsus attempts to found his 
 methods rather upon great cosmic principles. 10 But as the world advanced 
 farther into the modern period, such views were bound to be discredited; 
 Paracelsus is roundly scored by Francis Bacon, 11 and his views are crit- 
 icized even by J. B. van Helmont, 12 and Sir Thomas Browne. 13 Erdmann 
 says that only since and by means of Paracelsus has the doctrine of 
 the macrocosm and the microcosm been made the central point of the 
 whole of philosophy. 14 But it must be noted that, except in the case of a 
 
 I Cf. Paragranum, I; vol. I, p. 196 b. 
 
 8 Cf. Erdmann, op. cit., I, p. 621. 
 
 3 Paramirum, IV; vol. I, p. 99 a, b» 
 
 4 Archidoxorum, X, iii; vol. II, p. 396. 
 
 5 Cf. A. E. Waite, The Hermetic and Alchemical Writings of Paracelsus (2 vols., 
 London, 1894). 
 
 • Erdmann, op. cit. y I, p. 622 f. 
 
 7 See art., "Paracelsus," Encyc. Brit. (11), XX, p. 750. 
 
 % De peste libri III, exord.; vol. I, p. 413. 
 
 9 De ulceribus gall. X, add.; vol. Ill, p. 142 b, 143 a. 
 
 10 Erdmann, op. cit., I, p. 623. 
 
 II Advancement of Learning, II (in Works, ed. B. Montagu, Philadelphia, 1846, voL 
 I, p. 202). 
 
 12 Inventio tartari, in morbis temeraria, sec. 15 (in Opera omnia, 1707, p. 229). 
 xz Pseudodoxia epidemica, II, iii (in Works, ed. Wilkin, London, 1852, vol. I, p. 
 140). 
 u Op. cit., I, p. 613. 
 
60 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 man like Valentine Weigel, 1 or Robert Fludd, 2 or others of the alchemists 
 or occultists, the influence of Paracelsus was limited. His ideas were 
 carried to such absurd extremes that, in all the more open fields of 
 philosophy, they discredited rather than promoted the microcosmic 
 theories. The fact that the theories were revived in later periods, for 
 instance by Schelling and Fechner, is not to be traced to Paracelsus, so 
 much as to other influences which we shall examine later. 
 
 4. Giordano Bruno 
 
 1. Brunei's Modifications of Older Views. Students of Bruno have 
 traced various differences between the Italian treatises of 1584 and the 
 Latin poems of 1591, 3 but microcosmic theories run through both groups, 
 often with slight modifications of older views. In the earlier group the 
 Copernican system is extended from the sun and its planets to the whole 
 universe, 4 which is regarded as an organism. 5 In the Delia causa one of 
 the interlocutors, the humanist Polyhimnio, appears with an atlas which, 
 probably in allusion to the De ludo globi of Nicholas of Cusa, is said to 
 contain the representation of a globe; in reply to a question, he affirms 
 his belief in a correspondence between the parts of the macrocosm and 
 those of the microcosm, but waives aside some fantastic deductions from 
 
 1 Weigel (1533-1594), or whoever wrote the Astrologia theologizata attributed to 
 him, held that both macrocosm and microcosm consisted of seven states or stages, each 
 presided over by a planet (Eng. transl. by A. Kingsford, London, 1886, chap. VII, 
 pp. 97-98). In the doctrines of man's creation and constitution there is close de- 
 pendence upon Paracelsus (Ibid., chap. II, esp. p. 76). The attempt is made to supple- 
 ment the natural wisdom of astrology with the supernatural contribution of theology. 
 
 2 Fludd (1574-1637) was the author of a work called Utriusque cosmi maioris scilicet 
 et tninoris metaphysica physica atque technica hislotia. (2 vols., Oppenheim, 161 7). 
 The title page has a curious drawing of man, the microcosm, within the circle of the 
 macrocosm; man is represented as oriented with reference to the universe, his left 
 side corresponding to the north (C/. Lobeck, op. cit., II, pp. 921, 924). The term 
 macrocosm is used freely as a synonym for universe, and microcosm for man, both in 
 this and in others of Fludd's works. His position is, in general, that of Paracelsus; 
 he is also numbered among the Rosicrucians. In his Tractatus theologo-philosophicus 
 (161 7), he declares that man has a right to derive breath from the macrocosm, because 
 of his kinship with the divine essence (book I, chap, vi, p. 26). 
 
 3 Cf. Erdmann, op. cit., I, pp. 657 ff., and Encyc. Brit, (n) IV, pp. 686-687. 
 
 4 Cena de la Ceneri, quoted by W. Boulting, in Giordano Bruno, His Life, Thought 
 and Martyrdom (London, 1916?), pp. 120-121. 
 
 6 Delia causa, principio, ed uno, dial. Ill (German transl. by P. Seliger, Leipzig, 
 Reclam ed., p. 118). 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Reactions from Scholasticism 61 
 
 such a view and changes the subject, before Theophilo, who is supposed to 
 present Bruno's philosophy, has expressed an opinion. 1 Later on, 
 Theophilo declares that man is no more like the infinite than is an ant, or 
 a star, since all these things are without distinction as compared with the 
 infinite. 2 But he also admits a comparison between the relations of the 
 cosmic intellect to natural objects, on the one hand, and of our intellects 
 to ideas, on the other hand. 3 At another point he indicates that there 
 might be an interpretation of the world in accordance with the relations 
 of numbers in the decimal notation. 4 In the DeV infinito universo Bruno 
 writes that the course of nature is written in ourselves; 5 and rocks, 
 lakes, rivers, springs, etc., he compares to various members or organs of 
 the human body, adding that their accidents and disturbances, such as 
 clouds, rain, snow, etc., are to be compared to human diseases. 6 Of the 
 Latin poems, the De immenso contains the statement that everything is 
 composed of the four elements, both we and all things found " maiori in 
 corpore mundi." 7 There are processes of circulation in the universe, 
 and in our bodies; 8 it is not necessary that the "blood" of the universe 
 should be the same color as ours. The stars move themselves by their 
 own internal principles, and move more freely even than we do. 9 There 
 is a coition between sun and earth, resulting in the appearance of smaller 
 living creatures. 10 But since the earth does not exhibit signs of actions 
 and passions like ours, most men fail to see that the earth is our mother 
 and progenitor, conserver, and moulder, from whose viscera we have our 
 viscera and upon whose humours we are nourished. 11 In the De monade, 
 numero et Jigura, it is said that just as the "megacosm" has one radiating 
 sun, so the microcosm, man, has one heart. 12 This is the poem in which 
 apparently all the things in heaven, earth, or imagination that could be 
 
 1 Delia causa, dial. Ill; Seliger transl., p. 97. 
 
 2 Ibid., dial. V; Seliger transl., p. 169. Cf. Bruno's Cabala, quoted by Boulting, 
 op. cit., p. 170. 
 
 3 Delia causa, dial. II; Seliger transl., pp. 70-71. 
 
 4 Ibid., dial. V; Seliger transl., pp. 192-193. 
 
 6 Proem, epist, quoted by Boulting, op. cit., p. 137. 
 
 6 Cited by J. L. Mclntyre, Giordano Bruno (London, 1903), p. 221, n. 
 
 7 De immenso et innumerabilibus, V, ix (in Opera latine conscripta, ed. F. Tocco 
 and H. Vitelli, Naples, etc., 1879-1891, vol. I (ii), p. 147). 
 
 8 Ibid., VI, viii; p. 185. 
 
 9 Ibid., V, xii; pp. 157-158. 
 
 10 Ibid., VI, i;p. 179. 
 
 11 Ibid., V, xii; p. 159. 
 
 12 De monade, II; Opera, I (ii), p. 347. 
 
62 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 associated with the numbers from i to 10 are mentioned and rather 
 loosely compared. Thus a connection is suggested between the four 
 elements, four winds, four beasts, four powers of mind, four kinds of 
 spirits, 1 with similar extravagances for the other numbers. It is notice- 
 able that among the nine senses to be used in interpreting sacred writings, 
 or the world about us, Bruno includes the "anagogicus," by which the 
 significance of one part of Scripture is made out by another part, and 
 analogies are detected between things. 2 All the things which are com- 
 pared together make up the world, just as their characteristic numbers 
 lead up to the decad. 3 
 
 2. Bruno's Monadism. The views just noted are not very original, 
 and would be of little importance except for two facts. They show that 
 one who adopted and even extended the Copernican system did not give 
 up his microcosmic views along with his geocentric; and they exhibit 
 some of the implications of Bruno's monadism. Bruno is supposed to 
 have taken some of the chief ideas for this from Nicholas of Cusa; 4 at 
 any rate, Bruno sees that there must be a limit or minimum of divisibility, 
 else there can be no substance, 5 and that there must be a unit or monad, 
 else there can be no number; 6 and the two are identified, since if either 
 were taken away, nothing would remain. 7 Three minima, 8 or irreduc- 
 ibles, are distinguished — God, the "Monas monadum," 9 in whom both 
 greatest and least are one; 10 the soul, which serves as a center around 
 which the body is organized; u and the atom, which enters into the 
 composition of physical substances. 12 Besides these absolute monads, 
 there are relative monads or minima to be found almost everywhere. 13 
 The result is a world in which " that which lies hidden in the small may 
 therefore be seen in the large, and that lies open in the whole which the 
 part everywhere conceals"; 14 or, as he had already said in one of the 
 
 1 De monade, V; pp. 385, ff. 2 Ibid., X; p. 456. 3 Ibid., XI; p. 459. 
 
 4 C/. Erdmann, op. cit., I, p. 661; Boulting, op. cit., p. 30. 
 
 5 De triplici minimo et mensura, I, iii, 22; Opera, vol. I (iii), p. 141. 
 
 6 Ibid., I, ii, 13; p. 139. 
 
 7 Ibid., p. 140. 
 
 8 Tocco, quoted by Boulting, op. cit., p. 228. 
 
 9 De tripl. min., I, iv, schol.; vol. I (iii), p. 146. 
 
 10 Ibid., p. 147. 
 
 n Ibid., I, iii, schol.; p. 143. 
 
 "Ibid., I, ii, 29, ff. 
 
 1J Ibid., I, x; pp. 171 ff. 
 
 14 De immenso et innum., V, ix; Opera, vol. I (ii), p. 146. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Reactions from Scholasticism 63 
 
 Italian works, "in every man, in each individual, a world, a universe, 
 regards itself." l Thus a speculative monadism, which had perhaps 
 begun to be hinted in the Italian treatises, was worked out in detail in 
 the Latin poems. The work of L. Stein has made plausible the view that 
 Bruno's influence on Leibnitz has been overestimated; 2 but for Bruno, 
 at least, the speculative monadism enabled the microcosmic theories to 
 survive the shock of Copernicanism when that system was extended to 
 include a universe regarded as infinite. 
 
 5. Campanella and Boehme 
 
 1. Settings of the Microcosmic Theories of Campanella and Boehme. 
 From the point of view of microcosmic theories, Campanella and Boehme 
 may be compared to show how the theories fitted different systems of 
 theology during this period. Campanella's theology is that of Thomas 
 Aquinas, while Boehme is a Protestant mystic. Campanella starts from 
 a subjective standpoint and argues from the fact of thought to the exist- 
 ence of an infinite Being which excludes not-Being, but which, as God, 
 produces the worlds from superfluity of love. 3 Boehme seeks to formulate 
 what he has felt concerning the reconciliation of evil and good in God 
 who is the source of all existence, and from whom the world has evolved 
 in seven complicated stages. 4 Both men were involved in difficulties 
 with ecclesiastical authorities, although not particularly on account of 
 their microcosmic theories. 
 
 2. Views of Campanella. Campanella thought that when man was 
 compared with God, human science might well be called "micrology," 5 
 but, in order to advance his general argument by showing that nothing 
 was without soul, he thought it legitimate to argue from inner experience 
 to outer conditions. 6 A corporeal spirit, he says, would not suffice to 
 direct man; we find, in addition, an immortal soul. How much more, 
 therefore, must we conclude that the universe is governed by a world- 
 soul. If this were not so, then man, the "compendium epilogusque 
 mundi," as certain theologians call him, would be superior to the world 
 
 1 Spaccio delta bestia trionfante, quot. by Boulting, op. cit. } p. 162. 
 
 2 Stein, Leibnitz und Spinoza (Berlin, 1890), pp. 201-217. 
 
 3 Erdmann, op. cit., I, 643-646. 
 
 4 G. W. Allen, art., Boehme, in Hastings, Encyc. of Religion and Ethics, vol. II, 
 pp. 779, ff. 
 
 5 Erdmann, op. cit., I, p. 643. 
 
 6 Campanella, De sensu rerum, II, xxxii (Frankfurt, 1620, p. 193). 
 
64 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 itself. It is, declares Campanella, no argument against this view to say 
 that worms, for instance, must then be " informed" with the world-soul; 
 because there are parasites in and on the human body which do not 
 share its reasoning power. The world has a spirit (heaven); a body 
 (earth) ; and blood (the sea). 1 The argument from analogy is also used to 
 show that just as our bodies abhor a vacuum, so must the world-body. 2 
 In another work it is said, again, that we are in a relation to the earth 
 which is like that of the parasites of our body to us; and that the earth, 
 in turn, is a large animal within a still larger one. 3 On a somewhat similar 
 principle of extension from less to more inclusive units he describes an 
 organization of human society. 4 
 
 3. Views of Boehme. For Boehme, the world, which is the natural 
 body of God, 5 is a living creature, like a man. 6 Man is a little world, 
 having in himself the attributes of the great world — the sidereal, the 
 elemental, and the divine. 7 Between macrocosm and microcosm there is 
 unity and interaction. 8 Boehme elaborates in a fantastic and self- 
 contradictory passage the doctrine of signatures — the whole body signifies 
 heaven and earth; the body cavity (or, again, the bladder) signifies the 
 space between the stars and the earth; the flesh (or, again, the lungs) 
 signifies the element earth; the breath (or, the bladder) signifies the 
 air; the heart signifies fire; and the blood (or, again, the liver) signifies 
 water. The arteries signify the courses of the stars, and the intestines, 
 their operation and wasting away. The sky is the heart of nature, like 
 the brain in man's head. 9 Again, the sky, the stars, the depths of space 
 between the stars, together with the earth, are compared to the Father; 
 the sun, with its light and strength, to the Son; and the elements to the 
 Holy Spirit. 10 Thus man is fundamentally akin to the universe which 
 itself typifies the persons of the Trinity, and a basis is provided for man's 
 reconciliation and mystical union with God. 
 
 1 Ibid., pp. 193-196. 2 Ibid., I, x; p. 38. 
 
 3 See French transl., "De Vunhers et ses parties," in L. Colet's edition of Oeuvres 
 choisis de Campanella (Paris, 1844), p. 57. 
 
 'Erdmann, op. cit., I, p. 649. 
 
 6 Aurora, chap, ii (in Boehme's Werke, ed. by K. Schiebler, Leipzig, 1832, etc., 
 vol. II, p. 28). 
 
 6 Vom Dreifachen Leben des Menschen, VI, 48; Werke, vol. IV, p. 92. 
 
 7 Ibid., VI, 49; also Epistle 22, paragr. 7, Werke, vol. VII, p. 435; Aurora, ch. ill, 
 Werke, vol. II, p. 41; Signatura rerum, I, 7, Werke, vol. Ill, p. 274. 
 
 8 Dreifach. Leben, VI, 49. 
 
 9 Aurora, chap, ii; Werke, vol. II, pp. 26-30. 10 Ibid., chap. Ill; pp. 36-38. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Reactions from Scholasticism 65 
 
 6. Trend from Rationalism toward Empiricism in this Period 
 
 1. Microcosmic Theories of Writers less Important. The trend away 
 from the authoritarianism of the past and toward more empirical views of 
 the world may be traced in most of the early modern writers hitherto 
 considered; it is evident in general, too, when a number of other writers 
 who either are less important, or who said less about the microcosmic 
 theories, are grouped together. Thus L. Vives (1492-1540), who lived 
 under the shadow of the realist and nominalist controversy, 1 but who was 
 reaching out toward new methods, repeated the old view about the 
 senses representing the four elements, and thought man could be called 
 a little world because he was a complex of the strength and nature of all 
 things. 2 J. Cardan (1 501-15 76), who was more rationalist than empir- 
 icist, 3 devoted a chapter of his Arcana aternitatis to a discussion of the 
 likeness between the world and man. 4 John Dee, in his famous preface 
 to the English edition of Euclid's Elements (1570), maintained that 
 astronomy and cosmography, the sidereal and the terrestrial regions, 
 could be correlated, 5 and that, since man is the microcosm for whom all 
 creatures were created, the art of describing his perfect body should be 
 called Anthropography, the Art of arts, which would combine a great 
 number of contributions from other arts and sciences, from heaven and 
 earth and all their creatures, into proof of " our Harmonious, and Micro- 
 cosmicall constitution." According to Dee, Noah's ark and the Greek 
 maxim, "Know thyself," were alike foretokens of the microcosmic 
 theory. 6 The writings of Sir Thomas Browne exhibit some variations of 
 attitude toward microcosmic theories. In the Religio medici (1642) he 
 says that he thought that the theory that man is a microcosm was " only 
 a pleasant trope of Rhetorick" until his "neer judgment" told him there 
 was real truth therein, namely, that man combines the attributes of all 
 species from the inorganic to the angelic. 7 But in his Pseudodoxia 
 epidemica (1646), an indictment of popular superstitions, he declares 
 that it is improbable that the body of man is magnetic; this, he says 
 
 1 Cf. Windelband, op. cit., p. 360. 
 
 3 De anima et vita, I, 47 (Basle, 1538). 
 
 3 Erdmann, op. cit., I, p. 626. 
 
 * Opera (Lyons, 1663), vol. X, chap. VII. 
 5 Preface, p. iii. 
 
 * Ibid., p. ciiij. 
 
 7 Relig. med. (Everyman ed., 1906), p. 39. 
 
66 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 would "much advance the microcosmical conceit and commend the 
 geography of Paracelsus." ! On the other hand, few books of any period 
 have contained more "conceits" than Browne's Garden of Cyrus (1658), 
 with its ransacking of the whole universe for examples of the " quincunx." 2 
 Another writer of the period is F. M. van Helmont (1618-1699) to whom, 
 according to Stein, 3 Leibnitz owed his use of the term monad, rather than 
 to Bruno. Van Helmont speaks of " nobilissimam illam macrocosmi 
 atque microcosmi analogiam," in a curious work with diagrams showing 
 the human vocal apparatus in the form of the letters of the Hebrew 
 alphabet. 4 Stein quotes Leibnitz as mentioning a German translation, 
 printed at Hamburg, of an English work by van Helmont, evidently 
 entitled Paradoxes of the Macrocosm and the Microcosm? About this 
 time a certain Martin Meyer published a worthless book, which ran at 
 least to three editions, and in which the view that man is a microcosm 
 was elaborated from previous sources by the aid of crude drawings and 
 doggerel poetry in Latin and German. 6 
 
 2. Decline of Microcosmic Views among the Great Scientists. The early 
 modern writers whom we have thus far considered may be called, in 
 general, adherents of the microcosmic theories. The trend away from 
 such views begins to be marked in the works of the great scientists. 
 Even here there are sometimes isolated passages recalling the older views, 
 but it is clear that empiricism and induction have made a great difference. 
 The very first aphorism of Bacon's Novum Organum lays down the 
 principle that 
 
 " Man, as the minister and interpreter of nature, does and under- 
 stands as much as his observations on the order of nature, either 
 with regard to things or the mind, permit him, and neither knows nor 
 is capable of more." 
 It is not surprising, then, to find Bacon criticizing the fantastic theories 
 
 1 Pseudod. epidem., II, iii (in Works, ed. Wilkin, London, 1852, vol. I, p. 140). 
 
 2 Cf. Encyc. Brit. (11), vol. IV, pp. 666-667. 
 
 3 Leibnitz und Spinoza, pp. 201-217. 
 
 4 Alphabeti vere naturalis Hebraici brevissima delineatio (Suizbach, 1657 or 1667), 
 esp., p. 37. 
 
 5 Stein, op. tit., p. 213, n. 1, referring to Leibnitz; Otium Hanov., p. 226 (Dutens, 
 VI, 331). Cf. H. Ritter, Gesch. der Phil, vol. XII (Heidelberg, 1853), p. 7, n. 1; 
 
 PP. 33, 34- 
 
 8 Homo microcosmus . . macrocosmo expositus (3d ed., Frankfurt, 1670); copy in 
 New York Public Library. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Reactions from Scholasticism 67 
 
 of Paracelsus, 1 and saying that the alchemists have taken the term 
 microcosm in a sense too gross and literal, and have spoiled the elegance 
 and distorted the meaning of it. 2 And still there are traces of micro- 
 cosmic theories in Bacon. If we look to final causes, man may be re- 
 garded as the center of the world. If man were taken away from the 
 world, the rest would seem to be all astray, without aim or purpose; 
 whereas all things seem to be going about man's business and not then- 
 own. Bacon could even find some meaning in the old theories of man's 
 composition; for, after all, the body of man is of all existing things both 
 the most mixed and the most organic, 3 and, directly or indirectly, it is 
 nourished by all things. 4 Throughout the great bulk of Bacon's writing, 
 however, it is clear that man is the end rather than the imitation of the 
 universe, and that the microcosmic theories are illustrative rather than 
 essential. They played a rather more important part in the work of 
 Kepler, who, in his De harmonice mundi, presents his third law in a 
 setting which suggests that he may have been led to it by doctrines as 
 old as Pythagoreanism. He regarded the earth as a great animal whose 
 breathing depended upon the sun, and whose sleeping and waking caused 
 the rise and fall of the oceans. 5 Newton closed his Principia with an 
 allusion to a cosmic spirit pervading all bodies and exciting sensation and 
 volition in animals by its vibrations — 
 
 "but these are things which can not be explained in few words, nor 
 are we furnished with that sufficiency of experiments which is re- 
 quired to an accurate determination and demonstration of the laws 
 by which this electric and elastic spirit operates." 6 
 Robert Boyle dissents from the theory of Paracelsus, explicitly on the 
 ground that man was made not in the world's image, but in God's; 7 but 
 implicit throughout Boyle's writings is the view that the universe is 
 to be studied by the "Christian virtuoso" with the aid of experimental 
 methods. 
 
 1 Adv. of Learning, II; Works, ed. Montagu, I, 202. Cf. De augmentis scientiarum, 
 IV, ii, and Sylva sylvarum, cent. X, i. 
 
 2 De sapientia veterum, xxvi. 
 
 3 De sap. vet., loc. cit. 4 Adv. of Learning, II; Montagu I, 202. 
 
 6 Cf. Fechner, Zend-Avesta (1854), vol. I, p. 61, n., and A. M. Clerke, in Encyc. 
 Brit. (11), XV, 750. Kepler took pains to state some of the points at which his mathe- 
 matical theories of harmony differed from the fancies of Robert Fludd. De harm., V> 
 appendix; Opera (ed. C. Frisch, Frankfurt, 1864, vol. V, pp. 331, ff.). 
 
 6 Principia, book III, schol. 
 
 7 Usefulness of Philosophy (Oxford, 1663), p. 100. 
 
68 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 7. The Microcosmic Theory or Metaphor of Hobbes 
 
 1. The Conception of the State as a Leviathan. Along with the writers 
 of this period of changing conceptions concerning the microcosmic 
 theories should be mentioned Thomas Hobbes, whose Leviathan, even if 
 he himself did not mean the conception to be taken literally, may be 
 viewed as a prototype of more definite and literal organismic theories. 
 For Hobbes, the commonwealth is "but an artificial man, though of 
 greater stature and strength than the natural." l In this commonwealth, 
 the sovereignty is an artificial soul, which gives life and motion to the 
 whole body. The magistrates and other officers are artificial joints; or, 
 again, organs of will. 2 Reward and punishment are the nerves, by 
 which every joint and member, fastened to the seat of sovereignty, is 
 made to perform his duty; or, again, the financial channels are the nerves 
 and arteries. 3 " The nutrition of a commonwealth consisteth in the plenty 
 and distribution of materials conducing to life; in concoction or prepara- 
 tion; and, when concocted, in the conveyance of it by convenient con- 
 duits to the public use." 4 The wealth and riches of the particular 
 members are the strength of the commonwealth; or, again, money is its 
 blood. 5 The people's safety is the business of the commonwealth, 
 counsellors are its memory, equity and laws are its artificial reason and 
 will, concord is its health, sedition its sickness, and civil war its death. 
 Colonies are the children of the commonwealth. 6 Among the "diseases" 
 of a commonwealth analogues are found for hydrophobia, epilepsy, and 
 ague. 7 In the De corpore politico, invasion is compared to the violent 
 death of a commonwealth, while sedition is the death of a commonwealth 
 "like to that which happeneth to a man from sickness and distemper." 8 
 The parallel is carried even into the theory of a successful revolution, 
 which must present one body of rebellion in which the intelligence is the 
 life, number the limbs, weapons the strength, and a. directing head, the 
 unity. 9 
 
 1 Leviathan (Works, ed. W. Molesworth, London, 1839, vol. Ill, pp. ix, x). This 
 reference covers statements in this paragraph, except as otherwise noted. 
 % Ibid., p. 230. 
 l Ibid., pp. 238-239. 
 *Ibid., p. 232. 
 8 Ibid., pp. 238-239. 
 
 8 Ibid., pp. 239-240. 
 7 Ibid., pp. 315-320. 
 
 9 De corp. polit., chap. VIII; Works, vol. IV, p. 200. 
 
 9 Ibid., p. 209. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Reactions from Scholasticism 69 
 
 2. Function of Microcosmic Views for Hobbes. Such an organismic or 
 quasi-organismic theory as this enabled Hobbes to present the state as a 
 closely-knit and powerful creation, and at the same time to recognize the 
 importance of individuals within it. He is at once authoritarian and 
 individualistic. Such organismic or quasi-organismic bonds between 
 individuals strengthen his conception of a convention or contract, 
 whether the latter be alleged as a historical fact, or pictured for its moral 
 effect. But whether Hobbes is to be called an organicist, or his concep- 
 tion of a Leviathan is to be regarded as a metaphor, depends upon one's 
 definitions of these terms. Hobbes is not as insistent upon literal interpre- 
 tation as are some of the later organicists — once he calls the body politic 
 a fictitious body; * but on the other hand he must attach a certain serious- 
 ness to it in order to picture the individual as contained within the binding 
 relationships of the state. 
 
 8. Summary: Microcosmic Theories in the Early Modern Period 
 
 The microcosmic theories undergo numerous modifications in their 
 early modern restatements, and exhibit traces of the ferment observable 
 throughout the world of thought. They are common to both peripatetics 
 and their opponents and are found among both Catholics and Protestants. 
 Judging from the prevalence of microcosmic theories, it would have to be 
 said that the rise of the Copernican astronomy did not lessen the im- 
 portance which man ascribed to himself; rather, it was by the aid of 
 microcosmic theories that man's estimate of himself kept abreast of the 
 expanding universe. But the beginning of a decided trend away from the 
 theories, which has persisted to our own day, may be noted in the empir- 
 icism of the great scientists. The tendency begins to appear to regard 
 the older microcosmic views as illustrative metaphors rather than as 
 philosophical doctrines. 
 
 Appendix I — Microcosmic Theories and Alchemy in the Early 
 
 Modern Period 
 
 Some of the writers on alchemy who were important in the general 
 field of philosophy have been mentioned; but something should be said 
 of alchemy in general, and of some early modern writers who were more 
 obscure but not less ardent in their views on the microcosmic theories. 
 Though subjected to wide variations, the central idea of alchemy was 
 
 1 Be corp. polit., chap. VIII; Works, vol. IV, p. 140. 
 
70 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 that since all substances were composed of one "prima materia" they 
 could by appropriate means be first reduced to this, and then developed 
 from this into other forms. To this "prima materia" the name Mercury 
 (not ordinary mercury, but the "mercury of the philosophers") was 
 assigned. When this had been obtained, it was to be treated with 
 " Sulphur" to confer upon it the desired qualities. This Sulphur, or a 
 preparation from it, was called the elixir, or the philosophers' stone. 
 (See H. M. Ross, article "Alchemy," in Encyc. Brit, (n) vol. I, p. 520). 
 Since it was supposed to contain the essence of all substances, it was 
 known as the microcosm (E. A. Hitchcock, Remarks upon Alchemy and 
 the Alchemists, Boston, 1857, p. 40). Its preparation was linked with 
 astrological lore, on the principle that things in the earth should corre- 
 spond to things in heaven. Many of the writers employ the notion of a 
 magnet in man, and in the world (Hitchcock, op. cit., p. 93). Under 
 philosophical influences the concepts became further involved; the 
 "prima materia" became known as the soul of the metal, and the philos- 
 ophers' stone as a curative agent which could "make the sick metal 
 well" (H. Silberer, Problems of Mysticism and its Symbolism, transl. by 
 JellifTe, N. Y., 1917, p. 114). On the other hand, the philosophers' 
 stone came to have moral influence attributed to it; just as it ennobled 
 the metals, so it could ennoble man (L. Figurier, Valchimie et les al- 
 chimistes, Paris, i860, p. 21). The stone was regarded as an image of the 
 Trinity; as it was composed of mercury, sulphur, and salt, so man was 
 composed of spirit, soul, and body (Hitchcock, op. cit., pp. 94, 136; 
 Silberer, op. cit., p. 154). The soul of man is called a "microcosmic 
 heaven" (Silberer, p. 81). 
 
 According to J. Grashofer's A perta area. . . . (Frankfurt, 1623, Vorrede, 
 p. 7) the term " microcosm" was apparently used in the title of a book by 
 F. Tidicaeus. Among the alchemists who elaborated these ideas with 
 mention of microcosmic theories were (1) Thomas Norton (d. 1477), 
 author of The Ordinal of Alchemy (in the Hermetic Museum, Eng. transl., 
 ed. A. E. Waite, London, 1893, vol. II; see esp. p. 64); (2) George 
 Ripley (d. 1490), author of The All Wise Doorkeeper (Hermetic Museum, 
 II; see esp. p. 319, and cf. Hitchcock, p. 38): (3) J. Frizius, author of the 
 Summum bonum, verum . . . alchymice . . . subjectum (Frankfurt, 
 1629; see Silberer, op. cit., pp. 177 fL): (4) A. van Suchten (see Bene- 
 dictus Figulus, A Golden Casket of Nature's Marvels, publ. at Strasbourg 
 in 1608, Eng. transl., London, 1893, by J. Elliott, pp. 22-23). 
 
 Among those who wrote on the microcosmic theory in the more general 
 
Microeosmic Theories in Reactions from Scholasticism 71 
 
 sense, and made more or less distinctive contributions to it, were (1) 
 Alipili, author of Centrum naturce concentratum (see Hitchcock, p. 35, 
 and Silberer, p. 153): (2) M. Sendivogius (d. about 1604) who published 
 the Novum lumen chemicum (Hermetic Museum, II; cf. I, p. xi, and see 
 esp. II, pp. 87-88) and De sulphure (Ibid., see esp. pp. 138-139): (3) 
 M. Meyer (1568-162 2), author of A Subtle Allegory concerning the 
 Secrets of Alchemy (in Hermetic Museum, II; see esp. pp. 206 ff.): (4) 
 B. Figulus, author of the Golden and Blessed Casket, cited above: (5) 
 M. Ruland (Lexicon alchemice, Frankfurt, 161 2, esp. p. 335): and (6) 
 J. Walchius, author of a commentary on J. Grashofer's Kleine Bauer 
 (Strasbourg, 1619; see esp. p. 118). For references on alchemist writings 
 during the 18th century see A. B. C. vom Stein der Weis en, in Geheime 
 Wissenschaften, ed. by A. von d. Linden, Berlin, 191 5, vols. V, VI, VII, 
 VIII; esp. vol. VIII, pp. 71, 127-128, 167-198. Most of the works here 
 cited are in the New York Public Library. 
 
 Appendix II — Use of the Term " Microcosm" to Denote Man, 
 in English Literature From 1400 to 1650 
 
 In connection with the philosophical theories, it is significant that 
 during the early modern period the term " microcosm" or its equivalent 
 was used in English literature as a synonym for man. Several instances 
 of this are noted in the New English Dictionary, under "microcosm." 
 Besides the references there given may be noted J. Lydgate, The Assembly 
 of Gods (1403 or 141 2); ed. O. L. Triggs, in Univ. of Chicago English 
 Studies, vol. I (1895), lines 932 (see Triggs's note, p. 102), 995, 1250, etc., 
 passim. There are additional references in Lydgate, De Guil. Pilgr., 
 ed. F. J. Furnivall, Early English Text Society, extra series 83, London, 
 1901, part II, lines 21168-21173, 21233. Interesting in this connection 
 because of its long pedigree and possible affiliations is Lydgate's transla- 
 tion of the Secrees of Old Philisofres, ed. by R. Steele, Early Eng. 
 Text Soc, extra series 66, London, 1894, lines 2291 ff. (cf. Introd., p. 
 xv). The term is used by Philip Stubbs, Anatomie of Abuses (1583), 
 p. iii; by Joshua Sylvester, The Divine Weeks, ed. T. W. Haight, Wau- 
 kesha, 1908, lines 327 ff., and by Sir John Davies, Nosce te ipsum (1599) — 
 see A. B. Grosart, ed., Complete Poems of Sir J. D., in the Fuller Worthies 
 Library, London, 1869, pp. 47, 55, 97 ff. Grosart, p. 98, n., says that the 
 word "microcosm" is found "in theological (Puritan) writings." John 
 Davies of Hereford published a long poem entitled Microcosmos, The 
 
72 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 Discovery of the Little World, with the Government Thereof (1603); see his 
 Complete Works, ed. by A. B. Grosart, Edinburgh, 1878, esp. I, c, p. 85, 
 col. 2, line 16. In Shakespeare's Coriolanus, Menenius, after describing 
 his own character, says "If you see this in the map of my microcosm, 
 follows it that I am known well enough, too?" (II, i, 68). The idea that 
 man is a microcosm controls Phineas Fletcher's hideous Purple Island 
 (1633); see H. Headley's ed., London, 1816, esp. Canto I, xli, xlvi, and 
 V, viii. The term was used again as a title by Thomas Nabbes in his 
 Microcosmus, a Morall Maske (1637); ed. by A. H. Bullen in Old English 
 Plays, new series, vol. II, London, 1887; see esp. p. 174. P. Heylin, 
 J. Earle, and Joshua Sylvester used the term "microcosm," or "microcos- 
 mography " to denote small portions of the world or brief descriptions of 
 them. 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 
 MICROCOSMIC THEORIES IN PHILOSOPHY FROM 
 DESCARTES TO SPENCER 
 
 i. The Span of this Chapter 
 
 In spite of the fact that some of the men already considered as having 
 belonged to the transition period were in point of time his contemporaries, 
 one may make an epochal division in the history of philosophy at the 
 time when the great mind of Descartes grappled with world problems. 
 Descartes was apparently not interested in microcosmic theories; his 
 initial attitude of doubt made him begin by underestimating the external 
 world, and the philosophy of substance at which he arrived was reached 
 by divesting the external world of everything which might make its 
 resemblance to man interesting. But the abstract metaphysics of 
 Descartes was a forerunner of the abstract metaphysics of Spinoza, and 
 his emphasis upon the subjective turned men's thoughts in the direction 
 in which they were later developed, and involved in problems of epistemol- 
 ogy, from the time of Locke to that of Fichte and Schopenhauer. The 
 tendencies which derived encouragement from Descartes might, if un- 
 checked, have excluded from philosophy even the few resemblances 
 between the universe and man which the growing empiricism of the age 
 could countenance; but they were not allowed to develop unchecked. 
 Leibnitz formulated a more concrete metaphysics, and Hegel and 
 Schelling and their followers opposed subjectivism when it reached 
 extremes. Even empiricism was not left in undisputed possession of the 
 field; Fechner went beyond it by methods of speculation, while Lotze 
 met its mechanistic features with a philosophy of values. Finally Spen- 
 cer assembled the empirical data around a concept of evolution, citing 
 some famous illustrations which, with only slight changes of presupposi- 
 tion or interest, might have served as data for microcosmic theories. 
 
 2. The Metaphysical Systems of Spinoza and Leibnitz 
 
 i. The Pantheism of Spinoza. One might expect that the pantheism 
 of Spinoza, like that of the Stoics, would combine with some microcosmic 
 
74 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 theory; l but one finds Spinoza's argument passing by on either side of 
 such views. On the one hand, he emphasizes the infinite differences 
 between man and the world. On the other hand, the resemblances which 
 he notes are exceedingly abstract; 2 when viewed "sub specie aeter- 
 nitatis" the individuality which, for a microcosmic theory, would be 
 compared to the universe is absorbed into it. 
 
 2. The Monadism of Leibnitz. Spinoza pictures the universe as a 
 composite individual; Leibnitz thinks of it as an aggregate of individual 
 monads. The similarities between various portions of the universe which 
 any monadism is able to exhibit are in the case of Leibnitz heightened by 
 a parallelistic psychology and the doctrine of preestablished harmony, 3 
 as well as by his recognition of the method of analogy. 4 For Leibnitz, 
 there is a world of creatures, of living beings, of entelechies, of souls, in 
 the smallest particle of matter; each portion of matter "may be con- 
 ceived as a garden full of plants and as a pond full of fishes." But each 
 branch of the plant, each member of the animal, is also such a garden, or 
 such a pond. 5 Each monad, in spite of the fact that it "has no win- 
 dows," is in ideal relations with every other; hence every such simple 
 substance carries with it the impress of all other things, and appears as a 
 living and everlasting mirror of the universe, 6 although it must be made 
 clear that a monad is by no means equivalent to the universe which it 
 represents. 7 Monads may be grouped in compound substances or bodies; 
 each important monad is the center of such a substance. In these com- 
 pounds, some monads dominate over others; they may be organized for 
 feeling and memory. 8 A monad joined with a soul makes a living crea- 
 ture, an animal; because the monad reflects the order of all things, the 
 animal's body becomes an organism, and the soul becomes an organized 
 individuality. 9 In the "little world" the circulation of the blood has 
 been discovered, and in the "great world" the motion of the stars. 10 
 
 1 Cf. Weber, History of Philosophy (transl. Thilly), p. 334. 
 
 2 Ethics, II, xiii, lemma 7, n. Cf. the 15th letter, quoted by E. Caird, art. " Cartesian- 
 ism," Encyc. Brit. (11), V, 422-423. 
 
 3 Monadology, 78. 
 
 4 Cf. H. Hoffding, History of Modem Philosophy, Eng. transl. by R. Meyer (Lon- 
 don, 1908), vol. I, p. 348. 
 
 6 Monadology, 66. Cf. Ibid., 70. • Ibid., 56. 7 Ibid., 60. 
 
 *Principes de la nature et de la grace (in Philosoph. Schriften, ed. C. Gerhardt, 
 Berlin, 1887, vol. VI, p. 599). 
 
 9 Monadology, 63, 64. 
 
 10 Correspondence, in Stein, Leibnitz und Spinoza, pp. 333-334. 
 
Microcosmic Theories from Descartes to Spencer 75 
 
 Each soul pictures the universe from its own point of view; it is as if God 
 had varied the universe as many times as there are souls. Each soul is 
 "comme un univers concentre." * Between body and soul a preestab- 
 lished harmony is possible because they both are representations of the 
 same universe. 2 We must not think that true unity or substance is 
 confined to man alone, 3 but, since the soul is representative in a very 
 exact manner of the universe, the series of representations which the soul 
 will produce for itself will naturally correspond to the series in the uni- 
 verse. 4 Our soul is architectonic in its voluntary actions, and, discover- 
 ing the science according to which God has regulated things, it imitates in 
 its development and in its little world, where it is permitted to exercise 
 itself, what God does in the large world. 5 Once it is said that our souls, 
 like little gods, make worlds; 6 again, there is a distinction between souls, 
 which represent only the created world, and spirits which are, in addition, 
 images of God, and each in its circle a little divinity. 7 Every spirit, 
 being, like a separate world, sufficient to itself, independent of every 
 other creature, involving the infinite, expressing the absolute, is as 
 durable, as stable, and as absolute, as the universe of creatures itself. 8 
 By Leibnitz's expositions 9 of these views, microcosmic theories won an 
 established place in speculative metaphysics, although accounts with 
 subjectivism and empiricism were still to be settled. 
 
 3. The Critical Philosophy: From Locke to Fichte 
 
 1. Decline of Interest in Microcosmic Theories. Interest in resem- 
 blances between the universe and man was presently lost in the all- 
 engrossing critical problem. As the questions raised by Locke passed 
 through the hands of Berkeley, Hume, Kant, and Fichte, the outer 
 world was reduced to a status more and more subordinate, until it came 
 to be of little importance whether man resembled it or not. Here and 
 
 1 Letter, Gerhardt, vol. Ill, pp. 347-348. Cf. Philosoph. Abhandl., in Ibid., vol. IV, 
 
 P- 434- 
 
 2 Monadology, 78. 
 
 3 Letter to Arnauld; Schriften, Gerhardt, vol. II, p. 98. 
 
 4 New System of Nature, in Philosophical Works. Eng. transl. by Duncan (New 
 Haven 1908), p. 85. 
 
 5 Theodicy, in Duncan, op. cit., p. 305. 
 
 6 Corresp., in Stein, op. cit., p. 333. 
 
 7 Monadology, 83. 
 
 8 New System of Nature; Duncan, op. cit., p. 85. 
 *Cf. Encyc. Brit. (11), art., "Microcosm." 
 
76 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 there terms once used in the development of microcosmic theories were 
 used with new or at least with restricted connotations — as when Locke 
 used the terms "little world of man's own understanding" and "great 
 world of visible things," l and Kant used the words "macrocosmically" 
 and "microcosmically," meaning by them the infinitely great and the 
 infinitely small limits of the "mathematically unconditioned" at which 
 his "regressus" is said to aim. 2 Some of the views of these men might 
 easily be construed in microcosmic terms — as when Hume hints at a 
 comparison of the process of association of ideas to that of attraction in 
 physics, 3 and Kant declares that pure speculative reason is so con- 
 stituted that it forms a true organism, 4 and Fichte says that nature in 
 general forms an organic whole, and is posited as such 5 — but it is easy 
 to see that the weight of their interest is not upon such a comparison. 
 Everything is rendered in terms of psychology and epistemology. 6 Reid, 
 with his opposition to subjectivism, could write that it was not without 
 reason that man had been called an epitome of the universe, since he had 
 something in common with inanimate things, with vegetables, animals, 
 and rose at last to the rational life; 7 but this isolated passage seems 
 more like an illustration drawn from the ancient view than a piece of 
 fresh reasoning developed in this period. 
 
 2. Microcosmic Theories Stated in Hume's Dialogues. The most im- 
 portant recognition which microcosmic theories received during this 
 period was when Hume, in his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, 
 made one of his characters, Philo, present a restatement of ancient views 
 concerning analogies between an organism and the universe, in opposition 
 to the argument, as presented by Cleanthes, that the constitution of the 
 universe affords evidence of a designer. Philo is represented as saying 
 that the little agitation of the brain called thought ought not to be made 
 the model for the whole universe, 8 i.e., that purposiveness ought not to be 
 
 1 Essay Concerning Human Understanding, I, ii. 
 
 2 Critique of Pure Reason, Div. II, Book II, chap, ii, sec. 2 (Eng. transl. by M. 
 Mtiller, London, 1881, vol. II, p. 363). 
 
 3 Treatise of Human Nature, Book I, Part I, sec. iv (ed. T. H. Green and T. H. Grose, 
 London, 1886, vol. I, p. 321). 
 
 4 Preface to second edition of Critique of Pure Reason: Muller, op. cit., vol. I, p. 385. 
 
 5 Science of Right, Eng. transl., by A. Kroeger (London, 1907), p. 119. 
 
 6 A later example is found in Sir W. Hamilton's Discourses on Philosophy and Litera- 
 ture (London, 1852), p. 9. 
 
 7 Essays on the Active Powers of Man, III, I, i (London, 1827, p. 487). 
 
 8 Dialogues (edition of 1779), II, p. 477. 
 
Microcosmic Theories from Descartes to Spencer 77 
 
 projected into the universe. A mental world requires a cause as much as 
 a material; we have specimens in miniature of both of them, for our mind 
 resembles the one, and a vegetable or animal body resembles the other. 1 
 In fact, the universe resembles an animal or organized body, and seems to 
 be actuated with a similar principle of life and motion, and to exhibit 
 similar processes of circulation, repair of waste, and cooperation of 
 parts — so that one may infer that the universe is an animal, and that 
 God is its soul. 2 To this Cleanthes is made to rejoin that the analogy is 
 defective in many circumstances; there are in the universe no organs of 
 sense, no seat of thought or reason, no precise origin of motion or of 
 action; the universe, in short, seems to resemble a vegetable more than an 
 animal. 3 Philo on his part develops the latter analogy by the statement 
 that the universe, like a tree, produces seeds, which, being scattered into 
 the surrounding chaos, vegetate into new worlds. A comet is the seed of 
 a world; after it has been fully ripened, by passing from star to star, it is 
 tossed into the unformed elements which everywhere surround the 
 universe, and sprouts up into a new system. Or, if the world be con- 
 sidered as an animal, a comet is the egg of that animal, and its develop- 
 ment is like the hatching of an ostrich's egg in the sand. 4 If we are to get 
 a cosmogony, we may say that the world is more similar to a process of 
 generation than of fabrication. 5 In the closing words of the Dialogues 
 the views of Cleanthes are given preference to those of Philo, so that it is 
 hard to tell what weight Hume intended to attach to the latter. At any 
 rate, we have a statement of microcosmic views in a time when they 
 were not prevalent, whether or not Hume "inclines toward an organic 
 conception of the universe." 6 
 
 4. The French Enlightenment: Rousseau 
 
 1. Evidences of Decline of Microcosmic Views in France. The philos- 
 ophers of the French Enlightenment resemble the English philosophers of 
 the period in that little attention is paid to the older microcosmic theories. 
 Diderot's great Encyclopedic criticized the notion that man is an abridg- 
 ment of the universe on the ground that man must then sum up not 
 
 1 Dialogues, IV, p. 491. 
 
 2 Ibid., VI, pp. 503-504. 
 
 3 Ibid., VI, p. 506; cf. VII, p. 510. 
 *Ibid., VII, p. 511. 
 
 6 Ibid., VII, p. 512. 
 
 e F. ThilJy, Hist, of Philos. (New York, 1914), p. 361. 
 
78 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 merely the good of the universe but also its evil, and stated that the word 
 " microcosme " was obsolete. 1 But the whole work was conceived human- 
 istically if not microcosmically; it was proposed to "introduce man into 
 our work as he is placed in the universe, a common center," and to look 
 among the principal faculties of man for the general division adopted in 
 the work. 2 For Holbach, man is a production of nature, partially re- 
 sembling it and partially subject to its laws, but differing somewhat 
 from it and subject to laws determined by the diversity of his conforma- 
 tion. Man's existence is coordinated with that of the earth ; but man has 
 no right to think of himself as privileged in comparison with the rest of 
 nature. 3 
 
 2. Rousseau' s Theory of Society. While there was thus no inclination 
 in this period toward microcosmic theories in the physical sense, Rous- 
 seau, by some quasi-metaphorical statements in Le contrat social, kept 
 the way open for a later development of microcosmic theories in the 
 social sense — i. e., of organismic theories of society. Rousseau main- 
 tained that the social contract produced a moral and collective body, a 
 a personne publique." 4 As nature gives to every man absolute power 
 over his members, so the social pact gives to the political body similar 
 power over its members. 5 For nations, as for men, there are times of 
 youth and maturity; 6 limits of advantageous size; 7 disease, and death. 8 
 The government is, on a small scale, what the whole body politic is on a 
 large scale. The cooperation of mental and physical forces in man's 
 action is paralleled by the cooperation of the legislative and executive 
 power in a state; just as the former requires centralization, so does the 
 latter. 9 The legislative power is the heart of the state, the executive 
 power is the brain. Just as a man might live even though his brain were 
 paralyzed, but must succumb if his heart stops, so the state might survive 
 a lapse of executive power, but not of legislative power. 10 
 
 5. Reactions from Subjectivism: From Herder to Schopenhauer. 
 
 1. Herder's Philosophy of History. After subjectivism had gone to 
 extremes in the work of Fichte, other German thinkers led a reaction 
 against it; and as soon as this reaction set in, it led to different estimates 
 
 1 Encyclopedic (Geneva, 1778) vol., XXI, p. 820. 
 
 2 Art., " Encyclopgdie," ibid, vol. XII, pp. 382-383. 
 
 3 Systeme de la nature, I, vi (London, 1770, pp. 79, 84, 88). 
 
 * Le contrat social, I, vi. 5 Ibid., II, iv. 6 II, viii. 
 
 7 II, ix. 8 III, xi. • III, i. 10 III, xi. 
 
Microcosmic Theories from Descartes to Spencer 79 
 
 of the microcosmic theories. Thus, while Kant's anthropology opposed 
 free human development to nature, Herder, in his Ideen zur Philosophic 
 dcr Geschichte der Menschheit } urged that human history be viewed in its 
 astronomical, geological, and biological setting. According to Herder 
 it was after many vicissitudes among the lower forms of life that the 
 crown of the earth's organization, man, appeared — the microcosm. 
 Man is the son of all the elements and natures; he is their "erlesenster 
 Inbegriff." * In the course of development, the various species show more 
 and more organization as they approach man, as though they were tending 
 toward him; but Herder would avoid all fantastic systems, in which 
 plants and rocks are thought of as external members of man's body — 
 such imaginings only obscure the real resemblances between the species. 2 
 The study of man's capacities leads to the view that man is the connecting 
 link between two worlds, the natural and the spiritual; in man, nature 
 passes from the one to the other. 3 Human history is regarded as having 
 passed from a period of infancy, in the oriental civilizations, to its old 
 age, in Christianity. 4 So far as his microcosmic theories are concerned, 
 Herder is not very original, but his work, coming at the time when it did, 
 was very influential. 
 
 2. The Microcosmic Theories of Schelling. In the heat of his revolt 
 against the Fichtean view of nature as a postulate of the Ego, Schelling 
 put forth one after another the various confusing formulations of his 
 philosophy of nature. 5 Without attempting to discuss the details of the 
 differences between them, one may note, in general, that he held that a 
 common principle binds organic and inorganic processes; 6 this principle, 
 which makes of nature one great organism, 7 is identified with the world- 
 
 1 Ideen zur Philos. der Gesch. der Menschheit, I, chap. iii. 
 
 2 Ibid., II, chap, iv (4). 
 
 3 Ibid., V, chap. vi. 
 
 4 Cf. R. Falckenberg, History of Modern Philosophy (transl. Armstrong, N. Y., 1893), 
 p. 311. 
 
 5 The works of chief importance in this connection are the Ideen zu einer Pkilosophie 
 der Natur (1 797) ; Von der Weltseele . . . (1 798) ; Erster Entwurf eines Systems der Natur- 
 philosophie (1799); Einleitung zu dent Entwurf . . . (1799) ; Allgenteine Deduction des 
 Dynamischen Processes . . . (1800); System der Gesammten Philosophie und der Natur- 
 philosophie insbesondere (1804). These are all to be found in the Sdmmtliche Werke, 
 edited by Schelling's sons (Stuttgart and Augsburg, 1856, etc.). They are cited here 
 by the words Ideen, Weltseele, Entwurf, Einleitung, Deduktion, and System, respectively, 
 and by reference to volume and page of the collected works. All the volumes here 
 cited belong in the first series of that edition. 
 
 8 Weltseele, II, 347; also, Ibid., II, 350. 7 Ibid., II, 569. 
 
80 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 soul of the ancients. 1 He held, further, that nature develops in analogy 
 with reason. 2 In order to describe this development he brought from 
 subjectivism the duality of concepts emphasized in the Kantian antin- 
 omies and in the Fichtean doctrine of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. 3 
 In the pure productivity of nature nothing can be distinguished except 
 under the condition of duality; but productivity, thus limited, gradually 
 materializes itself and acquires forms, more and more fixed, which con- 
 stitute an evolutionary series (dynamische Stufenfolge) in nature. 4 
 The world of nature develops through three cycles (Potenzen), which 
 may be called those of homogeneous matter, qualitatively differentiated 
 matter, and organic processes. 5 In the first of these cycles, the universe 
 is initially organized in a gravitation system, 6 in which things may be 
 said to be outwardly one. 7 This gravitation principle is opposed, in the 
 same cycle, by the light principle (das Lichtwesen — not ordinary light, 
 but something more like the world-soul), in which things may be said to 
 be in inner union. 8 The two principles are, however, essentially one, and 
 in their identity there is manifested the "Band," or copula, which syn- 
 thesizes all dualities. 9 Out of this essential oneness is produced a second 
 cycle, or Potenz, also triadic, consisting of magnetism, electricity, and 
 chemical processes. 10 In this portion of his system, Schelling approaches 
 Leibnitz when he declares that every part of matter is a copy of the 
 whole universe. 11 The light principle by imparting rest to movement 
 makes a thing a mirror of the All. 12 In every product the infinite pro- 
 ductivity of nature is concentrated; in every product there is the germ of 
 a universe. 13 Individual things are related as organs of the All. 14 The 
 third cycle, that of organic nature, is only a higher power of the in- 
 organic; and the principle of construction of all living forms is found in 
 opposition of direction. 15 Where the typical process of synthesis of 
 opposed factors asserts itself in individuals, there is "Mikrokosmus, 
 Organismus," a completed exposition of the general life of substance in a 
 special life, a world in miniature. 16 Animation is a building of the Whole 
 into an individual. 17 An organism is not homogeneous, but is like the 
 
 1 Weltseele; II, 381, 569. 2 Einleitung; III, 273-274. 
 
 3 Ibid., Ill, 317. Cf. Ibid., Ill, 299. 4 Ibid., Ill, 297-302. 
 
 5 See Falckenberg, Hist, of Mod. Philos., p. 452. 
 
 • Einleitung; III, 312. 7 Weltseele; II, 369. * Ibid., II, 368-9. 
 
 9 Ibid., II, 370, ff. 10 Ibid., II, 373. » Ibid., II, 359- 12 Ibid., II, 370. 
 
 13 Einleitung; III, 290-291. u System; VI, 431. 16 Einleitung; III, 304. 
 
 16 Weltseele; II, 374. " Ibid., II, 364. 
 
Microcosmic Theories from Descartes to Spencer 81 
 
 universe, a totality, a system of things. 1 It is said that in this cycle the 
 principle of gravitation reappears in the plants, and in the female sex, 
 and that of light reappears in the animals, and in the male sex, and the 
 principle of the "Band," or copula, appears when both plant and animal 
 are transcended in man. 2 In one work it is maintained that the life of 
 plants constitutes a kind of magnetism elevated above the earth and 
 oriented toward the sun, 3 but that in the animals the sun is typified in 
 the brain, which fact gives rise to an opposite orientation. Certain 
 relations between the astronomical systems are declared to be reproduced 
 in organisms; satellites typify the structure of plants, 4 and comets are 
 the infusoria of astronomy. 5 In the organisms the processes of reproduc- 
 tion are sometimes said to be akin to magnetism; 6 irritability is held to be 
 akin to electricity; 7 and sensibility is sometimes said to be akin to chem- 
 ical processes. 8 Each sense has its particular correspondences among the 
 processes of gravitation, electricity, etc. 9 The animal instincts, since 
 they relate to the ground of existence, are akin to gravitation. 10 In 
 general, the organism serves as a link between two worlds, the cosmo- 
 gonic and the psychological; u the human organism makes thinking 
 possible. 12 The world is the permanent, while man is the temporary 
 instance of the threefold copula of things. 13 That representation which 
 could not be attained in plants and animals, because of their fragmentary 
 natures, is at length attained in man, who is "absolute, potenzlose 
 Identitat," the expression of infinite substance. In this respect, man 
 should afford the subject-matter of a new science, anthroposophy, which 
 would be quite different from anthropology. 14 More than the plants and 
 the animals, man exhibits well marked differentiations of upper and 
 lower, front and back, and right and left portions of his body; he may be 
 called the most perfect cube of nature. This "cube" of three dimensions 
 nature has endeavored to duplicate in the brain. 15 Man represents the re- 
 lation of the general, of the subject, which in him corresponds to time and 
 the square, to the particular, the object, which corresponds to space and 
 the cube; hence man is the immediate image of the universe. 16 Man's 
 
 1 System; VI, 381. 2 Weltseele; II, 375-376. Cf. System; VI, 406 ff. 
 
 3 System; VI, 409. 4 Ibid., VI, 485. 6 Ibid., VI, 482. 
 
 •Ibid., VI, 400. Ubid., VI, 418. 
 
 8 Ibid., VI, 430. Cf. Deduktion; IV, 74, and Falckenberg, Hist, of Mod. Philos., p. 453. 
 
 9 System; VI, 443-449. 10 Ibid., VI, 462. n Einleitung; III, 274. 
 12 Entwurf; III, 169. 13 Weltseele; II, 376. 
 
 "System; VI, 487-8. ■ " Ibid., VI, 489. u Ibid., VI, 490. 
 
82 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 body is a diminutive picture of the earth and the heavens. As in the 
 case of the living universe, man's digestive and reproductive organs are 
 on the inside, while his sense organs (which correspond to the sun) and 
 his muscles (which correspond to the planets) are directed outwards. As 
 the motions of the heavenly bodies are related to their inner identity, so 
 articulate language is related to reason. Man is accordingly 
 
 "the model of all living things; the harmony ... of the universe is 
 incorporated in him. . . . He is the center . . . and therefore in im- 
 mediate inner communion and identity with all things which he is to 
 know. All motions of the great or the little nature are concentrated 
 in him, all forms of actuality, all qualities of earth and heavens. 
 He is, in a word, the system of the universe, the fulness of infinite 
 substance on a small scale — that is, the integrated being, man be- 
 come God." * 
 Schelling's philosophy of nature belongs in a still larger triadic setting, 
 where, with the " Transcendentalphilosophie " it is synthesized in "Iden- 
 titatsphilosophie." In the works in which the last-named is developed, 
 the views which have been mentioned above are overlaid with social, 
 historical, and mystical considerations, in which Schelling abandons 
 himself still more irresponsibly to speculation. This was, of course, the 
 chief difficulty with his philosophy of nature, although in judging him 
 here one should remember how many of the commonplaces of present 
 day science, as regards both method and content, have been elaborated 
 since his time. 
 
 3. Theories Held by Some of Schelling s Friends. The influence of 
 Schelling was immediate; some of his friends produced even more re- 
 markable speculations than his. Notable among them was Heinrich 
 Steffens (1773-1845), who tried to present man in continuity with the 
 whole of nature, with particular reference to facts of geology and chem- 
 istry as then understood. Steffens thought that the relations of sub- 
 stances in his cohesion series, together with relations of polarity, re- 
 appeared in plants and animals. 2 The central point of all organization he 
 declared to be man; any individual organizations outside man must be 
 regarded as scattered portions of man's organization, and must be 
 studied in connection with man. 3 In some of his later works Steffens 
 
 1 System; VI, 491-2. 
 
 2 Beitrdge zur inneren Naturgeschichte der Erde (1801); see Erdmann, op. cit., vol. II, 
 pp. 632-633. 
 
 3 Anthropologic (Breslau, 1822), vol. I, preface. Cf. Erdmann, II, p. 634. 
 
Microcosmic Theories from Descartes to Spencer 83 
 
 elaborated a philosophy of religion. As humanity is related to the All, 
 so is Christ related to humanity. In creation three moments are to be 
 distinguished— the cosmical, when the planets ranged themselves about 
 the sun; the telluric, as earth found its central point in man; and the 
 historical, when Christ appeared as the Sun of humanity. 1 Lorenz 
 Oken (17 79-1 851) developed Schelling's philosophy particularly in the 
 direction of biology. He held that the bodies of the solar system have 
 separated themselves from the original matter by a polar linear action, or 
 differentiation from a common center. 2 The organic world, too, arises 
 from a chaos — i. e., the infusoria, 3 and develops by similar processes. 4 
 The organic world is the inorganic, concentrated; 5 all organisms must 
 resemble the universe. 6 (In other works, Oken says that in plants the 
 planetary life, and in animals the cosmic life repeats itself. 7 ) In a specula- 
 tion which reminds one of Paracelsus it is said that there is not an organ 
 in nature which is not imitated in the little nature — the earth-principle 
 appears in the animal kingdom variously, as covering, feeling, and worms; 
 the air, as skin, eyes, and insects; water, as lungs, touch and reptiles; 
 metals as bones, ears, and birds; sulphur, as livers, noses, and fish; salt, 
 as stomachs, tongues, amphibia, etc. 8 Oken thinks that animals ought to 
 be classified according to the occurrence in them of characteristic sense- 
 organs; but his classification varies. 9 Man unites in himself, and is a 
 focus for everything which is divided among the other species. 10 Oken 
 noticed in the human embryo processes later interpreted by the " recapit- 
 ulation theory" — at various stages of evolution the embryo is a polyp, 
 a plant, and an animal. 11 He had also a curious anatomical theory, 
 according to which the head, with its various features, was said to be a 
 repetition of the trunk, with its contents. 12 He maintained that it was as 
 justifiable to call the senses the qualities of the universe which in man, for 
 example, have become inward, as to say that the universe is a continua- 
 
 1 Erdmann, op. cit., II, 638. 
 
 2 P. C. Mitchell, art., " Evolution," Encyc. Brit. (11), vol. X, p. 28. 
 
 3 Oken, Die Zeugung (Bamberg and Wurzburg, 1805), p. 2. 
 *Ibid., pp. 188-101. h Ibid., p. 186. * Ibid., p. 148. 
 
 ''Das Universum als Fortsetzung des Sinnessystems (Jena, 1808); see Erdmann, 
 op. cit., vol. II, p. 654; Oken, Lehrb. der Naturphilos. (Jena, 1809-10), vol. II, §§ 817, 
 911, 954 ff, 975, 1780. 
 
 8 Die Zeugung, pp. 175-176. 
 
 9 Ibid., p. 175. See R. Owen, art., " Oken," Encyc. Brit. (11), vol. XX, p. 54. 
 
 10 Die Zeugung, p. 1. n Ibid., pp. 169, ff. 
 12 See Owen, Encyc. Brit., (11) XX, p. 56. 
 
84 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 tion of the senses. 1 The world process is not merely the antecedent 
 condition of sensation; it is its concomitant. What the universe does, 
 the sensation does along with it on a small scale. 2 Each* process of the 
 "Ur-Welt" passes over into the "Nach-Welt" as a specific sensation — for 
 example, light becomes sight in the organism. 3 The brain is a repetition 
 of the stomach and lungs; thinking is its digestion, phantasy its breath- 
 ing. 4 Schelling's friend J. J. Wagner (1775-1841), in his methodical 
 Organon (1851), and its later Erlauterungen reduced the world to 120 
 Ideas which form the branches of the tree of life. 5 Instead of the triadic 
 formula, Wagner uses a tetradic scheme of Nature, Opposition, Ad- 
 justment, Form, 6 which is found in the relations of God, Intelligence, 
 Substance, and the All, 7 and also recurs in physiological 8 and psycholog- 
 ical processes. 9 In this group also belongs K. C. F. Krause (1781-1832), 
 the originator of panentheism. He thinks that the farther science 
 progresses, the more there is revealed the similarity of the life of nature 
 with that of reason, and the parallelism of their powers and work. This 
 parallelism is necessary and permanent, since each exhibits the same 
 nature of God, 10 who holds the two together. 11 Structural parallelisms 
 are also found — according to Krause, the universe is an organic whole, 
 rich in independent members, in which all the members are well-ordered 
 and connected on every side. The human body, too, is in its way a 
 complete likeness of the universe; a religious sense has rightly called it 
 the "little world." 12 The earth has processes which resemble organic 
 processes. 13 Again, the organic world is an organism, a body, of which 
 the plants and animals are members. 14 Human society is also an organic 
 whole, in which individuals are members, and humanity on earth is like 
 a spirit in a body. 15 Moreover, the whole of our knowledge is a system 
 (Gliedbau) ; and philosophy is a system of partial systems, an organism 
 of partial organisms, as is the human body. 16 F. Baader (1765-1841), 
 strictly speaking, did not belong to the school of Schelling, 17 but was a 
 theosophist and mystic. He had views in common with the later views 
 of Schelling, although he substituted for the triadic formula a tetradic 
 
 1 Erdmann, op. tit., vol. II, p. 652. 
 
 2 Das Universum . . . (Jena, 1808), p. 17. % Ibid., p. 21. *Ibid., p. 5. 
 5 Erlauterungen (Ulm, 1854), p. 137. 6 Organon (Ulm, 1851), p. 2. 
 
 7 Erlauterungen, part IV, p. 2. 8 Ibid., p. 104. 9 Ibid., p. 113. 
 
 10 Das Urbild der Menschheit (Dresden, 181 1), pp. 23-24. u Ibid., p. 28. 
 
 12 Ibid., p. 10. n Ibid., p. 41. u Ibid., p. 24. 16 Ibid., p. 34. 
 
 19 Die Lehre vom Erkennen (Gottingen, 1836), p. 484. 
 17 Erdmann, II, p. 657. 
 
Microcosmic Theories from Descartes to Spencer 85 
 
 formula, adding to the warm and cold principles those of weight and 
 breathing. These four, he declared, are operative in both the great and 
 the little worlds. 1 An entry in his diary shows that he was at one time 
 (1786) favorably impressed by the theory that man is a microcosm; 2 
 but in other writings he modified the view, claiming that man, as a 
 mirror of divinity rather than of the cosmos, ought to be called "Mikro- 
 theus," or "little god." 3 It is said that H. C. Oersted (1777-1851) was 
 helped by his speculations to the discovery 4 of the deflection of the mag- 
 netic needle by the electric current; but the other speculations of the 
 school of Schelling had little in common with achievements of this kind. 
 The whole movement was chiefly noteworthy by reason of its aim and 
 its enthusiasm. 5 
 
 4. The Attitude of Hegel toward Microcosmic Theories. Schelling's 
 philosophy of nature is, in general, so much like Hegel's that one might 
 expect to find Hegel also an adherent of the microcosmic views, but the 
 traces of them are very few. Hegel was apparently not much interested 
 in cosmology/ He insisted strongly upon the concrete actuality of 
 experience; he thought that in the study of an organism the essential 
 thing to look for was not its place in a system, nor its character as an 
 
 1 TJber das Pythag. Quadrat in der Natur (1798), in Baader's Sammtliche Werke 
 (Leipzig, 1852, etc.), vol. Ill, p. 267. 
 
 2 Werke, vol. XI, p. 78. 
 
 3 For refs. see Index, Werke, vol. XVI, p. 324. Baader often quotes the French 
 mystic, L. C. de Saint Martin (1 743-1803). 
 
 4 Ueberweg-Oesterreich Grundr. der Gesch. der Phil., vol. IV (Berlin, 1916), p. 699. 
 
 5 In this connection mention may be made of a book by E. Bauer, Symbolik des 
 Kosmos . . . (Weimar, 1854). Bauer held, with K. G. Carus, that spiritual truths may 
 be presented in visible symbols without becoming involved in materialism (p. iv) . The 
 cosmos is a symbol of God (p. 7). The processes of attraction, polarization, undula- 
 tion, and neutralization, as well as morphology, may be traced in both cosmic and 
 individual lives (pp. 29-30). Minerals symbolize memory (p. 31); plants and animals 
 symbolize man's senses (p. 37). Contemporary with the men of this period was C. 
 Fourier (1 772-1837), with his curious Pythagoreanism. He held that the harmony of 
 human passions was reflected throughout the universe in social, animal, organic, and 
 material movements {Theorie des 4 mouvements . . . in his Oeuvres (Paris, 1861), vol. I, 
 pp. 29-31). Human history is outlined according to the ascending and descending 
 "vibrations" it has passed through and must pass through (pp. 34, ff.). He based his 
 social system upon a cosmic conception; on each planet he pictured a race of human 
 or quasi-human beings, each having as its function the making valuable of the life 
 of the planet and of the universe (C. Limousin, in Annates de I' Institute de sociologie, 
 vol. IV — Paris, 1898 — p. 322). 
 
 •J. E. McTaggart, Studies in Hegelian Cosmology (Cambridge, 1901), p. 2. 
 
86 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 isolated image of some general reality, but the process going on in it and 
 the function exercised by it. 1 In several passages he deprecates the 
 methods followed in the development of microcosmic theories — Para- 
 celsus and Boehme are not to be understood "nach der Existenz," and 
 Schelling and Steffens have worked out suggestive but superficial co- 
 ordinations. 2 Schelling's recognition of opposites in polarity is only an 
 empty scheme in which real development never comes by its rights. 3 At 
 the same time, the triadic formula is applied in the Encyklopddie much 
 more rigidly than by Schelling, and might easily be taken as the basis of 
 many a microcosmic construction. Moreover, Hegel alludes to the 
 earth as a dead-lying organism, 4 speaks of the individual as a world, 5 
 calls the Idea an organic system, and compares philosophy itself to an 
 organism. 6 But it was left for some of his interpreters to link his thought 
 up with the microcosmic theories more definitely than he himself did. 7 
 5. Microcosmic Theories Used by Other German Philosophers of the 
 Period. Other German thinkers in this period were more definite in their 
 expressions concerning microcosmic theories. Schleiermacher developed 
 his ethical and religious views with the aid of such theories. For him, 
 every individual thing is the work of the whole universe, 8 and contains, 
 by virtue of its individuality, something not found anywhere else. 9 The 
 world- spirit is revealed in the smallest things as well as in the greatest, 10 
 but preeminently in man's self-consciousness, which is the immediate 
 working of the universe. 11 By a deepening of religious feeling one can 
 find within one's self everything that is working upon one from without; 12 
 in the inner life, the universe portrays itself. 13 The organization of the 
 human spirit is the workshop of the universe; 14 again, we are the tools of 
 the universe. 15 Every individual human being is a portrait and com- 
 pendium of humanity. 16 In order to have the life of the world-spirit, in 
 
 1 Phanomenologie des Geistes, in Hegel's Werke (Berlin, 1832, etc.), vol. II, p. 202. 
 
 2 Ibid., vol. VII (1), pp. 156-7. 
 3 H6ffding, Hist, of Mod. Philos., II, p. 177. 
 4 Encyk., in Werke, vol. VII (1), p. 310. 
 
 6 Phdnotn., in Werke, vol. II, p. 319. 
 
 6 Gesck. der Philos., in Werke, vol. XIII, pp. 40-41. 
 
 7 See Falckenberg, Hist, of Mod. Philos., p. 494; Weber, Hist, of Philos., pp. 510-511 ; 
 J. G. Hibben, HegeVs Logic (New York, 1902), p. 17. 
 
 *Reden iiber die Religion, . . ., in Schleiermacher's Sammtliche Werke (Berlin, 1843), 
 Abt. I, vol. I, p. 290. 
 9 Ibid., I, 297. 10 Ibid., I, 226. "Ibid., I, 193. "Ibid., I, 235. 
 
 13 Ibid., I, 228. "Ibid., I, 287. "Ibid., I, 290. * Ibid., I, 237. 
 
Microcosmic Theories from Descartes to Spencer 87 
 
 order to have religion, man must first love his fellow men. That man is 
 most lovable in whom the world mirrors itself most clearly and most 
 purely. 1 The microcosmic conception is here psychological rather than 
 anatomical or physiological; it has little structural basis, and Schleier- 
 macher lays more stress upon the development of individual qualities 
 than upon microcosmic relations. 2 Interesting in the light of sub- 
 sequent developments are Herbart's suggestive comparisons between 
 ideas in the mind and individuals in society. Each exhibits conflicting 
 groups, in which the many are opposed by the few, and in which various 
 factors and elements tend to reappear at intervals. Either the ranks and 
 orders of society, or the legislative, executive and judicial powers of the 
 state afford suggestive analogies to the mental faculties. " If observa- 
 tions of this kind were completely elaborated, they would furnish a 
 science of politics similar to empirical psychology." 3 
 
 Schopenhauer substitutes will for the Hegelian reason, and holds that 
 in our own experience of willing we know the impulse which produces the 
 world and its living forms. 4 The various grades of objectification of this 
 will extend all the way from the physical processes of pressure and resist- 
 ance 5 up to man. 6 
 
 "If several of the phenomena of will in the lower grades of its 
 objectification . . . come into conflict because each of them, under 
 the guidance of causality, seeks to possess a given portion of matter, 
 there arises from the conflict the phenomenon of a higher Idea which 
 prevails over all the less developed phenomena previously there, yet 
 in such a way that it allows the essence of these to continue to exist 
 in a subordinate manner, in that it takes up into itself from them 
 something which is analogous to them." 7 
 By such progressive integration the objectification becomes more and 
 more distinct. The forces of gravitation are subdued by those of magnet- 
 ism; other grades of the conflict and objectification are seen in processes of 
 crystallization, the relation of suns and planets, physiological processes, 
 and the struggles between species. 8 Man alone, apart from the rest of 
 
 1 Ibid., I, 228-229. 
 
 2 Falckenberg, Hist, of Mod. Philos., p. 485. 
 
 3 Herbart, Lehrbuch der Psychologie, sec. 240 (Eng. transl. by M. K. Smith, New 
 York, 1896, pp. 190-191). 
 
 4 Uber die Wille in der Natur (Leipzig, 1867), p. 2. 
 
 6 The World as Will and Idea (Eng. transl. R. Haldane, J. Kemp, London, 1888), 
 vol. I, p. 195. 
 *Ibid., vol. I, p. 403. 7 Ibid., vol. I, p. 189. *Ibid., vol. I, pp. 189-192. 
 
88 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 nature, cannot express the whole being of the will, 1 but man can recog- 
 nize the will, his own nature, even in the inorganic. 2 Man has such a 
 degree of knowledge that his idea affords a repetition of the essence of the 
 world; and in man the world- will comes to fullest knowledge of itself. 3 
 With his will and his ideas, each localized in the body, 4 every one is 
 himself on a double aspect, the whole world, the microcosm, and what he 
 recognizes as his own being exhausts the being of the whole world, the 
 macrocosm. 5 Another thinker who takes psychology as his point of 
 departure is F. Beneke. For him, four processes characteristic of the 
 psychical — namely (i), the construction of sensory impressions and 
 perceptions, (2) the addition of new elementary faculties, (3) equilibra- 
 tion or reciprocal transfer of elements in perceptions or representations, 
 and (4) combinations of mental products according to the measure of 
 their similarity 6 — may all be traced downward into the material world. 7 
 
 6. The Panpsychism of Fechner 
 
 1. General Statement Regarding Fechner' s Theories. The thinkers who 
 were united in their opposition to subjectivism became divided among 
 themselves on the questions of materialism as against spiritualism. 
 Fechner attempted the panpsychist's answer, and in developing it 
 elaborated microcosmic theories in more detail, and in a more striking 
 manner, than any other writer, ancient or modern. His views may be 
 summed up by saying that men, astronomical bodies, and the universe as 
 a whole are to be considered both corporeally and spiritually, 8 and that, 
 when they are considered in this way, men in their relations to the earth 
 are as the earth and the other astronomical bodies are in their relations 
 to the universe as a whole. The spirit of the universe as a whole is known 
 
 1 The World as Will and Idea, vol. I, p. 200. 2 Ibid., vol. I, p. 153. 
 
 3 Ibid., vol. I, pp. 370-371. 4 Ibid., vol. I, p. 262. 
 
 5 Ibid., vol. I, p. 212; the terms are also found in vol. I, pp. 427-428, and vol. Ill, 
 p. 404. Cf. also vol. I, p. 237. In connection with Schopenhauer's microcosmic theories 
 mention should be made of his magnificent metaphor comparing the universe to a 
 symphony orchestra (Ibid., vol. II, p. 209; vol. Ill, pp. 330, ff.). 
 
 6 Beneke, Lehrbuch der Psychologie (Berlin, 1861), pp. 16, 18, 19, 26. 
 
 7 Falckenberg, Hist, of Mod. Philos., p. 512. 
 
 8 Zend-Avesta (Leipzig, 1851-1854), vol. I, p. 469. Unless otherwise specified, all 
 citations from Fechner refer to volume and page of this work. References may be 
 found by following this paging, which is given in the third edition (ed. by K. Lasswitz, 
 Hamburg and Leipzig, 1906). 
 
Microcosmic Theories from Descartes to Spencer 89 
 
 to us as God. Once, in a passage later somewhat qualified, he uses the 
 terms " macrocosm" and " microcosm" — saying that we have rocks in our 
 bones, streams running through our arteries, light penetrating our eyes, 
 and perhaps some fine force coursing in our nerves; 1 but his importance 
 for the history of microcosmic theories is much greater than this single 
 passage indicates. 
 
 2. Fechner 1 s Use of the Method of Analogy. Fechner is careful to say 
 that he brings no proofs for his views; the whole thing must remain a 
 matter of faith, but he thinks that no one will find a more natural, clearer, 
 simpler point of view. 2 Even though one might not be able to appeal 
 with confidence to any single argument which he puts forward, he holds 
 that there is a certain strength in their total effect. 3 The view is an 
 extension rather than a contradiction of those already established. 4 He 
 is aware of some of the limitations of the method of analogy; everything 
 is, in some respects, like everything else, but in other respects it is dif- 
 ferent; one must be careful to specify the respects in which he would 
 point out resemblances. 5 While every reasonable analogy helps, 6 and 
 while sometimes there are even analogies between series of unlike things, 7 
 still analogy is never as useful as teleology, 8 and serves only as the first 
 approach to more direct knowledge. 9 Since final dependence is not 
 placed upon the method of analogy, one should not be a slave of the 
 method, but should vary one's analogies in order to develop suggestive 
 points of view. 10 Like everything new, the method is precarious; but one 
 has no safety apart from it. 11 
 
 3. Theories of Resemblances between the Earth and the Human Organism. 
 With some cautions and reservations such as the foregoing, Fechner 
 proceeds to develop nearly fifty numbered points concerning resemblances 
 between the earth and the human organism. They resemble one another, 
 in that each arises from a flux; 12 each continues in an environment (in 
 the case of the earth, the aether) ; 13 each partakes of a force which is 
 general, applying it within the limits of individuality 14 (in the case of 
 the earth, the force is that of gravity) ; each develops from a greater body 
 by a process of differentiation; 15 each depends for existence upon a 
 
 1 Zend-Avesta, I, pp. 102-103. 
 
 2 1, 224-225. 3 Ibid., and I, 288; III, p. v. 4 1, 470. 5 1, 64. 
 
 » in, pp. iv, 45. * ni, s. 
 
 8 Die Tagesansicht gegeniiber der Nachtansicht (Leipzig, 1904), p. 34. 
 
 9 Zend-Avesta, III, iii. 10 1, 70-71, 283. " III, p. v. 12 1, 132. 
 18 Tagesansicht, p. 31. u Zend-Avesta, I, 136-137. 15 1, 51. 
 
90 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 father, and the universe; l each is linked to other individuals by species 
 relationships; 2 each incorporates its materials into a continuing and 
 definitely coordinated individual whole; 3 each has rhythmic 4 and 
 circulatory 5 processes; each passes through definite periods of develop- 
 ment; 6 each differs in its various parts according to the form of aggrega- 
 tion of its component parts; 7 each receives influences from other individ- 
 uals of its class, and by the help of these perfects within itself certain 
 structures which, though subordinate to it, constitute its highest part; 8 
 and each differentiates within itself a special region which is the locus of 
 outward action and upward striving (in the earth, this is the organic 
 kingdom — in man, it is the head, with the brain and sense organs). 9 
 Besides such analogies, there are also some interesting compound anal- 
 ogies between the earth and the human organism; it may be said that 
 within certain limits, terrestrial creatures are related to the earth as our 
 sense organs are to us. 10 Just as the body must help to produce an 
 image, so the earth must help to produce man. 11 Just as the earth does 
 not bring forth any new species of living organisms, so man does not 
 produce any new roots for words. 12 Just as our sensations of change 
 affect the whole body, so our activities affect the whole earth. 13 There 
 is some question concerning freedom, but both the earth and man can 
 bring forth new processes as well as old. 14 As the individual will is 
 greater than the sum of separate motives, so the will of the earth-spirit is 
 greater than the sum of separate individuals within it. 15 As ideas can go 
 contrary to the will of the person who has them, so we may go contrary 
 to the higher spiritual entities which contain us. 16 Just as a man receives 
 communications (sound-waves) from another by means of his sense 
 organs, so the earth may be said to receive communications (light- 
 waves) from other astronomical bodies by means of the plants, animals, 
 and men which it contains; we may suppose here that in the case of the 
 earth, as in that of the man, the waves taken separately convey little 
 meaning, and also that the light-waves mean something different to the 
 planet than they do to us. 17 Men are apparently much more closely 
 related to one another than are the astronomical bodies; but perhaps the 
 actions of the latter upon one another are after all more immediate. 18 
 
 1 1, 317. 2 1, 157; cf. I, 49, 95, and Tagesansicht, p. 32. 
 
 3 1, 49-51. 4 I, 50, 125. 6 I, 121. 6 I, 126. 
 
 7 1, 102; cf. 1, 136, 429, and Tagesansicht, p. 37. 8 1, 167. 9 1, 52. 10 1, 286. 
 
 11 III, 5. 12 I, 231. 13 1,130-131. 14 1, 168-180. "1,302. 
 
 16 1, 36-38. "I, 175-176. "I, 166-167. 
 
Microcosmic Theories from Descartes to Spencer 91 
 
 4. Explanations for Obvious Differences between Earth and Human 
 Organism. Fechner finds that no analogy between the earth and man can 
 be entirely applicable; x but nevertheless, some of the differences between 
 them can be explained. Among these are, first, the differences of degree. 
 Of course the earth is on a much grander and more complex scale than 
 man; 2 but these differences, far from showing that the earth is not an 
 organism, show that it is an organism of a higher order. 3 Moreover, the 
 earth would be at a disadvantage if its lungs, stomach, and brain were in 
 the interior, because the way leading to them would then be too long; we 
 must look for these organs, if at all, near the surface. 4 The absence of a 
 nervous system in the earth merely shows that the earth has not a 
 human soul. 5 Sometimes the differences are accounted for in terms of the 
 compound analogies; thus it is said that our bones are like rocks, but are 
 not real rocks, but that, since the human body is the most highly devel- 
 oped organ of the earth, we must expect to find more complications in us 
 than outside us. 6 Again, the earth's (geological) movements are great, 
 compared to our movements; but even so, the movements of our muscles 
 are great, compared to the bodily changes which sustain our ideas. 7 
 Again, it is said that the earth is quieter than man, but that, also, man's 
 body is quieter than his nerves, or the circulation of his blood. 8 Some- 
 times the differences between earth and man are traced to the part-whole 
 relation between them; 9 man cannot expect to repeat the whole earth on 
 a small scale, but only to present one finer portion of the whole. 10 Some- 
 times, finally, the differences between the earth and man are explained in 
 terms which imply the continuity of their processes; it is said that the 
 earth has lungs and brains, for example, in the very fact that men who 
 inhabit the earth have them. 11 To be sure, the brains of individual men 
 do not combine into one earth-brain; but in a human organism the 
 separate nerves do not combine into one single nerve, either. 12 By virtue 
 of such a relation of continuity as this, the earth may be said to run, eat, 
 and cry. 13 The earth has a slight degree of sensation when the plants have 
 sensations; a somewhat greater degree when the animals have sensations; 
 but more is mirrored in a living way in the experiences of mankind. 14 At 
 the same time Fechner refuses to say that the earth's reason is the sum of 
 human reasons. 15 
 
 1 1, 283. 2 1, 53; cf. I, 16, 57-58, 91, 284. 3 1, 60-62. « I, 82, 167. 
 
 6 1, 211. 6 I, 103. 7 I, 74; cf. I, 26, and Tagesansicht, p. 37. 8 I, 105. 
 9 1, 53; cf. Tagesansickt,p. 30. 10 I, 79; cf. I, 63. u I, 63. "I, 215. 
 13 1, 215; cf. II, 207. 14 1, 287; cf. I, 283. 16 1, 190. 
 
92 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 5. Other Differences between Earth and Organism, Left Unexplained. 
 Fechner recognized the weaknesses of some of his analogies without 
 attempting to account for them. For example, he says that although the 
 sea with its tides is like a beating heart, and the rivers and the brooks are 
 like arteries and capillaries, and the atmosphere into which the water is 
 periodically evaporated is like the lungs, and although in the case of the 
 earth the geological processes, and in the case of man the physiological 
 processes are connected with the foregoing, still, the comparison breaks 
 down. The heart drives blood into all the arteries, but the tides do not 
 appear in all rivers. Moreover, the tides go around the earth in a special 
 way, different from that of the blood in the body. The tides are due to 
 external influence acting upon the earth, but the pulse is not due to 
 external influence. And the water is not oxydized in the atmosphere as 
 the venous blood is in the lungs. 1 Again, some of the differences of de- 
 gree are accentuated. The principal masses of nerves and muscles in the 
 body tend to form aggregates, just as animals do in the earth. The 
 viscera sometimes show branching structures, as the plants do, and the 
 skeleton bears some resemblances to earth's rocks. But these resem- 
 blances are offset by differences; by means of an animal's nerves and 
 muscles, the skeleton can be moved, while we of course do not move the 
 earth — and on the other hand, plants work over relatively little of the 
 matter surrounding them, compared to the amount worked over by our 
 digestive systems. 2 The earth does not waste away, as does the human 
 body. 3 For us, winter and summer are differences of time, but for the 
 earth they are differences of place; 4 the earth has the entire content of 
 our consciousness before it, but we have not the entire content of its 
 consciousness before us. 5 All the cyclic processes of the earth, having as 
 their limit, its rotation, are confined to the earth; but all man's cyclic 
 processes are not confined to the individual's body. 6 Again, man is not 
 self-sufficient, as is the earth; still, it must be admitted that the earth has 
 some outer relations. 7 
 
 6. Analogies between Earth and Organism Extended to the Universe. 
 Although he recognizes such differences as those noted above, Fechner 
 extends his analogies between the earth and the organism to the universe 
 also. The extension is not made without some reservations; the fact, for 
 instance, that the solar system is superior to the earth system involves 
 
 1 1, 64-66; the comparisons vary — see I, 71, 126, 283. 
 
 2 1, 66. 3 I, 73; cf. I, 176-177. 4 I, 55- 5 I, 295; cf. I, 115. 
 
 6 1, 122. »I, 54-56, 91-95. 
 
Microcosmic Theories from Descartes to Spencer 93 
 
 relations different from those found in the fact that the earth is superior 
 to our bodies. 1 Whereas the earth must be admitted to have some exter- 
 nal relations, the universe is utterly independent. 2 The stars in the 
 universe are not very closely related to one another; men in the earth are 
 more closely related to one another; and the organs of the body of an 
 individual man are much more closely related to one another. 3 The 
 analogy which holds between man and the earth breaks down at some 
 points when applied to God. 4 But, for all these reservations, one may 
 say that the earth and each star are cells in the body of the universe; & 
 or, again, that as a man brings forth images and ideas within the unity 
 of his consciousness, so the earth brings forth the man and other living 
 beings within its unity, and so God brings forth the earth and the stars 
 in his unity. 6 The parallelism is strictly dualistic: human spirits belong to 
 a higher earth-spirit which binds everything earthly in one, and this 
 spirit belongs in turn to God, who binds the whole universe in one; on 
 the other hand, our bodies are parts of the earth-body, and the earth- 
 body is part of the divine body of nature. The earth is thus a body and 
 spirit intermediate between God and man. 7 Man is an offshoot and 
 representation (Bild) of the whole God-animated universe, although 
 immediately he is an offspring of the earth. 8 
 
 7. Use of these Analogies as Basis for Christian Doctrines. Upon a 
 basis of such analogies Fechner worked out in considerable detail theories 
 covering some of the important Christian doctrines. His argument 
 concerning the work of Christ may be stated as follows: an individual 
 man has many ideas of various degrees of importance, but in his experi- 
 ence there may come one idea which gives a supreme direction to his 
 entire life and thought, and with which all his subsequent ideas and acts 
 are linked up. Even when long sought for, the appearance of the pre- 
 eminent idea is often sudden. It takes time for the preeminent idea ta 
 prevail over the others, but when it does prevail it brings peace and unity 
 and correlated development. The preeminent idea is, in fact, a mediator 
 between the individual in whose experience it occurs, and something 
 super-individual, superior, controlling; the idea could not exercise its 
 controlling functions without such reference. But the idea need not 
 always be in conscious relation with the other ideas of the individual; 
 the fact that it appeared once in ordinary consciousness suffices to estab- 
 lish its contact with other succeeding states, and its controlling function 
 
 l n, 244. 2 i, 56, 105. 3 i, 165. *i, 302, 309. 6 i, 100. 
 
 •I, 44-45, 224, II, 244. 'II, I, 2. "Ill, 5. 
 
94 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 may continue long after it has disappeared, and after the outward cir- 
 cumstances which called it forth have been altered. Perhaps not every 
 man has such an idea; but the nature of each individual is fragmentary, 
 and needs to be supplemented by the ideas of other men. 1 Now, since 
 ideas in the experience of an individual may be set in parallel with 
 individuals in the history of the earth, we may say that a preeminent 
 man, Christ, has appeared and lived among men, and given to subsequent 
 history a direction, and linked his followers with himself, bringing peace 
 and unity. 2 He is a mediator between us and God, 3 but need not be 
 always upon the earth, as he was at first. 4 Christ as he was in his earthly 
 incarnation does not appear in other stars, but the Word must probably 
 be made flesh in other stars as well as in the earth. 5 Fechner devoted 
 much attention to a theory of life after death, which was also worked out 
 in accordance with his analogies. 6 The life of a man is related to the 
 earth as, for example, a visual sensation is related to the body; the earth, 
 together with its environment (the universe, or God), must help to 
 produce man, just as the body, with its environment, must help to 
 produce a sensation. 7 The death of a man is related to the earth as, for 
 example, the discontinuance of a visual sensation is related to the body; 
 and man's life after death is related to the earth as a memory of a visual 
 sensation is related to the body. 8 Just as the individual brain brings 
 forth what was essential in the sensation after the eyes are closed, so the 
 earth brings forth what was essential in the individual after death. 9 
 As memories persist in spite of the fact that new sensations are using 
 the same nerve paths, so individuals persist after death, in spite of the 
 fact that later individuals may have incorporated into their bodies the 
 same materials. 10 As all memories are to some degree associated in the 
 experience of an individual, so all individuals will be more or less asso- 
 ciated in the life after death; but there will be in the latter, as in the 
 former case, certain laws of association. 11 As our memories do not awaken 
 all at once, but await appropriate conditions, so we may suppose that the 
 life of individuals after death sometimes awaits appropriate conditions. 12 
 Just as it is by the aid of memory that the language of men is understood, 
 so it may be by our aid that the communications of the heavenly spheres 
 will become intelligible. 13 Fechner has a unique theory concerning the 
 
 111,54-57. f H, 5». 3 H, 53- * II, 62-64. 
 
 6 II, 61-62. 8 See Tagesansicht, pp. 99-100. 7 III, 4-5. 8 III, 7-8. 
 
 9 III, 9. 10 Tagesansicht, pp. 99-100. u III, 53-54, 193. 
 
 12 Tagesansicht , p. 94; cf. Ill, 329. 13 III, 51. 
 
Microcosmic Theories from Descartes to Spencer 95 
 
 conditions of life after death. As the corporeal elements of memory, 
 whatever they are, grow out of those of perception, so the corporeal 
 elements of a future life grow out of those of present life. 1 In the case of 
 the earth we find that, in spite of our ordinary view, the matter upon 
 which a man works during his lifetime forms a spatial and temporal 
 continuum. 2 There is thus a material and spatial continuity between 
 Christ and us; we know it in the Church (the body of Christ), the Scrip- 
 tures, and the sacraments. 3 Man during his lifetime makes a place for 
 himself in the earth, 4 leaves his impression upon the matter upon which 
 he has worked; this is his " body " in the life after death. 5 In the next life 
 we shall have the form of the present body, without being burdened by 
 its matter. 6 Nor does the future "body " depend merely upon the outer 
 impression made by each individual in the material of the earth; for we 
 all work not merely upon the earth, but also upon one another here, and 
 we all help to reconstitute one another in the new life. 7 There is, however, 
 something more than mere analogies involved; for our " memory-life" 
 here can be regarded as the germ (Keim) of our "memory-life" in the 
 hereafter. 8 
 
 8. The Influence of Fechner. Fechner felt that his work, the "day- 
 view" as opposed to the "night- view" of the empirical and materialistic 
 sciences, combined satisfactorily the results of studies of nature from 
 different points of view; that it had a certain strength because, after all, 
 it restated a view that was primitive; and that it formed a consistent 
 system, rather than a patchwork; 9 and that in it science and theology 
 were of mutual assistance. 10 But for most of the thinkers who have 
 succeeded him, his analogies have been too loose and his panpsychism, 
 in spite of his elaborate arguments for it, has been too fantastic. More- 
 over, the sciences since his time have been occupied almost exclusively 
 with the study of the accumulating data of evolution, until there has 
 been little time or interest in correlations in accordance with any other 
 principle. The result has been that, except for Paulsen, whose work will 
 be noted below, Fechner has had no notable following. But William 
 James found in him a man who had vision, who gave the impression of 
 one who did not live at second hand, who made some other systems of 
 philosophy appear thin by comparison, and who was "a philosopher in 
 the great sense." n 
 
 l m, 390- 2 in, 120. s in, 120-124, 363-370. * in, 52. 
 
 5111,124-128,131. 6 III, 145. 7 III, 160-165. » III, 46. 9 I,p.xiv. 
 
 10 II, 67. " A Pluralistic Universe (New York, 1909), pp. 149, 154, 165, 176. 
 
96 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 7. The " Microcosmus " of Lotze 
 
 1. General Position of Lotze. Another answer to the problems of 
 materialism and mechanism and empiricism was attempted by Lotze, 
 the title of whose masterpiece affords the instance of the use of the term 
 " microcosm " which is best known at the present day. From the point of 
 view of the history of the microcosmic theories, however, the term is 
 used in a restricted sense, and should be studied in the Lotzian setting. 
 This may be indicated by saying that Lotze proposes a system of centers 
 of force, which, except for the fact that they interact, are like the monads 
 of Leibnitz, and each of which is a mirror of the universe. 1 "To be" 
 means to stand in relations; 2 to exchange actions; 3 to be causes; 4 
 to be modes of one substance; 5 and, if we wish to understand nature, we 
 must say, to be at least in some degree akin to the nature of mind. 6 
 Mechanism, although universal in extent, is negligible in importance; 7 
 it is the condition of the mind's thought of itself, 8 but is transcended in 
 the unity of the soul, which is evident in the fact that we are able to 
 appear to ourselves. 9 "Living beings alone truly are; the other forms of 
 existence derive their explanation solely from mental life, not the latter 
 from them." 10 Only the full reality of an infinite living being has power 
 to knit together the multiplicity of things and to enable reciprocal actions 
 to take place. 11 The universal is, however, inferior as compared with the 
 particular, and any state of things is insignificant as compared with the 
 good arising from its enjoyment. 12 
 
 2. Lotze 's Strictures onOlder Microcosmic Theories. Lotze's estimate of 
 mechanism leaves him with scant sympathy for views which maintain 
 that there is an immediate and mysterious sympathy between man and 
 nature, particularly man and the earth, or that powers and tendencies of 
 development inherent in the earth are repeated in more significant forms 
 in the bodies of men, or that the internal fluctuations of telluric life find 
 echoes in changes of human organization, or that what the earth vainly 
 struggles to express receives a spiritualized manifestation in the constitu- 
 tion of conscious beings. He thinks that these views owe their convincing 
 power to men's strange inclination to regard the unintelligible and un- 
 demonstrable as having preeminent truth and profundity. 13 It is perverse 
 
 1 Microcosmus (first published 1856-64). Eng. transl. by E. Hamilton and E. C. 
 Jones, Edinburgh, 1887, vol. I, pp. 359-360. 
 
 2 Ibid., II, 578 ff. 3 II, 617, ft*. 4 H, 598. 6 H, 598. 
 • II, 647-648 and ff. 7 1, p. xvi. 8 II, 658. 9 1, 157. 
 
 10 1, 362. "1,380. 12 II, 728. "II, 7. 
 
Microcosmic Theories from Descartes to Spencer 97 
 
 to compare the earth's day and night to the waking and sleep of an 
 organism. 1 The Microcosmus renews a warfare, which Lotze had "begun 
 long ago," against the inclination to see in every individual department 
 of reality merely an imitative echo or a prophetic indication of some 
 other department, and in the whole great circle of phenomena only a 
 continuous shading forth of the higher by the lower, or the lower by the 
 higher. 2 He felt that the attempt to model the duties of creatures which 
 have minds upon the phenomena of the external world was a barren 
 blunder of sentimental symbolism, and could further nothing but the 
 establishment of ordinary conditions. 3 Enclosed within the great 
 machine of nature stands the smaller machine of the human mind, more 
 cunningly framed than any other, 4 yet physical events and conscious 
 states are absolutely incompatible. 5 Man is a living product, unique in 
 kind, receiving innumerable impressions from nature, that he may be 
 roused by them to reactions and developments, the cause of which lies in 
 himself. 6 
 
 j. Lotze' 's Use of the Term "Microcosm." Lotze's most distinctive view 
 of man as the microcosm has theological and ethical rather than physical 
 or physiological implications. 
 
 " As in the great fabric of the universe the Creative Spirit imposed 
 on itself unchangeable laws by which it moves the world of phenom- 
 ena, diffusing the fulness of the Highest Good throughout innumer- 
 able forms and events, and distilling it again from them into the 
 bliss of consciousness and enjoyment; so must man, acknowledging 
 the same laws, develop given existence into a knowledge of its value, 
 and the value of his ideals into a series of external forms proceeding 
 from himself. ... In the energy of a freedom that does not aim- 
 lessly stray and desire the fruit without the slow growth of the plant, 
 but consciously restraining himself within the firm bounds of neces- 
 sity which he holds sacred, and following the tracks prescribed to 
 him, . . . man will be that which, according to an ancient idea, 
 he is above all creatures — the complete reflection of the great real 
 world, the little world, the Microcosm" 7 
 In volume II the term "microcosmic order" is introduced to describe 
 "the impulses, ever fresh and ever the same, out of which have sprung 
 the many-hued blossoms of history, the eternal cycle in which human 
 
 ^I, 8. 2 II, 20-21. 3 II, 22. *I, 25. 
 
 8 1, 148, 161-163, 195. «II, 21. 
 
 7 1, 401. 
 
98 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 fates revolve." l It is evidently in the light of these passages that one is 
 to read the statement in the introduction to the effect that 
 
 "As the growing farsightedness of astronomy dissipated the idea that 
 
 the great theatre of human life was in direct connection with divinity, 
 
 so the further advance of mechanical science begins to threaten with 
 
 similar disintegration the smaller world, the Microcosm of man." 2 
 
 The title of the book was apparently chosen with such views in mind; 
 
 and it is clear that these uses of the term microcosm are, especially when 
 
 compared with Fechner's, loose. 3 In the sense in which the two words 
 
 are often used, one could say that Fechner's microcosmic theories are 
 
 predominantly structural, while Lotze's are functional. 
 
 8. Microcosmic Theories and the Theory or Evolution 
 
 i. Spencer's "First Principles." The next great figure in philosophy 
 marks the emergence of an absorbing new interest, which does much to 
 turn attention from the problems raised by Fechner and Lotze. Herbert 
 Spencer's elaborate exposition of the processes and law of evolution 
 carried illustrations from, and applications to various classes of "phenom- 
 ena" — astronomical, geological, biological, psychological, and sociolog- 
 ical. 4 All these exhibit attractions and repulsions, 5 rhythm, 6 segregation 
 of like elements, 7 which involves aggregation and secondary distributions, 
 or differentiations, 8 equilibration, 9 with internal motions of redistribu- 
 tion and composition, 10 and dissolution. 11 The whole process is, however, 
 one of cosmic oscillation, and alternation between epochs of evolution 
 and dissolution. 12 Thus Spencer was led to the conclusion that 
 
 "the entire process of things, as displayed in the aggregate of the 
 visible universe, is analogous to the entire process of things as dis- 
 played in the smallest aggregates." 13 
 
 ill, s : 2 I, P. xv. 
 
 3 In spite of Lotze's dominant tendencies, there are passages which remind one of 
 Fechnerian and other analogies. Both the living forms and mental life show associa- 
 tions (I, 367). Social groups are rightly called organic formations (I, 438). The 
 Infinite Being is stimulated from within by the production of living forms and reacts 
 by endowing them with souls; but this stimulation does not proceed by paths and 
 centers (I, 390-391). In his "Seele und Seelenleben" (1846; in Kleine Schriften, ed. 
 by D. Peiper, Leipzig, 1886, vol. II, p. 199), Lotze refers to the body as a microcosm. 
 
 4 First Principles (New York, 1896), part II, chaps. XIV-XVIL 
 6 Ibid., chap. IX. 
 
 • Ibid., chap. X. 7 Chap. XXI. «Chap. XIV, sec. 115. 9 Chap. XXII. 
 10 Chap. XVII. " Chap. XXIII. 12 Chap. XXIII, sec. 183. 1J Ibid. 
 
Microcostnic Theories from Descartes to Spencer 99 
 
 Such a conclusion as this might have led other writers directly to micro- 
 cosmic theories, but for a number of reasons Spencer did not develop his 
 thought in this direction. His emphasis upon a theory of knowledge 
 made him regard the data of the sciences as "phenomena," the real nature 
 of which was unknowable. 1 His antipathy for Hegelianism made him 
 antagonize a tendency to " decipher the universe as the autobiography of 
 an Infinite Spirit, repeating itself in miniature within our Finite Spirit." 2 
 He was concerned in demonstrating the continuity and unity of the 
 evolutionary process as a whole, rather than in studying the resemblances 
 between its various component processes; 
 
 "While we think of Evolution as divided into astronomic, geologic, 
 biologic, psychologic, sociologic, etc., it may seem to a certain ex- 
 tent a coincidence that the same law of metamorphosis holds through- 
 out all its divisions. But when we recognize these divisions as mere 
 conventional groupings, made to facilitate the arrangement and 
 acquisition of knowledge ... we see at once that there are not 
 several kinds of Evolution having certain traits in common, but one 
 Evolution going on everywhere after the same manner." 3 
 Although Spencer saw that astronomical bodies, like organisms, exhibit 
 structural differentiations accompanying their integrations, he thought 
 the processes were so slow and simple that they might be disregarded. 4 
 Thus materials which might have been used in the construction of a 
 microcosmic theory more imposing than that of Fechner were reduced to 
 the status of illustrations of the one all-absorbing process of evolution. 
 2. Spencer's " Principles of Sociology." Analogies are more prominent 
 in Spencer's theory of society. A society is to be regarded as an entity 
 because its parts exhibit persistent relations, 5 and these relations are 
 analogous to those of an organism. 6 Societies, like living bodies, originate 
 from masses which are extremely minute in comparison with the masses 
 which some of them eventually reach. 7 In each case there is increase by 
 simple multiplication of units, by union of groups, and by union of groups 
 of groups. 8 Growth is accompanied in each case by increasing unlikeness 
 of parts, 9 which are in relations of mutual dependence. 10 A society, like 
 a living being, may survive successive lives and deaths of its component 
 
 1 Chap. XXIV, sec. 194. 2 Pt. I, chap. V, sec. 31. 3 Chap. XXIV, sec. 188. 
 
 * Principles of Sociology (3 vols., New York, 1909-1912), sec. 215. 
 6 Ibid., sec. 212. 
 
 • Ibid., sec. 213. 7 Sec. 224. 8 Sec. 226. 9 Sec. 223; cf. sec. 230. 
 10 Sec. 223; cf. sec. 235. 
 
ioo Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 units. 1 In the living organism, and in society, there are in general three 
 types of organs, the sustaining, the distributing, and the regulating; in a 
 society these are, respectively, the industrial, the commercial, and the 
 directive and defensive systems. 2 Organs in organisms and organs in 
 societies have internal arrangements framed on the same principle; there 
 are in each case appliances for conveying nutriment, for bringing mate- 
 rials, for carrying away the product, etc. 3 The stages of progressive 
 specialization are parallel; 4 but in each case, organs may appear in 
 higher forms without going through all the earlier stages. 5 With all 
 his analogies, Spencer points out two or three important differences 
 between biological organisms and societies. The subordinate units of the 
 society are discrete, although this difference is greatly modified by 
 language. 6 Again, societies are asymmetrical. 7 In a society, also, con- 
 ciousness is diffused through all the constituent members, and there is no 
 specialized seat of feeling and thought. 8 These differences help to give 
 point to Spencer's insistence that there exist " no analogies between the 
 body politic and a living body, save those necessitated by that mutual 
 dependence of parts which they display in common." 9 He declares that 
 although he has made comparisons of social structures and functions to 
 structures and functions in the human body, these comparisons have been 
 made only because the latter structures and functions furnish familiar 
 illustrations of structures and functions in general. 
 
 "All kinds of creatures are alike in so far as each exhibits cooperation 
 among its components for the benefit of the whole; . . . this ... is 
 common also to societies. Further, among individual organisms, the 
 degree of cooperation measures the degree of evolution; . . . this 
 general truth, too, holds among social organisms. Once more, to 
 effect increasing cooperation, creatures of every order show us in- 
 creasingly-complex appliances for transfer and mutual influence; 
 and to this general characteristic, societies of every order furnish a 
 corresponding characteristic. These, then, are the analogies alleged : 
 
 1 Sec. 223. 2 Sec. 238, ff. 3 Sec. 231. 
 
 4 Sec. 232, ff., cf. sec. 252. 5 Sec. 233. 
 
 6 Sees. 220-221. In an early article (Westminster Review, vol. LXXIII, i860), 
 Spencer removes an apparent objection concerning differences in the mobility of 
 constituent parts of an organism and the state by saying that in the latter the citizens 
 are fixed in their public capacities (p. 51). His general conclusion is that points of 
 difference between the two serve to bring into clearer light the points of analogy (p. 56; 
 cf. Princ. of Sociol., sec. 269, n.). 
 
 7 Sec. 269. 8 Sec. 222. 9 Sec. 269. 
 
Microcosmic Theories from Descartes to Spencer 101 
 
 community in the fundamental principles of organization is the only 
 community asserted." 1 
 
 He means the organismic theory to serve only as a scaffold for his 
 sociology; 2 and he appeals to both resemblance 3 and difference 4 between 
 society and an organism, as support for his individualism. 
 
 j. The Term "Microcosm" Used by Darwin and Huxley. Of the other 
 great leaders of the evolutionists, Darwin used the term microcosm to 
 describe the constitution of multicellular organisms, made up of great 
 numbers of smaller units. 5 Huxley compared the organism to an army, 
 and said that in the fact that disease might be traced either to individual 
 cells or to the arrangements for their coordination "the microcosm 
 repeats the macrocosm," since the inefficiency of an army might be 
 traced to similar causes. 6 In his Evolution and Ethics, even when he 
 declares that the cosmic process, with its ruthlessness and resulting 
 survivals of the fittest, is not to be a pattern for human social actions, and 
 that men are not to imitate the cosmic process but to combat it, he still 
 uses the microcosmic terminology. 7 
 
 9. Summary: Microcosmic Theories from Descartes to Spencer 
 
 The course of development covered by this chapter has been indicated 
 in the opening section, above. The ancient microcosmic theories which 
 had been revived in various settings during the early modern period, 
 were first eclipsed by subjectivism, then, with the trend toward objectiv- 
 ism, revived in the theories of Herder and the speculations of Schelling 
 and his friends. Microcosmic theories were also involved in the master- 
 pieces of Schleiermacher and Schopenhauer. Fechner developed an im- 
 posing speculation by the aid of arguments from analogy; he was more 
 concrete than Schelling, but was fantastic in his panpsychism. Lotze, 
 using the microcosmic terminology, but assigning it some meanings of 
 his own, developed an elaborate philosophy of values, which attempted to 
 
 1 Sec. 269. 
 
 2 Sec. 270. The organismic theory of society is discussed in chapter V, below. 
 3 C/. Principles of Ethics (New York, 1897), sees. 370, ff.; cf. Coker, work cited 
 
 in chapter V, pp. 136 ff. 
 
 4 Princ. of Sociol., sec. 222; Coker, loc. cit. 
 
 6 Variations in Animals and Plants (N. Y., 1868), vol. II, p. 483. 
 
 6 Huxley, "The Connection of the Biological Sciences with Medicine," Nature, vol 
 XXIV, p. 346 (1881). 
 
 7 Evolution and Ethics (New York, 1899), pp. 59, 83. 
 
102 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 solve the problems of mechanism by dismissing them as negligible 
 in importance. But the rise of the theory of evolution led to new esti- 
 mates of this importance, although it did not lead to further development 
 of the microcosmic theories on any comprehensive scale. As a result of 
 Spencer's presuppositions, and Huxley's conclusions, and the fact that 
 presently increasing specialization and improved methods vastly aug- 
 mented the data to be interpreted, attention was turned from the prob- 
 lems raised by Fechner and Lotze, who remain the outstanding repre- 
 sentatives of consistent and detailed attempts to indicate by means of the 
 microcosmic conceptions the place of man in the universe. 
 
 Appendix — Microcosmic Theories in the Works of Swedenborg 
 
 The world which Swedenborg (i 688-1 772) described as having been 
 seen in his visions was organized on a macrocosmic and microcosmic 
 plan; "correspondences" were prominent throughout the system. The 
 Lord, by celestial things, regulates spiritual things; by spiritual things, 
 natural things; and by natural things, corporeal things. This constitutes 
 "order " ; when a man is regenerated he acquires a corresponding order and 
 thus becomes an image of heaven {Arcana codestia, Eng. transl., New 
 York, 1873, 10 vols; paragraph 911). Conversely, heaven is called the 
 Grand (Ibid., paragr. 2996), or the Greatest Man (911). It is also said 
 that this name is given because all things in . . . heaven correspond to 
 the Lord (3741); and that there is a correspondence, through heaven, 
 between the Lord and man (3883). Every part of the human body has 
 something heavenly — usually a " society " (of angels) — corresponding to it 
 (2996, 3884, 4041, 4045, 4523, 4528, 6013). From these societies celestial 
 and spiritual things "flow in with man" (3630) ; from the correspondences 
 man's subsistence is derived (2998). The universal heaven is such that 
 every one is, as it were, the center of all (3633). Each society is an image 
 of the whole, "for what is unanimous is composed of such images of 
 itself" (4625). Still, all situations in heaven are determined in respect to 
 the human body, and it is known from the situation what the societies 
 are, and to what province of man's organs and members they belong 
 (3639). The varieties of the life of good and truth in heaven are "accord- 
 ing to the reception of life from the Lord," and have a relation to each 
 other which is similar to the relation of portions of man's body (3744). 
 Correspondence with the celestial makes man "principled in love to the 
 Lord"; correspondence with the spiritual gives man charity for his 
 
Microcosmic Theories from Descartes to Spencer 105 
 
 neighbor (3634-3635). As to his spirit, man is, then, in heaven; as to his 
 body he is in the world (3634-3635), and is formed "an image of the 
 world" (6013). The internal man is a "heaven in the least form," and 
 the external man is a "world in the least form," and thus a microcosm 
 (6057). Material substances " correspond " as do heavenly substances, 
 but in an inferior degree (3741). The whole body is an organ composed 
 of the most concealed things of all that are in the nature of the world and 
 according to their secret powers of acting and wonderful modes of flowing; 
 this — which would now be called adaptation — is said to have been the 
 reason why the ancients called man a microcosm (4523, 6057). The 
 heart corresponds to the celestial, the lungs to the spiritual kingdom 
 (3635). At death man goes into that society of whose general form he is 
 an individual effigy {The True Christian Religion, Eng. transl., New 
 York, 1872, paragraph 739). 
 
CHAPTER V 
 
 TRACES OF MICROCOSMIC THEORIES IN RECENT SCIENCE 
 AND PHILOSOPHY 
 
 i. Recent Microcosmic Theories Isolated and Scattered 
 
 During the past fifty years the sciences have progressed so rapidly and 
 in such divergent directions that no attempts at synthesis comparable 
 to that of Spencer have been made. In philosophy the Neo-Hegelians 
 have abandoned the "Naturphilosophie," and the newer schools which 
 have opposed them have been in great measure absorbed in problems of 
 method. While theories corresponding to one or another of the older 
 microcosmic theories have appeared, they have either been isolated in the 
 midst of other doctrines, or they have consisted of vague generalizations 
 or allusions. It is, however, worthy of note that in the great scientific 
 advance all the principal sciences have made some use of theories to the 
 effect that certain portions of the universe imitate certain others in 
 structures and processes. A number of these microcosmic conceptions 
 have been adopted only to be discredited later on; but for all that, new 
 microcosmic conceptions keep appearing, and are even somewhat prom- 
 inent in the sciences of the present day. We shall consider in this con- 
 nection first, the so-called recapitulation theory in biology; second, the 
 recapitulation theory in psychology, including the "culture-epoch" 
 theory; third, the organismic theories of society and the state; fourth, 
 microcosmic analogies employed in contemporary science; and fifth, 
 microcosmic theories in recent and contemporary philosophy. 
 
 2. The Theory of Recapitulation in Biology 
 
 i. Definition. The recapitulation theory in biology asserts that an 
 individual of a given species passes through successive stages of develop- 
 ment, each of which represents a stage in the evolution of the species or 
 of several successive species. Other terms for this view are " the morpho- 
 genetic theory," "the biogenetic law," "the doctrine of parallelism," 
 and "the repetition theory." 1 
 
 1 Davidson, cited below, p. 2. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Recent Science and Philosophy 105 
 
 2. Early History of the Theory. The whole theory has been reviewed 
 by P. E. Davidson, in his dissertation on The Recapitulation Theory and 
 Human Infancy, 1 from which work the material for this section is almost 
 entirely drawn. Without attempting to do more than summarize what 
 Davidson presents in detail, we may note that the beginnings of the re- 
 capitulation theory go back at least to Lorenz Oken, as noted above. 
 K. E. Von Baer, whose name has sometimes been linked with the theory, 
 introduced a very important modification when he stated, in 1828, that 
 the resemblance between a mammalian embryo and other animal types 
 was between corresponding embryonic stages, and not between the 
 embryonic form of the mammal and the adult form of the other animals. 
 L. Agassiz in 1857 elaborated a threefold parallelism between the geolog- 
 ical succession of animals, their structural gradations, and the develop- 
 ment of individual representatives. E. Haeckel in 1866, in disregard of 
 all doubtful cases and perhaps not without some inconsistency, gave the 
 theory its popular formulation, to the effect that ontogeny recapitulates 
 phylogeny. In the same year A. Hyatt, in formulating his "law of 
 acceleration" stated that modifications tend to be inherited at earlier and 
 earlier stages, until they become embryonic; but E. D. Cope declared 
 that acceleration did not operate uniformly, and that hence the re- 
 capitulation theory was inexact. 2 
 
 3. Differences of Opinion Among Authorities Since 1866. Among the 
 large number of views of authorities in biology and paleontology assem- 
 bled by Davidson one finds wide variations of opinion concerning the 
 theory of recapitulation. The theory is accepted by A. Dendy practically 
 in the sense given it by Haeckel; Dendy says that however much modified 
 it may be by abbreviation and the superposition of secondary features, 
 the life-history of the individual is essentially a condensed epitome of the 
 ancestral history of the race. 3 W. E. Kellicott says something similar: 
 
 " Repetition is seldom particular, or detailed, never complete, yet so 
 many of the phenomena of development can be satisfactorily inter- 
 preted from the historical point of view, seeming to have this 
 historical sign rather than an immediately adaptive relation, that 
 as a general statement the law remains fundamentally true." 4 
 
 1 Teachers College, New York, 1914. 
 
 2 Ibid., pp. 5-28. 
 
 3 Outlines of Evolutionary Biology (191 2), p. 281; quoted by Davidson, p. 51. Cf. 
 Dendy, pp. 265-267; Davidson, pp. 37-38. 
 
 4 Text-book of General Embryology (1913), p. 24; quoted by Davidson, p. 52. 
 
106 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 C. Deperet maintains that, if we consider only the most general fea- 
 tures, it is indisputable that the development of an individual is a kind of 
 rapid recapitulation of the slow phases of the evolution of the species and 
 the branch; 1 but he also says that examples in fossil adult species of 
 representation of the embryonic or youthful characteristics of existing 
 animals cannot be generalized — they remain in the state of exceptional 
 facts. 2 Other writers, among them K. von Zittel 3 and L. C. Miall, 4 
 have placed more emphasis upon the fact that the evidence is not com- 
 plete. Still others have thought that after allowances have been made 
 for the work of other agencies, something remains which may be called 
 recapitulation, but have implied that it is not important; thus Hatschek 
 and O. Hertwig have held that the egg cell of the developed organism 
 and the amoeba are comparable only in so far as they fall under the 
 common definition of the cell; and that the two correspond not according 
 to their contents, but only as to their form. 5 J. C. Ewart thought that 
 while there were some remote resemblances between embryos and 
 supposed ancestors, still there should be a limit to the use of the word 
 recapitulation. 6 J. T. Cunningham held that in the case of the larva 
 of the frog there was much more of adaptation than recapitulation. 7 
 Another group of investigators has attempted to restate the theory in 
 terms of resemblances between present ontogeny and ancestral ontogeny; 
 most prominent among them is T. H. Morgan who points out that in 
 certain large groups, some forms develop in very different ways from 
 others; that it is entirely arbitrary to assume that the group characters 
 are the first to appear, and then successively those of the order, family, 
 genus and species; that the early embryos of a group are not identical 
 throughout different species; that it is absurd to claim that the ancestral 
 adult condition is repeated when rudiments only appear; that cases of 
 repetition of adult ancestral stages outside the group of vertebrates are 
 often doubtful, sometimes little less than fanciful; and that embryos are 
 to be compared not to ancestral adult forms but to ancestral embryos. 8 
 
 1 Transformations of the Animal World (Eng. transl., 1909), p. 254; quoted by 
 Davidson, p. 17 n. 
 
 2 Ibid., Deperet, pp. 254-256; Davidson, pp. 32-33. 
 
 3 Natural Science, VI, 308-309 (1895); Davidson, pp. 29-30. 
 
 4 Report of British Association . . . 1897, p. 682; Davidson, p. 41 n. 
 
 5 T. H. Morgan, Evolution and Adaptation (1903), pp. 78-83; Davidson, pp. 43-44. 
 
 6 Jour. Anat. and Physiol., XXVIII, pp. 348-350 (1893-4); Davidson, pp. 31-32. 
 ''Science Progress, VI (1897), p. 489; Davidson, pp. 56-57. 
 
 8 Evolution and Adaptation, pp. 73, 83; Davidson, pp. 52-54. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Recent Science and Philosophy 107 
 
 Finally, some writers have virtually abandoned the theory; T. H. Mont- 
 gomery on the ground that difference must not be estimated from visible 
 data alone, but that differences in growth-energies and ultra-observational 
 structural bases must be taken into account; l and A. Sedgwick, who 
 thinks that 
 
 " the view that embryonic development is essentially a recapitulation 
 of ancestral history must be given up; it contains only a few refer- 
 ences to ancestral history" 
 in the way of characteristics which have been lost by the adult and have 
 been absorbed into the embryonic or larval stages. 2 These divergent 
 opinions are enough to show that the position of the recapitulation theory 
 in biology is not easy to determine, but that there are at least some 
 formidable objections to the free acceptance of the older views. 
 
 3. The Theory of Recapitulation in Psychology 
 
 1. Recapitulation and "Culture-Epoch" Theories. Carried over into 
 psychology, the theory of recapitulation asserts that the development 
 of the individual mind exhibits a resume of the development of mind 
 throughout the evolutionary series. As a special case of this, there is the 
 "culture-epoch" theory, to the effect that the mind of a human individ- 
 ual presents in its development a resume of various ancestral stages in 
 human civilization. 
 
 2. Early History of these Theories. Theories of recapitulation are fore- 
 shadowed in ancient works, beginning with Aristotle, as noted above, 
 wherever attention is drawn to the fact that man contains in himself 
 characteristics of the other animal species. The theory received its most 
 complete expression in the work of G. J. Romanes, who worked out an 
 elaborate parallelism between the biological and psychological develop- 
 ment of the individual and the various members of an evolutionary 
 series of living forms. 3 The comparison of stages of human individual 
 development with stages of human history goes back at least to August- 
 ine; there are more or less definite traces of it in Lessing, Herder, 4 Herbart, 
 Comte, and Spencer. 5 The culture-epoch theory was formulated very 
 
 1 Analysis of Racial Descent in Animals (1906), pp. 191-192; Davidson, pp. 44-45. 
 2 Art., "Embryology," Encyc. Brit, (nth ed.), p. 323; Davidson, pp. 54-55. 
 
 3 Mental Evolution in Man (1889), p. 5. Cf. Table, frontispiece. 
 
 4 A. F. Chamberlain, The Child: A Study in the Evolution of Man (London, 1906), 
 P- 55- 
 
 6 G. E. Vincent, The Social Mind and Education (New York, 1897), pp. 71-75. 
 
108 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 definitely and rigidly by T. Ziller, who attempted to systematize the 
 educational process on this basis. 1 
 
 j. Later Opinions Concerning These Theories. In recent years the 
 theories have been the subject of considerable discussion in psychology 
 and pedagogy. Their most notable adherent has been G. S. Hall, who 
 has held that although the recapitulation theory has limitations and 
 qualifications in biology, its psychogenetic applications have a method 
 of their own, and that the child and the race are each keys to the other. 2 
 According to Hall, most of the non-volitional movements of infancy and 
 childhood may be regarded as rudimentary impulses to do acts which in 
 some pre-human stage were of great importance for life. 3 In play, 
 children rehearse the activities of our ancestors, repeating their life work 
 in summative and adumbrated ways. 4 Accelerations and retardations in 
 the height and weight of individual children are traces of ancient periods 
 in which the development of the race was accelerated and retarded. 5 
 The characteristics of children from the age of eight to twelve suggest the 
 culmination of one stage of life, as if it thus represented what was once 
 the age of maturity in some remote, perhaps pygmoid, stage of human 
 evolution. 6 Adolescence recapitulates a prehistoric period of storm and 
 stress. 7 Phyletic explanations "of all degrees of probability" are sug- 
 gested throughout the work. 8 Several other writers have worked out 
 similar views, 9 but there have been numerous criticisms of them. J. M. 
 Baldwin, while he compares in some detail various stages of biological 
 development in the race and psychological development in the individ- 
 ual, 10 emphasizes the facts that habit and association, 11 accommodation, 12 
 and individual variation 13 may lead to short cuts or breaks. J. Dewey 
 says that while educational theory is indebted to the culture-epoch theory 
 for the first systematic attempts to base a course of study upon the actual 
 unfolding of child nature, certain important qualifications must be made; 
 as usually stated, the doctrine underestimates processes and exaggerates 
 the importance of products, and in applying the doctrine, the present and 
 
 1 G. E. Vincent, The Social Mind and Education (New York, 1897), p. 81. 
 
 2 Adolescence (New York, 1904), vol. I, p. viii. 3 Ibid., I, p. 160. 
 4 Ibid., I, 202. &Ibid., I, 48. 
 
 6 Ibid., I, pp. ix-x. 7 Ibid., I, p. xiii; II, 70, ff. 
 
 6 Ibid., I, p. viii; cf. I, 215-216, 264, 356, 366; II, 192-194, 212-219. 
 
 9 See Vincent, op. cit., pp. 76, ff.; Chamberlain, op. cit., pp. 213, ff.; quotations in 
 E. L. Thorndike, Educational Psychology (New York, 1913), vol. I, pp. 249, ff. 
 
 10 Mental Development in the Child and the Race (New York, 1903), pp. 15-16. 
 
 11 Ibid., p. 20. u Ibid., p. 23. 13 Ibid., p. 32. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Recent Science and Philosophy 109 
 
 not the past should be accorded the primacy. 1 P. E. Davidson thinks 
 that psychological recapitulation varies from biological since in the former 
 the stages remain functional throughout life, and the correspondence is 
 less and less chronological. 2 After a critique of other evidence offered 
 for the theory, he concludes that in the case of intelligence, there may be 
 a distinguishable progression in both series, although, as L. T. Hobhouse 
 suggests, we are not yet in a position to state what is the real character 
 of the correspondence, if it exists. 3 E. A. Kirkpatrick emphasizes the 
 importance of environmental action, and says that since in the nervous 
 system the capacity for modification is greater than in any other part 
 of the body, and since the environment affecting the development of the 
 child is different from the environment of the race, there is little chance 
 of parallel modifications; the child and the savage resemble each other 
 chiefly because they are both, to a considerable extent, undeveloped 
 intellectually, and because in both the highest nervous structures are 
 only partially developed. The order in which the different kinds of 
 intelligence appear is doubtless the same — physiological, sensory-motor, 
 representative, conceptual — but there can be a close parallel only when 
 both have been in similar environments. 4 G. A. Coe says that there is a 
 considerable degree of similarity between child life and the "childhood 
 of the race"; both the race and the individual show a movement of mind 
 from immediate ends toward remote ones, from immediate data of sense 
 toward thought structures of greater and greater complexity, from im- 
 pulsiveness toward deliberation, and so on, but the individual must not 
 be regarded as predetermined by his ancestral history, nor kept out of 
 cooperative social enterprises until a supposedly "proper stage" is 
 reached. 5 Coe sketches, point by point, a contrast between the process 
 of social education according to the recapitulation theory and the theory 
 of continuity. 6 Perhaps the most unfavorable view of recapitulation is 
 that of Thorndike, who says of the biological theory that the clearest 
 cases of recapitulation are those where the way taken to produce the 
 structure is a likely way, apart from any tendency to recapitulate for 
 
 1 Art., "Culture Epoch Theory," in P. Monroe's Cyclopedia of Education (New York, 
 ion), II, p. 241. 
 
 2 Op. cit., pp. 78-79. 
 
 3 Ibid., pp. 80-92; Hobhouse (Mind in Evolution, 1901, p. 327, n.), quoted on pp. 
 91-92. 
 
 * Genetic Psychology (New York, 191 7), pp. 334, 357. 
 
 6 Social Theory of Religious Education (New York, 1920), pp. 149-150. 
 
 • Ibid., pp. 151-153. 
 
no Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 recapitulation's sake. When it is admitted that distortions and omissions 
 are frequent, little more is left of the theory than a useless general 
 scheme for explaining facts whose existence has to be proved by direct 
 observation. Of the psychological theory he says that it seems to be an 
 attractive speculation with no more truth behind it than the fact that 
 when a repetition of phylogeny, abbreviated and modified, is a useful 
 way of producing an individual, the individual may be produced in that 
 way. Thorndike thinks that no fact of value about either the ontogeny 
 or the phylogeny of behavior has been discovered as a result of the re- 
 capitulation theory. 1 Thus it appears that the data for the psychological 
 theories as well as for the biological theories of recapitulation are by no 
 means clear, and that any attempt to construe microcosmic theories 
 from them would find them as much of a liability as an asset. 
 
 4. Organismic Theories of Society and the State 
 
 1. Early History of Organismic Theories. Organismic theories of the 
 state may be treated as a special case of the more general organismic 
 theories of society. Comparisons, more or less metaphorical, between a 
 society and an organism have been noted above in connection with 
 Plato, John of Salisbury, Hobbes, Rousseau, and Spencer. A large 
 number of other writers have been reviewed in this connection by O. 
 Gierke in the work above noted. He thinks that mediaeval thought 
 proceeded from the idea of a single whole, under the influence of Biblical 
 allegories and a continuous tradition of pictorial phrases "in classical 
 writings," and that it was motivated by the desire that Church and State 
 should complete each other. 2 During the Middle Ages the organic view 
 promoted recognition of mutual obligations and even of necessary dif- 
 ferences in rank, and of centralized control; but it was conceived in terms 
 of creation more than of evolution, and failed to reach the conception of 
 the state as a legal person. 3 Another large group of writers is considered 
 by F. W. Coker in his monograph on Organismic Theories of the State} 
 
 1 Educational Psychology (New York, 1913), vol. I, pp. 254-258. 
 
 2 Op. cit. f pp. 22-23, and note 77. 
 
 3 Pp. 27-30. He cites as typical of the mediaeval view, Dante, De monorchia, I, 
 Chapters vi and vii. 
 
 4 In Columbia University Studies in History, Economics and Public Law, vol. 38 
 (1910). This work is later than those of T. van Krieken and E. T. Towne (p. 6). 
 Some of the minor writers mentioned as having held organismic theories are C. T. 
 Welcker, who (1813) compared the ages of political development with the ages of an 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Recent Science and Philosophy 1 1 1 
 
 The most important of the earlier writers, other than those mentioned 
 above, was Comte. Coker says that the organismic character of Comte's 
 interpretation of the nature of society and social forces appears from his 
 frequent recourse to analogies between society and an organism. Society 
 is called a social or collective organism, and has the organic attribute of 
 a " universal consensus," or harmony of all structures and functions 
 working toward a common end, and making government necessary. 1 
 ''Social statics" corresponds to the anatomy, and "social dynamics" to 
 
 individual (pp. 47, ff.); J. von Gorres, who (1819) compared the democratic and mon- 
 archic elements in a state to automatic and voluntary actions in man (pp. 44 ff.); 
 K. S. Zacharia, who (1839-42) held that the state is, at least ideally, like an individual, 
 a combination of spirit and matter, made up of units, with characteristics correspond- 
 ing to those of plants, animals and men, and should maintain its life by action, vital 
 integrity, unity, and inner efficiency (pp. 84, ff.); F. T. Rohmer, who (1844) held that 
 the fundamental forces of the human soul develop in four life stages, which also ex- 
 plain the development of the state, so that boyhood parallels radicalism, youth lib- 
 eralism, and so on (pp. 49, ff.); H. Ahrens, who (1850), although he was careful to 
 specify that the state is not a natural organism, compared it to the nervous apparatus 
 of volition in the individual, and explained the differences between state and organism 
 by the presence of a knowing, valuing and selective activity in the case of the state, 
 and by the fact that the state deals in ideal goods (pp. 32, ff.); K. Volgraff, who 
 (1851-5) based his system upon the four cardinal human temperaments, distributing 
 humanity into four races, each race into four classes, each class into four orders, and 
 each order into four tribes, and compared the organization of an organism to the con- 
 stitution or state-form, which is composed of four subordinate organisms — the civil, 
 judicial, financial, and military, corresponding to physiological arrangements, proc- 
 esses which maintain health, nutritive system and protective system, respectively 
 (pp. 60-62, 92-95); J. C. Planta, for whom (1852), a fundamental and universal sys- 
 tem was polarity and mutual supplementation, and who thought the state exhibits 
 such a living supplementation of the masculine-individualistic-subjective-rational and 
 the feminine-universalistic-objective-emotional; that the state has a soul in the collec- 
 tive political consciousness, and organs, legislation constituting the heart and govern- 
 ment the brain (p. 90, n.); and J. K. Bluntschli, who (1852-70) makes what is in some 
 ways the most exaggerated application of the organismic conception of any of the 
 political philosophers (p. 105). For Bluntschli the state is a living organism, not in- 
 deed a pure product of nature (p. 106), but a union of soul and body, with parts 
 animated by special impulses and capacities (p. 107), with some parts subordinate to 
 others (p. no), developing from within outwards, possessed of an individuality (p. 
 107), and being mortal (p. 112). The state is preeminently a moral and spiritual 
 organism (p. 112). It is masculine, compared to the church, which is characteristic- 
 ally feminine (p. 113, f.). It is the image of the human being, and also the image 
 of man (p. 114). 
 
 1 Cours de philosophic positive (4th ed., 1877), vol. IV, pp. 235-243; VI, 712, cited 
 by Coker, p. 123. 
 
ii2 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 the physiology of an organism. 1 But the major portion of the latter 
 treats of the "law of the three stages," to the effect that human intel- 
 ligence, in the individual as in the race, passes through the theological, 
 metaphysical, and positive stages 2 — all of which may be reckoned among 
 the theories of recapitulation rather than the organismic theories. Organ- 
 ismic in its suggestion, if not in its actual presentation, is Comte's doc- 
 trine of Humanity as The Great Being in whom all participate. 
 
 2. Bearing of Microcosmic Theories upon the Work of Lilienfeld. Con- 
 temporary of Spencer and perhaps uninfluenced by him, 3 P. von Lilien- 
 feld was an important figure among the organicists. His teachings have 
 been reviewed by both Barth and Coker; but neither has noted the bear- 
 ing of microcosmic theories upon them. Lilienfeld holds that throughout 
 all nature there is a tendency to concentration and individuation, 4 
 evident in the formation of atoms, molecules, cells, organs, organisms, 
 and combinations of organisms. 5 Every inorganic body in this way 
 exhibits in itself what the universe exhibits; both inorganic bodies 6 and 
 societies 7 may be compared to the solar system. Every cell is a micro- 
 cosm of the individual of which it forms a constituent part, 8 and every 
 individual is a microcosm of society. 9 Lilienfeld held it to be an estab- 
 lished result, not only in metaphysics, but also in science, that the uni- 
 verse exhibits in the large what man on a small scale contains within 
 himself, " in other words, that man and the physical world around him 
 are related to one another as a microcosm to a macrocosm." That this 
 is really true he thinks is shown by the biological theory of recapitulation, 
 as well as by the fact that the human body exhibits the mechanical, 
 physical, and chemical processes of all bodies. The higher social life of 
 man, too, is a microcosm of all human history; human society is a 
 " social cosmos"; this, says Lilienfeld, results from his introductory 
 considerations 10 in which society is held to be a "real organism." These 
 correspondences and relations furnish a background and setting for 
 
 1 Coker, p. 119. 
 
 2 P kilos, positive, IV, 490, cited by Coker, p. 120. 
 
 3 P. Barth, Die Philosophie der Geschichte als Sociologie (Leipzig, 1897), pp. 127-128 
 and note. 
 
 4 Gedanken iiber die Socialwissenschaft der Zukunfl (Mitau, 1873, etc.), I, 114. 
 b Ibid., I, 131-132; cf. II, 310. 
 
 6 Ibid., I, 130. 7 Ibid., I, 133. 
 
 8 La pathologie sociale (Paris, 1896), p. 165* 
 
 9 Ibid., p. 166; Gedanken, II, p. 310. 
 
 10 Gedanken, I, 280-281. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Recent Science and Philosophy 113 
 
 Lilienfeld's organismic sociology. He thinks that society exhibits the 
 five characteristic marks of an organism — intense and varied interaction 
 of forces, inner unity, purposiveness, differentiation, in the course of a 
 life-cycle, and capitalization, or the storing up of energies and materials 
 for future consumption. 1 This last is apparent in the universe as well 
 as in society. 2 Differences between a society and an organism are ex- 
 plained by the fact that society is an organism of a higher degree, 3 or that 
 the biological organisms have been subjected to different environmental 
 actions, 4 or that society is not a visible organism because we ourselves 
 form a part of it. 5 The social organism is made up of cells, or individuals, 
 and "inter-cellular substance," or the physical and economic environ- 
 ment. 6 The economic functions of a society, including production, 
 exchange, consumption, growth and reproduction, are or may be com- 
 pared to the physiological functions of an organism; 7 the judicial 
 functions of a society may be compared to the morphological relations of 
 an organism, since they have to do with its divisions into parts; and the 
 political functions of a society, like the individuating principle of an 
 organism, make it a unity. 8 Political disturbances are compared to 
 diseases, and are traced to lack of purposive development, 9 lack of 
 harmony between whole and parts, 10 or to alterations in the place-, 
 time-, or mass-relations of constituent units. 11 Treatment may consist 
 in a process of excitation or depression, with changes of distribution, 12 
 unless death, in the form of social disintegration, 13 intervenes. Lilienfeld 
 evidently felt the force of the objection which has since developed into 
 the psychological theory of society; for to think of society in terms of an 
 organism seems to reduce it to the vegetative level, and not to do justice 
 to human achievements. He attempts to meet this by the view that a 
 society is a combination of nerve-cells rather than a combination of cells 
 in the more general sense; 14 a society has no muscular system or osseous 
 structure. 15 This has been interpreted by Barth 16 and Coker 17 to mean 
 that the nervous systems of individual men, as distinct from the rest of 
 their bodies, form the constituent "cells" of the social organism; but it 
 
 I Gedanken, I, 55-68. 2 Ibid., I, 295. 3 Ibid., I, 51-52, 80. 
 4 Ibid., I, 89-91. 6 Ibid., I, 143, 150. 6 Ibid., I, 176-177. 
 
 7 Pathologie, p. xxix; Gedanken, I, 81-82, 152-153. 8 Gedanken, I, 87. 
 
 9 Ibid., I, 167. ™Ibid., I, 170. 
 
 II Pathologie, pt. II, chaps. IV, ff.; Coker, op. cit., p. 152. 
 
 12 Pathologie, p. 230. 1S Gedanken, I, 158. u Ibid., I, 139. 
 
 16 Pathologie, p. 227; cf. Ann. de VInst. de sociol., IV, 226. 
 16 Op. cit., pp. 129-130. 17 Op. cit., p. 145. 
 
H4 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 seems to be more accurate, and more in accord with what we have called 
 the macrocosmic setting of Lilienfeld's sociology, to say that at least 
 sometimes his view is that the individuals of a society are related to their 
 environment as the cells of a nervous system are related to their inter- 
 cellular substance, but that a man in the environment constitutes, since 
 he has his entire nervous system, a much more highly developed " ner- 
 vous cell" than any of those which he as a biological individual contains. 1 
 This would make society an organ of the environment rather than, 
 strictly speaking, an organism; but Lilienfeld holds that the terms 
 "organic system" and "organism" are identical. 2 
 
 3. Organismic Theories of Other Writers. A. Schaeffle, in his elaborate 
 Bau und Leben des Socialen Korpers? carried the analogies of Spencer and 
 Lilienfeld farther, but omitted some of them in his second edition, 4 in 
 which he emphasized the fact that society, compared with an organism, 
 presents characteristics which are unique. 5 He intended to avoid the 
 term " organism," 6 but used the term " organ" in connection with the 
 " social body," 7 and analyzed the latter in terms of morphology, physiol- 
 ogy, and psychology. 8 The social cell, or unit, is the family, 9 which is 
 "the primitive social microcosm"; 10 accordingly there is both inter- 
 cellular and intracellular substance, the latter being the private property 
 of the family. 11 Although the origin of social arrangements is said to be 
 spiritual, there is an elaborate doctrine of social tissues. 12 To family 
 relationships in general corresponds the connective tissue of organisms; 1S 
 to the protective arrangements of society correspond epidermal tissues 
 and the like; 14 to the economic processes of society correspond the 
 nutritive and circulatory processes of an organism; 15 to the technical 
 establishments of society correspond the muscular tissues; 16 and to 
 intelligently directed human social life, comprising individual nervous 
 systems and the symbols, linguistic, artistic, etc., which these employ, 
 corresponds the nervous tissue, with its nerve cells and fibres. 17 Schaeffle 
 develops the last-named analogy at considerable length — great cities 
 
 1 Lilienfeld says as much, Gedanken, I, 178. 2 Ibid., I, 150. 
 
 8 1st ed., 1875-1878; citations here are from reprint of 2nd ed., Tubingen, 1896. 
 
 4 Vol. I, p. iv. 5 1, pp. iv, v. 6 1, pp. vii, 18. 7 1, 138. 8 1, p. ix. 
 
 9 1, 18, 20, 26, 66, 106. 10 1, 76. u I, 20, 69. 
 
 12 1, 86, 104 ff. Barth (op. cit., p. 141) says that Schaeffle has no analogy for social 
 " domiciliation"; but Schaeffle thought that the fact that organisms and society had 
 the same environment made other analogies inevitable (I, p. iv). 
 
 13 1, 21, 67, 109. 14 1, H2. 15 I, 31, 79, 112. 
 
 "I, 21, 117 ff. 17 I, 124. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Recent Science and Philosophy 115 
 
 correspond to the higher nervous centers, provincial towns to the spinal 
 column, outlying districts to the peripheral nerves; 1 the civilized ar- 
 rangements for the distribution of commodities are analogous to the 
 nervous integration of the viscera; 2 a society even obeys Fechner's law 
 and the law of summation. 3 Just as the central nervous system some- 
 times intervenes in the activity of an organism, otherwise reflex, so a 
 government must sometimes intervene in society, but neither absolute 
 centralization nor absolute decentralization is normal. 4 A. Fouillee, in 
 his La science sociale contemporaine? tried to reconcile opposing theories 
 of society by calling society a "contractual organism." 6 There are, he 
 thinks, three kinds of organisms — those of the lower animals, in which 
 consciousness is confused and dispersed; those of the higher animals, in 
 which consciousness is clear and concentrated; and those of societies, in 
 which consciousness is clear and dispersed. 7 There is nothing in society 
 analogous to the concentration of self-consciousness in the case of an 
 individual; 8 but the thinkers and leaders among men are analogous to 
 the most highly developed brain cells in an organism. 9 The organismic 
 theory has among its political implications an emphasis upon the mutual 
 dependence of the parts of a state, the dangers of brusque reforms, the 
 superiority of evolution to revolution — although the latter may some- 
 times be necessary — and the reconciliation of progressive and conserva- 
 tive doctrines in a liberalism which will provide for both autonomy and 
 centralization. 10 One must remember that in a society, factors of intel- 
 ligence and will are involved; u in fact, a society is an organism because 
 it is thought, and wished. 12 Fouillee goes on to attempt a higher synthe- 
 sis; for the universe, too, with its reciprocal actions and reactions is like 
 a vast organism; and it may be supposed to be an organism which is 
 social, or tends to become social, conscious and volitional. That which 
 man knows as will may be taken to be the principle of the universe, 
 which was only vague in the early stages of evolution, but later on be- 
 comes clear. Society may in this sense be said to be the end of the uni- 
 verse; "if the individual organism is already a little world, society is 
 still more worthy of the name of microcosm." 13 Moreover, language, 
 
 l I,i3S. 2 I, 136. 3 I, 179, 180. "1,23,137. 
 
 6 1 st ed., 1880; citations here from 2nd ed., Paris, 1885. On Fouillee, see Coker, 
 pp. 180 ff. 
 
 e La science sociale, pp. in, ff. ''Ibid., pp. 245-246. 
 
 8 Ibid., p. 243. 9 Ibid., p. 108. 
 
 10 Ibid., pp. 128 ff. " Ibid., pp. 143-144. 12 Ibid., p. 115. 
 
 13 Ibid., pp. 411-415; cf. pp. 123-127. 
 
n6 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 which develops naturally in society, is a whole world, an image of the 
 world of thought, and of the universe. Perhaps then the universe is a 
 society of beings whose members cooperate, at first unconsciously, but 
 later reflectively, in the life of the whole. 1 W. Wundt, in his System der 
 Philosophic had a word to say for the organismic theories; that, although 
 many saw in them only metaphors, still the differences between societies 
 and organisms should not hide the fundamental fact that such binding 
 into a unified whole, with division into organs between which there is 
 division of labor, has the characteristic marks of an organism; but the 
 fact that the individuals of a society can form an idea of their own 
 spiritual nature forbids any further analogy. 2 Apart from such con- 
 siderations, individuals and societies are bound by relations of collective 
 consciousness and collective personality. 3 J. S. Mackenzie, in his 
 Introduction to Social Philosophy* held that an organism is a little uni- 
 verse in itself; it is a universe, and not a unit — it has parts, it grows, and 
 has an end. 5 In these respects, society is more nearly analogous to an 
 organic whole than to any other type of unity; 6 but since the end of 
 society is the highest life of its individual members, it need be called 
 organic, if at all, only in the sense that it is an incomplete whole, whose 
 completion would consist simply in its own perfect development. 7 
 R. Worms, in his Organisme et socieie, worked out one of the most defi- 
 nite and thorough parallelisms between the two, comparing their anatomy, 
 physiology, and pathology in detail. 8 He presents some answers to 
 objections that have been raised against the organismic theories, espe- 
 cially by Fouillee. To the objection that "only individuals exist," 
 Worms replies that biology shows all individuation to be relative. 9 To 
 the objection that cells cannot live freely in an organism as individuals 
 can in society, he says that sometimes cells live when separated from 
 their parent organisms, and that, on the other hand, individuals in 
 society are interdependent. 10 To the objection that the biological organ- 
 isms are continuous in structure, with contiguous parts, he says that 
 society has everything that contiguity secures for the organism, namely, 
 inner continuity of movement and interchange of utilities, and that 
 
 1 La science sociale, pp. 416-417. 
 
 2 Wundt, System (Leipzig, 1889), pp. 598, ff. 
 
 8 Ibid., pp. 600, ff. 4 New York, 1895. 5 P. 164. • P. 176. 
 
 7 Pp. 272-273. 
 
 8 Worms, Org. et soc. (Paris, 1896), p. 7. See Coker, op. cit., pp. 170 ff. 
 
 9 Worms, op. cit., p. 42. 10 Ibid., pp. 46-51. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Recent Science and Philosophy 117 
 
 moreover there is no actual contact of vital parts either in plant or ani- 
 mal. 1 To the objection that in the biological organism consciousness is 
 concentrated, while in a society it is diffuse, he replies that the distinc- 
 tion is not absolute; a great part of man's activity is unconscious, and 
 cells not in the nervous system must be supposed to have some rudi- 
 mentary consciousness. 2 At the time same, the resemblances between 
 organisms and societies must not be construed as identities, and some 
 of the relative differences between them are important. 3 Consideration 
 of them leads to the view that a society is a super-organism, an organism 
 with added features. 4 In a later discussion, Worms says that, although 
 the organismic method is not the only method to be used in sociology, it 
 can reconcile psychological theories of society and the view of economic 
 materialism, 5 and that it shows the error both of radical individualism 
 and of Utopian socialism. 6 J. Novicow, in his Conscience et volonte 
 sociale says that a society differs from an organism in its morphology; 
 most civilized societies resemble an embryonic nervous system more than 
 they resemble man — but the biological resemblances are complete. 7 
 The cell, "already a world," goes on to form the higher aggregate of the 
 organic individual; there is nothing to prevent a still higher aggregate of 
 these individuals. 8 To the objection that in a society an individual can 
 form a part of more than one institution or group, whereas in an organism 
 a cell can form a part of only one organ, Novicow replies that an organ 
 may exercise different functions, although not at the same time; and, 
 again, that the difference is one of degree — just as living substances 
 are more unstable than non-living chemical compounds, so societies, the 
 next higher aggregate, are more unstable than living substances. 9 To the 
 objection that the constituent cells of an organism have no individual 
 consciousness analogous to that which is found in the members of a 
 society, he says that the members of a society are conscious each of his 
 individual life, but not of the life of the group, so that the analogy holds, 
 after all. 10 Those individuals who are most vividly conscious constitute 
 the social sensorium; the social organ analogous to the brain is not the 
 
 1 Worms, op cit., pp. 51-53. 
 
 2 Ibid., p. 59. * Ibid., pp. 72, ff. 4 Ibid., pp. 9, 394. 
 6 Ann. de VInst. de sociol., IV, p. 303 (1898); Coker, op. cit., p. 179. 
 
 6 Ibid., Ann., pp. 296-304; Coker, pp. 178-9. 
 
 7 Novicow, Conscience .... (Paris, 1897), pp. 9, 100. 
 
 8 Ann. de VInst. de sociol., IV, 188. 
 
 9 Ibid., IV, 182-183. 
 
 10 Conscience, p. 19. 
 
n8 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 government, but the "social elite." 1 In this group, as in the brain's 
 process of volition, a project rallies its supporters. 2 The history of a 
 society is analogous to the memory of an individual. 3 Novicow's general 
 conclusion is that societies are organisms of a particular nature. 4 With- 
 out the organic theory, he thinks that sociology would be either purely 
 empirical or hopelessly metaphysical. 5 
 
 4. Critique of the Organismic Theories. It is well known that the 
 objections 6 to the organismic theories of society and the state have 
 proved too strong for them, and have reduced them to the status of 
 suggestive metaphors or partial truths. 7 Even where the analogies could 
 be defended — and the arguments brought against them were sometimes 
 the more faulty of the two — the logical and metaphysical objections 8 to 
 their use have remained formidable, and the practical consequences as 
 drawn from them have not been impressive. 9 The great objection is that 
 the organicists, in spite of their varied efforts, have been too abstract, and 
 have not made adequate provision for the facts of human intelligence, and 
 the higher life of man. Yet it may be worth noting that the failure, as 
 well as the rise, of the organismic theories occurs in the period of the 
 decline of microcosmic theories in general. 10 Lilienfeld and Fouillee, at 
 least, argued for the existence of an organismic society in what they 
 deemed to be an appropriate cosmic setting; but so little help in this 
 direction has been forthcoming from any other quarter of philosophy u 
 that the issues raised by the organismic theories have been decided upon 
 quite other grounds. 
 
 I Conscience, pp. 19-20; cf. p. 220. 2 Ibid., p. 113. 
 3 Ibid., p. 33. 4 Ann. de VInst. de soc, IV, 183. 
 
 6 Ibid., pp. 1 88-191. L. Gumplowicz, in his Geschichte der Staatstheorien (Innsbruck, 
 1905), p. 437, compares the world of the natural sciences, the macrocosm, with "the 
 social-political microcosm," maintaining that the doctrine of a supreme miracle- 
 worker is erroneous in the latter as in the former. 
 
 6 For refs., Coker, op. cit., p. 209. 
 
 7 Cf. F. H. Giddings, Principles of Sociology (New York, 191 1), p. 420; C. A. Ellwood, 
 Sociology in Its Psychological Aspects (New York, 191 2), pp. 386 ff. 
 
 % E. g., Barth, op. cit., pp. 93, 164; Coker, op. cit., pp. 198 ff. 
 
 9 Coker, p. 201. 
 
 10 The microcosmic affiliations of the organismic theories have been urged as an 
 argument against them. L. Stein (Ann. de VInst. de sociol., vol. TV, p. 289) said that 
 organismic views marked a recurrence to a primitive anthropomorphism akin to that 
 of the Pythagoreans, except that it is not the universe, but the social group, which is 
 regarded as the macrocosm. 
 
 II Cf. the work of Renouvier, Royce, and Spaulding, cited in section 6. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Recent Science and Philosophy no 
 
 5. Microcosmic Analogies Employed in Contemporary Science 
 
 1. Possible Implications of Current Analogies. In spite of the fact that 
 such microcosmic views as are implied in the theories of recapitulation 
 and the organismic theories of society have been subjected to serious 
 criticisms, one finds that at the present time the various sciences fre- 
 quently draw upon one another for illustrative analogies which, if they 
 are to be taken seriously, imply that structures and processes of portions 
 of the universe which vary in size resemble one another, and that rela- 
 tions which may be termed microcosmic obtain between them. This 
 implication is not always developed; and it may be said in general that 
 the possible significance of the analogies presented is not investigated. 
 Some of the analogies which have recently been used are indicated in the 
 following paragraphs. 
 
 2. Analogies between Structures Studied in Physics, Chemistry, and 
 Astronomy. P. Kropotkin in 1893 declared that chemistry was gradually 
 introducing the idea of mass and motion into its symbols and considering 
 the molecule as a system of minute bodies oscillating around a common 
 center, comparable to a system of stars, and constituting "a particle of 
 the universe on a microscopic scale — a microcosmos which lives the same 
 life." * Recent work on the structure of atoms has led to the view that 
 all the chemical elements are made up of positively charged cores or 
 nuclei, surrounded by orbital electrons. 2 There have been some notable 
 criticisms of the view, 3 and many points remain to be worked out before 
 it can be accepted without qualification, but on the whole the alleged 
 analogy between an atom and a solar system has come to be familiar. 
 A. D. Cole has called such an atom "a world in itself" and a " complex 
 microcosm"; 4 and E. Fournier d'Albe has gone so far as to say that we 
 may even imagine the electron to be "a veritable microcosm." 5 The 
 last-named writer has also worked out what he holds to be a geometrical 
 
 1 "Recent Science," Nineteenth Century, vol. XXXIV, p. 252 (1893). The molecule 
 is called a microcosm by Benjamin Moore in a popular work, The Origin and Nature 
 of Life (New York, 1913?), p. 105; cf. p. 79. 
 
 2 See, e. g., E. Rutherford, "On the Structure of the Atom," Philosophical Magazine 
 (6), vol. XXVII, pp. 488, ff. 
 
 3 See, e. g., I. Langmuir, "The Arrangement of Electrons in Atoms and Molecules," 
 Journal of the American Chemical Society, vol. XLI (1), pp. 868, ff. (1919); esp., pp. 
 931-932. 
 
 4 "Recent Evidence for the Existence of the Nucleus Atom," Science, N. S., vol. 
 XLI, p. 73 (1915). 
 
 6 The Electron Theory (London, 1909), pp. 288-289. 
 
120 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 ratio between the dimensions of an electron, the earth, and the galaxy — a 
 ratio of approximately ten thousand trillions to one, which he thinks is 
 "nothing less than the ratio of the scales of successive universes." * 
 He finds in the " fruitful and suggestive astronomico-chemical analogy a 
 boundless vista of worlds within worlds." 2 However this may be, one 
 can at least take as significant the statement of W. D. McMillan: 
 
 "We find ourselves almost midway in a series of physical units. On 
 the one side we have the electrons, atoms and molecules, and on the 
 other we have the ordinary masses, stars and galaxies. . . . Each 
 physical unit is analyzed into units of the next lower order and 
 synthesized into those of the next higher order. Each unit is an 
 organization endowed with the proper amount of energy to carry 
 on its existence and to insure its identity." 3 
 3. Attempts to Interpret Astronomy in Terms of Biology. In recent 
 years there have been attempts, more or less metaphorical, to understand 
 astronomy in terms of biology. A. W. Bickerton has worked out a theory 
 of the origin of new stars from "grazing impacts" of older stars; his title 
 is The Birth of Worlds and Systems. 4 T. C. Chamberlin, using a series of 
 biological metaphors, thinks that our "planetary system must clearly 
 have had a bi-parental origin"; that while collision, "a bi-parental proc- 
 ess .. . has stood in a parental relation to new celestial evolutions, 5 " 
 our system arose from the near approach of a passing star to the sun, 
 with attendant disturbances which gave rise to the solar nebula and 
 planetary knots. 6 Percival Lowell once referred to the solar system as 
 "an articulated whole, an inorganic organism, which not only evolved, 
 but evolved in a definite order." 7 Fournier d'Albe has taken such 
 resemblances more seriously: 
 
 "The question of the possible life of the galactic system as an organ- 
 ism may at first sight appear strange or even absurd; but can we 
 logically deny it or make it improbable? Reduce spaces and times 
 by the world-ratio, and we have atoms in rapid motion . . . with an 
 inner nucleus and outer rim or cell-wall sufficiently cohesive to 
 
 1 Two New Worlds (London, 1907), pp. 9-10. 
 
 2 Electron Theory, p. 290. 
 
 3 " The Structure of the Universe," Science, N. S., LII, p. 67 (1920). 
 
 4 London, 191 1. 
 
 6 The Origin of the Earth (Chicago, 1916), pp. 101-102. 
 * Ibid., pp. 130, 135. 
 
 7 Quoted in Nature, vol. XCI, p. 539 (1913). 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Recent Science and Philosophy 121 
 
 exhibit individuality, but sufficiently open to admit material from 
 outside. . . . We should be chary of denying every species of life to 
 an aggregation of matter simply because it is very bulky and its 
 evolution is difficult to observe." l 
 
 4. Attempts to Interpret Geology in Terms of Anatomy and Physiology. 
 Ancient views to the effect that the earth is a living creature have some 
 curious points of resemblance with recent geology. S. Meunier, in his 
 Les harmonies de revolution terrestre, compared the earth's structure to an 
 anatomy, and declared that the earth resembled "d'une maniere trou- 
 blante" a gigantic organism. 2 He mentioned particularly the mechan- 
 isms of transformation and displacement, which make possible the 
 circulatory processes which keep the earth in equilibrium. 3 He has elab- 
 orated this view in a later work, La geologie biologique} The work of 
 Chamberlin, mentioned above, contains some striking metaphors drawn 
 from the field of physiology. The planetesimals were the food on which 
 the planetary knots fed; 5 the spacing of planets was modified by the 
 character of their "feeding-ground." 6 Even statements which are not 
 meant metaphorically suggest more or less close resemblance to anatomy, 
 as when it is said that the earth developed a segmented structure, with 
 certain great gyrals over the ocean, through which the superior accessions 
 of planetesimal dust were received. 7 Chamberlin says that the function 
 of igneous effusion in the economy of the earth may be likened to that of 
 perspiration in the case of an animal. 8 
 
 5. The Views of A. J. Herbertson. In recent years there has been one 
 suggestion of the relation between biology and geology which lies along 
 the line of the speculations of Fechner, Fourier, Lilienfeld, and Fouillee. 
 A. J. Herbertson, at the British Association meeting in 1913, spoke of 
 any one of what he called the "natural regions" of the earth as "a 
 symbiotic association of plants, animals, men, indissolubly bound up 
 with certain structures and forms of the land, possessing a definite water 
 circulation, and subjected to a seasonal climactic rhythm," 9 and said 
 that "man in the natural region may be compared with nerve cells in an 
 animal." 10 The fact that such regional units are complex he declared to 
 
 1 Two New Worlds, pp. 126-127. 
 
 'Paris, 1908, p. 16. 3 Ibid., p. 19. * Paris, 1914. See esp., p. 301. 
 
 6 The Origin of the Earth, p. 141. 
 
 •/&*</., p. 152. 7 Ibid., pp. 195-198. *Ibid., pp. 239-240. 
 
 9 Report of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1913, p. 557. 
 
122 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 be "no reason for not applying scientific methods to their investigation, 
 nor for doubting that substantial results can be gained by their use." l 
 In an article in Scientia in the same year he said that the term macro- 
 organism might be given to such a complex entity. 
 
 "If these geographical regions and localities are taken as repre- 
 senting organs, tissues and cells, we perhaps get nearest to a useful 
 comparison — but such comparison is not essential and need not 
 be pressed. . . . Such regional leviathans exist, and we are each a 
 part of them. If the geographical region is a macro-organism, then 
 men are its nerve-cells. . . . Man is no more, though no less, to be 
 considered apart from the rest of these leviathans than the nervous 
 system is to be considered apart from the rest of the organism of 
 which it is an essential element." 2 
 6. Attempts to Interpret Biology in Terms of Sociology. Parallelisms 
 recalling the organismic theories of society are sometimes found in con- 
 nection with biology. According to H. E. Crampton, in describing 
 certain metazoa 
 
 "it is absolutely necessary to employ the terms of human social 
 organization, because the hydra's body is a true colony of diverse 
 cells in exactly the same sense that a nation is a body of human 
 beings with more or less dissimilar social functions. To begin with 
 the differentiation into ectoderm and endoderm, the organism is 
 comparable to a human community made up of military and agricul- 
 tural classes." 3 
 C. S. Sherrington also has linked the two fields: 
 
 "The old Greek simile of our school classic likened man's body to 
 the body politic ... a corporate whole composed of individual 
 members. Biology gives this a literal truth. The microscope re- 
 veals that plants and animals are literally commonwealths of in- 
 dividually living units. . . . Thus the corporeal house of life is built 
 of living stones. In that house each stone is a self-centred micro- 
 cosm. . . ." 4 
 In this connection it may be noted that Sherrington elsewhere calls the 
 organism a microcosm. 5 
 
 1 Report of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1913, p. 557. 
 
 2 "The Higher Units," Scientia, vol. XIV, pp. 205, 212 (1913). 
 
 3 The Doctrine of Evolution (New York, 1911), p. 255. Cf. pp. 20-21. 
 
 4 "Physiology; Its Scope and Method" in Lectures on the Method of Science, ed. by 
 T. B. Strong (Oxford, 1906), p. 67. 
 
 6 The Integrative Action of the Nervous System (New Haven, 1906), p. 160. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Recent Science and Philosophy 123 
 
 7. Attempts to Interpret Psychology in Terms of Biology. 1 Thorndike 
 has suggested some points of resemblance between psychology and 
 biology: 
 
 "We should look upon the mental life of an individual as developing 
 in the same way that the animal or plant kingdom has developed. 
 As conditions of heat and food supply have everywhere been the 
 first requisite to and influence on animal life, so the physiological 
 conditions of the brain's activities are the first modifiers of feeling 
 and action. As the stimuli of climate, food, . . . and the rest have 
 . . . rendered possible the production of millions of different 
 animal types, so the sights and sounds and smells of things . . . 
 awaken in the mind new mental varieties, new species of thoughts 
 and acts. In a score of years from birth the human mind, like the 
 animal world, originates its universe of mental forms. As in the 
 animal kingdom, many of these variations fail to fit the condi- 
 tions . . . and die ... so many of the mental forms produced are 
 doomed to a speedy disappearance in consequence of their failure to 
 fit outside events. The elimination of one species by others in the 
 animal world is again paralleled by the death of those thoughts or 
 acts which are out of harmony with others. Species of thoughts, 
 like species of animals, prey upon one another, in a struggle in which 
 survival is the victor's reward. Just as species of animals fitted to 
 one environment perish or become transformed when that environ- 
 ment changes, so mental forms fitted to infancy perish or are trans- 
 formed . . . throughout the incessant changes of a mind's surround- 
 ings. . . . The condition of a man's mind at any stage in its history 
 is then, like the condition of the animal kingdom at any stage in the 
 history of the world, the result not only of the new varieties which 
 have appeared, but also of a natural selection working upon them." 2 
 W. P. Montague in his Variation, Heredity and Consciousness says that 
 the brain "builds up a 'psychic organism,' a life within a life, composed 
 of differentiated forms of energy." 3 
 
 8. Attempts to Interpret Logic in Terms of Biology. Finally there may 
 be mentioned a tendency to import biological comparisons into logic. 
 B. Bosanquet in the preface to his Logic, the sub-title of which is The 
 Morphology of Knowledge, writes that he is indebted to Alfred Robinson 
 
 1 See work of Herbart, cited above, and Royce, below. 
 
 2 Educational Psychology, III, pp. 308-309. 
 
 3 Proc. Aristotelian Society, vol. XXI, p. 39 (1921). 
 
124 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 for the suggestion of a comparison between the study and analysis of 
 judgment forms and the study and analysis of the forms of flowers and 
 plants. 
 
 "... I have never seemed to myself able to exhaust its suggest- 
 iveness. If I have at all reproduced for others the spectacle of 
 continuity and unity in the intellectual life, combined with the 
 most varied and precise adaptation of its fundamentally identical 
 function to manifold conditions and purposes, which this comparison 
 never fails to present to my own mind, I shall so far have succeeded 
 in the object of my work." l 
 He says that it is essential for this view that the form of thought be 
 regarded as a living function, and that therefore the "morphology of 
 knowledge" be construed as not excluding the "physiology of thought." 2 
 According to J. E. Creighton, the thought by which modern logic is 
 dominated is that of the unity and continuity of all intellectual life. 
 "Thought is regarded as an organic, living function or activity, 
 which remains identical with itself throughout all its developing 
 forms and phases. . . . The conception of an organism whose parts 
 are developing in mutual relation and interdependence promises to 
 be as fruitful when applied to logic as it has already shown itself to be 
 in other sciences." 3 
 Creighton thinks that the evolutionary concepts of change, differentia- 
 tion of structure, specialization and integration apply also to thinking, 4 
 but that such application may sometime come to be recognized as weak. 5 
 
 6. Microcosmic Theories in Recent and Contemporary Philosophy 
 
 i. General Characteristics of this Period. That the philosophies of the 
 present day are more diversified than those of other periods is partly 
 true, as a consequence of the broadening of the field of knowledge and the 
 diversity of facts to be considered; but it is partly an illusion, due to the 
 fact that in estimating the present we lack the perspective which has 
 toned down so many of the diversities of the past. Among writers whose 
 works are now current one finds numerous differences of opinion regarding 
 the microcosmic theories; the remarkable fact is that the terminology and 
 
 1 B. Bosanquet, Logic (Oxford, 1888), p. vii. 
 
 2 Ibid., p. 2. 
 
 3 An Introductory Logic (New York, 1920), pp. 34-35. 
 
 4 Hid., p. 317, ff. 
 6 Ibid., p. 314. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Recent Science and Philosophy 125 
 
 so much of the content of the theories are retained by men who differ 
 widely at other points. Some of the writers whom we shall consider, for 
 example Paulsen and Renouvier, offer more or less explicit restatements 
 of older views; while other writers, although never entirely independent 
 of older views, make individual contributions which are more note- 
 worthy. 
 
 2. Paulsen's Restatement of Fechner. F. Paulsen followed Fechner 
 in matters which concern the microcosmic theories, adding here and there 
 a word about the method — that it ought to show that the astrophysical 
 estimate of the planets is not the last nor the only one possible, 1 and that 
 it ought to reconcile science and religion — for while it is not strictly 
 scientific, still, whoever follows the indications of things attentively and 
 gets an unspoiled impression of reality will be led ultimately to such 
 ideas. In this philosophy, too, the fact of life becomes interpretable, in 
 its origin, and place in the totality of things. 2 
 
 3. The "Nouvelle Monadologie" of Renouvier and Prat. A combination 
 of Leibnitzian monadism with Kantian phenomenalism is presented by 
 C. Renouvier and L. Prat. Molecules and atoms are to be regarded as 
 physical abstractions. 3 Monads are metaphysical, and differ from atoms 
 in that the latter possess no representative faculties; 4 the monad is a 
 simple substance, reduced to essential relations of being. 5 The monads, 
 however, form by their groupings the molecules of simple inorganic 
 bodies. 6 A living organism is a functional organization of monads; each 
 of its subordinate organs may be a functional organization, and may 
 be said to be living. The central or directing monad of each organism is 
 set over its little world, and may be said to be living in an eminent degree. 7 
 Each organism, and in the organism, each organ, is a society; but a 
 society is not an organism, because individuals may pursue individual 
 ends. 8 For Renouvier, however, man is not so much the "little world " 
 as he is the sum of the whole world; for when one reflects upon the fact 
 that of all that man can know, the foundation and means is in himself, 
 
 1 Introduction to Philosophy (Eng. transl., by F. Thilly, New York, 1895), pp. 107, 
 ff. F. H. Bradley says "Every fragment of visible Nature might, so far as is known, 
 serve as part in some organism not like our bodies. ... It is natural to refer to Fech- 
 ner's vigorous advocacy" (Appearance and Reality, London, 1893, p. 271 and n.). 
 
 2 Paulsen, Introduction, pp. 109, 233, ff. 
 
 3 La nouvelle monadologie (Paris, 1899), pp. 5, 11. 
 
 4 Ibid., p. 11. 6 Ibid., p. 12. 
 6 Ibid., p. 48. 7 Ibid., p. 46. 
 8 Ibid., pp. 326-327. 
 
126 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 one will be prepared to admit that, except for God, the creation of the 
 world is primarily and essentially the creation of man. 1 
 
 4. Affiliations of Royce with Microcosmic Theories. No recent efforts 
 to show that the universe is characterized by the processes of a conscious- 
 ness or mind or will have been more imposing than those of Josiah 
 Royce. He advanced as a hypothesis the view that in the case of nature 
 in general, as in the case of the particular portions of nature known as 
 our fellow men, we are dealing with phenomenal signs of a vast conscious 
 process, whose relation to time varies vastly, but whose general char- 
 acteristics are throughout the same. 2 He thought that 
 
 "This conception of the natural order as a vast social organism of 
 which human society is only a part, is founded upon no merely 
 animistic analogies between the physical phenomena and the 
 phenomena of our organisms, but upon a deeper analogy of the very 
 nature of our conception of other finite beings besides ourselves.' ' 3 
 Concerning the nature of this latter conception, he attempts to estab- 
 lish the idealistic thesis that one is conscious of one's Ego only by virtue 
 of the contrast between this Ego and something which one regards as 
 external to one's self, and, in part at least, as an experience possible for 
 one's self rather than actual; but anything that is called experience, even 
 though it be only possible for one's self, must be actual for some other 
 consciousness. There is, therefore, a universe of other actual experience 
 beside one's own finite experience. 4 
 
 "The whole universe exhibits the phenomenon, first, of one great 
 consciousness, embracing an infinitude of geometrical, physical, 
 chemical, physiological facts; and, secondly, of a vast multitude of 
 individual conscious beings. . . . " 5 
 The processes of what is usually regarded as unconscious nature are 
 found to share with those of conscious nature in the narrower sense four 
 
 1 La nouvelle monadologie, p. 465. A view quite the opposite of this, involving the 
 use of the term microcosm in an epistemological sense, is that of M. Guyau, in The 
 Non-Religion of the Future (Eng. transl., New York, 1888), p. 481. "We are obliged 
 to admit the hypothesis of a multitude of microcosms, of mine, yours, everybody's, 
 and of a single macrocosm, the same for everybody. Between the great world and 
 every little world there is an incessant communication. We live in the universe, and 
 the universe lives in us." 
 
 2 The World and the Individual, second series (New York, 1908), pp. 226-228; 
 cf. pp. 141, 142. 
 
 3 Studies in Good and Evil (New York, 1899), p. 207. 4 Ibid., pp. 207-218. 
 5 The Religious Aspect of Philosophy (Boston and New York, 1885), p. 349. 
 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Recent Science and Philosophy 127 
 
 features — first, both regions are subject to some condition that demands 
 the irreversibility of great numbers of their processes; second, both 
 regions are subject to processes which involve in general a tendency of 
 one part to communicate, as it were, with another part, influencing what 
 has occurred in one place through what has occurred at another place. 
 This is seen in communications between minds, with attendant assimila- 
 tions — processes which are similar to, and continuous with, certain still 
 more vast and pervasive series of processes, described as wave-move- 
 ments. The third feature of resemblance is that " both the material and 
 the mental worlds show a tendency, under favorable conditions, to the 
 appearance of processes resembling those which, in the life of a mind, we 
 call habits." Physical nature is full of at least approximate rhythms; a 
 given process tends to repeat itself over and over, but is often checked by 
 processes of irreversible change. Habits are just such tendencies to 
 routine, to rhythm, in conscious life. Like the rhythms of external 
 nature, they arise, last awhile, and seem to pass away; and the difference 
 between the two series may be chiefly a difference of time-span. The 
 fourth class of processes apparently common to conscious and uncon- 
 scious nature alike are the processes of evolution. 1 In the evolution of 
 new forms of consciousness {i.e., new biological species), and of new sorts 
 of plans and ideas, there are resemblances. The process of sexual re- 
 production is regarded as analogous to that of conscious imitation, in 
 which the conscious union of former types of activity results in a new act 
 intermediate between them. In both series, further, there are processes 
 of trial and error, and survival as a result of selection. 2 
 
 In the "Supplementary Essay" of The World and the Individual, 
 Royce presents an elaborate argument to show that the Absolute is self- 
 representing. He first adopts Dedekind's theory of an infinite series of 
 numbers as a system that can be exactly represented or imaged, element 
 for element, by one of its own constituent parts. 3 Self-representation is 
 thus taken as a genetic principle of the number system, which system is 
 regarded as having, in barest and most abstract outline, the form of a 
 completed self. 4 It is then declared that any work of the intellect, since 
 it is interpretable in terms of the ordinal numbers, or of some higher type 
 of order, has the structure of a self-representative system. 5 But the 
 
 1 World and Individual, second series, pp. 219-223. 
 *Ibid., pp. 315 ff. 
 
 3 World and Individual, first series, (iqoo), pp. 507, ff. 
 
 4 Ibid., p. 534. 5 Ibid., pp. 535~S38. 
 
128 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 world itself, in accordance with Royce's "fourth conception of being'* 
 is then said to be interpretable in the same way; hence the Absolute must 
 have the form of a Self. 1 The larger Self permits the included self in 
 some aspect of its nature to become an individual and an image of the 
 Absolute. 2 At the same time, society is also an organism, and a fragment 
 of a larger whole; 3 and there may be even a race-consciousness of which 
 individual consciousnesses, animal or human, represent temporally brief 
 sections. 4 Thus, while Royce does not use the term microcosm, his 
 views have a number of points in common with microcosmic theories. 
 5. Some More Explicit Microcosmic Theories among the Idealists. 
 R. B. Perry has defined idealism as "a form of spiritualism in which man 
 the finite individual is regarded as a microcosmic representation of God 
 the absolute reality." 5 Some of the idealists have been more explicit 
 than Royce in aligning themselves with one form or another of micro- 
 cosmic theory. R. Eucken maintains that when a man attains the 
 spiritual life, " two worlds meet together in him . . . not merely in such 
 a manner that he provides the place in which they meet, but so that he 
 acquires an independent participation in the new world." Whereas in 
 his previous way of living he had been "a mere part of a world," he now 
 becomes "a world in himself, something more than human, something 
 cosmic." 6 Bosanquet says that 
 
 "We are minds, living microcosms, not with hard and fast limits, 
 discontinuous with others or with the perfect experience. . . . Nature 
 is complementary to mind, an external system, continuous with our 
 mind, through which the content and purposes of the universe are 
 communicated. The detail of the universe is elicited into mental 
 foci and external conditions pass through them into the complete 
 experience which we call the whole, the Absolute." 7 
 A. Seth Pringle-Pattison holds that "every individual is a unique 
 nature, a little world of content, which, as to its ingredients, the temper- 
 ing of the elements and the systematic structure of the whole, constitutes 
 an expression or focalization of the universe which is nowhere exactly 
 
 1 World and Individual, first series, (1900), pp. 544-545. 
 
 2 Second series, p. 303. 
 
 3 Ibid., p. 183. 
 
 4 Ibid., p. 232. 
 
 6 Present Philosophical Tendencies (New York, 191 2), p. 113. 
 
 6 Life's Basis and Life's Ideal (Eng. transl. by A. Widgery, London, 191 1), pp. 
 140-150. 
 
 7 The Principle of Individuality and Value (London, 191 2), pp. xxxi, xxxvi. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Recent Science and Philosophy 129 
 
 repeated." l As an idealist in the field of philosophy of religion, A. M. 
 Fairbairn holds that the key of all mysteries is man — "what are we but 
 symbols and parables of the vaster life of the whole? " He thinks that in 
 Christian theology there should be a doctrine of Christ which would 
 "show Him in relation to the whole system of things," and that this is 
 found when the conception of Christ is related to history as the idea of 
 God is related to nature — each is in its own sphere the factor of order, or 
 the condition of a rational system. Thus the Incarnation is viewed as 
 the epitome and mirror of all the mysteries of being. 2 
 
 6. Bergson's Doctrine that Organisms Imitate the Universe. One of the 
 most important microcosmic conceptions of recent years is that of 
 Bergson, when he compares the living organisms to the universe. 
 
 "We do not question the fundamental identity of inert matter and 
 
 organized matter. The only question is whether the natural systems 
 
 which we call living beings must be assimilated to the artificial 
 
 systems that science cuts out within inert matter, or whether they 
 
 must not rather be compared to that natural system which is the 
 
 whole of the universe. That life is a kind of mechanism I cordially 
 
 agree. But is it the mechanism of parts artificially isolated within 
 
 the whole of the universe, or is it the mechanism of the real whole? " 3 
 
 Bergson thinks that the evolution of living species within a world 
 
 represents what persists of the original " upward" trend of spirit, as 
 
 opposed to the downward trend of matter; 4 life on our planet is directed 
 
 the same way as the creative evolution of the universe; 5 the living forms 
 
 are "systems which within the whole seem to take after it." 6 
 
 1 The Idea of God in Recent Philosophy (Oxford, 191 7), p. 267. J. Ward {Naturalism 
 and Agnosticism, New York, 1899, vol. I, p. 26) uses the term microcosm in describing 
 the view of some of his opponents, to the effect that our finite knowledge might be so 
 related to the whole as to be, in spite of its finiteness, adequate. J. S. Mackenzie 
 {Introd. to Social Philos., New York, 1895) says that to be rational or self-conscious 
 means to be a microcosm (p. 257; cf. pp. 201-202, and p. 184). 
 
 2 The Philosophy of the Christian Religion (New York, 1903), pp. 17-18, 60, 478. 
 
 3 Creative Evolution (Eng. transl. by Mitchell, New York, 1916), p. 30. 
 
 4 Ibid., p. 247. 6 Ibid., p. 343. 
 
 6 Ibid., p. 37. J. E. Boodin in his Cosmic Evolution (in Proc. Arist. Soc, vol. XXI, 
 p. 108, 1921), suggests that the life process may imitate the order of the larger cosmos. 
 Bergson's attempt to delineate "a genesis of intellect at the same time as a genesis 
 of material bodies," and to show that intellectuality and materiality have been con- 
 stituted in detail by reciprocal adaptation {Creative Evolution, pp. 186-187) may be 
 interpreted microcosmically. He uses the term microcosm once (p. 214) to designate 
 an artificial system isolated within the world. 
 
130 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 j. Present Emphasis upon Differences between Universe and Man. 
 There is in contemporary philosophy a marked tendency to emphasize 
 differences rather than resemblances between the universe and man; but 
 sometimes these views are phrased in such a way that they suggest points 
 of contact with microcosmic theories. This may be illustrated by some 
 passages from G. Santayana's Life of Reason: 
 
 "Like all animals and plants, the cosmos has its own way of doing 
 things. . . . Great is this organism of mud and fire, terrible this vast, 
 painful, glorious experiment. . . . Why should we not look on the 
 universe with piety? . . . Society is not impossible between it and 
 us; since it is the source of all our energies. . . shall we not cling to 
 it and praise it, seeing that it vegetates so grandly and so sadly? " * 
 Writing in a vein less metaphorical he says of "Nature and Human 
 Nature": 
 
 "Man is a part of nature and her organization may be regarded as 
 the foundation of his own; the word nature is therefore less equivocal 
 than it seems, for every nature is Nature herself in one of her more 
 specific and better articulated forms. Man therefore represents the 
 universe that sustains him; his existence is a proof that the cosmic 
 equilibrium that fosters his life is a natural equilibrium, capable of 
 being long maintained." 2 
 But while the universe thus constitutes the natural basis, man is 
 charged with the ideal fulfilment — " the Life of Reason is no fair repro- 
 duction of the universe, but the expression of man alone." 3 A similar 
 tendency to interpret nature and man in terms of continuity but to 
 emphasize the differences between them is to be noted in the work of 
 F. C. S. Schiller, who thinks that 
 
 "We need not shrink from words like hylozoism or panpsychism, 
 provided they stand for interpretations of the lower in terms of the 
 higher. For at bottom they are merely forms of Humanism — 
 attempts to make the human and the cosmic more akin and to 
 bring them closer to us that we may act upon them more success- 
 fully." 4 
 From a point of view otherwise quite different from those of the 
 authors just cited, E. G. Spaulding develops the conception of a " creative 
 
 1 Reason in Religion (New York, 1905), pp. 190-191; cf. pp. 192, 249. 
 
 2 Reason in Common Sense (New York, 1905), p. 288. 
 
 3 Reason in Society (New York, 1905), p. 199. 
 
 4 Studies in Humanism (New York, 1907), p. 443. 
 
Microcosmic Theories in Recent Science and Philosophy 131 
 
 synthesis" linking nature and human nature, but introducing successive 
 differences between them: 
 
 "The atom differs from the electron that composes it — the molecule 
 
 from its constituent atoms — the cell from its molecules and colloidal 
 
 particles, society from the human individuals which are its units. 
 
 No realm of fact, whether subsistent or existent, is exempt from this 
 
 principle of creative synthesis, in accordance with which one or 
 
 more specific organizing relations so relate parts that there are new 
 
 qualities in the resulting whole, and whole and part belong to 
 
 specifically different universes of discourse. The realm of values is 
 
 no exception." 1 
 
 8. Traces of Microcosmic Theory in Sheldon's "Productive Duality." 
 
 One contemporary writer finds resemblances between various portions 
 
 of reality which may, when more fully worked out, lead to some kind of 
 
 microcosmic theory; this is W. H. Sheldon, in his Strife of Systems and 
 
 Productive Duality. He finds that 
 
 " throughout the range of human thought and deed there recurs . . . 
 one and the same problem, viz., to maintain the integrity of a given 
 thing, person, principle, institution, in the modifications which the 
 environment imposes upon it. In the dialect of technical philosophy 
 this is called harmonizing the principle of external relations with 
 that of internal relations." 2 
 He presents a solution of the problem, declaring that "the doctrine 
 that one entity cannot be influenced by another without losing its self- 
 identity is pure superstition." 3 Reality is characterized by duality more 
 deeply than by unity. 4 Accordingly, his work 
 
 "maps reality as a collection of dyads, or two-in-one monads: if a 
 
 physical comparison is allowed, of two-atom molecules; if a biological 
 
 one, of families, each of which is based upon the contrast of sex. It 
 
 does not at present offer any further chart; it is here limited to the 
 
 study of the microcosm rather than the macrocosm." 5 
 
 But he thinks the principle will "explain more of the structure of 
 
 reality than the present volume can show"; 6 what he aims to discover is 
 
 " something of the plan of the whole universe." 7 
 
 1 The New Rationalism (New York, 1918), p. 500. Spaulding says (p.205) "Does 
 not science . . . picture both the macrocosmically great and the microcosmically 
 small?" 
 
 2 Strife of Systems . . . (Cambridge, 1918), p. iii. 3 Ibid., p. 460. 
 
 4 Ibid., p. 475. 6 Ibid., p. 524. 6 Ibid., p. iv. 7 Ibid., p. 18. 
 
132 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 7. Summary: Traces of Microcosmic Theories in Recent Science 
 
 and Philosophy 
 
 The topics treated in this chapter are indicated in the opening section. 
 In the matter of microcosmic theories in science, it has been noted that 
 the various theories of recapitulation and the organismic theories of 
 society are involved in some difficulties; but that quite recently a number 
 of authorities in different sciences have been interpreting their subject 
 matter in terms drawn from other sciences. Some of these analogies are 
 so striking that they may indicate similarities of structure and process 
 such as would fall under our general definition of microcosmic theories; 
 but few of them are worked out with anything like this in mind. In re- 
 cent and contemporary philosophy, microcosmic theories are more 
 prominent among the idealists than in the other schools. There is a 
 strong tendency to emphasize not resemblances, but differences between 
 the universe and man. There are indications that as the work of Sheldon 
 is further developed it may present something in the nature of a micro- 
 cosmic view of the relations of various portions of reality. 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 CONCLUSION: GENERAL ESTIMATE OF MICROCOSMIC 
 
 THEORIES 
 
 i. General Survey of the History of Microcosmic Theories 
 
 i. Diversity of Theories Considered, and Their Unity. We have traced 
 the appearance and development of a large number of theories which have 
 in common the notion that portions of the universe which vary in size 
 exhibit marked resemblances in some of their structures and processes. 
 Often the theories which we have considered seem to have little else in 
 common; and in the different sources they are found along with many 
 differing implications which we have neither precisely excluded nor 
 studied in detail. But between the theories which we have considered 
 we find in most cases, serving as additional threads of connection, either 
 the peculiar microcosmic terminology, or else allusions, general or 
 specific, to the works of other writers, or again the fact that the writers 
 have belonged in the same theological or philosophical tradition. The 
 differences are so great that it would not be correct to speak of "the 
 microcosmic theory," in any save a restricted sense; but on the other 
 hand the resemblances are such that, keeping carefully to the plurals, one 
 may speak of " theories of macrocosms and microcosms." 
 
 2. Widespread Occurrences of these Theories. Traces of these theories 
 are, as we have shown, found throughout practically the whole history 
 of philosophy, from what are probably meant as references to them 
 among the Pre-Platonic Greeks to a number of diversified views and 
 usages of writers of the present day. Summaries covering the develop- 
 ments indicated are to be found above in connection with each chapter. 
 A general summary such as is now to be attempted might well begin by 
 saying that, although they exhibit periods of rise and decline, such views 
 apparently belong among the philosophical perennials. 
 
 3. Philosophies Unfavorable to Microcosmic Theories. It is significant 
 to note, although any statement about them must be made in a very 
 general way, the points of contact and opposition which, historically 
 considered, the theories of macrocosms and microcosms are found to 
 exhibit. Beginning with the oppositions, it may be observed that in 
 
134 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 ancient philosophy such theories are, so far as the evidence goes, almost 
 or quite absent from the works of the Eleatics, Sophists, Epicureans, and 
 Skeptics, and are barely mentioned by Aristotle. They are present but 
 not prominent in the writings of many Christian theologians throughout 
 the mediaeval period. They disappear almost entirely in the period 
 dominated by the critical philosophy. They reappear in objective 
 idealism, but in the present period of ascendancy of empiricism and 
 humanism they tend to be disregarded. The microcosmic theories do not 
 flourish in an atmosphere of abstract speculation; they decline when the 
 problem of knowledge is made a difficulty, as well as when interest in the 
 supernatural on the one hand or the humanistic on the other upsets 
 the balance of a consideration more evenly divided between man and the 
 universe; and the theories are likely to be suspected or forgotten in a 
 period when the data of the sciences accumulate faster than they can be 
 organized. 
 
 4. Philosophies Favorable to Microcosmic Theories. The philosophies 
 apparently most favorable to microcosmic theories have been, in chron- 
 ological order, hylozoism, Pythagoreanism, probably Stoicism, the work 
 of Philo, Neo-Platonism, the mediaeval Jewish philosophy and the 
 Encyclopcedia of the Arabian Brethren of Sincerity, the work of Paracel- 
 sus, Boehme, Leibnitz, Schelling, Schleiermacher, Schopenhauer, Fechner, 
 and the recent absolute idealists. When this group is compared with the 
 group surveyed above it may be said, again in a very general way, that 
 where the microcosmic theories appear the tendency is toward concrete, 
 as distinguished from abstract speculation — toward a speculation which 
 emphasizes a mutual interaction between the universe and man and 
 tries to interpret the one in terms of the other. 
 
 5. Motivations of Microcosmic Theories. When the history of the 
 theories is surveyed from the point of view of motivations, it appears 
 that the microcosmic interpretations of the universe are associated with 
 all the chief types of value. They may be expressions of either meta- 
 physical, religious, ethical, noetic, or aesthetic interests; or, as most 
 often occurs, may combine something of several or of all these. Some- 
 times the emphasis is upon a theory of reality which exhibits similarities 
 throughout its various portions. Sometimes, again, it is upon a kinship 
 between man and the universe, or some power thought to be behind the 
 universe. Sometimes the microcosmic theories have urged man to a 
 type of conduct which may be called universal, or cosmic, and have tried 
 to see men's social organizations in terms of larger correspondences. 
 
General Estimate of Microcosmic Theories 135 
 
 Again, the theories have served as means to relatively easy generaliza- 
 tion^ about the world, and to the unifications of such knowledge as the 
 different periods have afforded. And finally, the theories have helped to 
 suggest the beauty of the world and the sublimity of man's possibilities 
 within it — it is not without significance that the term microcosm has been 
 used so much in literature, nor that the word cosmos itself, to one trained 
 in the Greek meanings, connotes beauty as well as order. All these 
 motivations are deep-seated and persistent; and a discussion of the 
 present value of the microcosmic theories may proceed from this point. 
 
 6. Affiliations which Microcosmic Theories have Survived. Before 
 considering these motivations at the present time it may be noted that in 
 the past, taken singly or together, and measured from one period of the 
 history of philosophy to another, they have been strong enough to bring 
 the microcosmic theories through their temporary affiliations with the 
 ancient mythologies, the fatalism of the Stoics, the fantastic analogies 
 of the mediaeval Jews and Arabs, the vagaries of astrology and alchemy, 
 and the irresponsible speculations of a Schellingian philosophy of nature. 
 These matters are no longer to be charged against the microcosmic 
 theories, because the latter have shown themselves able to survive them, 
 and exhibit vitality in new forms. 
 
 7. Affiliations Which Still Afford Ground for Criticism. It must, how- 
 ever, be added that to many at the present time the microcosmic theories 
 still seem to be involved in some of their early modern and more recent 
 affiliations — in a mysticism like that of Boehme, or a panpsychism like 
 that of Fechner, or an over-confident idealism like that of Lotze, or a block 
 universe like that of Royce, or an ill-conceived scientific adventure like 
 the theories of recapitulation and the organismic theories of society, or, 
 in general, an unwarranted dependence upon the insecure method of 
 analogy. The problem of the present value of the microcosmic theories 
 depends then upon the strength of the motivations which make for them 
 and the evidence which supports them, measured against the strength of 
 such criticisms as these. 
 
 2. The Present Value of Microcosmic Theories 
 
 1. Criticisms at Present Forcing Modifications of Theories. There is no 
 question that according to the current estimate criticisms such as those 
 just mentioned are too strong for the microcosmic theories, and are 
 making necessary decided modifications of them as the price of their 
 retention. In this section an attempt will be made, first, to indicate 
 
136 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 modified types of microcosmic theories which are or may be widely 
 accepted at the present time, as implications or even as equivalents of 
 views already prevalent. Thus we shall consider the possible significance 
 of microcosmic theories as expressions of aesthetic, noetic, ethical, and 
 religious values, bearing in mind that we are dealing with expressions in 
 regard to which there may be, not merely individual acceptance here and 
 there, but rather general agreement. After having examined these re- 
 statements one by one, we shall then try to estimate their combined 
 significance. Finally, in a concluding paragraph, we shall indicate 
 briefly a metaphysical position which, if it were adopted, might render 
 possible a restatement of microcosmic theories from another point of 
 view. 
 
 2. Present Msthetic Value of Microcosmic Theories. Of the persistent 
 motivations which may be expected to keep the microcosmic theories 
 reappearing, there need be no question that the aesthetic motivation has 
 possibilities which are at once the most abundant and the least explored. 
 They are abundant because the realm of aesthetics is so broad and fair, 
 so largely free from the restraints imposed by the world of facts. In 
 aesthetic creation one may disregard and even contradict the evidence 
 drawn from all realms less colorful. Now, since recent years have wit- 
 nessed such a marked renaissance of the imagination in philosophy, it 
 may be that at some no very distant time the philosophical imagination 
 as such will be turned, in a way which all will recognize as legitimate, 
 upon the physical universe, as well as upon man and his affairs. It does 
 not seem very likely, because the prestige of the natural sciences is now so 
 overwhelming; but if the time ever comes it is possible that the successive 
 complicated repetitions of pattern according to some microcosmic theory 
 may, like the chords of a Pythagorean lyre, or the recurrent motif of a 
 Schopenhauerian symphony, appeal to imaginations eager to catch a 
 strain of what the ancients felt to be the cosmic harmonies. This is, as 
 was said, a field practically unexplored; but certainly somewhere in it 
 there is something which has gone out of the modern world. 
 
 3. Present Noetic Value of Microcosmic Theories. Quite different from 
 the foregoing is another aspect of possible significance of the microcosmic 
 theories, upon which there may be general agreement. So far as one can 
 see, it will always be possible, and largely unavoidable, to make a certain 
 epistemological and logical use of them. For, with the growing distrust 
 of false problems in this field, we are being forced to a new recognition of 
 the fact that the account of the world which our minds afford must be 
 
General Estimate of Microcosmic Theories 137 
 
 taken as, in the main, and at least potentially, a trustworthy account. 
 If any one cares to insist upon it, this statement can always be made to 
 mean that the mind in some sense of the word tends to represent the 
 world on a small scale, and hence to afford a microcosm of it. So far 
 as one can see, it makes little difference here which of the various theories 
 of knowledge is adopted; but it must also be said that the so-called micro- 
 cosmic relation here is so universal and so inevitable that it has no con- 
 spicuous or particular meaning. 
 
 4. Present Ethical Value of Microcosmic Theories. The case of ethical 
 values is somewhat more promising. Along with a modification of 
 Darwinism in biology, to the effect that evolution often proceeds by co- 
 operation as well as by the elimination of the unfit, there has come a 
 modification of Huxleyism in ethics, to the effect that the cosmos cannot, 
 after all, be altogether opposed to the presence of man. But, figuratively 
 speaking, in ethics we still approach the cosmos with a good deal of 
 diffidence, fearing lest it cast upon us the shadow of Stoic fatalism, or in 
 some other way set at naught our creative intelligence. This hesitation 
 may be partially overcome if it is recognized that the law of the cosmos 
 itself is creativity — that it proceeds by a creative evolution, or by a 
 series of creative syntheses; perhaps even that it is "creating creators." l 
 If this be granted, the microcosmic phraseology may be freely used to 
 urge the cultivation of broad sympathies and manifold attainments; and, 
 outside the realm of religion, few metaphors are more striking than these, 
 with their veritable " world of meaning." Such ideals when upheld go 
 far toward counteracting the excessive specialization which is one of the 
 faults of our time, as well as its other forms of more serious one-sidedness 
 and excess. 
 
 5. Present Religious Value of Microcosmic Theories. It is as difficult in 
 connection with microcosmic theories as it is in every other respect to 
 secure agreement concerning religious values. According to some current 
 estimates of religion, everything essential has been said when aesthetic 
 and ethical values have been discussed; for religion is regarded as a kind 
 of intermediate stage in their development, as an extension of the 
 ethical or aesthetic interest into the realm of myth and subsistence which 
 issues in new aesthetic or ethical consequences. According to the older 
 views, and to those who accept them in a more or less modified form, exist- 
 ence is itself a capital element in value, and values tend to evaporate un- 
 less they have existential sources and sanctions. Since in this section we 
 
 1 Phrase used by E. W. Lyman, in another connection. 
 
138 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 are noting possible agreements, it may be said here that there is one point 
 in which these contending views seem to be just beginning to blend — it is 
 in the attachment of a higher religious value to the physical universe. 
 If the manifold difficulties of such a compromise measure can be overcome 
 it may afford an object of religion which is at once spacious enough for 
 the creative imagination and reliable enough for the spiritual experience; 
 we may, in Santayana's phrase, regard the universe with piety, and 
 experience what Clifford called cosmic emotion. But it is evident that, 
 according to the opinions at present most widespread, such a consumma- 
 tion would contain a preponderant admixture of the imaginative element; 
 and the same would be true of any microcosmic theories modelled upon 
 it. So far as present opinions go, then, there would be here no advance 
 upon the situation noted in the cases of aesthetic and ethical values. 
 
 6. Summary of these Estimates of Microcosmic Theories. The foregoing 
 estimates of the microcosmic theories may be summed up by saying that, 
 from the point of view at present prevailing, the aesthetic interpretation 
 of microcosmic theories is too far-fetched; the epistemological interpreta- 
 tion is too self-evident; the ethical interpretation is powerful, but its 
 power is that of a metaphor rather than that of a fact; and the religious 
 interpretation draws so heavily upon the imagination that it loses its 
 claim to literal truth. On the whole, then, it might seem to be better to 
 leave the microcosmic theories to lie like fossils scattered throughout the 
 upheaved and faulting strata of the history of philosophy, than to try to 
 breathe into them the breath of life. 
 
 j. Indications of Recrudescence of Microcosmic Theories. Yet if the past 
 is to teach us anything it should be to remember that in studying the 
 microcosmic theories we are dealing with a philosophical perennial — or 
 to keep the other figure, with a species which is remarkably persistent. 
 In the strata of the history of philosophy which are even now being laid 
 down there are scattering indications of the vitality of some notions 
 which may be called microcosmic. It may be said that they exhibit 
 vitality, because they occur in connection with some of the most flourish- 
 ing portions of contemporary knowledge, namely, the sciences, some of 
 the interpretative analogies of which are indicated in the preceding 
 chapter. The analogies are, as was said, scattered, and uncertain, and 
 uncoordinated; there are, however, enough of them so that from this 
 point of view the suggestion presents itself that if the world could be 
 interpreted in terms of a concrete and realistic monadism whose individ- 
 ual units, as studied in laboratories and observatories, are seen in their 
 
General Estimate of Microcosmic Theories 139 
 
 interactions with one another to exhibit essentially similar structures and 
 processes, the way might be open for a modern microcosmic view, which, 
 in so far as it was founded upon scientific evidence would not be exposed 
 to some of the criticisms levelled against the views of the past, and 
 which at the same time would be able to modify in the direction of 
 existential sanctions some of the current conceptions of values. The 
 possibility appears to be strengthened when one considers that, with 
 different and doubtless more adequate epistemological presuppositions 
 and with slight changes in his scientific interests, Herbert Spencer might 
 have turned in this direction his data of evolution; and that Bergson, the 
 outstanding critic of the Spencerian conceptions, has himself advanced 
 one or two of the most striking microcosmic hypotheses of our time. It 
 is a question, however, not of the history of the theories, but of the 
 realistic metaphysics, of the logical justification of such a method of 
 analogy as would be necessary, and of the scientific evidences of similar- 
 ities in structures and processes. 1 These points are in fact all reducible 
 
 1 In an article entitled "Evolution and Epitomization " (Monist. vol. xxxi, pp. 536- 
 584), I have indicated in a preliminary and tentative way what seem to me to be some 
 possible steps in such an argument. The hypothesis is to the effect that the data of 
 evolution, when studied in detail, may be seen to exhibit also a concomitant process 
 of epitomization — the latter being denned as the repetition, at successive stages of 
 evolution, of structures and processes essentially analogous to those of other stages 
 whose units vary in size. Three implications of this hypothesis are developed in the 
 article — first, that of a realistic monadism, such as is alluded to above. For this, I 
 have taken, with a number of qualifications and indications of difficulties involved, 
 the series: electrons, atoms, molecules, astronomical bodies, solar systems, star 
 clusters, etc., . . .; organic compounds, . . . unicellular organisms, multicellular 
 organisms, social groups . . . ; specialized cells, nervous areas, reflex arcs, complex 
 reflexes, (instinct- and value-) complexes . . . (pp. 541-543). I have treated at 
 some length a portion of the evidence which I think goes to show that each of these 
 monads or members of the series tends to exhibit (I) a relative individuation in a 
 milieu; (II) interactions, especially with monads previously developed, involving ac- 
 cretions and depletions; (III) at least in some cases a process of reproduction of new 
 monads from old; and (IV), again in some cases at least a process of integration or 
 "creative synthesis," accompanied by differentiations of structure, and resulting in 
 the formation of relatively individuated monads (I) of the next stage (pp. 543-572). 
 A consideration of these similarities, as well as of the breaks observable in the series 
 of monads as enumerated above, leads to the formulation of the second implication 
 of epitomization, to the effect that the cosmogonic series, as above enumerated, is 
 epitomized by the biological series, and the biological series, in turn, is epitomized 
 by the neuropsychological (pp. 572-574). A more concrete estimate of this relation 
 leads to the formulation of the third implication, to the effect that the structures and 
 processes studied in ecology are epitomized by those studied in physiological psychology. 
 
140 Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms 
 
 to the last-named; for any view that is supported by scientific evidence 
 can if necessary fashion its own logic, and fight its own metaphysical 
 battles. If this should turn out to be the case with a realistic monadism 
 such as is here suggested — or perhaps even, so long as the question of its 
 possibility remains open — the long-neglected microcosmic theories of the 
 past may, in addition to their historical importance and their human 
 interest, have a vicarious meaning and an illustrative function. 
 
 The general result of the three implications is a view that the structures and processes 
 of the universe tend, by a kind of progressive concentration throughout the monads 
 of the cosmogonic, biological, and neuropsychological series to be, so to speak, dis- 
 tilled into, or brought to a focus in the social groups and through these into our values 
 and ideas. The universe is viewed as not merely evolving, with the result that men 
 and their experiences have appeared, but also as epitomizing, with the result that 
 men and their experiences have a more significant relation to the whole (p. 582). 
 
INDEX OF AUTHORS 
 
 Numbers refer to pages and notes. Names of doxographers, editors and translators 
 are in most cases not included. 
 
 Abraham Ibn Daud, 41 
 
 Agassiz, L., 105 
 
 Agrippa of Nettesheim, 53 n. 1 
 
 Ahrens, H. (no n. 4), in 
 
 Ahudhemme, 39 n. 4 
 
 Alain of Lille, xvi, 32, 33 
 
 Alchemists, 69-71, 135 
 
 Alipili, 71 
 
 Allen, G. W., 63 n. 4 
 
 Ambrose, 34 
 
 Anaxagoras, 6 
 
 Anaximenes, 2, 7 
 
 Anselm, 35 
 
 Apollodorus, 12 
 
 Arabians, 28, 36-37, 38, 40, 57 n. 1, 135. 
 
 See also Brethren of Sincerity. 
 Archelaus, 30 
 Aristotle, xiv, xvi, xvii, 2, 3 n. 3, 9, 10-n, 
 
 10 n. 12, 18 n. 1, 22, 28, 47, 107, 134 
 Arnobius, 30 
 Arnold of Bonneval, 32 
 Arnold, E. V., xvii, 3, n n. 3, 12 n. 2, 15 
 Augustine, 33, 35, 107 
 Aurelius, see Marcus Aurelius 
 Avicebron, see Solomon Ibn Gabirol 
 Avicenna, 51 
 
 Baader, F., 84-85, 85 n. 3 
 
 Babylonians, xvi, xvii, 18 n. 2, 19, 24, 28 
 
 Bacon, F., 59, 66-67 
 
 Baer, K. von, 105 
 
 Baeumker, C, 2 
 
 Bahya Ibn Paquda, 41-42, 43, 48 n. 4 
 
 Baldwin, J. M., 108 
 
 Barth, P., 112 n. 3, 113, 114 n. 12, 118 n. 8 
 
 Basilidians, 30 
 
 Bauer, E., 85 n. 5 
 
 Baumgartner, M., xvi, 33 n. 8 
 
 Bede, The Venerable, 34 
 
 Beer, B., xv, 19 n. 3, 42 nn. 6ff, 43 n. 2, 46 
 
 Beneke, F., 88 
 
 Bergson, H., 129 and n. 6, 139 
 
 Berkeley, G., 75 
 
 Bernard of Tours, 36. See Silvestris, 
 
 Bernard 
 Bernard Silvestris, see Silvestris, Bernard 
 Berthelot, P. E. M., xvi, 18 n. 2, 25 
 Bickerton, A. W., 120 
 Bigg, C, 16 n. 4 
 Bischoff, E., 45 n. 7 
 Block, P., 43 
 
 Bluntschli, J. K., (no n. 4) in 
 Boehme, J., 53, 63-64, 86, 134, 135 
 Boer, T. J. De, 46 n. 5, 51 n. 4, 52 n. 1 
 Boethius, 34 n. 5 
 Boethus of Sidon, 13 
 Boodin, J. E., 129 n. 6 
 Bosanquet, B., 123-124, 128 
 BoucheVLeclercq, A., xvi, 11 n. 3, 23 n. 9, 
 
 25 n. 9, 26 n. 9, 27, 34 n. 10 
 Boulting, W., 60 n. 4, 61 nn. 2, 5, 62 nn. 
 
 4, 8, 63 n. 1 
 Boyle, R., 67 
 Bradley, F. H., 125 n. 1 
 Brethren of Sincerity, xv, xvi, xvii, 39, 41, 
 
 42-43, 46-51, 134 
 Brightman, F., 32 n. 8 
 Browne, Sir T., 59, 65-66 
 Broyd€, I., xvi, 39, 41 n. 14, 42, 46 n. 1,51 
 
 n. 1 
 Bruno, G., 53, 60-63, 66 
 Burnet, J., 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 n. 1 
 
 Cabala, xvii, 40, 45-46 
 Caird, E., 74 n. 2 
 Campanella, T., 53, 63-64 
 
142 
 
 Index 0} Authors 
 
 Cardan, J., 65 
 
 Carus, K. G., 85 n. 5 
 
 Chalcidius, 7 n. 4, 23 
 
 Chamberlain, A. F., 107 n. 4, 108 n. 9 
 
 Chamberlin, T. C, 120, 121 
 
 Chrysippus, 12, 13 passim, 15 
 
 Cicero, 14 n. 5, 15 
 
 Clean thes, 13 passim 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, 30, 31 
 
 Clerke, A. M., 67 n. 7 
 
 Clifford, W. K., 24 n. 4, 138 
 
 Coe, G. A., 109 
 
 Coker, F. W., 101 nn. 3, 4, noff 
 
 Cole, A. D., 119 
 
 Comte, A., 107, 111-112 
 
 Conger, G. P., 139 n. 1 
 
 Cope, E. D., 105 
 
 Cornford, F. M., 1 
 
 Cornutus, 14 n. 5 
 
 Cosmas Indicopleustis, 31 
 
 Crampton, H. E., 122 
 
 Creighton, J. E., 124 
 
 Cumont, F., xvii, 18 n. 2 
 
 Cunningham, J. T., 106 
 
 Dante, no n. 3 
 
 Darwin, C, 101, 137 
 
 Daud, Abraham Ibn, see Abraham Ibn 
 
 Daud 
 David ben Mervan al Mokammez, 39 
 David of Nerken, 6, 20, 33 
 Davidson, P. E., 104 n. 1, 105-107, 109 
 Da vies, John, of Hereford, 71-72 
 Da vies, Sir John, 71 
 Dedekind, R., 127 
 Dee, J., 65 
 
 Democritus, xiv, 6, 26, 33 
 Dendy, A., 105 
 Deperet, C, 106 
 Descartes, R., xiii, 73 
 Dewey, J., 108-109 
 Diderot, D., 77-78 
 Diels, H., 4 
 
 Dieterici, F., xv, 10 n. 12, 46ff 
 Diogenes Laertius, 6 n. 1 
 Diogenes of Babylonia, 13 
 pseudo-Dionysius, 35 
 
 Doctor, M., 42 nn. 5ff, 43 and nn. $8 
 Donnolo, Shabbethai, 39-40 
 Douglas, A. H., 53 n. 1 
 Duval, R., 39 n. 4 
 
 Earle, J., 72 
 
 Eclectics, 20 
 
 Eleatics, 134 
 
 Eliezer, Rabbi, 38 
 
 Ellwood, C. A., 118 n. 7 
 
 Empedocles, 4-5, 7 
 
 Epicureans, 134 
 
 Epiphanius, 30 
 
 Erdmann, J. E., 2 n. n, 10, 23 nn. 6, 8, 
 32 n. 15, 54 nn. 1, 6, 55 n. 9, 56 n. 15, 
 59 and nn. 2, 6, 10, 60 n. 3, 62 n. 4, 
 63 nn. 3, s, 64 n. 4, 65 n. 3, 82 nn. 2, 3, 
 83 nn. 1, 7, 84 nn. 1, 17 
 
 Erigena, Scotus, 32 and nn. 2, 9, 33 
 
 Eucken, R., 34 n. 5, 128 
 
 Ewart, J. C, 106 
 
 Ezra, Moses Ibn, see Moses Ibn Ezra 
 
 Fairbairn, A. M., 129 
 
 Falckenberg, R., 54 n. 4, 79 n. 4, 80 n. 5, 
 81 n. 8, 86 n. 7, 87 n. 2, 88 n. 7 
 
 El-Farabi, 51 
 
 Fechner, G. T., xiii, 50, 60, 67 n. 7, 73, 
 88-95, 98, 98 and n. 3, 99, 101, 102, 
 115, 121, 125 and n. 1, 134, 135 
 
 Fichte, J. G., 73, 75, 76, 78, 80 
 
 Figulus, B., 70, 71 
 
 Figurier, L., 70 
 
 Firmicus Maternus, 25 
 
 Fletcher, P., 72 
 
 Fludd, R., 60 and n. 2, 67 n. 5 
 
 Fliigel, G., 47 n. 2 
 
 Fouillee, A., 115-116, 118, 121 
 
 Fourier, C, 85 n. 5, 121 
 
 Fournier d'Albe, E. E., 119-120, 121 
 
 Frizius, J., 70 
 
 Fulgentius, 26 
 
 Gabirol, Solomon Ibn, see Solomon Ibn 
 
 Gabirol 
 Galen, 7 n. 4, 20, 22, 47 
 Gataker, T., xvi, 34 n. 3 
 
Index of Authors 
 
 143 
 
 Giddings, F. H., 118 n. 7 
 Gierke, O., 36 and n. 5, no 
 Godefroid of St. Victor, 33-34 
 Gomperz, T., 4, 5, 9 n. 3 
 Gorres, J. von, (no n. 4) in 
 Grashofer, J., 70, 71 
 Gregory the Great, 32 
 Gregory Nazianzen, 31 
 Gregory of Nyssa, 32, 33, 44 
 Grosart, A. B., 71 
 Gumplowicz, L., 118 n. 5 
 Gundisallinus, xvii, 32, 37 
 Guttmann, J., xvi, 39 n. 6, 41 n. 10 
 Guyau, M., 126 n. 1 
 
 Haeckel, E., 105 
 
 Hall, G. S., 108 
 
 Hamilton, Sir W., 76 n. 6 
 
 Harnack, A., 31 
 
 Hartmann, F., 53 n. 1 
 
 Hatschek, 106 
 
 Haureau, J., 34 n. 1 
 
 Hegel, G. W. F., 73, 85-86, 87, 99 
 
 Helmont, F. M. van, 66 
 
 Helmont, J. B. van, 59 
 
 Heraclitus, xvii, 3-4, 7 
 
 Herbart, J. F., 87, 107, 123 n. 1 
 
 Herbertson, A. J., 1 21-122 
 
 Herder, J. G., 78-79, 101, 107 
 
 Hermes Trismegistos, xvi, 25-26, 40 
 
 Hermetic Writings, 25-26 
 
 pseudo-Hermippus, 34 
 
 Hertwig, O., 106 
 
 Heylin, P., 72 
 
 Hibben, J. G., 86 n. 7 
 
 Hicks, R. D., 2 n. 5, 11 n. 3 
 
 Hierocles of Alexandria, 24 
 
 Hippocratean School, 4, 5-6, 7 
 
 Hippolytus, 30 
 
 Hitchcock, E. A., 70, 71 
 
 Hobbes, T., 68-69, no 
 
 Hobhouse, L. T., 109 
 
 Hoffding, H., 74 n. 4, 86 n. 3 
 
 Holbach, P., 78 
 
 Honorius of Autun, 34 
 
 Horovitz, S., xvii 
 
 Hume, D., 75, 76-77 
 
 Huxley, T., 101, 102, 137 
 Hyatt, A., 105 
 
 Ibn Daud, Abraham, see Abraham Ibn 
 
 Daud 
 Ibn Ezra, Moses, see Moses Ibn Ezra 
 Ibn Gabirol, Solomon, see Solomon Ibn 
 
 Gabirol 
 Ibn Paquda, Bahya, see Bahya Ibn 
 
 Paquda 
 Ideler, J., 25 and n. 11 
 Isidore of Pelusium, 35 
 Isidorus Hispalensis, 34 
 
 Jamblichus, xvii, 23 
 
 James, W., 95 
 
 Jellinek, A., xv, 38 n. 3, 39 n. 7, 40 and 
 
 nn. iff, 43 and n. 11, 51 n. 1 
 Jepheth ben Ali, 39 
 Jewish writers (Graeco-Roman period), 
 
 16-19 
 Jewish writers (mediaeval), xiii, xvi, 29, 
 
 36, 37-46, 57 n. 1, 134, 135 
 Joel, M., xvi 
 John of Damascus, 32 
 John of Salisbury, 35, no 
 Jones, R. M., xvii 
 Joseph Ibn Zaddik, xv, 37, 42-43, 44 
 Joseph the Galilean, Rabbi, 38 
 
 Kant, I., xiii, 75, 76, 79, 80, 125 
 Karppe, S., xvii, 38 n. 5, 39 nn. 3, 7, 41, 
 
 45 nn. 4, 9, 46 n. 2 
 Kaufmann, D., 52 n. 2 
 Kellicott, W. E., 105-106 
 Kepler, J., 67 and n. 5 
 Kirkpatrick, E. A., 109 
 Krause, K. C. F., 84 
 Krieken, T. van, no n. 4 
 Kroll, J., xvi, 25 n. 8, 26 n. 1 
 Kroll, W., 34 n. 9 
 Kropotkin, P., 119 
 
 Langmuir, I., 119 n. 3 
 Legge, F., 30 n. 4 
 
 Leibnitz, G. W., 63, 66, 73, 74~75> 80, 96, 
 125, 134 
 
144 
 
 Index of Authors 
 
 Lessing, G. E., 107 
 
 Leucippus, 6 n. 1 
 
 Lilienfeld, P. von, 11 2-1 14, 118, 121 
 
 Limousin, C, 85 n. 5 
 
 Lippmann, E. O. von, xvii, 18 n. 2, 25 n. 
 
 10, 26 n. 13, 46 n. 4, 47 n. 3 
 Lobeck, C. A., xv, 3 n. 2, 25 n. 2, 26 nn. 
 
 2ff, 27 nn. iff, 60 n. 2 
 Locke, J., 73, 75-76 
 Lotze, H., 73, 96-98, 98 n. 3, 101, 102, 135 
 Lowell, P., 120 
 Lydgate, J., 71 
 Lyman, E. W., 137 n. 1 
 
 Mclntyre, J. L., 61 n. 6 
 
 Mackenzie, J. S., 116, 129 n. 1 
 
 McMillan, W. D., 120 
 
 Macrobius, 7 n. 4, 14 n. 5, 17 n. 6, 20, 26 
 
 McTaggart, J. E., 85 n, 6 
 
 Maimonides, xvi, 43-45 
 
 Manes, 30 
 
 Manilius, 25, 26 
 
 Marcus Aurelius, xvi, 15, 16 
 
 Maternus, see Firmicus Maternus 
 
 Mauthner, F., xviii 
 
 Maximus, 32 
 
 Melampus, 26 
 
 Meunier, S., 121 
 
 Meyer, A., xv, 2 and n. 11, 3, 4, 6 n. 4, 
 
 34 n. 5, 37, 55 n. 3, 57 n. 1 
 Meyer, Martin, 66 
 Meyer, Michael, 71 
 Miall, L. C, 106 
 Midrashim, 19 n. 3, 38, 40 
 Mitchell, P. C, 83 n. 2 
 Monoimus, 30 
 Montague, W. P., 123 
 Montgomery, T. H., 107 
 Moore, B., 119 n. 1 
 Morgan, T. H., 106 
 Moses Ibn Ezra, 41 
 Motakallimin, The, 43 
 Munk, S., xvi, 45 nn. 5, 8 
 
 Nabbes, T., 72 
 
 Natan, Rabbi, 19 n. 3, 38, 40 
 
 Nemesius, 31 
 
 Neo-Platonists, xvi, xvii, 20-24, 28, 35, 
 
 47, 134 
 Neo-Pythagoreans, xvii, 19-20, 24, 47 
 Neumark, D., xvii, 17 n. 6, 41, 43 n. 5, 
 
 46 n. 5, 51 nn. 2, 3 
 Newton, I., 67 
 Nicholas of Cusa, 53, 54~55, 55 n. 6, 60, 
 
 62 
 Nilus, 33 
 Norton, T., 70 
 Novicow, J., 1 1 7-1 18 
 
 Ocellus Lucanus, 20 
 Oersted, H. C, 85 
 Oken, L., 83-84, 105 
 Olympiodorus, 25 
 Origen, 31 
 Orphics, xvii, 26 
 Owen, R., 83 nn. 9, 12 
 
 Paquda, Bahya Ibn, see Bahya Ibn 
 
 Paquda 
 Paracelsus, 53, 54-60, 66, 67, 83, 86, 134 
 Paulsen, F., 95, 125 
 Perry, R. B., 128 
 
 Philo, xvii, 7 n. 4, 16-19, 20, 28, 38, 134 
 Philolaus, 3 
 Photius, 3, 19 n. 4 
 Pico della Mirandola, G., 53 n. 1 
 Planta, J. C, (no n. 4) in 
 Plato, xvi, xvii, 6, 7-10, 15, 20, 23, 28, no 
 Plotinus, 20-23 
 Plutarch, 26 
 Pollak, K., 19 n. 3 
 Pomponazzi, P., 53 n. 1 
 Porphyry, 6 n. 1, 23 
 Posidonius, 12, 13, 14 
 Prat, L., 125 
 Pre-Platonic philosophers, 1-7, 12, 20, 
 
 27, 133 
 Pringle-Pattison, A. Seth, see Seth Pringle- 
 
 Pattison, A. 
 Probst, J., 45 n. 6 
 Proclus, 23, 24 
 Protagoras, 6 
 Ptolemy, 47 
 Pythagoras, xvi, 2, 19 
 
Index of Authors 
 
 145 
 
 Pythagoreans, 2-3, 6, 7, 9, 27, 67, 85 n. 5, 
 104, 118 n. 10, 136 
 
 Quintilian, 27 
 
 Raymond of Sabunde, 32 
 
 Reid, T., '76 
 
 Renouvier, C, 118 n. 11, 125-126 
 
 Ripley, G., 70 
 
 Ritter, H., 66 n. 5 
 
 Robinson, A., 124 
 
 Rohmer, F. T., (no n. 4) in 
 
 Romanes, G. J., 107 
 
 Ross, H. M., 70 
 
 Rousseau, J. J., 78, no 
 
 Royce, J., 118 n. 11, 123 n. 1, 126-128, 
 
 135 
 Ruland, M., 71 
 Rutherford, E., 119 n. 2 
 
 Saadia ben Joseph, 39 
 Saint-Martin, L. C. de, 85 n. 3 
 Santayana, G., 130, 138 
 Schaeffle, A., 114-115, 114 n. 12 
 Schelling, F. W. J., 60, 73, 70-82, 83, 84, 
 
 85, 86, 101, 134, 135 
 Scheuderlein, J., 32 n. 15 
 Schiller, F. C. S., 130 
 Schleiermacher, F. D. E., 86-87, 101, 134 
 Schopenhauer, A., 73, 87-88, 88 n. 5, 101, 
 
 134, 136 
 Schuster, P., 4 
 
 Scotus Erigena, see Erigena, Scotus 
 Sedgwick, A., 107 
 Sefer Yezirah, 16, 45, 51 
 Sendivogius, M., 71 
 Seneca, 14-15 
 
 Seth Pringle-Pattison, A., 128 
 Severian, 34 n. 3 
 Shabbethai Donnolo, see Donnolo, Shab- 
 
 bethai 
 Shakespeare, W., 72 
 Sharastani, 51 n. 2 
 Sheldon, W. H., 131-132 
 Sherrington, C. S., 122 
 Siebeck, H., xvii, 4 
 Silberer, H., 70, 71 
 
 Silvestris, Bernard, 36-37, 42 
 
 Skeptics, 134 
 
 Socrates, 6, 7, 9, 10 
 
 Solinus, 25 
 
 Solomon Ibn Gabirol, xvi, 40-41, 43 
 
 Sophists, 6, 134 
 
 Spaulding, E. G., 118 n. 11, 130-131 
 
 Spencer, H., 73, 98-101, 102, 104, 107, 
 
 no, 112, 139 
 Spinoza, B., xiii, 73-74 
 Steffens, H., 82-83, 86 
 Stein, L., xv, n, 12, 14 n. 5, 15 n. 2, 63, 
 
 66, 74 n. 10, 75 n. 6, 118 n. 10 
 Steinschneider, M., xvi, 39, 51 
 Sthenidas, 20 
 
 Stoics, xv, xvi, 11-16, 28, 134, 135, 137 
 Stubbs, P., 71 
 Suchten, A. van, 70 
 Swedenborg, E., 102-103 
 Sylvester, J., 71, 72 
 Synesius, 34 
 
 Talmud, 19 n. 3, 38 
 
 Taylor, H. O., 35 n. 9 
 
 Thales, 2 
 
 Thilly, F., 77 n. 6 
 
 Thomas Aquinas, 31, 32, 63 
 
 Thorndike, E. L., 108 n. 9, 109-110, 123 
 
 Tidicaeus, F., 70 
 
 pseudo-Timaeus Locrius, 19 
 
 Towne, E. T., no n. 4 
 
 Triggs, O. L., 71 
 
 Trithemius, 53 n. 1 
 
 Tylor, E. B., 26 n. 2 
 
 Ueberweg, et al., 36 n. 7, 85 n. 4 
 Underhill, E., xvii, 25 n. 6 
 
 Varro, 26 
 
 Viereck, P., 34 n. 9 
 
 Vincent, G. E., 107 n. 5, 108 nn. 1, 9 
 
 Vitruvius, 26 
 
 Vives, L., 65 
 
 Volgraff, K., (no n. 4) in 
 
 Wagner, J. J., 84 
 
 Waite, A. E., 59 n. 5, 70-71 
 
146 
 
 Index of A uthors 
 
 Walchius, J., 71 
 
 Ward, J., 129 n. 1 
 
 Weber, A., 2, 5, 74 n. 1, 86 n. 7 
 
 Weigel, V., 60 and n. 1 
 
 Weinsberg, L., 43 and nn. 1, 4, 5, 9 
 
 Welcker, C. T., no n. 4 
 
 Windelband, W., xvi, n nn. 2, 3, 65 n. 
 
 Worms, R., 116-117 
 
 Wulf, M. De, xvii, 36 nn. 6, 8, 43 
 
 Wundt, W., 116 
 
 Xenophon, xvii, 6, 10 
 
 Zacharia, K. S., (no n. 4) in 
 
 Zaddik, Joseph Ibn, see Joseph Ibn 
 
 Zaddik 
 Zeller, E., 2 n. 10, 10 n. 12 
 Zeno (Stoic), 12, 13 passim, 14, 15 
 Ziller, T., 108 
 Zittel, K. von, 106 
 Zohar, 45-46 
 
VITA 
 
 George Perrigo Conger, born at Genoa, N. Y., May 18, 1884, son of 
 Willis N. and M. Estelle Perrigo Conger; attended elementary schools 
 and graduated from Groton (N. Y.) High School, 1900; spent two years 
 in business; attended Cornell University, 1903-1907, graduating in the 
 latter year with the degree of Bachelor of Arts; attended Union Theolog- 
 ical Seminary, 1907-19 10, graduating in the latter year with the degree 
 of Bachelor of Divinity; attended the University of Marburg in the 
 summer semester, 1909, and, as Fellow of Union Theological Seminary, 
 the Universities of Berlin, Jena, Paris, and Heidelberg, from 1910 to 191 2. 
 Ordained into the ministry of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A., 
 June 18, 1913. Married Miss Agnes D. Hulburd, of Hyde Park, Vermont, 
 October 15, 1913. Minister of the First Presbyterian Church, Rice Lake, 
 Wisconsin, 1913-1915. Secretary of the Young Men's Christian Associa- 
 tion, War Prisoners' Aid, at Khabarovsk, Siberia, 191 6-19 17. Graduate 
 student at Union Theological Seminary, 191 7-1920, and at Columbia 
 University, in the Department of Philosophy, 1918-1920. Minister of 
 the First Presbyterian Church, Palisades Park, New Jersey, 1918-1920, 
 and Assistant in Field Work, Union Theological Seminary, 1918-1920. 
 Assistant Professor of Philosophy in the University of Minnesota, 1920-. 
 
H 72 83 
 
 LbJi 
 
°y£W/ ♦* ** 
 
 0°\* 
 
 
 
 %^ 
 
 ,V ^ • 
 
 
 
 
 
 > .«*^% ^ ,*o •!••• > v .c^L'* <^ ^ •••ill 
 
 
 
 A°+ 
 
 *.°v 
 
 Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
 
 \ v s Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
 
 , * **a( Treatment Date: Sept. 2004 
 
 v^ v [ PreservationTechnologies 
 
 C^ ,J J> °*6y A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 
 
 * Y ^M. ° & 1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
 
 f fi- *>V * *a Cranberry Township, PA 16066 I 
 
 \ J 1 ' . • " • . %. o* . ' ■ • . *o ,7^4,7792, " 
 

 
 ;.-^g* 
 
 
 *^ A> 
 
 v & % • 
 
 ^ *. 
 
 C° y/rtoZ' o * ■ •i^** * 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ♦ **'> 
 
 
 
 ft"' 
 
 * v »!iik* ^ 4,0* .;••- *> 
 
 ••/ v^V %/$fr\* V^V 
 
 
 r^** ^ 
 w" « 
 
 <> *^ 
 
 i •.»*• /\ ; -»ff * ♦♦^ 
 
 
 
 k'^^s^\ '-jfSfSk j?\ ; .^^." ** v % \ 
 
 
 v< 
 
 w 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 *^U A> 
 
 
 
 <r^ *-tv. 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 013 194 3817 #