BOOK 109.B33 c. 1 BAX # HANDBOOK OF HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 3 T153 0D05T7flT D -'«£. BOHITS PHILOSOPHICAL LIBRARY. A HANDBOOK HISTOEY OF PHILOSOPHY. An^andbook , 63 OF THE EISTOEY OF PHILOSOPHY. FOB TEE USE OF STUDENTS, BY EENEST BELFORT^BAX. EDITOR OF ' KAXT's PROLEGOMENA,' ETC.: CTHOR OP ' JEAN PAUL MARAT, A HI6T0RIC0-EI0GRAPHICAL SKETCH,' ETC. I, ONDON: GEORaE BELL AND SONS, YORK STREET, COVENT GARDEN. 1S86. t^ LONDON : PKINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND feONS, LIMITED, STAMFORD STEFET AND CHAKI^G CBOSS. PREFACE. When I was requested to undertake the editing and re- ^vision for Bohn's Philosophical Library, of a new edition of ' Tennemann's Manual of the History of Philosophy,' a "very brief examination sufficed to make it evident to me that the amount of correction and alteration required to bring the latter only approximately up to date would be such, that the last state of that manual would bid fair to resemble the condition of a certain relic associated with the Thirty Years War, resj)ecting which we are told, the "head, neck, legs and part of the body have been renewed, all the rest is the real horse." It was therefore decided that I should undertake an entirely new volume on the subject. The plan adopted has been to give a more or less detailed account of those philosophers who either consti- tute epochs in the history of speculation, or at least have contributed something of their own toward its subsequent development, without filling the work unnecessarily with a mere crowd of names. Of course in the case of thinkers of subordinate importance, a selection made on this principle must always be open to criticism, but that there )are no flagrant cases of partiality or carelessness is my conscientious belief. VI PREFACE. It will be observed that there is a progressive expansion ■ in the treatment as modern times are approached. A bibliography has been appended where it has been con- sidered necessary, especially in the case of those earlier periods of which the exposition has been more condensed. As regards later \viiters, the view taken is that the primary need of the student is to study the original works themselves rather than what other people have written about them, desirable as this may be as a ■ supplementary aid. AVorks, moreover, treating of these thinkers are numerous, and their titles readily accessible to the student. I must, in conclusion, beg the reader to remember, as some extenuation of any short-comings he may find, that this little work only professes to be a " handbook " to the study of the subject, and not an exhaustive treatment of it. It should also be stated that I have been ably assisted by Mr. Davison's compilation of the excellent index which concludes the work. HANDBOOK TO THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY. GENERAL INTEODUCTION. I. What is Philosophy? Man finds himself conscious of being in a ready-made world, of which he forms part and parcel. He apprehends this fact long before the impulse arises in him to compre- hend it. He is aware, that is to say, of this world in its concrete actuality, long before he feels himself driven to try and become aware of it in its abstract possibility. ted But this impulse nevertheless arises at a certain stage 1 of man's development, and the result is philosophy, which may be described as the offspring of the conscious endeavour to reconstruct the given world of perceptive experience — the world found constructed in actuality — according to its possibility. This enormous and all-embracing problem, as a matter of course, exhibits a variety of aspects, and has naturally been approached by many paths. The History of Philosophy shows us these aspects as they progressively unfold themselves to the human mind, and the various paths that have been struck out for their investigation, one or two proving highways, many byways, and not a few blind roads. The first aspect under which the problem presented itself in ancient Greece, whose philosophical develop- ment may be taken as typical, was that of Being or existence; the statement was — to discover the ultimate constituent of the physical universe. In the next stage, the problem became refined. It was no longer an ultimate 2 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY. [Introd. cosmical principle that was sought for, but the ultimate form of existence was conceived as one of which the world of sense was a mere mode, if it were not indeed opposed to it. The problem of philosophy continued to be attacked on the side of being from these two points, the concrete and the abstract, until the Sophistic Revolution which issued in Socrates, when the standing-ground was radically changed. It was now seen for the first time that inasmuch as the possibility of formulating, much more of solving the problem of the Being of the sensible world, presupposed the capacity of Knowing, the first step in philosophy must be an investigation of the conditions under which this know- ledge comes to pass, in other words, an examination of the capacity of knowing, itself. The philosophical labours of the two typical thinkers of antiquity, Plato and Aristotle, were mainly occupied with this problem. Philosophy distinguishes itself from mythology and theology, by being essentially a conscious and reasoned efi'ort to explain the universe, while mythology and theo- logy are, at least in their genesis, essentially the uncon- scious and spontaneous results of a primitive imagination, which employs the notion of volition and personality as the basis of causal condition. The fact of their being at a later stage refined and presented in a quasi-philosophised guise, or supported by philosophical arguments, does not alter their intrinsic character. The radical distinction between philosophy and special science lies in that while the latter is concerned either with the classification and description of certain isolated groups of phenomena, or with formulating the real or causal conditions of the possibility of these groups con- sidered jjer se, the former is occupied with the t )tality of all phenomena, either as concerns its real conditions in time (cosmology and psj^chology), or its elemental conditions, i.e. the conditions of its possibility (metaphvsic proper).* Science is concerned with a part for itself alone, while philosophy, if it concerns itself with any part or isolated group of phenomena at all, only regards it in its relation * Of the di-tinction between real and elemental conditions, we sliall have occasion to treat more at length in a subsequent division of the J) resent work. Introd.] I. WHAT IS PHILOSOPHY? 3 to the whole, or as a necessary propaadeutic to a coherent view of the whole. The word philosophy tradition states to have been fiist used by Pythagoras. This semi-mythical 2:)ersonage, ac- cording to the Avell-known legend, when asked by Leon, the tyrant of Phloeus, what vocation he followed, replied that he had none, but that he was a philosopher. On being interrogated as to the meaning of the woid, he replied, that as in the Olympic Games some sought glory, others gain, while others, more noble, came to enjoy the spectacle ; so in life, while there were many prepared to work for honour, many for riches, there were yet a few who, despising all these things, found their occupation in the contemplation and knowledge of nature and man, and that these were the philosophers. In the dialogue Euthydemus, Plato defines philosophy aTi(rL<; ivLaT-^/xr] to speak, their capacity for spon- taneous development and progress, exhausted itself before the birth of that great world-evolution constituting the Ihistory of Humanity jn'oper, and of which ancient Greece and modern Europe, with its colonies, are the extreme terms. The sixth century before Christ, or thereabouts, the age of Gautama, Confucius, Zoroaster and Thales, is the dawn of history in the latter sense. The history of the modern world is closely and de- finitely knitted to that of the Middle Ages, and this again tc» the history of ancient Greece and Rome, the whole forming an organise! system. But the direct influence upon the classical civilisations of those of Assyria, Baby- lonia, Palestine, China, India, or even Egypt, is at best obscure. For this reason we do not purpose dwelling at any length on the quasi-philosophies, or more properly theosophies, of the East. It is probable that a considerable body of theosophic lore was enshrined in the Egyptian temples ; but encased as it 16 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY. was in mythological language, and coming to ns as most of it does through Greek sources, it is impossible to give anything approaching a coherent and correct view of its general features. The Semitic race, on the other hand, has never in any of its branches produced an original philosophic or even theosophic system of its own. The Semitic mind is, in its pure state, anti-philosophical. Though it has given to the world no less than three important ethical religions, we search in vain through the whole body of pure Semitic literature, that is, such as reflects the Semitic intellect unaffected by non-Semitic culture (e.g. the Hebrew Scriptures and the Koran), for a single trace even of a philosophic thought, much less a sj'stem, unless indeed we choose, as some have done, to read a metaphysical meaning into the old Hebrew formula, " I am that I am " — the general character and isolated position of which, however, would give colour to the hypothesis of an Eg5q3tian origin. The fragments of reputed Assyrian and Akkadian literature are likewise entirely destitute of a philosophical side. In the Medo-Persian literature, as that of an Aryan race, we might naturally expect to find something like a philosophy, and, in fact, the latter portions of the Zend-Avesta show attempts to render the theological doctrine of the dual principle philosophic. But there is even here no sign of an independent and original philosophical movement. In China the only ancient writing possessing any speculative interest is that of Lao-tse, born B.C. 604, and the main position of which is practically identical with that of Indian Metaphysic, though alleged to have been uninfluenced by it ; but there is much in the treatise of a purely theological character, and devoid of all philosophic interest. It is in India, that we first find a distinct and unmis- takable philosoydiic development. In the sixth century before Christ, when the non- Aryan monarchies of Egypt, Phoenicia, Babylonia, and Assyria, were sinking into decay, and their empires fast becoming disintegrated by foreign influences, the Hindoos felt the thrill of that mighty wave of energy heralding the birth of the new human consciousness — moral, intellectual, and religious — which was consequent on the decline of the earliest THE ORIENTALS. 17 forms of civilisation. But the philosophic development of India is deprived of the interest vv^hich would other- wise attach to it, owing to its separation from that of the main trnnk of the historic races, and its consequent crudity and limitation in scope. The sacred philosophy (so-called) of India is contained in the Upanischads, or third section of the Vedic scrip- tures. Their main thesis consists of the monistic idea of the one true existent Absolute, spoken of variously under the names of Paramathman, Brahman, as opposed to the world of falsity and appearance, or the Maya. The Maija is the negation of Brahnan. In itself. Brahman is unthink- able and undifferentiated in-ness of Being ; only through the illusion, or the Maya, does it become conscious, mutable, undividualised. " As the colours in the flame or the red-hot iron proceed therefrom a thousandfold, so do all beings proceed from the Unchangeable, and return again to it." " As the web issues from the spider, as little sparks proceed from fire, so from the one soul proceed all living animals, all worlds, all the gods and all beings." " Two birds (the Paramathman, the universal soul, and Jivathman, the individual soul) inhabit the same tree (abide in the same body), &c." " As from a blazing fire substantial sparks proceed in a thousand ways, so from the imperishable various souls are produced, and they return to him." These, and numberless other passages of similar purport, are to be found scattered throughout the Upanischads. The one theme is varied in a hundred different ways, but its substance is the same. This Metaphysic of the Upanischads, as will be readily seen, is, to the last degree, abstract. No modus vivendl exists between the Absolute One and the world of " many- hued reality " — between the real and the non-real. The practical consequence of this is an Ethic of Asceticism, which has absolute indifference and passivity for its ideal f life. A little later than the Upanischads, which are for the ost part poetic in character — and rather semi-conscious ttempts to picture the mystery vaguely felt, than con- cious efforts to explain it — come the six philosophical ystems — properly so-ealled. Their dates are supposed c 18 HISTOKY OF PHILOSOPHY. to lie between the fourth and fifth centuries before Christ. The first in order is the Nyaya, founded by Gotama ; the second, the VaiseJiiJca of Kanada ; the third, the Sdnkhya of Kapila; the fourth, the Yoga of Patanjali; the fifth, the Mimdnsd of Jaimini ; and the sixth, the Veddnta of Badarayana or Vyasa. These systems are given in the form of Sutras or Aphorisms. The Nyaya is essentially a system of Logic, It deals at length with the proposition, the syllogism, the category, the predicable, &c. The VaiseshiJca is a supplementary development of the Nyaya, but in addition to its elaboration of the categories fur- nished in the former, it contains a definite cosmology of an atomistic character. The resemblance of this to the Greek atomism, and even in some respects to that of modern science, is striking. The foundation of the SanMiya philosophy is a Monism, which in the course of the system issues in a species of Dualism. The distinction between matter and spirit is insisted upon ; it being laid down as an axiom that the production of mind from matter, as of something from nothing, is an absurdity. The Sankhya also contains a systematic theory of Emana- tion. The Yoga is a kind of pendant to the Sankhya. Its bearing is mainly practical. It treats of the means by which the individual soul may attain union with the universal soul, these means being asceticism of the most drastic description. In the Mimansa we have no properly philosophical doctrine taught, and indeed its claim to rank among the philosophical systems rests solely on its logical method. Its central idea is the deification of the Veda and Vedic ritual. It is opposed to both rationalism and theism, the Veda being the supreme authority. The Vedanta is really little more than an expansion of the doctrines of the Upanischads of the one Substance Brahma realised in the world, or more accurately the one really existent Brahma manifested in the world of illusion and plurality, to which, at most, a practical existence can be ascribed. The personal soul — the Jivatliman — through ignorance mistakes itself and the world for real things. Once it is set free from this ignorance, and arrives at a proper understanding of the truth, the illusion vanishes, and it sees the identity of itself and the woiid with the en iiji late ffler iieD( Tlie .air tlie too( parti Id "ini tion 1 \n\ THE ORIENTALS. 19 universal soul, the one Paramathman. As will be appa- rent, wellnigh the whole theosophy and philosophy of India turns upon a more or less poetically expressed Monism. Its drawback consists in the fact that it is abstract, and incapable of furnishing a coherent and logically determined view of conscious reality as a whole, and also from its vague and mystical character, which V precludes scientific deduction of the data of consciousness fvom the outset. Besides the six dogmatic systems we haze noticed, the Hindoos possess an empirical, sceptical, and materialist school in that of Carvaka and his followers, whose doctrines and even their mode of statement bear a close resemblance to those of La Mettrie, and the French rationalism of the last century. Some also reckon the eclectic Pantheistic doctrine contained in the Bhagavad- gita, as forming a distinct system. In reviewing the prehistoric civilisations, that is, such as are found complete in all essentials at the dawn of history, and even then laying claim to a remote antiquity, we find that the great awakening of the sixth century (circa) passed over some of them without response. Of this class are the Egyptian, Assyrian, Chaldean, and Phoenician, with probably the Lydian and other civilisa- tions of Asia Minor. Others again, such as the Aryan civilisations of Hindoostan and Persia, and to a lesser extent that of China, responded to the impulse of the new movement; but the results of the awakening sooner or later became crystallised, thus resolving themselves into mere accretions on the previously existing culture, which hence speedily relapsed into its former state of stagnation. The first had lost their independent vitality ere history dawned. The second had enough vitality to respond to the impulse agitating the world around them, but were too old and set for its influence to be more than very partial. In contrast to these ancient Oriental civilisations already " in the sere and yellow leaf," we find the Greek civilisa- tion bursting into life, and forming the focus of the newly iwakened individual consciousness. Here there was a culture forming, and not fixed into a more or less rigid groove. Hence with the Greece of the sixth century and c 2 20 HISTOEY OF PHILOSOPHY. its colonies, we enter on the history of the main stream of human development. There is no longer the tendency to universal crj^stallisation, discoverable in all the prehistoric civilisations of the East. Henceforth the ever-widening stream never becomes completely frozen over. There is always a channel left for the currents of progress. For this reason, it is only in so far as the ancient civilisations acted or were reacted upon by the European civilisation of the classical nations, or that of their successors, that they have any real historical as distinguished from anthropological significance. In concluding the present section, we may observe that philosophy, as the product of a conscious effort to explain the world, cannot be said to have existed prior to the awakening of the human mind to definite consciousness of itself. Xot until man cleUherately iormulsbtedL to himself for their own sal^e, and not to subserve religious or other ends, the problems. What am I ? What is my relation to the world ? AYhat is the principle of the world ? can he be said to have begun to philosophise. Hence we may fairly deny the title philosophy to any such theories of the world, as the theogonies, cosmogonies, and theo- sophies which obtained previously to this epoch. In no ancient country do we find an original movement of a philosophic character outside Greece with, as we have seen, the solitary excejDtion of India. But in India the move- ment was but of short duration, and has exercised compara- tively little influence on history. We pass on, therefore, to a consideration of the first period of Greek philosophy. As among the best authorities for Oriental thought, apart from the ancient books themselves in their various translations, may be men- tioned, for the Egyptians, Gardner Wilkinson's ' Ancient Egyptians,' and Buusen's ' Egypt's Place in Universal History.' For the Chinese, Pauthier's Esquisse (Vune histoire de la Philosopliie chinoise, and Plath's Eeh'gion tind ddtus der alien Cliinesen. Among the numerous works on the Indians. Monier Williams's ' Indian Wisdom,' contains a good account of Indian thought; also Colebrooke's 'Essays on the Philosophy of the Hindoos,' in his 'Miscellaneous Essays'; various translations of the Eoyal Asiatic Society ; and Earth's ' Religions of India,' which gives an excellent general view of the subject ; for Buddhism, may be cited the various Eeview and other articles of Mr. Pthys Davids ; Burnouf's Introduction a Vhistoire du Bouddhissme indien; and Spencer Hardy's ' Legends and Theories of the Buddhists,' ( 21 ) GEEEK PHILOSOPHY INTEODUCTION. In Greek philosophy there are six well-marked periods. (I.) that of the Pre-Socratic Schools ; (II.) the period of Socrates and what are commonly termed the imperfect Socratists ; (III.) the culminating epoch of Greek thought in Plato and Aristotle ; (IV.) the commencement of its specialisation, and decline with the Stoics, Epicureans and the various Sceptical schools ; (V.) the period subsequent to the Eoman conquest characterised by the recrudescence of the earlier pre-Socratic doctrines, or what may be termed the anti- quarian period; and (VI.) the period of Neo-Platonism. with which ancient philosophy closes. Respecting this arrangement, it may be desirable to remark that I have filiated the imperfect Socratic schools directly on to Socrates, in preference to placing them after Plato and Aristotle, for the reason that they seem more immediately the outcome of the actual Socratic teaching, so far as it has come down to us. With the Cyrenaics, the Cynics, the Megarics, the chief, where not the sole subject-matter of philosophy, remains, as with Socrates, ethical; the teaching was mainly oral, while, generally speaking, the doctrines themselves are directly traceable to utterances or actions of the historical Socrates. Plato and Aristotle, on the other hand, cannot be said to have received more than an impulse from Socrates. It is next to certain that they could not have obtained a single speculative doctrine from their master, while the extent to which the dialectical method of Plato's dialogues is attributable to Socrates or Plato himself, is, and will probably remain, a matter of dispute. In both Plato and Aristotle, philosophy, which Socrates had expressly subordinated to practical 22 GREEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch i. issues, is extended to the widest speculative questions — questions which, so far as we know, never even occurred to Socrates, as they had certainly not occurred to his predecessors. After the great original achievements of these two giant thinkers, Greek thought ceased to be productive, and confined itself to the reproduction and development of pre-Socratic, Socratic, Platonic, or Aristotelian doctrines ; in the end absorbing Oriental theosophy. The pre-Socratic philosophy falls under two sections ; the first comprising what are usually known as the Ionian, the Italian, and the Eleatic schools ; and the second taking in Herakleitos, Empedokles, the Atomists (Demokritos and Leukippus), and Anaxagoras. In considering these early stages in the history of philosophy, we must guard ourselves from reading into systems ideas pertaining to later phases in the evolution of thought. There is a difficulty for many of us, ac- customed as we are to modem rules of philosophising, in realising the naive and crude fashion in which great problems presented themselves to the early thinkers, and the still more crude attempts at solution which satisfied them. It is essential to bear in mind, especially in the schools of our first section, that distinctions and modes of statement, familiar to us now as household words, were with them non-existent — such, for instance, as Materialism and Idealism, Theism and Atheism, Subjec- tive and Objective, Knowing and Being, ]\Iind and Matter. Hence, for example, it is impossible to label Thales as materialist or immaterialist, theist or atheist, and the attempt to do so only shows an utter lack of historical insight. The problems, or the aspects of problems, of which these expressions connote the supposed solution, had not as yet appeared above the horizon of speculation, and hence this terminology is altogether devoid of meaning. The lonians were merely naive Hylozoists, that is, they simply took the world as they found it ; to them the object of external perception (as existent), being the all, the only thing standing in need of explanation. Accordingly, the problem was to find the ultimate form of that object, a particular form from which all other forms were deriva- Epoch I.] THE PRE-SOCRATIC SCHOOLS. 23 tive. Thales pronounced this to be Water ; Anaximenes, Air ; and Anaximander, a formless chaos. They might, and it is likely enough did, believe in the gods of their age and country ; but these gods, like the souls of men and demons, were conceived, no less than the other objects of the world, as entities constituted of this same primitive matter. The attitude of mind represented by the early Ionian specu- lators was that of a simple childlike questioning, which readily accepts the first answer that offers itself, and with this rests satisfied, without waiting to test its consistency even with itself, much less with fact. For Greek philosophy in general, the best work is Professor Eduard Zeller's Philosophie der Grieehen, some of the volumes of which have been published separately in English ; that on the pre-Socratic philosophy is translated by S. F. AUeyne : also Dyk's Versokratische Philosophie. Of the ordinary histories of Philosophy, Ritter's may be mentioned as particularly full on the pre-Socratic schools as on ancient philosophy generally. An English translation of this portion of Ritter (in 4 vols.) exists, but is now out of print and scarce. Eitter and Preller's ' Selection of Fragments ' is also a standai:d work. Brandis' Handbuch der Ge- schischte der GriecMsch-Romische Philosophie has considerable value. No good English work specially devoted to ancient philosophy exists, with the exception of Ferrier's ' Pre-Socratic Philosophy.' Of the numerous critical and antiquarian essays in Latin and German on individual philosophers and special questions of scholarship, only those of interest to the general student will be mentioned. EPOCH L— THE PEE-SOCEATIC SCHOOLS. I. THE IONIAN SCHOOLS. Thales. Thales, one of the seven sages, is the reputed founder of Greek philosophy. He was born about B.C. 624, but the exact date is uncertain, at Miletus, whence his ancestors are said to have migrated from Boeotia. Of the numerous saws attributed to him, and his knowledge of Mathematics and Astronomy, it is not necessary to speak at length. It is sufficient to observe that Thales was one of the most famous mathematicians and astronomers of ancient times, is alleged to have introduced geometry to the Greeks, 24 GKEEK PHILOSOPHY. ^ [Epoch I. and to have been the first to foretell eclipses. Some doubt exists as to the authenticity of the story of his Egyptian journey, and still more as to his having acquired his learn- ing from Egyptian sources. Little or nothing is known with certainty as to his life, though there are numerous legends respecting it. The claim of Thales to be the founder of philosophy rests on his having been the first to attempt to explain the world on a non-mythological and non-theological principle. He propounded the question, What is the ulti- mate substance to which all things are reducible ? and answered it by asserting the primitive substance to be water. How he arrived at this conclusion is not known, nor indeed the manner in which he conceived the world to be evolved, though, judging from the analogy of kindred systems, this was by a process of condensation and rarefaction. There have been plenty of theories as to how Thales was led to his central doctrine (e.g. Aristotle's, that it was by obser- ving that the seeds of all things are moist), but they are one and all purely conjectural. Various cosmological specu- lations were attributed to Thales in ancient times, among others, that the earth was a flat disc floating upon water ; that the heavenly bodies were glowing masses; also theories respecting the nature of demons, heroes, &c. All the reports concerning the doctrines of Thales are, however, of so doubtful and contradictory a nature, that it is impossible to assert anything with certainty respecting them, except as concerns the cardinal thesis of water being the principle of all things. If we are to believe some of these reports, he seems to have been hardl}^, if at all, eman- cipated from the animistic or fetischistic attitude of mind peculiar to the early stages of human culture ; but this would appear scarcely compatible with those which credit him with a comparatively high degree of scientific attainment. Anaximandros. Anaximandros, or, as it is usually Anglicised, Anaxi- mander, was also a native of Miletus, and a younger con- temporar}^ and some say pupil of Thales. The date of his Epoch I.] THE PRE-SOCKATIC SCHOOLS. 25 birth is given as B.C. 611. Nothing is known of his life. Report states that he was also proficient in geography and astronomy ; that he designed the first map and celestial globe ; and, according to some, invented the sun-dial, tlKjugh others attribute this to Thales or Pherekydes. He un- doubtedly wrote the first philosophical treatise, its main thesis being that into that whence things arise, they must return ; that this primal substance, which he is the first to designate by the word principle (apx^)? is a formless and infinite matter, incorruptible and eternal, and that of its own inherent force things arise from it and pass into it again, or perhaps we might say it determines itself in forms which either give way to other forms or lose all form whatever, ^.e. return again to the primal indefiniteness. The first determination of primitive substance was heat and cold, a fiery sphere arising surrounded by cold air. From fire and air were formed the stars (Anaximandros regarded the stars as animated beings or divinities, according to the view prevalent in ancient times, and subscribed to by no less a thinker than Plato), in the midst of which floats the cylindrically-shaped earth, immovable, owing to its equidistance from all points of the sur- rounding heavens, which were apparently conceived as a circumscribed space like the interior of a hollow globe. The earth was originally fluid. Through the co-operation of heat and moisture organic life originated, passing suc- cessively into higher and higher forms. All land animals were primarily marine organizations, becoming modified, and gradually assuming their present characters as the con- ditions of their environment changed. As the earth began to dry, the fins gave place, among those inhabiting the dry portion of its surface, to members more adapted to life under the new conditions. This development from pre- existent forms applied no less to man than to other animals. A moot-point as regards Anaximandros has been the nature of his primitive essence. That it was conceived as material substance, few scholars of any eminence have doubted, but some, like Bitter, have been found to main- tain that its differentiation existed in it from the begin- ning, in other words, that it was an infinite aggregate of 26 GKEEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I. determinate elements like the Jiomoeomoerioe of Anaxagoras. That such an assumption is not only unsupported by- evidence, but is foreign to the whole nature of the specu- lation, has been conclusively shown by Zeller. All the accounts respecting the primitive substance of Anaxi- mandros emphasise the fact of its absolute formlessness. The advance made by Anaximandros upon Thales will be apparent to the most superficial student. There is little doubt that Anaximandros w^as a speculative genius of the first order. Prompted, in all jDrobability, merely by the crude and disconnected dicta of Thales, he constructed a coherent system on the hylozoistic basis, a system, consider- ing the then state of knowledge, possessing considerable plausibility, and containing one of the most remarkable anticipations of the great cosmological truth of modem times which history can offer. The wonderful guess of Anaximandros on the subject of Evolution must ever maintain his name as memorable in the annals of human thought. It is noteworthy that this idea, if not consciously deduced from his cardinal doctrine of a universal substance, infinite in quantity and indefinite in quality ;per se, yet possessing the inherent capacity for infinite modification, nevertheless, logically follows from it. The forecast of Anaximandros has slept for two thousand years. It first began to awaken at the end of the last century, and when in the fulness of time it burst into that richness of life which has so jorofoundly influenced the thought of our age, it was no longer on the shores of the ^gean, deserted by the genius of speculation for many a long century, but in the little village of Down in Kent. It is a remarkable circumstance, as the late Dr. Thirlwall observed (' History of Greece,' vol. ii. pp. 134-5), that the speculations of Anaximandros were so little followed up by later thinkers of antiquity, though it may be accounted for in more ways than one. Anaximenes. The date of Anaximenes' birth is uncertain ; but he was probably a younger contemporary of Thales and Anaxi- Epoch l] THE PRE-SOCRATIC SCHOOLS. 27 mander, being by some asserted to have been a pupil of the latter. He was, also, a native of Miletus. Anaximenes re-affirmed the qualitative character of the primal substance, but instead of identifying it, as Thales had done, with water, asserted it to be air. The working out of the system accorded with this alteration. As Thales had conceived the earth to be a flat disc, floating upon water, so Anaximenes described it as a flat disc, floating upon air. The latter, however, definitely worked out the notion of the production of the real world through the condensation and rarefaction of the primitive element. Heat and cold appear to have corresponded to this process — heat representing rarefaction, and cold condensation. Anaximenes is reported as maintaining the production of clouds from air, of water from clouds, and of earth from water. The earth was the centre of the universe, the heavenly bodies, which consisted of a mixture of earth and fire, circulating round it. All things were destined to be ultimately resolved into air. The work of Anaximenes in which these doctrines were propounded, was known to Aristotle and his pupil Theo- phrastus, but appears to have been lost soon after their time. Diogenes of Apollonia. A hiatus exists in the line of the Ionic physicists between Anaximenes and the present philosopher, the last of the school, only broken by one or two obscure per- sonages, who are little more than names, such as Hippo, a follower of Thales and Idaeus, who seems to have been influenced by Anaximenes. Diogenes is generally supposed to have flourished about the time of Anaxagoras. Very little is known of his life, and even the identity of his birthplace, Apollonia, is not settled, but it is generally referred to the place of that name in Crete, though the fact that he wrote in the Ionic dialect, and belonged to the Ionic school, tends to militate against this supposition. With Diogenes we undoubtedly reach the highwater-mark of Ionic specu- lation. To Diogenes, as to Anaximenes, the circumambient air, which seems to interpenetrate all things, was the 28 GREEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I. essence of which all things consist, the primitive form of matter of which all other forms are modifications, and into which they must ultimately be resolved. 1'he great philosophic merit of Diogenes consists in his being the first to explicitly enunciate the principle of Monism. His predecessors had, one and all, assumed this principle implicitly at the outset, but Diogenes seeks to demonstrate it. He urges the inexplicability of mutual action and reaction, othei-wise than on a monistic basis. He shows that the facts of nature and the real world all point to one primitive substance as their substratum. This explicit Monism denotes a considerable advance in speculation. Another distinctive feature of the philosophy of Diogenes, which some would maintain, though perhaps without sufficient reason, to be not so much a develoj^ment on older lines as a change of front, was the attribution of intelligence to his ' air.' The soul, the intelligent element in man, was of course nothing but breath or air. Hence the question may have arisen. Why should not the air- matter manifested as intelligent in us, be so in its essential nature ? Diogenes, in his attempts to prove this, gives us the earliest sample we possess of the design argument. At the same time, we have in the doctrine itself the first distinct expression of the theory of an anima mujidi, which has played such an important part in subsequent speculation. In Diogenes the Ionian Physicism finds its culmination and conclusion. The school had doubtless, in his time, fallen into disrepute, and the plausibility and more recent form its fundamental principles assumed under his auspices failed to rehabilitate it. Such was the condition of philo- sophy at the time of Anaxagoras. But as most of these early schools overlap each other, so to speak, it is impos- sible to deal with them chronologically, and hence we are compelled to retrace our steps, in order to follow another line of speculation, viz. the Pythagorean or Italian. ( 29 ) II. THE ITALIAN SCHOOL. Pythagoras. " Among all the schools of philosophy known to us," says Zeller, " there is none of which the history is so over- grown, we may almost say so concealed by myths and fictions, and the doctrines of which have been so replaced in the course of tradition by such a mass of later con- stituents, as the Pj^thagorean." It is indeed impossible now to disentangle the doctrines of Pythagoras himself with any certainty from those of members of his school. A still greater mystery overhangs the life of Pythagoras, the three biographies that have survived from antiquity being altogether unreliable. That Pythagoras was the son of a stone-cutter, named Innesarchus, and was born at Samos, as well as that he was of Phoenician descent, all are agreed ; while his birth is generally fixed at between B.C. 680 and 590. In his fortieth year he is said to have left his home and started on his travels, extending over twelve years, in the course of which he visited Ionia, Phoenicia, and Egypt, finally settling down in the Greek city of Crotona in Southern Italy. There are, however, various con- flicting reports on the age at which he left Samos, and also on the duration of his stay in the East, the only unanimity being as to his ultimate place of residence. In ancient times Pythagoras was commonly regarded as the main original channel for the introduction of Oriental, and es23ecially Egyptian, ideas into Europe. Pythagoras, soon after his arrival in Crotona, became a political and religious as well as a philosophical power throughout the Greek colonies of Italy. There is eveiy indication of a desire on his part to establish a cult and polity on the model of the Eastern theocracies. Thus, we have the division of doctrine into esoteric and exoteric, with a corresponding distinction among its hearers, of the introduction of mysteries, the prohibition of sundry articles of diet, the institution of a special regime of life for the elect and such as aspired to be so, and above all, the attempt, for a time more than partially successful, to 30 GREEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I. acquire a political authority for himself and his followers, amounting to the complete control of the state. The circumstances of the death of Pythagoras are variously related. According to some accounts he was killed in one of the civil tumults which ended in the destruction of the whole faction, and the massacre or dis- persion of its members ; according to others, he died of starvation at Metapontum (about B.C. 500), whither he was compelled to fly to escape the vengeance of the popular party. As it is practically impossible to furnish a reliable account of the philosophy of Pythagoras himself, we shall confine ourselves to giving a sketch of the Pythagorean system as it has come down to us, without attempting to enter into moot points of scholarship as to the relative antiquity of its re23uted doctrines. The Pythagohean System. With the Pythagorean philosophy we enter upon a new and more advanced j^hase of Greek thought than that of the Hylozoists of Miletus. The Pythagoreans were evidently capable of a high degree of abstraction. The principle and essence of all things was now no longer conceived as concrete, but as abstract. The fundamental doctrine attributed to Pythagoras, that " All is number," must be taken as meaning not merely that everything can be treated numericall}^ but that number is that by which the constitution of things is determined. In other words, the matter as well as the form of the real was deemed to consist in number, although the antithesis of matter and form had not as yet become explicit in thought. The Pythagoreans were probably led to this theory by perceiving that all mathe- matical conceptions are reducible to terms of number. It was most likely to an attentive study of the mathematical aspects of astronomy and music, sciences which the Pjiiha- goreans especially cultivated, that the doctrine of numbers is more immediately traceable. There is no doubt that the ideas of proportion and harmony jjervaded the whole Pythagorean sj^stem. The world was conceived as a harmoniously articulated whole ; the doctrine of numbers was merely the ultimate expression of this conception, an Epoch I.] THE PRE-SOCRATIO SCHOOLS. 31 exj^ression which will a]3pear natural enough when one considers that the, to us, familiar distinction of abstract and concrete had not been made. This hypostasis, then, of numbers naturally gave rise to an emanation-theory. 'J hat whence all numbers are derivable, their source or generative parent, as it is termed, is the One or Unity. From the One, as their common root, all numbers proceed, and inasmu<5h as all numbers are contained therein, it is often designated as " the number." From the One, there issues the antithesis which plays so great a part in the system, of the Indefinite and Definite,* or the unlimited and the limiting, in which perhaps, we may see a faint adumbration of the later antithesis of matter and form. Thence proceeds the odd and the even ; the even being identified with the indefinite, and the odd with the definite, because the odd sets a limit to bi-partition which the even does not. The definite or limiting is throughout regarded as the higher principle, but is equally with its correlate subordinated to Unity or the One. from these main pairs (viz. the Indefinite and the Definite, the Even and the Odd) proceed eight subordinate couples, which, with the two primary, make up the sacred number ten ; the complete Pythagorean categories being as follows: (1) Definite and Indefinite; (2) Odd and Even ; (3) Onet and Many ; (4) Right and Left ; (5) Male and Female; (6) Resting and Moving; (7) Straight and Curved ; (8) Light and Darkness ; (9) Good and Evil ; (10) Square and Oblong. In so far as these contradic- tions, immanent in the original unity, appear in opjDOsition to each other outside this unity, arises the system of numbers or things. The application of this theory to the detailed expla- nation of the concrete world could not be effected otherwise than by a series of arbitrary combinations, ae that one is the point, two the line, three the plane, that virtue is a harmony of certain numbers, &c. * Erdmann remarks as characteristic that in place of the physical opposition of heat and cold as with the hylozoists, we have here a logical opposition. (Erdmann, vol. i. p. 26.) t Tliis antithetical unity was distinguidhed from the unconditioned unity at the basis of the system. 32 GEEEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I. In the Pythagorean cosmology, the universe was divided into ten S23heres, which were regarded as revolving round the central iire. The soul was of course conceived as in essence number ; and cognition as arising in and through number. That which could not be expressed mathemati- cally was therefore incognisable and nothing. The above is of course only a brief sketch of the leading jDositions of a system which exercised a vast influence ujion ancient speculation, but which nevertheless suffered more variations in the hands of its individual adherents than any other, for the reason that its founder committed nothing to writing. Add to this, that the earliest Pythagorean fragments probably date from a century after Pythagoras's time, and the difticulty of ar- riving at true Pythagoreanism with certainty, at present, will be sufficiently apparent. It will be seen, however, from what we have said that the Pythagorean system (so-called) contains all the later philosophical disciplines in germ. Thus in addition* to an ontology proper, we have the first attempt on the basis of this to solve the problems of Theory of Knowledge, Psychology, Cosmology and Ethics. These attempts, it is true, are confined to a few merely arbitrary and childish dicta, but still they are significant as showing a recognition of the existence of these problems, and of the duty of philosoph}' to explain them on its fundamental principles. But it is of the utmost importance to bear in mind that Pythagoreanism was primarily a religion and a polity, and that to this its philosophy was supposed to lead up as its end and goal. It is in the character of hierophant, rather than that of philo-opher, that the majestic and semi-mythical figure of Pythagoras stands forrh so con- spicuously in classical histor3\ The remembrance of the personality of the great Samian as a religious leader lingered with the world till the last ray of the afterglow of ancient culture had died away. The most interesting ancient sources for Pj^thagoreanism are the" Golden verses," with the commentai y by Hierokles. (33) ^OLS. 35 vcver slight, THE ELEATIC SCHOOL. -» follows : If st first reach — »<>. — ^^ ' next ^ 'nt Xenophanes. The reputed founder of the Eleatic school was born at Kolophon, in Ionia. The date of his birth is uncertain, but he is said to have flourished about B.C. 530. He spent the greater part of his life in travelling, in the manner of an ancient baid, through the chief cities of Sicily and Magna Greecia, finally settling in Elea, a town of Southern Italy. The burden of the poems which Xenophanes, sung, was that the All or the One, as it was variously termed, was God. As a pendant to this we have a polemic against the current polytheism, and the immorality of the narratives of the poets. Some of the fragments preserved would seem to imply a theistic tendency,* but others dis- tinctly identify " God " with the spacial universe. Thus the statement that the shape of the deity was spherical is plainly an inference from the apparent figure formed by the sky and horizon. Passionless, without motion, neither limited nor unlimited, " all eye, all ear, all thought," such was the God, Being, or All, of Xeno- phanes. It is the enunciation of unity and change- lessness as the attributes of true Being against the multi- plicity and change of the world of appearance, which gives Xenophanes his place in the history of philoso- phy. Otherwise he would have been no more than a religious reformer. As it was, the religious element in the teachings of Xenophanes remained almost still-born. The philosophical alone has left a mark on history. Parmenides. Parmenides, of Elea, probably a pupil of Xenophanes in his old age, and much esteemed in his native city for * " There is one God alone, the greatest among gods and men, resem- bling mortals neither in body nor in thought." Apud Clem. Alex, i. I. J) 32 GKEEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I. In the Pand statesmanship, embodied his philosophy in into ten sp!?^ C)f which considerable fragments remain, the central'^esides an introduction, of two main divisions, ess' Jttrbo' treating of the doctrine of the true, and the -r.cond containing a cosmical theory of illusory appearance. In Parmenides, the theological terminology of Xeno- phanes is abandoned. Being, as distinguished from Xon-being, is the subject-matter of philosophy. True knowledge, the knowledge of Being, is only to be obtained through intellect ; the senses serve only to delude us with an apparent reality, which is in truth non-existent. Being is one, unchangeable, unbecome, infinite, and eternal. The appearance of change, multiplicity, limitation, etc., in the sense world, is illusory. Parmenides enunciated for the first time, in history, the doctrine of abstract Monism, and an abstract Monism it is, of the crudest and most uncompromising description. Melissos and Zeno. The distinguished Samian General Melissos, also be- longs to the Eleatic school. His subject-matter is the Ens, or being, which, like Parmenides, he regarded as an immovable, indivisible unity. Like Parmenides, Melissos has a polemic against the conception of a void, which is declared impossible. His work is mainly directed against the Ionian Physicists. The Eleatic Zeno is stated to have been an adopted son of Parmenides, whose doctrines he embraced in their entirety. He was regarded as a man of heroic character, and numerous stories of his fortitude are related. There is no new doctrine taught by Zeno. His philosophical work consisted of an attempt to fortify the positions of Parmenides, and to clinch his arguments and demonstra- tions. This he efiected or sought to efi'ect b}^ means of Dialectic, or the reductio ad ahsurdum, a method of proof which he was the first to employ. Numerous instances illustrative of his skill in this kind of argumentation are transmitted, of which the most noted is the so-called Achilles-puzzle. The object was to prove the impossibility of motion. If Achilles and the tortoise run a race, and Epoch L] THE PRE-SOKRATIC SCHOOLS. 35 Achilles do but give the tortoise a start, however slight, he will never overtake the tortoise. — Proof as follows : If Achilles is to overtake the tortoise, he must first reach the point where the tortoise was when he started ; next the point it has attained in the interval ; next the point arrived at, while he is making this second advance ; and so on ad infinitum, which is obviously impossible in a finite time.* This is one of four arguments employed by Zeno to prove the impossibility of motion. Arguments of an analogous kind are brought forward to demonstrate the impossibility of plurality. In Zeno the opposition of the Eleatic philosophy to common sense is brought out into the most prominent relief. Multiplicity and motion are not encountered with general arguments, as with Par- menides, but their impossibility is sought to be drawn from their very conception. In this way Zeno's dialectic started problems which philosophy has never since been able to evade. Soon after Melissos and Zeno, the Eleatic school seems to have died out, its dialectic being absorbed by the Sophists. It should be observed that several of the Eleatics included a cosmology (not very consistently perhaps) in their philosophy, of which, since it is destitute of value or importance, either intrinsically or as bearing on the system proper, no account has been given. One point only is worthy of notice, namely, that the Eleatics invariably assumed two elements as primal instead of the one element of the Ionian Hylozoists. In this we may perhaps see a transition to the four elements of Empedokles. The way in which the Eleatic system, starting from a polemic in the person of the founder against the current theology, became purely philosophic, has already been noticed. * " The infinity of space in this race of subdivision is artfully run against a finite time ; whereas if the one infinite were pitted, as m reason it ought to be, against the other infinite, the endless divisibi- lity of time against the endless divisibility of space, there would arise a reciprocal exhaustion and neutralisation that would swallow up the astounding consequences, very much as the two Kilkenny cats ate up each other." De Quincey"s works, Vol. XVI., p. 154. D 2 36 GEEEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I. THE METAPHYSICAL-PHYSICISTS. Herakleitos. We have now reached a group of thinkers who com- bined the Hylozoism of the lonians with the metaphysical methods of the Pythagoreans and Xenophanes.* The metaphysic of the Eleatics was purely abstract. It admitted of no modus vivendi with the material world. One unchangeable, immovable and eternal being alone existed as the essence of the real, all else was absolute illusion. The negation of the possibility of motion and change was now met by their affirmation as the insejDarable attribute of real being. Physics, or cosmology, ceasing to be separated by an impassable gulf from philosoj^hy proper, as with the Eleatics, was absorbed into its central doctrine. The leading names in this group are Herakleitos, Anaxagoras, Empedocles, and Leukippus and Demokritos. Herakleitos sprang from an ancient family of Ephesus, claiming descent from the Homeric Nestor. He was an arch-aristocrat, and a bitter hater of the democracy of his native town. The date of his birth was probably about B.C. 532. On account of the mystical language in which his doctrines were couched, he obtained the cognomen of the " Obscure." The cardinal doctrine of Herakleitos : " All things flow," was an aphorism for the great principle of " becoming ; " of the identity in contradiction of all things, which it is the undoubted glory of the Ephesian thinker to have for the first time definitely enunciated. Everything is and is not at the same moment ; it exists only in transition. The inherent opposition of all things, the strain of contradiction running through them, he describes as " the harmony of the world like that of the lyre and the bow." PhysicalJy expressed, the ultimate essence of the real * The work of Parmenides was subsequent to that of Herakleitos. Epoch I.] THE METAPHYSICAL-PHYSICISTS. 37 was " fire," that element beiug symbolical of non- stability, of ceaseless change. "The one world of all things, has not been made either by a god or a man ; but it was, and is, and will be, an everliving fire, kindling itself according to measure and extinguisshing itself according to measure." From the upper regions where the fire was purest it descended to the middle regions where it became water, less pure, less living ; till finally it reached the lowest region of all, the region of least life, least change, and least motion, viz. the earth. At this point the reverse process commenced, the fire gradually ascending to the sphere of its original purity. From fire all things come, and into fire they must return. The "fire" of Herakleitos must be understood rather as an incandescent vapour than as actual flame. The processes of the evolution and dissolution of the world out of and into this fiery vaj^our are eternally alternating. Herakleitos employed various illustrations to bring home to the mind the eternal flux of things ; as that one could not step twice into the same river, etc. To illustrate that everything existed in combination with its opposite, he instanced sleep and waking, life and death, youth and age. It is a manifest historical misapprehension to describe Herakleitos, as is done byUeberweg, as a " Hylozoist to the backbone," * since the slightest acquaintance with his doctrines suffices to show us that their salient point is not so much the theory of a primitive fire, which is rather inferential and illustrative, as the doctrine of the eternal flux and reflux of things, and of contradiction and strife as essential to existence. The Herakleitan school continued to possess numerous adherents, especially in Ephesus and the Greek cities of Asia Minor, till the time of Sokrates. One of Plato's teachers, Kratylos, was an Herakleitan. The work of Herakleitos which bore the title, common to most of the pre-Sokratic treatises, Trept s, was extant and much read by the Christians of the second and * " Vom hause aus Hylozoist," Ueberweg, Vol. I., p. 46. 38 GREEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I. third centuries, — but fragments only have reached modem times. There are several monographs on Herakleitos, by different Gi-erman scholars, the most celebrated being Ferdinand Lassalle's great work. Die PJiilosophie Hera- Jcleitos' des Dimkeln von Epliesos, 2 Bde.^ Berlin, 1858, the critical value of which, however, is impaired by its strong Hegelian tendency. EmI'EDOKLES. Empedokles was born at Akragas, in Sicily, B.C. 490. His history is overlaid with legends, of which the well- known storj^ of his suicide on Mount Etna is a specimen. Empedokles, like Parmenides, embodied his philosophical views in an epic poem. The four elements (so-called), fire, water, earth and air,* were to Empedokles the ultimate forms of the real, but they were not like the Ionic primitive substance capable of qualitative change. All things were composed of these four elements, but by a mixture in various proportions. In themselves they were absolutely statical, possessing no inherent principle of determination, such as condensation and rarefaction, as with the Hj-lozoists and Herakleitos. The change and multiplicity of things is brought about by mechanical principles foreign to their essential nature. Those principles were love and hate, a uniting and a separating principle. By this dualistic conception Em- pedokles found the modus vivendi between the Absolute Being of Parmenides, which excluded all becoming, and therefore all reality, and the absolute flux of Herakleitos, which seemed to exclude all self-existent Being. Empedokles conceived of absolute existence, like Xeno- phanes, as originally one unchanging all-encompassing sphere, which the opposing influences of love and hate first reduced to the world of change, motion, and plurality by the comlDination and separation of the four " roots," as Empedokles terms them, which it implicitly contained. Each of the two forces prevails alternately in the process * We perliaps ought rathar to say, the solid, the liquid, the gaseous, and the ethereal, i.e. the four forms of matter. Epoch I.] THE METAPHYSICAL-PHYSICISTS. 39 of the world-formation. Originally, absolute love (i.e. union) obtained. Hate gained an entrance and severed the elements from one another, in which way individual beings arose. But the power of hate reaching its ex- tremest point, individual things cease to exist. Every particle of matter is separated from every other particle. The combining influence of love then enters again, and new individual beings arise, till with the complete re-establish- ment of the power of love all reverts to the primal state of absolute quiescence and unity. Empedokles' philosophy also contained a theory of the order in time and the manner of the origin of plants and animals. Sense-perception it explained by the out-flow- ing of particles from external bodies, and their impinge- ment upon the organs of sense, every element in bodies being perceived by us through a corresponding element in ourselves. Anaxagoras. Anaxagoras, who was born at Klazomenoe about B.C. 500, of a noble family, subsequently migrated to Athens, and became the friend of Perikles. Owing to an accusation of atheism, he was compelled to leave the city, and fly to Lampsakos, where he died at the age of seventy-two. Like Empedokles and the Atomists, Anaxagoras postula- ted qualitatively unchangeable substance, by the combina- tion and separation of which, individual things arose. This substance consisted of an infinite interpenetration of ele- ments, an infinite chaos. It was neither increased nor diminished, but suffered only combination and resolution into infinitely varying forms. The primitive aggregate was termed by subsequent exponents of the system Homoi- omeroi. The union of these ultimate elements with each other was so complete, that they were divisible to infinity, there being no ultimate and irresolvable atoms at their basis. This formless mass was subjected not to a necessary law, but to vovs, or mind, an omnipotent and omniscient power that produced order and harmony out of the chaos. The separation is conceived as going out successively from a middle point in ever-widening circles. As with most of the ancients, Anaxagoras regarded the earth as the centre 40 GREEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I. of the universe. His theory of the origin of organic beings strongly resembled that of Anaximandros. The two most noteworthy points in the philosophy of Anaxagoras are the introduction of the notion of mind into philosophic speculation, and the assertion of the infinite divisibility of matter, or, as it is termed, Dynamism. A great deal has been made of the first of these points, as might naturally be expected, but so far from its supposing any advance in conception, we may rather consider it as philosophically a reaction to anthropomorphism. The appearance of the problem of the ultimate constitution of matter upon the arena of speculation, on the other hand, undoubtedly marks an epoch in the history of thought, and had immediate results. The Atomists. The reputed founder of Atomism in Greece was Leu- kippus, respecting whom scarcely anything is known, not even whether he committed his doctrines to writing or not. According to Aristotle, he originally belonged to the Eleatic school. The real literary founder of the school, Demokritos, who is described as a pupil of Leukippus, flourished about half a century later than Anaxagoras. He was born at Abdera, and is stated to have employed the large fortune he possessed in travelling throughout Egypt and the East. He died at an advanced age, much respected, in his native town. Demokritos composed a large number of works, all of which, with the exception of fragments preserved by later writers, have perished. The Atomistic system connects itself by opposition, in an unmistakable manner, with that of Anaxagoras. The latter philosopher had assumed a chaotic aggregate divis- ible to infinity as the primal substance of all things. Demokritos postulates a plenum and a void, the former of which he also terms existent, and the latter non- existent. The existent consists of an infinite plurality of atoms, each of which is indivisible. Between the atoms is the void or non-existent. The connection and distinction between this system and that of Anaxagoras is obvious. AVith Anaxagoras the plenum was practically a Epoch I.] THE METAPHYSICAL-PHYSICISTS. 41 continuous substance, for the plural designation can only- have a qualitative application, the notion of the " void " or empty space being excluded. The atoms of Demokritos, on the contrary, were conditioned in their existence by the void, in other words they were discrete substances. The Homoiomerioi of Anaxagoras, again, were infinitely divisible, the atoms of Demokritos absolutely indivisible. The action of the atoms was conditioned in a triple way, by their order, their position and th.Q\r form. Their size was various, but upon it depended their weight, that is, their tendency to move do^vnwards. The atoms, like the void, w^ere eternal. Their motion was also original and eternal. The weight of the atoms being unequal, some falling with a greater velocity than others, gave rise, according to Demokritos, to lateral motions, which again with the original motion, constituted a circular or vortex motion, which was ever extending itself, and w^hich was the proximate cause of the world-formation. In this theory, we have a distinct reminiscence of Anaxagoras. These positions, the Atomists thought, sufficed to explain the variety of phenomena. The suj)er-sensible atoms and the void alone existed in themselves, the real world existed for us only. Perception was explained by the efflux of atoms from bodies producing images on our mind through the medium of the organs of sense. Demokritos was the last of the Metaphysical- Physicists, and of the older Greek speculators. The crisis produced by the Sophists had already begun ; the attention of philosophy was already being drawn away from the contemplation of Being to Knowing, from the object to the subject, and Greek thought was fast becoming ripe for the magical and renovating touch of Demokritos^^ younger contemporary Sokrates. 42 » GEEEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I. ^ TRANSITION TO SOKRATES. The Sophists. The founder of tlie negative and sceptical school of the Sophists or "wise men" is usually designated as Protagoras. This brilliant philosophical free-lance wasbomat Abdera, the city of Demokritos, in a humble sphere of life, out of which his abilities soon carried him. After travelling in Sicily, he settled at Athens, where he made much money and fame by his, teaching, for which he was the first to demand payment. Led, it is stated, by the Herakleitan doctrines to a sceptical attitude, his fundamental thesis gradually acquired shape. It consisted, to put it in modern language, in the denial of all objectivity and the restriction of all knowledge to mere impressions of the individual subject. Protagoras maintained that to every assertion a contrary assertion could be opposed with equal right. His favourite aphorism was : " Man is the measure of all things." As a result, probability took the place of truth, and immediate utility, of goodness. Prodikos, born in the island of Chios, also came to Athens while a young man, and adopted the calling of Sophist. His chief merit lies in his having contributed to fix the definitions of words, thus preparing the way for the Sokratic dialectic. His lectures were so much in request as to enable him to make a charge of fifty drachmas a person. Another eminent name in the Sophist school was (rorgias, who, evidently influenced by the Eleatics, maintained that neither being or non-being, one or many, become or unbecome, had any reality or meaning. His orations, in which a similar dialectical mode of argument to that of Zeno was employed, were delivered publicly on any given subject. Extemporaneous oratory and oral disputation he attached much importance to, and became eminent throughout Greece and the colonies for his skill in these arts. Two orations, of doubtful genuineness, have come down to us under his name. Epoch L] THE SOKKATIC SCHOOLS. 43 Among other eminent Sophists may be mentioned Hippias, Polos, Thrasymachos, etc. The Sophists practically dealt a death-blow at the earlier philosophies considered as independent systems, by opposing them to each other and showing the one-sided- ness of each, while the plausibility of the several doctrines taken by themselves, combined with their mutually exclusive character to produce a spirit of universal scepticism throughout the philosophic world, even apart from the arguments more especially directed to this end. The individualist and utilitarian nature of the Sophistic ethics naturally procured for the doctrine wide accepta- tion at a time when the old civic feeling was beginning to wane. The " gilded youth " of the Greek cities flocked to the lectures of its professors, more to learn the art of skilful disputation, for the profitable exercise of which the public life of the Hellenic race afforded such a wide field at this period, than from any intrinsic interest in philosophical questions. As a natural consequence, the whole Sophistic teaching ultimately came to have mere rhetorical display for its end, by which those proficient therein might make the worse appear the better reason, as occasion required. It was this empty dialectical art that reigned almost supreme in Greece under the name of philosophy, when the " Silenus figure " appeared in the Agora at Athens, with a dialectic similar indeed in kind, but employed for another purpose ; a dialectic which was destined to make an end of Sophism, as Sophism had made an end of pre- vious dogmatism. It has been often remarked, and with justice, that the Sophistic movement was never strictly philosophical, but was rather a popular rationalistic out- burst, having its springs in the entire religious, political and social life of Greece shortly before the Peloponnesian war. As such it is difficult to fix upon any individual as the acti^al founder of the movement, which, so far as names are concerned, was rather consentaneous than successive. The sudden appearance of the Sophistic orators throughout Xhe Greek world is one of those phenomena in the history of culture, for which not more than general causes can be assigned in the absence of exhaustive historical data. 44 GREEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. SECOND EPOCH. SOKEATES. We have now arrived at the first great land- mark in Greek speculation. The personality of the son of Sophroniskos is one of the few world-personalities whose name and fame have found an echo amid all races, where- ever human culture has existed. The date of Sokrates' birth is approximately fixed at from B. c. 471 to 469. He was the first philosopher born in Athens, where his father was a sculptor, a calling he himself followed during the early portion of his career. After receiving the education prescribed by law, Sokrates appears to have taken up the studies of astronomy and geometry. The story of his having been a pupil of Anaxagoras or Archelaus, is generally regarded as a fabrication, though there is no doubt that he attended the lectures of the Sophists, notably Prodikos. It is also probable that he read most of the extant philosophical literature ; he was certainly familiar with the treatise of Anaxagoras. Plato relates that he came personally into contact with Parmenides while a boy — a statement which Ueberweg credits, though generally considered doubtful. Sokrates took part in three campaigns during the Peloponnesian war, in which he signalised himself by his courage and endurance. Otherwise he held aloof from public aftairs, onty once in his life occupying an official position. Seldom leaving his beloved Athens, he daily mixed with the crowds that thronged the Agora, willing to converse with all who wished to do so. Young men were especially attracted by him, and presently the world- famous group, comprising among others, Plato, Xenophon, Eschines, Euripides, Krito, etc., came to be formed. Meanwhile, Sokrates had acquired a celebrity which eclipsed that of his Sophist teachers, and which led the comic poet Aristophanes, who hated philosophy, to satirise it in his person in the ' Clouds.' It is a noticeable fact that Aristophanes apj^ears to have been about as ignorant of Epoch II.] SOKRATES. 45 the tiling he was satirising as many popular writers in our own day, who, without his genius, attempt to make fun of new truths and their advocates, for, like them, he seemed to consider it immaterial, so long as he was attacking philosophy, what distinctions of stand-point he confounded. Thus Sokrates is represented in the character of a Sophist, Aristophanes being apparently oblivious of the fact that Sokrates led a polemic against the Sophists. The main, and we may perhaps say, only, thesis in Sokrates' philosophy was the assertion of the identity of knowledge and virtue. No man was willingly bad, but only from ignorance and confusion. As a corollary from this we have the assumption that virtue is teachable, and that as all knowledge is essentially one, so is virtue. The revolution effected by Sokrates has been well described by Cicero as consisting in the bringing down of philosophy from heaven to earth. Had Sokrates written a treatise, it would not have borne the traditional title of those of his predecessors, " On Nature," but rather " On Man." The immediate object of his teaching was the attainment of clear ideas or concepts, the highest of all being that of the good, or the Summum Bonum ; in order through this knowledge to attain the perfect life. Eeferring to his mother, the midwife Phanarete, he used to say that as her calling in life was to deliver children into the world from the womb, so it was his calling to watch over mental parturition, and deliver ideas from the mind. The method he used to effect this, was that of irony, or pretended ignorance. He would ask questions on any subject, as though for information. The oftentimes confident answers received would lead to further questions, till in the end the luckless victim of confused ideas and loose thought, would be brought to silence, if not to an admission of the victory of the Sokratic dialectic. Aristotle declares Sokrates to have been the founder of the inductive method, though this could only have been as applied to ethical subjects and the defini- tion of words ; but here again it would seem only fair to credit his master Prodikos with the foundation of this logical art. The Sophists had identified truth with individual opinion or conception. Sokrates distinguished between 46 GEEEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. indivicUial conceptions as such, and those that, purified by- Dialectic, were of universal application, i.e., true. All learning was recollection ; all teaching the bringing to light and clearness of ideas already existing, although confusedly, in the mind of the taught. The result of Sokrates' Dialectic was often simply to demonstrate the reciprocal untenability of rival theories, without reaching any positive conclusion. Much has been written respect- ing the Scu/i-oi'tov of Sokrates. There seems every reason for thinking that in accordance with the prevalent beliefs he really regarded himself as under the supervision of a tutelary supernatural agent, which warned him of the danger attending certain courses of action. The story of Sokrates' condemnation and death is too well known to need repeating at length in a work of the present scope. Having excited the enmity of the pietists, by his refusal to be initiated into the Eleusinian mysteries, and the hostility of the democratic party by his former friend- ship with Kritias, one of the worst of the thirty tyrants, for which the subsequent breach between them had not atoned ; also probably by the fact of his having remained unmolested in Athens throughout tlie worst period of the tyranny ; he was impeached by JMeletos, an inferior poet, Lykon, a Khetorician, and Anytos, a leather-dealer, on three counts, charging him respectively, with "introducing strange Gods," with corrupting youth, and with having moulded the character of tyrants. He was convicted and condemned to death, at first by a majority of six, but subse- quently on appeal, of eighty votes. The circumstance that the sacred vessel bearing the Athenian ofierings had just sailed for Delos, allowed him nearly a month's respite — during which he refused the means of escape ofi'ered him — before, in April B.C. 399, he drank the hemlock in the presence of his sorrowing disciples. Much exaggerated blame has been bestowed on the Athenians for the condemnation of Sokrates. There is strong evidence that in its early stages at least he favoured the Lacedemonian policy, while his known intimacy with Kritias naturally threw grave suspicion on bis teaching. As Thirlwall remarks, the strangeness consists not in the fact of the conviction, but in the smallness of the majority ErocH II.] THE SOKRATIC SCHOOLS. 47 by which the philosopher was at first convicted. But, though even the external circumstances of the case are sufficient to account for the action of the Athenians, there is, we believe, a deeper significance in the attitude of all that was conservative in the Athenian state towards Sokrates. It was not zeal for the gods, qua gods, as we take it, that formed the underlying ground of suspicion, but zeal for the old civic spirit. The citizens of Athens felt vaguely that the " Know thyself" of Sokrates was the expression of a religion and an ethic, radically incom- patible with the old spirit of solidaritj^ — an ethic of individualism and introspection, which, if j^nshed to its logical conclusions, must sap the ancient traditional ethic of duty to the state as an organised whole at its very root. This introspection was the " strange god " of which the Athenians felt an uneasy dread, as destructive of the old state religion and morality. It is somewhat of an irony on the almost servile respect with which Sokrates generally treated the established cultus, and his excessive care to avoid any imputation of impiety, that this should have constituted one (jf the main charges against him in the capital indictment. The revolution in thought inaugurated by Sokrates con- sisted, (I.), in the retrospective method he employed, the change in thesubject-matter of philosophy, from things to ideas, from being to knowing, and (II.), in the ethical and individualist tendency of all his work. Henceforward ethics, and the ethical sciences, occupy, if not as with Sokrates, an exclusive, at least a foremost, place in every system. The Sokratic Schools. In the nature of the case, it was impossible for Sokrates to leave behind him a school of pure Sokratists. His philosophy was rather a mfethod than a doctrine. Sokrates had said that the only sense in which he could interpret the Delphic oracle's words, that he was the wisest man in Greece, was, that while others thought they knew some- thing, he knew that he knew nothing, and thus in his person fulfilled the Delphic maxim "Know thyself." Thus the Sokratic method of philosophy, of the search after 48 GKEEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. clear ideas and virtue, or the " perfect life," was pursued in various directions, and led with diiferent temperaments to different results ; for all of which, however, it was possible to find some justification in the many-sided utterances of the master. There were naturally, among the disciples of Sokrates, personalities, like Xenophon, mere men of the world, who had been generally influenced and attracted by the conversation of Sokrates, but had no independent interest in philosophy. On the other hand, there were those who had a real interest in the philosophical side of Sokrates, who sought to derive some definite result from the life and teaching of their master, to formulate for themselves and their followers what his aims were, and what his teaching really led to, when logically carried out. These were the founders of the minor or " imperfect " (because one-sided) Sokratic schools, as they are termed, of which there are three, the Megaric, the Cyrenaic and the Cynic. The originator of the first of these was Euklid, of Megara. Before he became a disciple of Sokrates, Euklid had embraced the Eleatic philosophy ^ which he never subsequently abandoned, interweavir. ' the Sokratic Ethics in an ingenious manner witn txa' One-Being doctrine of Parmenides. As with Sokrates, th proper subject-matter of philosophy was the Good ; br Euklid identified this ideal Good of Sokrates with t^ ontological One of the Eleatics. To him virtue, kno ledge, God, &c., were only diverse names for this absolu fact. There was certainly little more than a formal carrying out of the Sokratic doctrine in Euklid's system, since Ethics, jjer se, appear to have been neglected by him and his school, whose main interest centred in dia- lectical polemic, after the manner of Zeno. Aristippus, the founder of the Cyrenaic school, was the son of a wealthy merchant of the gay and voluptuous city of Gyrene. Attracted by the fame of Sokrates, he came to Athens, and remained in close intimacy with him till his death. Aristij^pus was much more of a Sokratist than Euklid. He despised all speculation not having an immediate bearing on practice. The life of man alone had an interest for him. He diverged, however, from Epoch II.] THE SOKKATIC SCHOOLS. 49 Sokrates on the opposite side to Euklid, in the vahie lie ulaced on Dialectics and reasoning generally ; maintaining .hat all knowledge was in essence merely that o^ our own individual states of feeling. Hence the consideration of these and their causes make up the whole subject-matter of the theoretical side of his philosophy. All states of consciousness are reducible to violent motion, moderate motion, and the lack of all motion. The first is jDain, the second is pleasure, and the third is apathy. Pleasure, Aristippus boldly proclaimed as the only good. The practical side of philosophy was the attainment of pleasure, the great art of life that of avoiding pain and apathy. With Aristippus, it was the immediate pleasure of the moment that was to be sought, and which the " wise man " was to seize. He was not, however, to be governed or controlled by it, but, as it were, to ride it, as a horseman rides his steed. On the other hand, the Cyrenaic " wise man " w^ould not embrace a present pain even with a view to future pleasure. It was this point which mainly distinguished the hedonism of Aristij^pus from that of Epicurus, of whose ethical system he was otherwise the forerunner, and in whose school the Cyrenaics became subsequently merged. Numerous writings are attributed to Aristippus, as to Euklid, but they have completelj^ perished in both cases. The creator of the Cynic school, or rather sect, was the Athenian Antisthenes, who, after an education at the hands of Gorgias the Sophist, came to Sokrates. What specially charmed him in the latter, was his independence of external " goods " and what to others were the ne- cessities of life ; his superhuman hardihood in adversitj'. He subsequently set up as a teacher in the gymnasium of the Kynosarges, whence the name of the sect. Antis- thenes became enamoured of the notion of the pride of virtue, upon which he heard Sokrates dilate, and it was this that he and his followers caricatured in their own persons. With Antisthenes, as with Sokrates, virtue was the one thing worth living for, but his ideal virtue Antisthenes placed in deprivation and asceticism. Ab- solute indifference to circumstances was the first and the last demand of wisdom, Avhich stood in no need of elabo- E 50 GREEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. rate argumentation, but only of strength of character. Its sole end consisted in the avoidance of the pleasures and desires that so readily gain the mastery over us, and a fortiori of all that bears the impress of luxury or even refinement. Accordingly the Cynics (of whom the best known is not so much the founder of the sj^stem, as his successor, the famous Diogenes of Sinope, but whose lives were all cast in one mould) were content with at most a wallet and a staif, ate anything they could obtain, slept in the first place that presented itself, and jDcrformed all the offices of life in public. The Cynics committed nothing to writing, and all that has been handed down from thein consists of j^ersonal anecdotes, miscellaneous maxims and, to modern ears, somewhat feeble witticisms. Epoch III.] PLATO AND ARISTOTLE. 51 THIRD EPOCH. TLATO AND AEISTOTLE. This third epoch in Greek philosophy is a landmark not merely in the history of philosophy but in the history of human thought and culture generally. In these two great typical thinkers the thought of all preceding- ages converged as in a focus, while from them have diverged rays, which have more or less guided all later inquirers directly or indirectly, and influenced all the more important currents of thought in the world's subse- quent history. Plato and Aristotle are frequently regarded as antithetic and mutually exclusive ; they are really complementary. Plato is occupied mainly with an inquiry as to the necessary and universal element in experience. Aristotle supplements this inquiry, by one respecting the contingent and particular element in the real, the em- pirical laws to which special departments of phenomena are subordinated. In this way, he became the founder of the inductive method of physical science. Before com- mencing o*ur analysis of the systems of Plato and Aristotle it will be desirable to take a rapid survey of the ground we have been traversing, and which has led up to them. In this way we shall better be able to judge what is their special individual contribution to human thought, and what is merely the welding together into an organic whole of the more or less fragmentary doctrines of their predecessors. The Ionian Physicists contented themselves with a search after some primitive corporeal substance. In this they implicitly assumed unity as the basis of the real world. The last important member of the school, Diogenes of Apollonia, explicitly formulated the monistic doctrine, and endeavoured to show that the world must be so to speak "cut out of one block," that there must he one principle immanent in its multiplicity. This, the Pythagoreans had already accentuated in their doctrine of the Noetic one, or unity, in which all numbers, and, a E 2 52 GEEEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch III. fortiori, all tilings were immanent. But the Pythagoreans, besides this, removed the inquiry from the ground of concrete substance to that of abstract mathematical relations. These were of course hypostasized, and' made the essences of which the real world was the manifesta- tion, and which were in their turn the manifestation of the original unity. Thus at the same time that an addition to the range of philosophic inquiry was made by this introduction of abstract notions, the monistic principle was raised to an integral place in philosophy. The Eleatics, by pushing this principle to its extreme limits, forced into relief the opposition of the abstract and the concrete, the one and the many, an opposition which they made absolute. They were thus compelled by their fundamental principle to deny the sense-world, an issue which led to the introduction of a Dialectic, based on an examination of its fundamental notions. But the one-sided Monism of the Southern Italians was encountered in Asia Minor by a Monism embodied in perhaps the most V.. 'liant of all the pre-Sokratic systems, that of Herakleitos. This Monism took its stand on the fusion of the very contraries whose opposition the Eleatics would have made absolute. The other philosojjhers of the Metaphy si c£p1- Physicist group attempted the solution of the same problem — namely, to tind a modus vivendi between abstract absolute Being and the multiplicity of the sense-world — but they failed to formulate anything satisfactory. They all sacrificed the one to the many at starting; their systems are pluralistic ; in other words, the knot is cut but not untied. Then came the Sophists, who placed all these various systems on a level, by declaring man to be the measure of all things, thereby practically denying the possibility of truth in a higher sense. Following the hint given by them, though despising their pedantry, Sokrates abandoned the search for physical or meta- physical truth, and applied himself to the search for logical truth, to the definition and formulation of concepts, and the attainment of " virtue " which necessarily followed from a knowledge of the ideal " good." Sokrates was em- phatically the philosopher and the apostle of inwardness. Erocii III.] PLATO AND ARISTOTLE. 53 ^'Kn ow thyself/' was the bepjuninpi; aD(L-_fiJ3iL of his tgacliiiig! But this self-kno\vleclgo involved the , trans- formation of the confused and ha})hazard thought of the multitude, which the least criticism could involve in hopeless contradiction, into clear, well-defined notions, capable of universal application. A development of three hundred years thus culminated in Plato. Plato represents the synthesis of Sokratism and Pre-Sokratism. In Plato the essence of the whole pre- Sokratic philosophy is to be found transfused and trans- formed by the Dialectic of Sokrates. The element which is most prominent in the constructive portion of his Avork is Pythagoreanism, but he owes scarcely less a debt TO the Eieatics, to Herakleitos, and even to the sceptical theories of the Sophists. Aristotle, while starting from the synthesis of Plato, brought the power of his mighty intellect to bear upon it with the result that he effected a more complete fusion of the pre-Sokratic thought than even Plato had done ; that is, he seized more completely the meaning and the essential in those systems. He more thoroughly separated the ore, which they severally contained, from the accidental dross with which it was combined. For instance, how many a clumsily expressed doctrine and distinction of Pythagorean and Eleatic lay hidden under the cardinal antithesis of form and matter. What a light was cast on the problems of philosophy by the at once definite and com- prehensive expression (an expression covering neither too much nor too little), of a principle which preceding thinkers had been vainly groping after in the dark, now grasping it for an instant, now blindly clutching at some other, quite unessential fact in mistake for it. But Aristotle 's more popular, though not greater title to fame, lay in his foundation of the inductive method, and of natural science itself in the modern sense of the word. Obse rvation arul P.vpp.rjjmpmj^^ r.ollpr>.t,ir)n^_iiifting and COJuparison^of facts, ~witli__a_view L of throu gh them arriving at general principles, has its origin in the thinker of Stagira. 54 GREEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch III. PLATO. Plato, or to give liiin his correct appellation, Aristokles, was bom at Athens about B.C. 429, his father's name being Ariston, and his mother's Periktione. His youth was passed amid the artistic splendours which the age of Perikles had left behind it. Born of an aristociatic family, he hated the democracy of Athens no less than his master, Sokrates. As a youth, he appears to have occu- pied himself with poetic attempts, which he committed to the flames, when in his twentieth j^ear, he decided to devote himself to philosophy. Previously to his acquaint- ance with Sokrates, which occurred at this time, he received instruction in philosophy from Kratylos the Herakleitan, and probably from Epicharmos the Pytha- gorean. He also seems to have been conversant with the philosophy of the Ionian school, as well as with that of Anaxagoras. Of his long and close intimacy with Sokrates, in the course of which his own system gradually took shape, it is only necessary to make mention. After the execution of his master, he repaired to Megara, remaining some time in companionship with Euklid, doubt- less devoting himself with ardour to the Eleatic philo- sophy, of which Euklid was the great post-Sokratic ex- ponent. He subsequently entered upon a prolonged period of travel, visiting first Ionia, and then Gyrene and Egypt, and occupying himself with mathematical and other studies. Of more influence on his subsequent in- tellectual development was his journey to Italy, where he became more intimately acquainted with the Pytha- gorean system, and more thoroughly assimilated its doc- trines, than previously. Possibly this influence induced him to intermeddle with the political affairs of Syrakuse. It was on his way home thence to Athens, that he was (under circumstances variously related) captured and sold into slavery ; a state in which he might have remained but for the interposition of his friend, Annikeris, the Cyrenaic, who ransomed him. On his arrival at Athens, about forty years of age, he founded his school in the groves of Akademos, subsequently purchasing the garden Epoch III.] PLATO. 55 on the hill Kolonos, as its perpetual possession. With the exception of two further fruitless expeditions to Sicily, he remained in Athens, devoting himself to teaching and writing for the remainder of his life, which terminated B.C. 347. Plato's Philosophy. Plato is the first ancient thinker of whom we possess anything more than fragments. All Plato's works are exoteric, that is, suited not only for the school, but for cultured readers generally. Critics, ancient and modern, have exercised their wits in determining which of the writings that have come down as Plato's are genuine, and which are the works of disciples. Even in Antiquity attempts were made to fix the order of the Platonic Dialogues in a systematic manner. In connexion with modern Platonic exegesis, it is sufficient to cite the names of Schleiermacher (Plato's Lehen und Schriften), Socher ( Ueher Plato's Scliriften), Stallbaum (in his critical edition of Plato's works), Hermann (Geschichte der Platonischen Philosophie, ZeWer (Philosophie der GriecJien), Grote (Plato and the other companions of SoJcrates), and Jowett (Plato's works translated into English). The content of Plato's philosophy naturally falls into the well-known division of Dialectics, Physics, and Ethics, although it is doubtful if he himself so formulated it. The positive doctrines have to be sought out in the various dialogues, each of which is, generally speaking, devoted to the elucidation of some one point, but all of which possess a merely negative and preparatory in addition to their positive side. Plato, like any modern philosophic writer, always pre-supposes in his readers a knowledge of the chief philosophical literature of his time. His polemic, in common with that of his master Sokrates, is mainly directed against prevalent conceptions, and the doctrines of the Sophists ; though there were not wanting sly shafts aimed at the Sokratic teaching itself. In the Theaisetus and the Parmenides, "common sense " is attacked ; its object is shown to possess no stability, and its existence to be at the best, probability or opinion merely. The goal of all these discussions is to 56 GREEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch III. produce scepticism of ordinary notions and the dictates of unreflective perception ; and is thus identical with the conviction of ignorance, which it was the aim oC the Sokratic Dialectic to bring about. But this is with Plato only the recoil previous to the philosophic spring about to be made. All philosophy begins with the recluctio ad absurdum of common notions. The re is no true knowledge ; wisdom, or even morality, but thaj: at j^ Tu^.d~thTT)u gTTph i 1 o- _§^Mc^rej[ec"n'on.^~"The^ virtue Qjf ^^ecommon man is the e^ct of chance and — custom. TEe success even of a Perikles, is merely due to a happy concurrence of character and circumstances. In the ordinary sense the man is termed brave, even though he fights from fear ; .but_ no _actioiiJfijceally^yirtjwu^w^ full conscioiisness_ gf^lts^grounds. It is not, as with the Sophists, the individual perception or opinion that sums up the truth for man, but that which is divine and univer- sal in him, namely, the reflective, self-comprehending Reason. Plato draws the distinction between impulse and rational will, and shows that where pleasure is made of set purpose the sole principle of action, the reverse of pleasure is attained. (Gorgias.) The subjective condition of true__knowlfid^e is jDhilo- sophical yearning or desire. Neither the all-knuwing (crocfios:) nor the wholly ignorant (d/xa^-^s) is concerned therewith, but only the lover of wisdom (^tA.o(To the Jews to show that all Greek wisdom was implicitly contained in their own Hebrew writings. The Therapeutas absorbed much of the P^^thagorean doctrine. The Essenes were also, in all probability, strongly leavened with Hellenism. Perhaps one of the most remarkable phe- nomena of this time is the appearance of pseudo-works by semi-mythical personages purporting to be of prodigious antiquity. Of this nature are the writings attributed to the ancient prophet, priest, and king, Hermes Trismegistos. In Philo himself we find the tendency of the epoch con- centrated, and in him we have the germ of the system known as Neo-Platonism, which played so momentous a part in the final struggle of the old Pagan civilisation with Christianity. According to Philo the senses and reason are alike untrustworthy ; the highest truth ultimately rests on an internal illumination or revelation, in respect of which the human reason is passive. " God " is absolute being, in whom there is neither quality, quantity, nor relation. " God " is not the creator of matter, but is removed from it by the Xoyos yei/iKooraros which is equivalent to the supreme idea of Plato and the prime mover of Aristotle, and which may be regarded as containing implicitly the sum total of all the forms or ideas of the real world. The relation of the Logos, or supreme idea, to the inconceivable " God," or " One," is that of emanation, just as the material world is in its turn an emanation from the Logos. The world is often spoken of by Philo in similar language to that of Plato as the " only begotten son of God." But in Philo everything is personified and brought into connection with the Judaic theology and angelology of his time. The world he conceived as actually created by inferior beings — angels and demons — which may be taken as answering to personified ideas or class-names. Philo illustrates his doctrine by the metaphor of rays of light spreading from an effulgent centre, and decreasing in brilliancy as they reach the circumference. The characteristic of the school of which Philo may be considered as the forerunner, and which was the last effort Ei'OCH VL] NEO-rLATONISM. 91 of ancient tlionght, lay in the fact that in it human reason fell into the background as insufficient to the attainment of the highest truth. The " dialectic," which for Plato was the great and only highway to supreme wisdom, became subordinate with the Neo-Platonists to the passive " contemplation " which to them was alone adapted for the contemplation of the divine. The science of the Greek world had to yield to the mysticism of Asia. This transformation of philosophy into theosophy, is the key- note of the wdiole Neo-Platonic movement ; in some of its representatives it may be more pronounced, in others more veiled, but it is always present. Neo-Platonism claimed to be not only the reconciler of philosophical systems, but of the diverse religious cults of the ancient world. It took all philosophies and all religions under its wing. It remains to trace briefly the career of this remarkable and unique religio-philosophic movement, which not only furnishes the material for the concluding chapter in the history of the ancient world, but by leaving its impress on its great rival and antagonist, Christianity, has indirectly influenced the speculative thought of the ages which have succeeded. As we have already seen, ever since Greek philosophy ceased to be speculatively productive in the generation succeeding Alexander the Great, and began to confine itself to reproducing and piecing together older doctrines, a change came alike over the object of philosophy and the object of life. Knowledge of the great world- secret was no longer sought after for its own sake, but as a guide to life. It was no longer the welfare of the city, or commonwealth, that concerned the philosopher, but his owTi individual welfare. It is true Sokrates was, so far as philosophy was con- cerned, the father of introspection and individualism, but the time of its triumph had not yet come. His great successors, Plato and Aristotle, found no perfect virtue and no perfect life save in the community. The end of all virtue was still with them, the welfare of the " city." The individual by himself was nothing but an element in the whole. Such was the original view of all ancient peoples, and not least of the Greeks. The beliefs and cere- monials of the ancient religions all tended to this concep- 92 GREEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch VL tion of life. But as it declined, the antithetic conception of the import of the individual qua individual, grew. The conflict of Sokrates with the Athenians which resulted in his condemnation and death, may be viewed as the first episode in the struggle of the new individualist ethics with the ancient social ethics. In philosophy proper, the success of the Stoic and Epicurean schools may be taken as indicating the beginning of its supremacy. The con- solidation of the Eoman empire, and the extinction of the free states of Antiquity, deprived men of even the interest they had left in public life, and threw them more than ever back upon themselves. Soon after this, a movement originating in Palestine, where these ethics of " inward- ness "had attained their highest development, spread over the empire, attracting men and women of all conditions in life, in a manner and to an extent, none of the philoso- phical sects could have ever done. The whole history of the struggle of Neo-Platonism with Christianity, is the history of an effort to reconcile the introspective move- ment with the existent speculative basis ; to satisfy the new individualist cravings without the definite break with tradition which Christianity involved. As such, Neo- Platonism naturally borrowed much from the ethical side of Christianity, but not without furnishing Christianity in return with a groundwork for its theology. Neo-Platonism* practically dates from Philo, but during the first and second centuries its development is obscure. It is not till the beginning of the third century that we are confronted with a definite ^personality (if we except the Syrian Numenius, who flourished at the time of the Antonines) in Ammonius Saccas, who died in the year 243. Ammonius, though the nominal founder of the system, himself wrote nothing, and it is said, exacted a pledge of secrecy from his disciples, which it is doubtful if any of them kept. Plotinus (born 205), his most famous pupil and the typical representative of Keo-Platonism, was, on the other * The term Neo-Platonism, though its connotation may be under- stood by all students, is too narrow to indicate the great syntlietic movement of Philosi»pliical Paganism which occupied the first four centuries of the Christian era. Erocn VI.] NEO-PLATONISM. 93 hand, a voluminous writer. The doctrine of Plotinus may be briefly epitomised thus : — The highest truth, knowledge, or Avisdom, is only to be a2:)preliended by intuition, the highest grade of which is identity with the known — wherein the distinction between being and knowing is abolished. The highest principle is absolute and uncon- ditioned. The " One," the '.' Existent," the " first God," are the various names which Plotinus employs to exjoress this primal fact, in which all things " live and move and have their being," but which is nevertheless, itself out of all direct relation to the real world. But how can the real world be deduced from such a principle as this ? Plotinus replies, by a process of emanation. From the first principle, namely, is eternally and necessarily generated a second, the content of which is less than the first; in other words, which is a weakening, a de- terioration (so to speak), of its essence. This stage in the degradation of the primal entity, is the vov<5 or intelligent principle, which has as its final aim and goal the Absolute, whence it emanates. Whereas, of the first principle none of the categories of reality could be pre- dicated, the vov<5, or second principle, may be said to unite within itself all contradictions, as the one and the many, rest and motion, the act of thinking and the object thought. The vovs thus becomes the sum -total of all ideas and general terms, from the highest to the lowest. The third principle, or lujjpostasis (the term by which these successive momenta of the emanation are commonly described), is the i//i^x^, the universal principle of life and motion, or the world-soul, which is in its turn a weaken- ing, an inferior copy of the i/oi)?, from which it immediately derives the degree of existence it possesses. As the mere refle:^ and shadow of the rational principle, though it acts and orders the world in accordance with reason, it does so not by virtue of its own inherent intelligence, but by that of the source whence it emanates. Hence it is, that thought is embodied in all the processes of nature, these processes simply indicating the presence of the ideas which are planted by the vovs, and which the xl/vxq mechanically translates into sensible reality. Plotinus in some places speaks of the world-soul as dual — i.e., of a 94 GREEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch VI. soul tending to matter, which he designates ^vo-t?, and of a soul tending to Eeason, for which the term i//vx^ ^^ ^P®' cially reserved. These three hypostases ; the Trpojros ^eos or primal principle, the vovs (Reason) or secondary principle, and the if/vxr/ (World-soul) or tertiary principle, consti- tute the so-called Alexandrian trinity. It may be viewed as compounded of the " Good " of Plato, the " Reason " of Aristotle, and the Zeus or universal life of Herakleitos and the Stoics. This Neo-Platonic, ontological, trinity is distinguished from the Christian, ^/^eoZo^z'ca^, trinity, by its being essentially an immanent as opposed to a transcend- ent conception of the universe, its momenta being, not persons but aspects, and more definitely by the notion of necessary emanation as opposed to that of arbitrary creation. The " Matter " of Plotinus, which he ojDposes to " God," was not corporeal substance, for this, in so far as it is real possesses form, and in so far as it is i?iformed, par- takes of the nature of the vovs, but like the non-existent sense-world of Plato, or the -rrpojTY] vXtj (first matter) of Aristotle, it was a mere formless negation — the negation of the rational — as darkness is the negation of light. We shall understand the root-idea of the whole Neo-Platonic ethic, when we remember that it is essentially based on the notion of disengaging the w^orld-soul from the non-exis- tent element, the matter, on which it acts, and of which activity the sense-world is the result. The stage of the Reason is then reached, and lastly that of the Primal One itself. This ecstasy, or absorption in absolute unity without difference, motion, or change, was the aim of the philosopher's life. Plotinus was followed by his pupil Porphyry, who represents the Roman Neo-Platonism, in which the tendency to theosophy and mysticism was less marked than in the Syrian Neo-Platonism represented by Jam- blichos. Porphyry wrote several w^orks against Christi- anity, which were subsequently burnt. The allegorisa- tion of the Pagan myths and ceremonies occupied an ever larger place in the teaching of Keo-Platonism in jDro- portion as the power of Christianity grew. From the end of the third century all trace of the division of sects is lost, every Pagan thinker succumbing to the prevailing Epoch VI.] NEO-PLATONISM. 95 eclecticism, and being classed as a Neo-Platonist. Com- mentating on the works of Plato and Aristotle became now the main occupation of the philosopher. After the death of Hypatia, which took place in the fifth century, philosophy was driven from Alexandria, and strangely enongh its last place of refuge was Athens. It was here that Proklos, the last eminent representative of ancient philosophy, taught. Proklos was born a.c. 412, at Byzantium. He studied under various teachers, and early devoted himself to Plato. In Proklos the religious side of Neo-Platonism culminated. He had himself been initiated into every Pagan mystery within his reach, and was proud of the title of hierophant of all religions. Christianity alone he held in abhorrence. In philosophy, Proklos approached the Syrian Neo-Platonism of Jambli- chos rather than that of Plotinus. The primal principle was with Proklos, itself threefold. From this triadio principle the others emanated. The relation is invariably that what the first is the second has as predicate. Being, as the predicate of all things, stands above and before all ; but inasmuch as reason (j/ovs) implies life as well as being, the second hypostasis is not reason (vovs) but life {^oiiji). From this latter emanates the reason, which thus forms the third hypostasis. Each hypostasis like the first is triply articulated. These three triads con- tain the complex of all reality. The first is identified with the divine world, the second with the demonic world, the third with the world of human spirits. The physical doctrine of Proklos differs in little from that of Plotinus. The Platonic division of temporal, sempiternal and eternal, is retained and made to correspond with the division of somatic, psychical, and pneumatic. The first is under the dominion of Fate, the last under that of Providence. Of the Ethic of Proklos there is not much that is new to be said. The end of life was to him as to other Neo- Platonists, the comprehension of, or union with, the divine principle. Immediate inspiration or ecstasy was the highest source of knowledge. For this truth, the soul may be prepared, however, by ceremonies and magical practices. But Proklos, although in a sense a follower of Jamblichos, was distinguished from him by his devotion to 96 GREEK PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch VI. all the great Greek thinkers, who, he contended, differed only in form from each other, but whose teaching was substantially identical — though Plato was the culminating point. Proklos died towards the end of the fifth century (485) at an advanced age. He was succeeded in the chair at Athens by his bio- grapher, Marines of Sichem ; he in his turn appears to have been followed by Isidore of Alexandria, both mere gram- marians of no original ability. Damascius of Damascus was the last professional philosopher of Greece. In 529 the schools were closed by edict of Justinian, and Damas- cius with six friends banished the empire. They repaired to the court of Chosroes, the King of Persia, where they hoped to find the opportunity of establishing a Platonic republic, but returned disappointed ; Chosroes, in his treaty with Justinian, stipulating that they should live and die in peace. About this time lived the senator Boethius, the last surviving representative of philosophy in Eome, who was executed on a false charge by the Gothic king Theodoric. He is notable as occupj^ng a position apart from the dying Keo-Platonism of the age, having helped to lay the foundation of the Aristotelian supremacy of centuries later. For although they produced no effect whatever on the age in which he lived, his works were counted among the chief text books of the mediasval schools, and contributed largely in the formation of the Scholastic philoso]^iliy. It is doubtful whether he was Pagan or Christian, though more probably the former, as even in his last work, De Consolatione Philosophise, there is no allusion to Christianity. Night was now fast closing around the ancient world. The old classical civilisation, from which the life had long- since fled, was falling to pieces limb by limb and shred by shred. In the sixth century its final dissolution may be said to have taken place. Within a space of little more than fifty years occurred the fall of the Western empire, the closing of the schools of philosoph}^, and the formal abolition of the consuls. The barbarian was established as master throughout the AVestern world, including Italy itself, and was pressing hard on the confines of Justinian's NEO-PLATONISM. 97 empire. The last remains of Paganism had almost dis- appeared. In the cities the temples sacred to tlie gods of yore were re-echoing to the litanies of priests and acolytes, while in the country they were silent and neglected. The ancient world was dead, the mediaeval world as yet unborn. Such was the sixth century. It is not without a certain sense of sadness that one can look back at this corpse-like world. Neo-PJatonism had succumbed before its great rival — the rival whose mental attitude and spirit it had practically adopted. It would be curious could we but transport ourselves to that age, and inhale for a moment its intellectual and moral at- mosphere, and understand the yearning looks cast back toward the ancient traditional rites and faith by many even professing Christians ; to talk with the grammarian in his library ; feeling that the philosophy it was his delight to study, Plato, Aristotle, Pythagoras, Herakleitos, had been but ill exchanged for the martyrologies, legends of saints, and disputes monophysite or monothelite of the church ; to witness the midnight rendez-vous of the peasant, as the rites of some local cult were celebrated in secrecy and in silence at the sacred fountain, the traditional grove, or the crumbling waj^side altar. One thing that may be regarded as certain, is that the Christianity of that age, formulated and organised indeed, but as yet unembodied in any distinct civilisation of its own, and with the fragments of Paganism, imperfectly assimilated, still clinging to it in their cruder form, was something radically distinct from anything that the word recalls to our minds to-day. ( 98 ) TEANSITIONAL THOUGHT. THE GNOSTICS AND CHRISTIAN FATHERS. We must now, before taking a final leave of antiquity, retrace our steps in order to glance briefly at the course of that speculation which was either Christian, or at least dominated directly by the Christian idea, and which thus forms the connecting link between the ancient world and the media3val. The attitude of Christianity, and that of all con- temporary systems having their source in the Christian idea, was one of hostility to " the world." Every world- historic idea necessarily enters the arena of historj^ as the negation of the actual status quo. But the anti-worldli- ness of the Christian idea, though it included this, went far beyond it. In theology it meant the appearance of the conception of the su;pernatural in direct contradiction of the natural ; while in ethics it meant the erection of individualism in 02:)position to the ancient communism, the old, " worldly " conception of citizenship. In short, the aii^z-worldliness of Christianity meant o/Z^er-worldliness This change is traceable in germ as far back as the sixth century B.C. or even earlier. The Hebrew prophets, the first Isaiah, Amos, etc., proclaimed the " gospel of inward- ness," with the doctrine of a transcendent god, a " searcher of hearts ; " the Buddha again, later, preached the doctrine of individual salvation in Nirvana, from the curse of life, the world, and consciousness; Pythagoras, in Europe, seems to have had a glimpse of the same idea ; while, as we have already pointed out, the decline of the old civic or communal feeling threw men more and more back upon themselves as individuals. Sokrates' "Know thyself" THE GNOSTICS AND CHRISTIAN FATHERS. 90 was the first definite expression in the Greek world of this ethic of individualism. Coincidently with this, and intimately connected with it, arose the tendency to a purification of the divine and supernatural, by its separa- tion from the human and natural. To the cultured Stoic of the later classical ages, the gods were exalted farther above humanity than they were to the cultured Gieek of the earlier age, for even to contemporary popular concep- tion they were hardly any longer mere nature-gods. But in Europe the movement of " inwardness " and super- naturalism obtained, at least in any formulated shape, only among the educated classes. In farther Asia, India, China, and Persia, and also in Palestine, it indeed assumed popular and organised forms, but in Buddhism, Confucian- ism, Zoroastrianism, and the later Judaism, the future existence of the soul, when taught at all, was taught in a half-hearted, and faltering way; only in the two latter creeds, if even in them, assuming at all a prominent position. It is clear that the spiritualist-individualist movement did not reach its highest phase of formulation or of organisation in any of the faiths mentioned. It first appeared in Europe in an organised and popular form as Christianity. In Christianity, for the first time, more- over, the ethics of individualism became definitely fused with a spritual or supernatural theology ; the individual became immortal, not in the vague, metaphysical sense of Platonism or of Neo-Platonism, in which the individual was merged in the Idea or the noetic One, still less in the colourless sense of the primitive ghost, to which the goal of existence was the quiescence of respectable interment, — but immortal as an individual, pure and simple, the heir to the life of the blest. Some maintain the primordial idea of Christianity was that of the messianic kingdom on earth. If it had been so, or at least if it had remained so, it would have con- tinued what it was at first, a mere Jewish sect. Its world-supremacy was due to its being the complete ex- pression in an organised form of the rising introspective ethics, in combination Avith a spiritualist theology. These ideas, previously put forward in an abstract form, and isolated from one another, now became the living and real H 2 100 TRANSITIONAL THOUGHT. parts of a complete systepi. The movement of inward- ness and mysticism ever progressing in an unorganised form, and among the cultured classes, now took organised expression among the masses. The Gnostic systems were the grotesque results of an imperfect assimilation of the new principle at a time when its formulation was incomplete. The relation of the natural and supernatural, and their union in a divine- human being was not as yet crystallised into the same rigidity of dogma that it was subsequently. This espe- cially applies to the earlier period of Gnosticism, when though it was, so to speak, " in the air," it had not attained any definite expression. The earliest traces of Gnosticism are discoverable in the first generation of the Church. To this period be- long the Simon ians, whose origin was attributed to the mythical Simon Magus ; also the heresies of Corinth, Thessalonica, etc., referred to by St. Paul ; but the most noteworthy appears to have been the sect founded by one Kerinthus. They are all connected with Christianity by some form of the doctrine of incarnation. It was towards the end of the first, or the beginning of the second century, that Gnosticism first attained any real importance as an element in ecclesiastical history. The Gnostic sects may be divided into two categories, repre- sented respectively by the Hellenic Gnosis, whose home was Alexandria, and the Syrian Gnosis, whose home was Antioch. At least, this division seems to have the most to be said in its favour, although others have been made. The Alexandrian Gnostics were dominated largely by Platonic, and Neo-Platonic ideas, and the Syrian Gnostics by the Persian dualism. The chief representatives of the Alexandrian or Hellenic Gnosis are Basilides, who taught about 125, Karpokrates, and Valentinus (circa 150), who in all probability originally belonged to the Basilidean school, but came to Kome, where he instituted a sect of his own which attained considerable notoriety and numerical proportions. He died in Cyprus. The Valen- tinian sect boasted many well-known names, and lingered on till far into the sixth century. The only original THE GNOSTICS AND CHRISTIAN FATHERS. 101 Hnostic work that lias survived is the ttlcttls c-ocfiLa of Valentinus. Among the Syrian Gnostics, tlie most eminent names are its reputed founder, Menander (said to have been a disciple of Simon Magus), who taught at Antioch ; Saturninus, Tatian and Bardesanes. As in a sense belonging to this section of Gnostic teachers, though by many historians placed in a division by himself, may be mentioned Marcion, the distinctive feature in whose teaching was the opposition to Judaism, and the Petrine Christianity, and its insistance on a gnosticised form of Paulinism. The notion of the utter corruption of matter may be described as the ground principle of all the Gnostic systems. From the Pleroma or inconceivable and un- approachable Prius of all things, "the immeasurable," the "unfathomable abj^ss," proceed seons or emanations, which in an order variously described in different systems terminate in the sense-world. All the Gnostic principles from the highest to the lowest are personified. It is in the passage from the Pleroma to the world that the main distinction of the various systems lies. The Alexandrian Gnosis gives it, in Neo-Platonic fashion, as a continuous progression, matter only becoming real in proportion as it is infiltrated by some higher eeon. Both the Syrian Gnostics, on the other hand, conceived the process in Zoroastrian fashion, as the iuA^asion of the Kingdom of darkness, matter, by the Kingdom of light, the system of ideal emanations or geons. The dual principle is thus present from the first in this latter case. It should be observed that the process of world-emanation or creation was apparently conceived as actually historical, that is, as taking place in time and space. In Gnosticism, Christ becomes one of the higher eeons, proceeding from the personified ideal Kingdom of light, to redeem the world. But the rank assigned to him ditfers in different systems. In some the Christ is merely one of the lower angels allied to the Demiurges, or immediate creator of the world, while in others it appears as intermediate between the Demiurges and the Pleroma. But in all cases, the Christ is distinguished from Jesus the son of jNIary, into whom it entered. The Demiurgos is commonly identified by 102 TRANSITIONAL THOUGHT. the Gnostics with the god of the Jews — the Jahveh of the Okl Testament. But here again there is a clifierence of view. Thus to Basilides, Yalentinus, Karpokrates, etc., he Avas a fallen angel, whose Kingdom it was the mission of the ajon Christ to destroy (a view apparently main- tained by Marcion), while with Saturninus Bardesanes and others, he was merely not " good " in the highest sense, the Christ having appeared in order to supersede his lower kingdom of mere righteousness by " goodness." * Gnosticism forms a strange and fantastic episode in the history of thought. Neither theology nor ^Dhilosophy, yet something of both, neither Christian nor Pagan, yet some- thing of both — bizarre in an age of prophets, soothsayers, founders of new cults, and revisers of old cults — these curious theosophic systems, originated in the iirst century, rose to importance in the second, and died away practically in the third, though some of the sects dragged on an existence till the age of Justinian. Manichasanism, which arose on their ruins, achieving a success at one time threatening even to Christianity itself, was little but a modified Zoroastrianism. Its reappearance in the thirteenth century in a Christianised form, as Pauli- cianism or Albigensianism, its rapid spread and as rapid extinction, though one of the most stirring and re- markable stories furnished by the history of the Middle Ages, does not fall within the scope of the historian of philosophj^. The common doctrine of the absolute and inherent evil of matter, and of its separation from the divine, led wdth the Gnostics to strangely pp]30site ethical views. With some, probably the majority, it was the basis of an ethic of rigorous asceticism, but with others, notably the Karpokratians, the Ophites, and the Kenites, it as- sumed the form of an antinomianism, which regarded all actions as indifferent, inasmuch as they all affected matter onl}^, and with this the divine in man was in no way con- * In some sects (e.g. the Ophites, the Kenites) the antipathy to Judaism was carried to the extent of deifviug the thiugs and person- ages supposed to be most obnoxious to the god of the Jews, as the serpent, Cain, &c. cerned. Epi])hanes, the son of Karpokrates, even enjoined excesses on his followers. The subject next to occupy our attention is the move- ment contemporaneous with Gnosticism, going on within the Church, in the persons of the ancient Fathers. This movement had for its end, at once to justify Christianity to the cultivated mind of the age, and to refute the Gnostic heresies (so-called), the form of which was semi- philosophical. The link which the early Fathers thought the}^ discovered between Pagan philosophy and Christian theology was — Plato. Pliilo and the Keo-Platonists had evolved trinitarianism out of Plato. The task of the " Platonising " Fathers, as those were termed who sought to mediate between the speculative opposition of the old world and the new, was to endeavour to show that what Plato had dimly foreshadowed by the light of reason was supernaturally revealed in the new religion. The great historical importance, however, of the early fathers, con- sists in their having laid the foundation of the cardinal Christian dogmas. The first of the philosophic Fathers was Justin, sur- named the Martyr (103-167). He had received an education at the hands of Platonic and Stoic teachers, and we may imagine was of " good " family. It was apparently in his later years that he became Christian. The authorship of two apologies for the Christians, ad- dressed to the Emperors Antoninus Pius and Marcus Au»relius, are ascribed to him, as well as a dialogue between himself and a Jew named Gryphon, and other pieces of more doubtful genuineness. In opposition to the pre- vailing Polytheism, he urged the impossibility of the ingenerate, changeless essence from whom all things proceed, being other than One. At the same time he admits a measure of truth in the writings, and of goodness in the lives of the ancients. In Sokrates especially, he sees the manifestation of the logos, • a term he was probably the first to employ in a Christian connection. Plato and Herakleitos, no less than Moses and Elijah, he was disposed to regard as forerunners of Christ, and indeed actually applies to them the epithet Christian. 104: TEANSITIONAL THOUGHT. The doctrines of the fall of man, freedom of the will, hereditary sin, regeneration, are severally expounded on Platonic and Stoic principles. Next in order to Justin Martyr comes Athenagoras, who also addressed an apology for the Christians to Marcns Anrelius, in which he seeks to furnish a philo- sophical basis for Monotheism, maintaining the Polytheist to be deceived by demons, and led by them into a con- fusion between the divine and natural. In this Athen- agoras undoubtedly touches the key-note of the essential distinction between Pagan naturalism and Christian super- naturalism. With one the divine is immanent in nature, the gods are simply the personified forces of nature, they are the familiar friends or enemies of man, like himself only more powerful ; to the other, nature, in itself dead, is created, animated and governed by the will of a trans- cendent deity, differing in kind and not in degree merely from man as a natural being. Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, about the middle of the second century, wrote a treatise addressed to a Pagan friend which contains the first distinct enunciation of the Christian doctrine of the trinity, though the conception of the Holy Ghost labours under some ambiguity, being still partially identified with the logos. Iren^eus, the pupil of Polycarp (executed 202, at Lyons, of which city he was bishop), was specially concerned with refuting the Gnostics, respecting whom he is one of our chief sources of information. Hippolytus also dealt with the same subject in a lengthy treatise. Minucius Felix defends Christianity on the ground of its ethics. Polytheism he seeks to explain away in Euhemeristic fashion. More important than any of these from the standpoint of the historian of philosophy is Clement of Alexandria, who flourished in the third century. His Stromata are not only a mine of interesting gossip respecting the earlier Greek thinkers, but one of the cleverest of the patristic attempts to found Christianity on a Platonic basis. Clement distinguishes between the Trt'crrc?, or faith, which is the root, and the yv^a-is, or knowledge, which is the crown ; the means to the attainment of the latter being the understanding {liridTy^iiri) of what had been THE GNOSTICS AND CHRISTIAN FATHEIIR. 105 previously received by faith. The true Gnosis is dis- tinguished from the false, by the morality and true brotherly love it engenders. The theology of Clement issues in a kind of Pantheism in which all life and activity is identified with God. The Clementine thcosophy, as may be imagined, shows many points of contact both with Gnosticism and Neo-Platonism. Clement's disciple, Origenes (said to have been also a pupil of Ammonius Saccas;, is by far the most important figure among the early Fathers. He it was who first made any serious attempt to reduce Christianity to the form of a coherent body of doctrine. Carrying out the idea of Clement respecting faith (Tricrrt?) and knowledge (yvwcns), he made it his task to formulate the latter, at the same time combating the principles of the heretical Gnosis, and acting as Christian apologist against Paganism. According to Origen, in addition to their literal or jjsijchical meaning, the Hebrew Scriptures have a pneumatic one. The initiated may discover in them an esoteric significa- tion to which the literal is merely the cloak. Origen, with the Pythagoreans, regards the limited as superior to the unlimited, and hence assigns a limit to the divine power. In the doctrine of the trinity, we notice a development on Justin and Theophilus, inasmuch as Origen fixes the position of the second Person, and pronounces his generation eternal. The Holy Ghost, although spoken of as above all created things, occupies a subordinate and intermediate position. With Origen all creation is eternal, that is, creative activity has neither beginning nor end. Though the present world is not eternal, yet an infinity of worlds has preceded this one. This is not intended to imply the eternity of matter, since the doctrine of creation out of nothing is strongly insisted upon.' The spirits which were created first in order, having fallen, were assigned, according to the degree of their transgression, various positions in the hierarchy of existence, including human bodies. The species subsequently took the place of the individual in Origen's doctrine of the fall, individual pre-existence being apparently surrendered. Besides the exoteric or personal relation to the divinity, Origen postulated an esoteric or 106 TKANSITIONAL THOUGHT. general one, viz., tliat of the Cliurch or comnmnity of saints. Inasmuch, as all creation is destined to absorption in this whole, it would imply a failure of the divine purpose if even the greatest of the fiends ultimately perished. In proportion as the Church grew as an organisation, gi'ew the desire for the formulation of its doctrines. The Chiistianity of reminiscence and expectation, of sentiment and vague belief, which had sufSced for the first century, failed to satisfy the second ; as a natural result aspirations began to crystallise into a definite system, assimilating the while the various Alexandrian and Zoroastrian doc- trines which formed a portion of the general intellectual life of the age. By the second half of the third century this process of crystallisation had approached completion. But even yet the line between heresy and orthodoxy was drawn in a comparativeh^ loose manner, as is evident from the doubtful position Origen occupies in Church history. From this time forward, however, when the position of the Church was assured by its numbers, wealth, and importance, against being crushed out by any persecution that might arise, and when the purely defensive attitude became less and less necessary, increased attention was given to the codification of the mass of dogmas which had now grown up, and to giving them severallj^ increased precision. The apologetic Fathers now give place to the dogmatic, the link between them being supplied by Origen. The foundation of dogmatic Christianity was obviously to be sought for in the doctrine of the trinity. Hence it was this which formed the main battleground of the various sects and parties in the Church from the begin- ning of the fourth century onwards. What relation did the historical Jesus bear to the second Person in the Trinity ? What was the relation of the second Person to the first ? Were the three Persons co-ordinate ? AVas it unity or triplicity which constituted the essence of the Godhead ? All these, and many subordinate questions began now to occupy the doctors of the Church. That the Christian trinitarian doctrine first took shape in Alexandria — that seething cauldron of s^^eculation — THE GNOSTICS AND CHRISTIAN FATHERS. 107 during the second century there is no reason to doul)t. But its earlier history is wrapped in obscurity. Of the nature and extent of the intercourse between the schools of philosophy and the leaders of the Christian Church in the Delta city, we know nothing ; yet that there was an intercourse is evident.* Ammonius Saccas, the reputed founder of Neo-Platonism (which was really founded in all essentials by the Platonic Jew, Philo, in the first century B.C.), is by some writers alleged to have been a Christian, at least originally, though it is evident that during the period of his activity as a teacher, he was altogether outside the pale of the Church. The truth was probably that he took considerable interest in the new system, and probably visited the assemblies of the Christians. He might even have had himself initiated, as a means of ascertaining the nature of the Church's esoteric doctrine. In any case, it is interesting and signifi- cant that the Christian Origen is said to have been one of his pupils, in company with the Neo-Platonists Plotinus and Herrennius. But whatever may have been the genesis of the doctrine, the beginning of the fourth cen- tury found its definition the subject mainly occupying the attention of the Christian communities. The Judaic monotheism of the Sabellians, in which trinitarianism is reduced to a shadow, was opposed by the jDaganising tendency of Arius, with whom the logos or second Person, was a created being, subordinate in nature to the first. As yet the dogma had not attained the consistency requisite for it as a fundamental thesis of Christian theology. The figure with whom its final formulation as the canon of orthodoxy is indissolubly associated, is that of Athanasius, (298-373), bishop of Alexandria. On the thesis of Athanasius it is unnecessary to dwell, since, after a desperate struggle with Arianism, it obtained what proved a decisive victory at Nica3a, in 325, where it was erected by a large majority into the orthodox Christian doctrine, a position it has maintained through- out Christendom ever since. The attempts subsequently * According to the critics the fourth Gospel was the immediate outcome of this intercourse. 108 TRANSITIONAL THOUGHT. made to mediate between the two parties, the disputes about a word, and the political, social and religious dis- turbances caused by the question during the whole of the fourth century, lie entirely outside the history of philosoph}^ The last of the Church Fathers that need detain us is St. Augustine (353-412), bishop of Hippo, whose specula- tive career offers many points of interest, as connecting the ancient and the medigeval world. Of Christian parentage, Augustine subsequently became Manichfean, but after a time reverted to the creed of his youth. Augustine found a refuge from scepticism, like Descartes at a later time, in the certainty of self-consciousness. From this he argues the certainty of being, life, and knowledge, which he maintains are involved in the primary fact of self-consciousness. Reflection on the highest stage of Being shows, he maintains, that the reason in its acts of cognition and judgment, pre-supposes certain fundamental principles, culminating in the eternal truth Avhich unites them in that synthesis which is tanta- mount to the supreme all-embracing idea of Plato or the creative intellect of Aristotle, but which Augustine identi- fies with the Christian Logos. That this identification of knowledge or consciousness itself with the divinity, is in- distinguishable from the Pantheism of the Neo-Platonists is obvious. Indeed Augustine himself admits his Platonism, often designating Plato " the true philosopher." For him the distinction between Faith and Knowledge, Eevelation and Reason, does not exist. The one is merely a prepara- tory stage to the other. Everywhere faith is the begin- ning, and precedes Reason, although intrinsically Reason is higher than faith. Inasmuch as God is wisdom itself, the philosoj)her, that is, the friend of wisdom, is the friend of God. God, as the essential object of all knowledge, cannot be conceived under the categories which serve to determine mere objects of sense. He is great without quantity, good without quality, every- where present irrespective of space, eternal apart from time. He cannot even be spoken of as substance, since no accidents can be predicated of him. The best definition that can be given is that of the essence of all things, for THE GNOSTICS AND CHRISTIAN FATHERS. 109 outside of, and apart from, him, nothing exists. Since his being knows no limitation, he is better defined in a uegative than a positive manner. Being, knowledge, will, action, are in him one. In short, God is the unknow- able, absolute, and unconditioned fact which the known, the relative, and the couditioned pre-supposes. But the character of Augustine as Christian dogmatist required that he should not stop at an unknowable God. Hence he proceeds to a consideration of the manifestation of God as revealed to us. This is nothing other than the doctrine of the trinity. Here again the agreement with the Neo- Platonists is strong, though the personal terminology of the Christian doctrine is formally maintained. Indeed Augustine, so ftir as the letter went, actually put the coping-stone on the work of Athanasius, by not only distinguishing the Holy Ghost from the other Persons, but by co-ordinating it with the logos ; his doctrine being that in each of the three Persons, the divine substance is equally preseat Thus to non-metaphysical ecclesiastics, Augustine might well appear the champion of orthodoxy : though looked at a little more closely, it would be difficult to find a single heresy with which he might not be chargeable.* With all his verbal adhesion to the Christian dogma, it is plain that philosophically he is, in spite of himself, a Platonist and a Pantheist. The world is for him " der Gottheit den ewigen Kleid." The creative power with- drawn, and the world would disappear. Into Augustine's theory of the freedom of the human will, which he identi- fied with the divine will, thereby opening a path to his predestinarian theology, and his controversy with Pelagius on this head, space precludes our entering. It is enough to state that Augustine was, in the exoteric and practical side of his theology, as much the type and embodiment of the Christian theologian, as he was in the esoteric and theoretical side of the Neo-Platonic philosopher. With Augustine the constructive period of Christian dogmatics finally closes. The whole Christian scheme was now * The passages in which Augiistine repeatedly insists on the equal participation of the three Persons in every creative act, might have been written by Sabellius. 110 TRANSITIONAL THOUGHT. mapped out in all its essentials, and many of its particn^ lars. All that remained was to apply this system to the details of life. An f»;nstine practically conclndes the line of the ancient Christian Fathers, as his contemporary, Proklos, that of the ancient pagan philosophers. In Augustine we take, as it were, a second, and this time a final farewell of the ancient world. The curtain falls once more. It will rise again on a Catholic and feudal Europe, whjere the races of modern times furnish the chief actors. Among the best works on the Christian and semi-Christian specula- tion of the first three centuries, may be mentioned : in English, Smith's ' Dictionary of Christian Sects and Heresies,' Hansel's * Gnostics of the Second Century,' Article, " Gnosticism," ' Encyclopaedia Britan- nica,' 9th ed., also separate articles, Basilides, Carpocrates, Cerinthus, &c. ; in French, Matter's ' Histoire du Gnosticisme ' ; in German, Baur's 'Drei erste Jahrhunderte des Christenthums,' Neauder's ' Kirchengeschichte ' (also translated in Bohn's library), and among recent works Hilgenfeld's ' Ketzergeschichte,' &c., &c. The original works of the early Fathers are translated in the Aute-Nicene library. THE EARLIER SCHOOLMEN. Ill MEDIiEYAL PHILOSOPHY. THE EAELIER SCHOOLMEN. The first representative of mediaeval philosophy occupies 80 far as speculation is concerned, a somewhat anomalous position. He stands like a solitary obelisk between the ancient world and the middle ages. The rise and rapid decline of the pure Keltic civili- sation is an interesting phenomenon in the history of mediaeval Europe. Its greatest architectural monument remaining is the cathedral of lona ; its greatest literary monument, the works of Johannes Scotus Erigena. Erigena, the first mediaeval philosopher, is the solitary representative of Platonism among the schoolmen, if, indeed, he can be properly classed as a schoolman. The spirit of scholasticism, or at least of the earlier scholasticism, was one of subordination. The function of the reason was to act as j;he Jiandmaid of dogma, in defining, applying, justifying it ; in Erigena, however, we see a much freer tendency. In him, Eeason takes prece- dence of dogma, since even the f]oo;]nas laid down and formulated by the fathers, were arrived at by the help of Eeason. Erigena is fond of saying that philosophy and religion are one, that true philosophy is true religion, and vice versa. At the same time, he proceeds to explain the world on Platonic principles, into which the Christian scheme enters only incidentally. Scotus Erigena was bom in Scotland, or Ireland (it is uncertain which, though most probably the latter), about the year 800. He doubtless received his education in one of the monastic schools which then covered Ireland and Keltic Britain, and where Greek was still taught in conjunction with Latin. In 843 he was called to the court of Charles the Bald of France, and entrusted with 112 MEDIAEVAL PHILOSOPHY. the Chair of the Schola Platina, a position he retained foi many years. The tradition which assigns to him an academical post in the University of Oxford, under Alfied the Great, is generally considered nnaiithentic. Scotus Erigena, in all probability, died in Paris about the year 877. The totality of all Being or Xature* falls, according to Erigena, under four classes ; the Uncreated-Creating, thi? Created-Creating, the Created -Uncreating, and the Uncrea.- ting-Uncreated. By the first and the last of these classes, God in His pure essence is indicated ; the former denoting God as the ground of all Being, the latter as the final end and goal of all things. The second, which stands in direct opposition to the fourth, as does the third to the first, comprise between them the totality of real or related existence. It may be remarked that the first three classes are discoverable in both Plato and Aristotle, not to speak of later thinkers, while the fourth is plainly indicated by the Neo- Platonic writers. Of the five books into which the philosophical treatise of Erigena is divided, the first treats of God as the Uncreated-Creating ; as that in and through which everything exists. He is the begin- ning, the middle, and the end, and hence, says Erigena, justly regarded as the imity of three Persons. This trini- tarian conception may also be viewed in another light, as theunity of being, willing, and knowing, or again of essence, potentiality, and actuality. The same trinity is discover- able in the soul of man, the "image of God," it matters not whether we adopt the first of the classifications just given, which was that of Augustine, or the second, which is that of the other Fatliers. In agreement with Augustine, Erigena denies any of the categories of thought to the essence of God, who he insists can best be defined as ^mre nothing. The first passage or progression is to the subject-matter of the second book, which deals with the created, which is also creating. This is nothing other than the system of the Platonic ideas, or ideal prototypes, in other words, the logos which embraces all things as the beginning, in * As will be seen, Erigena employs the word Nature as synony- mous with Being, and not in the usual limited sense, of the world as perceivable. THE EARLIER SCHOOLMEN. 113 whicli all things were created, as the wisdom in which they were intuited. Although created, they are neverthe- less eternal, inasmuch as the process of creation is not in time, but co-eval with time. As with the Neo-Platonists these principles stand to each other in a graduated order of participation. They Comprise within them the principles and forms of all real things, which are only real in so far as they participate in the essence of these forms. It is thus that they may he regarded as the direct causes and principles of the real world, or of that nature which is created, but does not itself create. This complex of indi\ddual objects forms the theme of the third book. The latter comprises a cosmology with which, by a process of allegorisation, the Biblical is forced into accordance. Man is the officina creaturarum, in whom the consciousness of the whole lower creation is gathered up. He is now out of paradise, inasmuch as he is divided from God by the sense- world. But this is not the end of his being. He is destined to a reconciliation with God, a reabsorption in the divine essence. Respecting this, the fourth and fifth books treat. In these the Pantheism of Erigena is most pronounced. Evil has no substantial existence, since the ground and essence of all reality is God. Similarly evil has no positive cause. It is incausale. Free will, to which many have referred the existence of evil, only determines it- self to evil, through want of knowledge, that is, through our mistaking evil for good. (We call the attention of the reader to the fact that this is an echo of the Sokratic doctrine.) Since its object is a mistaken one, since it is evil, and therefore negation, the will remains unsatisfied, its end being unaccomplished. This we term punishment, and therefore that only can be punished which does not exist. The purpose of punishment is hence, not the destruction of the substance of the sinner, but merely the accident of this substance, the misdirected, and there- fore essentially negative, will. On this ground Erigena insists with Urigen on the ultimate union of all things in God, on the reabsorption of the whole creation into the substance from which it sprang, after all that is evil, i.e. J negative in it, has been finally purged away. I 114 MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHY. This re-absorption should logically exclude individuality ; but Erigena does not appear to contemplate this, at least more than to a limited extent. The antitheses of creator and created, heaven and earth, male and female, indeed disappear, but the individuality remains, though in what sense it is difficult to determine. *As in the order of crea- tion, so in the order of absorption or deification, there are degrees according to purity, or the reverse. Tlie great work of Erigena, De Divisione Naturse, is written in the form of a dialogue between a master and disciple. Anselm. We pass over a period of two hundred years, during which no names of special note occur in the schools. This brings us to the eleventh century, a most important one in the history of scholasticism, since it gave birth to two of its most prominent figures, Anselm and Abelard. The former was born in 1035 at Aosta. He was educated first at Avranches and subsequently at the Abbaie de Bee in Kormandy, where he followed Lanfranc as prior, and afterwards as abbot. In the archbishopric of Canterbury, which he occupied from 1089 till his death in 1099, he w^as also a successor of Lanfranc. With Anselm philosophy becomes avowedly the hand- maid of theology. Its object is the justification of dog- matics, although its procedure, Anselm declares, must be independent of dogma. In Erigena we saw that the idea of personality and conscious volition in the Godhead and the world-order (the fundamental feature in all theology — as such. Christian or otherwise — the feature which distinguishes it from metaphysic proper), was left very much in abeyance. In Anselm, on the con- trary, as might be expected, it assumes a much more prominent place, since Anselm was no searcher after truth, but a philosophical advocate on behalf of the doc- trines of the Church. His chief wor]' is the Proslogimn^ which contains the first serious attempt i^j ^'ase rJieology on the so-called ontological argument. Anselm argues the existence of God from the mere conception of a supreme being which obtains in the mind. All things, THE EARLIER SCHOOLMEN. 115 inasmuch as they can be expressed by predicates, point to this ultimate concept, just as the predicate great points to the concept greatness, the predicate good tb good- ness, &c. Ansehn agrees with Augustine in defining God as the Essence of all things. In three dialogues de veri- tate, de lihero arbitrio, and de causa diaholi, Anselm de- velopes the thesis that the being of the real world is es- sentially negative, and in this way explains creation out of nothing ; the meaning of which is that the being of the world is the negation of the being of the Deity. Its purpose is the glory of the Deity, to which even the fall of man has contributed, by enabling man to become conscious of that glory. The freedom of the will is also dealt with, in a libertarian sense. Anselm occupies the position of a link between the Platonism of Erigena and his successors, and the pure Aristotelianism of the schoolmen proper. The great scholastic controversy — Nominalism versus Eealism— was yet to come, although near at hand. Its immediate starting-point may be considered the, in the first instance, purely theological polemic of Anselm against Roscellinus, canon of Champiegne, whose doctrine on the subject of the trinity tended in the direction of Tritheism. Anselm in this dispute takes the realist position against Eoscellinus, who is the representative of the most extreme nominalism. The former, like all his predecessors, and in spite of the Aristotelian tendency of much of his own thought, had never doubted that universals were to be regarded with Plato as having a substantive existence apart from the particulars and singulars in which they were realised. The latter maintained the then paradoxical (and in truth equally one-sided) position that universals had no signifi- cance except as words, that they were flatus vocis. It is noticeable how the great metaphysical problem which had occupied the ancients — the relation of matter and form — was now becoming whilTtled down to a mere logical or even psychological issue, in which its kernel was entirely lost and its bearings totally changed. It is remarkable also how this mere question of the schools was made the arena for the strife of Church parties and the battleground of twelfth-century orthodoxy and heresy. At first the I 2 116 . MEDIAEVAL PHILOSOPHY. weight of the Church's authority was thrown into the realist scale. This was to be expected, not only owing to the heterodox theological attitude of the first representa- tive of nominalism, but also because it gave to sense-per- ception the foremost place, besides cutting at the root of the ontological and all similar arguments. The panthe- istic tendencies of Eealism, when logically carried out, were apparently not discerned at this time. Abelard. The leading representative of the great scholastic controversy was Abelard (born 1079), a native of Pallet, or Palais, near Nantes. He studied first under Eoscellinus, and afterwards in Paris under the Eealist William of Champeaux. The result was a dissatisfaction with the teaching of either, but especially with that of the latter, which led Abelard to challenge his master to a public disputation. This ended triumphantly for Abelard, inasmuch as William was compelled to a formal recanta- tion of his extreme Realism. Abelard's reputation as the greatest dialectician of the age now grew rapidly, and scholars flocked from all sides to hear the PMlosojphus Peripateticus, as he somewhat arrogantly styled himself. Eising higher and higher in public estimation, in spite of a lengthened remission of labour owing to ill-health, as well as of the not unnatural animosity of his former master and now humiliated rival, William of Champeaux, whom he had literally driven from Paris, Abelard attained the chair of the great Cathedral school of Notre-Dame, being at the same tiYne nominated canon. It was now that the romantic episode occurred which was destined to overshadow the whole of Abelard's sub- sequent career, and which has given to the dialectician and schoolman the undying place he occupies in popular im- agination. It would be out of place in a manual like the present, to enter into a detailed account of the well-known story of the seduction of the canon Fulbert's niece by Abelard, of Abelard's passion, and Heloise's life-long devotion. A subsequent secret marriage, though for a time it appeased the indignation of Fulbert, did not THE EARLIER SCHOOLMEN. 117 prevent the perpetration of the crime which, to a large extent, shattered Abelard's subsequent life. He was not born fur the cloisters, and his attempt to retire from active work to the abbey of St. Denis was a failure. He reapjoeared as teacher, seemed to be regaining his old popularity, was condemned on a charge of heresy, again fled from the world, this time into the wilderness, was sought out by the students, again induced to teach, was once more driven by new dangers to the desolate abbey, Gildas de Rhuys, in Brittany, whence was penned his share of the well-known correspondence with Heluise. The final blow to Abelard's reputation was the fiasco of his attempt to answer St. Bernard, to whom his dialectics were an abomination. Condemned once more for heresy, Abelard was on his way to plead his cause in person at Eome when his health broke down, and he died shortly after, on the 21st of April, 1142, at the priory of St. Marcel. He was buried at the convent of the Paraclete (erected by his own scholars), of which Heloise, who subsequently shared his tomb, was Superior. Their bones, after many vicissitudes, now lie in Pere la Chaise. Abelard was in a sense the founder of Scholasticism, that is, the method of philosophising (for a system Scholasticism was not), which has for its end the rational formulation of the Church's doctrines. In Abelard we first find that exclusive ascendency of Aristotle, which is its main characteristic. Plato, before the chief store- house for the philosopher and theologian, henceforth remained a sealed book until the Renaissance. It was Abelard, too, who fixed the question of universal s as the central one. In antagonism alike to the extreme Realism of William of Champeaux, and the extreme Nominalism of Roscellinus, he maintained, formally at least, the Aristo- telian position, universalia in rebus. We say formally, as it is doubtful how far Abelard saw the metajDhysical bearings of the question. But at least he joined with the Kominalists in ascribing full reality only to sensible concretes, while he repudiated the fiatus vocis doctrine, proclaiming the existence of the universal in the concrete, and declaring it to emerge in the act of predication. The doctrine of Abelard has been termed conceptualism ; 118 MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHY. but the applicability of this desigTiation rests upon the assumption that Abelard concerned himself with the mere psychological question of the mental subsistence of the universal. It is most probable that he never clearly grasped the distinction between the metaphysical and the psychological problems. He was pre-eminently a logician who took delight in dialectical combats for their own sake, as his contemporaries of the sword took delight in combats with the lance for their own sake. With ethics, however, Abelard occupied himself to some extent, and some of his observations in this department are acute, and in certain points even anticipate the remarks of modern thinkers, although awe of the Church's authority pre- vented him from treating the subject in any thorough manner. THE AKABIANS AND JEWS. 119 THE AEABIANS AND JEWS. We must turn aside now from the Schools of Catholic Europe, with the controversy raging between Nominalism and Eealism, where Aiistotle was being exploited in the interest of the Church, to a series also of Aristotelian thinkers, trained, not in the fathers, but in the Koran, and who appear first of all in the East, and afterwards in Spain. For their acquaintance with the writings of the Stagirite, the Arabians were largely indebted to the Nestorian Christians of Syria. The physician of the Prophet himself was a Nestorian. But it was not until the reign of the Abbassides, in the eighth century, that the medical and philosophical Greek literature came generally into vogue with the learned Saracen. The first Arabian' translation of Aristotle dates from the beginning of the ninth century. About the same time, or rather later, flourished Alkendi, to whom the English Eoger Bacon was much indebted. He was the first to attempt to place the Islamite theology on a rational basis. As Professor Wallace observes (Encyclopsedia Britannica, 9th ed., art. " Arabian Phi- losophy "), " there were schoolmen amongst the believers in the Koran, no less than amongst the Latin Chris- tians. At the very moment when Mohammedanism came into contact with the older civilisations of Persia, Baby- lonia, and Syria, the intellectual habits of the new converts created difficulties with regard to its very basis, and proved tl^emselves a prolific source of diversity in the details of} interpretation." taking at the philosophical problem from the point of vie\r'='lf Mohammedan monotheism, the difficulty was to reconcile the ascription of manifold attributes to a being whose essence was unity. The next in interest was the relation of the Divine omnipotence to the freedom of the human will. But the philosophical genius of the Semitic mind was not sufficiently great to deal with these questions 120 MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHY. satisfactorily to itself without the assistance of European thought. It is a noteworthy circumstance that the phi- losophy of Aristotle appears in its purest form in the Middle Ages, in the works of the Arabian writers. Next to Alkendi comes the so-called Alfarabi, who died A.D. 050. His philosophy was buried in the darkness of a secret order, such was the suspicion with which his rationalising tendencies were regarded. One of the most important of the philosophers of the East, was Avicenna (born 980). In him the question of Nominalism and Eealism resolved itself, not after the manner of Abelard in the West, by a destructive criticism of the rival theories, but by a recognition of their equal justification. According to Avicenna, all universals exist ante res in the Divine understanding, iyi rebus, as the real predicates of things, and post res, as the abstract concepts formed by the human mind. At the head of Avicenna's metaphysic stands the absolutely simple, necessary, and perfect essence. This is the Good towards which every- thing tends, and from its particiiDation in which its relative perfection is derived. Notwithstanding its unity, this principle embraces as determinations of its thought, the necessary (as distinguished from the merely contingent) in all real objects. Opposed to this abstract principle oiform, is the liyle or matter. The matter of Avicenna is, like that of Aristotle, Plato, and their successors, merely the principle of limitation, of non-being, of contingency, in which the whole sense-world partakes ; in other words, the principle of plurality and potentiality, as against that of unity and actuality. Nature is the synthesis of these fundamental principles. The passage from the higher to the lower is to be conceived as eternal. The cause which gives reality to things is equally necessary to preserve their reality. It is an error to suppose that once brought into being, objects would remain so of themselves. Avicenna, as a natural consequence of this doctrine, teaches the eternity of the world. It is unnecessary to enter upon the manner in which Avicenna brings this dualistic system into conformity with his theological creed. Suffice it to say, that any contradiction between the doctrine of reason and the THE ARABIANS AND JEWS. 121 revelation of the Prophet, is to him an impossibility. In practice he advocates asceticism as a means of freeing the soul from the bondage of matter, and raising it to the intelligible world, which is its proper destination. Al Ghazzali (born 1059) represents the sceptical side of Arabian philosophy, as Avicenna does the mystical. .His work may be described, like that of the late Dean Mansel's ' Limits of Religious Thought,' and Mr. Balfour's * Defence of Philosophic Doubt,' as an effort to resuscitate a popular theology by a demonstration that pliilosophic conceptions are as unreliable, and as susceptible to negative criticism, as those of common experience, which philosophy pretends to undermine. The consequence of the scepticism of Al Ghazzali was the triumph throughout the East of unphilosophical Mohammelan orthodoxy. Spain became henceforth the chief theatre of Saracen learning. The first figure that strikes us in the Moorish Empire is Abu Beker, who was born at Saragossa, towards the end of the eleventh century. He wrote only small treatises, most of which are lost. The most famous of these, ' The Guide of the Lonely,' treats of the stages through which the soul rises from the instinct that it possesses in common with the lower animals, to the active intellect, which is an emanation of the Deity Himself. This is, as with Avicenna, by a progressive freeing of itself from the potentiality and multiplicity of sense. Abu Beker is chiefly interesting as leading up to the greatest of all the Mohammedan thinkers, Averroes. Averroes was born at Cordova in the year 1120, and died in Morocco, as physician, in the last year of the century. His veneration for Aristotle amounted almost to adoration, his works chiefly consisting of commentaries on the master, Averroes is strong in his polemic against the doctrine of creation out of nothing, and in his rehabilitation of the Aristotelian principle of evolution. What is called crea- tion is nothing but the transition from potentiality to actuality. Matter ( ontains within it all forms, according to their possibility ; they do not require to be super- induced upon it from without, as in the Platonic doctrine 122 MEDIiEVAL PHILOSOPHY. of Avicenna, but to be merely evolved, the distinction betweeen potentiality or possibility, i.e., matter, and actuality, i.e., form, existing only in our limited thought, The philosopher should recognise this. He should see that the oft-repeated question as to whether chaos or matter has preceded or followed 07'der or form, from bis point of view, has no meaning, since the merely temporal distinction of possibility and actuality is for him merged in the higher category of neceissity. Averroes found in his religion what he was expounding in a rational form, shadowed forth in images and symbols. Only a few could attain the highest goal, viz. philososophical truth ; for the rest, the popular creed was necessary. With Averroes the series of the Saracen thinkers closes. Their influence is readily discover- able in the writings of Albertus Magnus, Thomas Aquinas, and indeed, all the later schoolmen. Before proceeding to again take up the thread of Western speculation proper, we must cast a glance at the con- temporary Jewish philosophy, a type of which we may find in Maimonides. This, although possessing no espe- cial bearing on what immediately follows, will have its importance when we come to treat of Spinoza. The Jewish philosophy of the middle ages consists partly in the Kabbala, which was a secret doctrine, claiming great antiquity, but in all probability not dating from earlier than the middle of the ninth century; and partly in a Judaistic Aristotolianism, traceable immediately to the Arabian thinkers, especially Averroes. The doctrine of the Kabbala is comprised in two books, called resj^ectively Jezirah, or Creation, and SoJiar, or Illumination. It is the former book which contains the original Kabbalistic doctrine, the latter being avowedly the production of a Spanish Jew of the thirteenth century. It will suffice to state that the doctrines contained in these books are simply a mixture of Neo-Platonic, Neo- Pythagorean, Parsic, and other theosophies. The Moorish Empire was the happy hunting-ground of all searchers after knowledge and si^eculative freedom in the middle ages. In spite of not unfrequent bursts of intolerance, thought was probably freer in Spain than in THE ARABIANS AND JEWS. 123 any other European country. It was not alone Mussulman thinkers and scholars that found a home there ; Christians and Jews taught and studied side by side with them. The civilisation which produced the Alhambra and the Escorial can boast not only Averroes, but Avicebron and Maimonides. The first Jewish philosopher of any note is Avicebron, author of the work Fons Vitse, mu(;h quoted by the schoolmen. He was born at the beginning of the eleventh century, at Malaga, and died aliout 1070. His main thesis is the universality of the opposition of Matter and Form (or, which is the same thing, of Genus and Differentia), throughout the sensible, no less than the intelligible and moral worlds ; and at the same time, their indissoluble conjunction. Will alone transcends this opposition, and hence cannot be defined, but only seized by intuition. Avicebron was a pronounced Pantheist, and his work was in consequence shunned by the orthodox, no less among the Jews than the Christians. Moses Ben Maimon, or Maimonides, who was a native of Cordova, was born 1135, and died, 1204, at Cairo. He was alike among his co-religionists and the outer world the most highly esteemed of all the mediseval Hebrew thinkers. Although much influenced by his Mohammedan con- temporaries and predecessors in the field of i:)hilosophical research, having studied under the famous Averroes, he none the less cultivated with assiduity the writings of Aristotle himself. He was a voluminous writer, not only on philosophy but also on law and medicine. His main doctrines were the impossibility of predicating any positive attributes of the Deity ; with this was con- nected his division of all existence into the Makrokosmos and Mikrokosmos, terms which play such a large part among the alchemists and the pseudo-physicists of a later age. Maimonides, in spite of his devotion to Aristotle, refused to admit the eternity of the world a parte ante. The divine intelligence is, according to his doctrine, connected with the singular or individual through the human intelligence. In itself it only contains the universal forms of things. The writings of Maimonides soon became widely circu- 124 MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHY. lated, and were much commented upon. It was chiefly through his contemporary, Gersonides, that they were made known to the Gentile world. THE LATER SCHOOLMEN. Albertus Magnus., This eminent schoolman and reputed magician was born in Swabia, about the year 1193, receiving his education at the university of Padua. In his thirty-sixth year Albertus repaired to Cologne, as professor in the Dominican College there. He is also said to have taught in several other places, amongst them Strasbourg and Paris, but subsequently returned to Cologne at a time when Thomas Aquinas was beginning to achieve distinc- tion. After much wandering in France and German}^ he died in the year 1280, having outlived his famous pu2)il *' the angelic doctor." Albertus Magnus was the first of the schoolmen to expound the Aristotelian philosophy in systematic order, at the same time taking account of its various Arabian commentators, and to seek to bring the whole mass — original form and later developments — into possible harmony with ecclesiastical dogma. He expounds his modified version of " the philosopher " in a series of writings which form a running commentary on the Aristotelian text. His theory of the Universal is nearly identical with that of Avicenna. It is universale ante rem in the divine mind ; universale in re in the synthesis of realit}'^ ; and universale post rem as the mental concept. Albertus is careful to separate the Trinitarian doctrine of the Church and the dogmas connected therewith from his rational or philosophic theology. He none the less rejects the Aristotelian doctrine of the eternity of the world, holding fast in this case to the Church dogma of a creation in time. Albertus, with Aristotle and Plato, contends for the materiality of the soul and its independence of the body so far as its existence is concerned, although not in THE LATER SCHOOLMEN. 125 respect of it as an active agent in the real world. The ethics of Albertns rest entirely on the principle of the freedom of the will. His attempt to combine the Aristotelian morality with the Christian is more ingenious than successful. Thomas Aquinas. Thomas of Aquino, born 1225, at the castle of his father, a Neapolitan count, is the central figure among the later schoolmen. His abilities being early recognised, he was sent to the Dominican School in Cologne, where Albertus Magnus was then lecturing. He followed Albertus to Paris, and back again to Cologne, there assuming the position of Magister Studentium. He subsequently gave courses of lectures in most of the chief universities of Europe, while at the same time engaged in affairs of State, both in France and Italy, and active in all the public business of the Church. He died in 1274. Thomas Aquinas may be described as the spirit of Scholasticism incarnate. His Smnma Theologia is an attempt to realise the scholastic ideal of an all-embracing system of knowledge comprehending philosophy proper, theology, and such physical speculations of an alchemistio character, which then did duty for science. The grand principle on which Aquinas based his system was that there were two sources of knowledge, — revelati on, a,nd_rea&au. ThiLiiliiefldiaracterii^tic of i-evela- tion is th e m ysterious and incomprehensible guise in which i ts truths are conveyed, but which are to be belieye^^in spite of this. The channels of revelation are the Hebrew Scriptures and Church tradition. The Eeason of Aquinas is not to be confounded with the individual reason. It is the other main source of knowledge, its artery being the writings of the Greeks, especially of Plato and Aristotle. In both these two channels of knowledge there is a higher and a lower sphere, the latter of which, alone, man can hope to attain. Though distinct for us, in the last resort. Reason and revelation alike draw from the same ultimate source, namely, God, or the Absolute One. Thomas Aquinas did for the Christian theology what Averroes did for the 126 MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHY, Moslem, and Maimonides for the Jewish. He supplied it with a fairly coherent, philosophical dress. In his theory of the universal, Aquinas follows his master, Albertus Magnus, who, as we have seen, in his turn follows Avicenna. Eealism (whether Platonic or Aristotelian), and Nominalism, alike have their relative justification. In the agreement of things with the eternal ideas consists tlieir truth; in the agreement of our thoughts with the things, consists the truth for us. The connection between the metaphysic and theology of Aquinas is seen when he comes to treat oiForm as independent Substance, in which way the existence of spiritual being is explained. The angels of Aquinas, like those of Philo, are simply personified universals. In treating the Scholastic period generally, but more especially a writer like Aquinas, it is hard to say where philosophy ends and theology begins, for in spite of St. Thomas's primary distinction, we find the theological method named pervading the whole current of his thought, as of that of the Schoolmen generally. The influence of the "Angelic Doctor," as he was termed, on the thought, and more than all, on the terminology of subsequent ages, must not be measured by the comparatively limited space we can aiford, or, indeed, that it is necessary, to devote to him, in a work like the present. " Were the importance of a school determined by the number of its adherents and its long continuance," says Erdmann, "none could compare with that of the Albertists, as they were originally, or the Thomists, as they were afterwards called. There are even many who see in Thomas at the present dsij the incarnation of the philosophical reason." The present pope Leo XIII., in 1879, constituted Thomas Aquinas the, so to speak, official exponent of the philosophical side of Catholicism. Not long after his death, however, he had already obtained the same position among the Dominican order to which he had belonged. There can b^s no doubt or question, whatever may be our opinion of the value of the scholastic philosophy in general, or of that of St. Thomas in particular, that he was one of the subtlest and acutest intellects that have ever lived. The s ervices he THE LATER SCHOOLMEN. 127 has rendered in giving precision to philosophical termin- ology mnst alone, apart from all question of the particular tenets associated with his name, render him deserving of the gratitude of all subsequent thinkers. Duns Scotus. John Duns Scotus, the precise year and place of whose birth are somewhat uncertain, though the probabilities seem in favour of a Scottish origin, flourished during the latter half of the thirteenth century. He is reported to have studied at Merton College, Oxford, where he became remarkably proficient in all branches of learning, especially mathematics. In 1301 he was appointed Professor of Philosophy at Oxford, and attracted great attention, a fact expressed in the legend that no less than thirty thousand students attended his classes. He acquired his title of " Doctor Subtilis," on account of the dialectical ingenuity he displayed in bis defence of the doctrine of the immaculate conception, a dogma which was main- tained by the Franciscans, to whom Scotus belonged, against the Dominicans. He died, it is said, in the thirty- fifth year of his age at Cologne, in November, 1308. Though the Scotists, or followers of Scotus, continued, till the close of the Scholastic period, the rivals of the Thomists in the learned world, it must not be supposed that he was any the less a realist in philosophy than Aquinas himself; indeed, Scotus nay be regarded as rt-presenting the harder and more uncompromising form of the realist doctrine. He als'^ indicates a reaction against the eclecticism of Aquinas in another respect. Aquinas, as we know, gave to reason an amount of authority independent of dogma ; Scotus. on the other hand, will not admit of any other channel of knowledge than the ecclesiastical one. In accordance with this position, he rejects the ontological arguments offered by Aquinas in favour of the existence of the Deity, whose being and attributes he proclaims altogether outsiclo the sphere of reason. The most important of the writiiigs of Scotus consisted of commentaries on Aristotle and Lom- bardus. His strength consists rather in negative criticism 128 MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHY. than in constructive thought. This is connected, according as we view it, either as cause or consequence of his fundamental position, which amounted to denying for the reason any sphere of use other than that of undermining its own pretensions. To him who proclaimed the un- conditional acceptance of the Church's doctrines in their very letter as the primary duty, it was not likely that any attempt at constructing a rational theology would find much favour. Scotus is what Occam was still more, a Christian Al Ghazzali. All things, according to Scotus, are constituted of Form and Matter combined. The principle of individuation he finds in Form. The special individual determination or the Thisness (Jisecceitas) imposes itself as Form on the Matter which is constituied of generic and specific character. The essence of individuation is distinguish- able in the things as well as in the intellect, although it has no existence separable from them, i.e. the Universal is not merely potentially present in the object, but actually so. Scotus is particularlj^ strong in his assertion of the freedom of the will, which he declares capable of self-determination without motive. It will be sufficiently clear from this brief sketch that by his doctrine of the Thisness (JisBcceitas), or principle of individuation, not implying any limitation or deterioration of the What- ness, or quiddity, but rather the completion and perfecting of it, Scotus has discarded the last remnant of the older Platonic realism, according to which the sense element, or in other words, this same principle of individuation was the purely negative matter, limiting the perfection of the universal form, which inhered in it. William of Occam. William, born at Occam (now Ockham), in Surrey, a Franciscan and pupil of Duns Scotus, was for some time professor in Paris. Opposed to the temporal power of the Hierarchy, in accordance with the principles of his order, he threw himself with ardour into the conflict between the French Monarchy and the Papacy on the side of the THE LATER SCHOOLMEN. 129 former. Persecuted by the papal party, he fled to Padua, and subsequently to Munich, where he placed himself under the protection of Ludwig of Bavaria. He died in Munich about the year 1347. In William of Occam, the swan of scholasticism sang its death-song. For from Occam's new arguments and re- statement of the position of Nominalism, which he championed, resulted the bankruptcy of the school- ardently philosoj^hy. Occam was as much opposed to Scotism, the dominant philosophy of his order, as he was to the Thomism of the Dominicans. His definition of a Universal is interesting. " A Universal is," he says, " a particular intention of the mind, itself capable of being predicated of many things, not for what it pro- perly is itself, but for what those things are ; so that in so far as it has this capacity it is called Universal, but in so far as it is one form really existing in the mind, it is called singular." With Occam the great controversy respecting Univer- sals became consciously narrowed to a purely psycho- logical issue. The coincidence between much in his writings with the doctrines of the later English Em- piricist school is, allowing for scholastic terminology striking. According to Occam, the Species {intelligibiles) of the Scotists are superfluous entities. It is rather the actus intelUgendi itself which is the sign of the thing. By sign, William understands that by which one thing is distinguished from another thing. He draws a line between natural signs, or signs of objects over which our v/ill has no control, and those general terms forme p in the mind which can be called up and dismissed at pleasure. The former constitute our percej)tions or thoughts of things, the latter are merely states or modi- fications of the soul caused by these perceptions. But it would be just as irrational to suppose that even the first of these, i.e. our necessary thoughts, or our perceptions through sense, resemble the things perceived, as to suppose that the sigh resembles the pain which causes it, or the smoke the fire. Here we have a plain statement, albeit couched in scholastic phraseology, of the ordinaiy empirical doctrine of a world of " things-in-themselves," K 130 MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHY. which are the cause of our perceptions but concerning which we know nothing more. The second order of signs, our ideas or general concepts, have, according to Occam, no connection whatever with things, but are merely built up of our perceptions of things and serve to indicate these. They are mere words or names, having no more resemblance to the perceptions which gave rise to them than the latter in their turn have to the things by which they are caused. The principle of Occam's philosophical method is well expressed in his favourite maxim : entia non sunt multqjli- canda p'seter necessitatem. Sufficiunt singularia, et ita tales res universales omnino frustra jpommtur. He makes short work of distinctions which, until then, had passed as the common property of the learned. The same tendency to simplification is observable in his theology. Like his master Duns, he denies the possibility of basing theology on reason. With William of Occam, the philosophy of the Church virtually closes. After him there is no original figure. The various schools continued to furnish writings and disputations up to the period of the Renaissance, and even later, but there is little to record concerning them. Among the best works giving a general view of the philosophy of the Middle Ages may be mentioned Haureau, de la philosopMe scolastique (2 Yoll. Par. 1850) ; Kaulich, Geschichte der sclwlastischen Philosophie (Prague, 1863) ; Stocld, Geschichte der Fhilowphie dea Mittelalters (Mainz, 1862-66); Frantl, Gesch. der Logic im Ahend- Jande. Muurice, Medipeval ^Philosophy, in Vol. I. of his Moral and Metapliysical Philosophy, which contains perhaps the best and fullest English monograph on the subject. For the Arabians and Jews may be consulted Munk, Melanges de philosophie juive et arabe (Paris, 1859); Ernest Eenan, Averroes et Vaverroisme (Paris, 1852 ; 2nd Ed. 1865); Geiger, Moses hen Maimon (Breslau, 1850); a\so Beer, Philo- sophie und philosophische Schriftsteller der Juden (Leipsic, 1852). About the time that Scholasticism was declining, a curious niovementsprHng up in Germany. This was the so-called " German Mysticism " of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. It is in the main concomitant with the rise of that German national literature which was brought to an untimety end by the Tliirty Years' War. This mystical movement may be said to have originated with the Master THE LATER SCHOOLMEN. 131 Ecliliart, who, tired of the teachings of the schools, broke away from them in a direction which led directly to Jacob Bohme, and indirectly to the Lutheran Keformation. Johannes Tauler, of Strasbourg, may be also mentioned as one of.the leaders of this movement. Though he did not add much in substance to the speculations of Eckhart, he was possessed of a literary style which his predecessors lacked, and thus contributed to popularise them. The most important work of this school in its influence on German thought was one by an unknown author, sub- sequently published by Luther as " A German Theology '* {Eyn deutsch Tlieologia). The burden of the whole school is the evil and unreality of the phenomenal world ; true reality only being recognised in a world outside the limits of time and space to which man must attain ere he rises to his higher life. We have in them an apt illustration of history repeating itself. To Eckhart and his followers, as to Plotinus, the goal of the reason is found in the absolute all-embracing Unity wherein all difference is abolished, Indeed this German Mysticism of the later Middle Ages is little but a reproduction of Neo-Platonic theories, con- siderable as was it8 practical influence and results. On the German Mystics the best work is Praegers Geschichte der deutschen Mystik i-m MittelaUer (1st Part, Leipsic, 1875) ; Rosenhrantz, Der Deutsche Mystik, Konigsberg, 1836). In French, Albert Barran, Etudes sur qitelqties tendences du mysticisme avant la reformcitian (Strasbourg, 1868). K 2 ( 132 ) TRANSITION TO MODERN PHILOSOPHY. THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE KENAISSANCE. Feudalism was in ruins. Industry and Commerce were rising into power. Catholicism was rapidly disintegrating as a system even in spiritual matters, while as a con- trolling factor in the affairs of the world it was merely one, by no means the greatest, among several contending forces. The philosophy of the schools was everywhere in disrepute among earnest and independent thinkers. The art of printing had just been invented, and was of itself revolutionising older habits of thought. The New World was being opened up by enterprising Spanish and Portu- guese mariners. And last, but not least, Constantinople had but recently fallen before the crescents and horsetails of Mahomet II., and its treasures, literary and artistic, been, in consequence, dispersed throughout the Western World. Such was Europe as the fifteenth century closed, and the sixteenth opened. Among a crowd of diverse, yet connected factors, each contributing its quota to the for- mation of the mental character of an epoch, it is difficult to assign the relative importance of any one in particular. Yet it is sufficiently obvious that it was the last event mentioned which gave its immediate colouring to the philosophy of the period. Little as the so-called Renaissance has in common with the Middle Ages pure and simple, it yet possesses a distinct mediasval character of its own, just as the period of the Christian Roman Empire has the stamp of the civilization of antiquity upon it, notwithstanding the gnlf which divides it from the ancient world properly so called. The industrial middle class of the fifteenth century were so far nearer allied to the yeomen and free tenants of feudalism than to the commercial classes of modern times. In the same way the hatred of scholasticism FICINUS AND PICUS. 133 and the desire to start afresh on the lines of ancient thought in its purity did not prevent the philosophical literature of the period from having a distinct mediaeval and scholastic flavour. Early in the fifteenth century, there was a society esta- blished in Florence by a Greek named Plethon, the com- mentator of Plato, under the special j^rotection of Cosmo de Medici, for the study of the works of Plato untrammelled by theological scruples. Marsilius Ficinus (1433-1499), who taught in the school, was 'the author, in addition to a work entitled Theologica Platonica, of a well-known Latin translation of Plato. Another prominent reviver of Platonism was John Picus of Mirandola. Turning from Platonism to Cabbalistic mysticism and charlatanry, Picus of Mirandola repaired to Kome to propound nine hundred theses on every conceivable subject, logical, ethical, mathematical, metaphysical, theological, magical, which he offered to defend against all comers. By these he suc- ceeded in achieving great notoriety at the time, though not without falling under the suspicion of heresy. Picus died at the early age of thirty-one, in the year 1494. Ficinus and Picus may be taken more or less as types of the average philosophical product of the Eenaissance in Italy. Scholars like them crowded the court of the Medicis. The great speculative result of the classical revival of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries may be seen in the Pagan- ism which became fashionable among the upper classes, extending even to the Papal chair itself. A state of things prevailed similar in many respects to that presented by the French pre-revolutionary salons of the eighteenth century, of which it was indeed the precursor. The dominant classes, while amid their own circle avowedly an ti- Christian, were publicly, and before the common people, devout members of the Church. The cultured indifferentism of Italy was in striking contrast with the earnestness felt and displayed in religious matters the other side of the Alps. To Leo X. the sale of indulgences seemed a short and easy method of raising money, as little objectionable as any. This opinion was doubtless shared by the higher clergy, and all those who, whether Italian or not, had come directly under 134 THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE RENAISSANCE. the influence of the Eenaissance. Populus vult decipi et decijnatur was their motto; and it was surely only fair that the populus should pay for its deception. To Luther and his confreres of the German Reformation, whose contact with the Eenaissance was only indirect and second-hand, and who possessed in addition, the fierce earnestness of the northern temperament, the whole body of Christian dogma was of serious and vital moment. To the man who believed himself to be continually wrestling with the devil, it is obvious the said of free leave of sinning was horrible in the extreme. The great religious conflict of the period known as the Reformation, was not so much the struggle of a new religious idea with the old Catholic one, as with the class-culture of the Renaissance. It may be roughly characterised as a conflict between the two great natural groups of western Europe — the Latin and the Teutonic. The former would have had two creeds, that of a Paganised culture for the upper classes existing con- currently with abject superstition in those below them in the social scale ; the latter contended for the right of the growing middle classes to independent judgment within certain limits ; i.e. what they deemed the fundamental arti- cles of Christian belief. To them the free-thought and eccle- siastical superstition of the Latins were alike abominable. But it was an indispensable condition, even in Italy itself, great as was the latitude allowed in speculation, that none should endanger the authority of the Church. Giordano Bruno, born 1548, near Naples, originally a Dominican, found this to his cost. In consequence of his having come to disbelieve the ecclesiastical dogma, he left his order, a fact which in itself must have constituted him a fool, and a somewhat dangerous one to boot, in the eyes of his brother Italian churchmen of the period. To this noble-minded man the lip-service and speculative chicanery of other clerical scholars was abhorrent. He, at least, could not continue professing a creed, or serving a church, in whose pretensions he disbelieved. He was hence com- pelled to leave Italy. At first he repaired to Geneva, then the capital of the Reformation ; but the " reformed " doctrines, so-called, were to his logical mind even less satisfactory than the Catholic orthodoxy he had forsaken. GIORDANO BRUNO. 135 From tlience he went to Lyons, Toulouse, Paris, and ultimately to Oxford and London. He found a temporary resting;- place at the Court of Queen Elizabeth, and hold disputations at Oxford, It has even been conjectured, though on perhaps insufficient grounds, that while in Londoh, Bruno made the acquaintance of Shakespeare, and that certain philosophical allusions occurring in "Hamlet" ma}'- be traced to the influence of his conversa- tion on the poet. But the spirit of wandering again seized Bruno ; he travelled to Wittenberg, thence to Prague, subsequently visiting Frankfort-on-the-Maine, where he remained some little time, and from which place an evil fate seems to have drawn him once more across the Alps into his native country. He fell into the hands of the Inquisition soon after his arrival, and was conveyed to Eonie in 1593. There he suffered an imprisonment of some years' duration, during which time every attemj^t, whether by force or cajolery, to induce him to recant his views was nobly and successfully resisted. When, at the beginning of 1600, he was sentenced to death, Bruno is reported to have said in the presence of the Court, " It behoves you to have greater fear in pronouncing this sentence than I have in receiving it." He was burnt at Eome on the 17th of February, 1600. A statue has been erected to his memory at Naples, before which the students, on one occasion, burnt an encyclical letter of Pope Pius IX. Bruno is certainly by far the most important and original philosophic figure to which the Renaissance gave birth. An ardent disciple of the new physical doctrines of Copernicus, he was not satisfied with philosojihising en the old Platonic or Aristotelian lines, but sought a theory of the universe which should embrace the new science. Bruno's admiration for the older Greek philosophers was great ; he placed them before either Plato or Aristotle, for the latter of whom he seems to have had a genuine hatred. An^ixagoras, Herakleitos, Pythagoris, he held in high esteem; but the thinker wlio most immedately influenced him was perhaps Nicolas of Chusa, the celebrated German ecclesiastic and mystic of the fifteenth century. To Bruno God was simply the immanent princix:)le of the universe, or world-soul. Bruno attacks what he con- 136 THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE EENAISSANCE. ceives the dualism of Matter and Form; the Form is immanent in all Matter of which it is only an aspect. Like his enemies, the Scholastics and the Arabian Aristotelians, he held to the three-fold existence of ideas, or universals, ante res, in rebus, and post res — metaphj^sically in the ultimate unity or world-soul, physically in the real world, and logically in tlie sign, symbol or notion. God, or the universal substance of all things, is related to the real world as the universal to the particular. In the laws of nature, which are the expression of his being, Bruno discovers true freedom. But the determining and infinitely actual principle presupposes a possible principle, which becomes determined. The other pole of the philosophic equation is therefore the old prin- ciple of Matter, or the infinitely possible. Thus, as might be expected from the nature of things, Bruno was bound, when once he attacked the ultimate philosophical problem, to express himself in that same Aristotelian fashion which he elsewhere condemns as dualistic. The position held by Bruno in reference to the problem of Monism or Pluralism is not quite clear. His work De Monade Numero et Figura, seems to incline to the latter; the De Immenso et Innumerahilibus to the former ; but possibly he had never clearly propounded the question to himself. God, or the universal principle, inasmuch as it embraces the sum of things, is the maximum possibile ; inasmuch as it is equally present in every atom, the minimum possibile. It compre- hends in itself every other contradiction ; thus, that which is everywhere centre, is at once everywhere and nowhere periphery, &c. The one principle is the same, not only in kind, but in degree, whether in the plant, the animal, or the stone. The infinite possibilities of the one substance are realised successively in the order of time, which is also in- finite. As Erdmann remarks, if on the one side Bruno may be regarded as a forerunner of Spinoza, on the other he is none the less a forerunner of Leibnitz. The monad is the principle of the working of the soul. Every order of beings is perfect according to its kind ; there is no absolute, but only a relative evil. These principles are developed on Pythagorean lines. Bruno is remarkable for having been the first to attempt REUCHLIN, ETO. 137 the incorporation of the new scientific conceptions into a philosophical system. He is moreover interesting from his having been the first thinker in the modern world who openly and definitely broke with Christi- anity. A true son of the Kenaissance, in spite of his originality, his philosophy, like his character, was essentially formed on a Pagan mould, and he knew it. But unlike the rank and file of the scholars and gram- marians of the age, he boldly attacked the dogmas which he disbelieved, and which were abhorrent to him, and attacked them too in no compromising or half-hearted manner. In this he was not followed by his countryman and contemporary Thomas Campanella, also a man of con- siderable original power, though inferior to Bruno. Cam- panella is chiefly noteworthy as the immediate prede- cessor of Descartes, in making the certainty of the actual moment of consciousness the starting-point of his phi- losophy ; and also in having employed the ontological argument to prove the existence of the Deity. In many respects he approached Bruno, even in the latter's Pan- theism, but he nevertheless always contrived to keep on good terms with the Church, being in his later years a strong advocate of Papal domination. THE SIXTEENTH-CENTUEY ALCHEMISTS AND COSMIC SPECULATORS. The sixteenth century was eminently an age of travelling scholars. The whole of civilized Europe was at this period of universally awakening intellectual activity, literally overrun with students who contrived to support themselves chiefly by obtaining hospitality in return for some slight service, educational, medical, or divinatory; among these were brilliant disputationists and scholars like Giordano Bruno and Johannes Eeuchlin, &c., but the vast number obtained a meagre subsistence by soothsaying, fortune- casting and healing (or the reverse). It was an age of rest- less intellectual cravings and of ceaseless wandering. The 138 ALCHEMISTS AND COSMIC SPECULATOES. Faust legend — the last instance in history of the complete envelopment of a personality in myth — is a perfect embodi- ment of the spirit of the sixteenth century. . It was em- phatically the epoch of the occult sciences, so-called. The strange lore which had lain buried in monasteries, shunned by all but a few doctors during the Middle Ages, was now the common property of every man possessed of a little , learning. Add to this, that the new culture of Greek and Hebrew had opened up sources hitherto sealed. As Italy may be taken as the tj^pical country for the more purely literary and artistic side of the Eenaissance, so Germany (understanding by the term the German-speaking countries of Central Europe) may be regarded as the typical country of this magical-theosophic aspect of it, though, of course, in neither case is any exclusiveness implied. The inter- mingling of theosophic lore with the rising physical science was most systematically carried out in Germany. Most of the theosophic and alchemistic notions which now became popular, the elixir vitas, the philosojDher's stone, the elemental spirits, are immediately traceable to the Kabbala (see above, p. 121), the authors of which probably drew from Coptic, Persian and other Oriental sources, in addition to the Talmud and other Rabbinical writings.* The first to introduce the study of Hebrew, and especially of the Kabbala, into Germany was Johannes Reuchlin, who studied under Picus of Mirandola and Ficinus in Italy, and subsequently settled at Tubingen. The story of his successful conflict on behalf of Hebrew literature with the monks of Cologne, in which he was supported by the re- formers Melancthon and Ulrich von Hutten, is well known. He wrote a treatise De arte cabhalistica. After Eeuchlin maybe mentioned Cornelius Agrippa von Nettesheim (1486- 1530), who wrote a treatise De occulta pJiilosophia. Agrippa ^ was a true son of his century, spending his life in courts, universities, on the battle-field, and anon in studious re- tirement, seldom remaining more than two or three years * The Rosicrucians, the Freemasons, the Illuminati of the eighteenth, century, all date indirectly from this Alchemistic or rather physico-' theosophic movement of the sixteenth century. The attempt to con- nect Freemasonry with the mediaeval craft-guild of masons can only pass muster with those who have not studied the period in question. PARACELSUS. ' 139 at the utmost in the same place. Like Giordano Bruno, these writers, especially Agrippa, drew much from the writings of the mystic Nicolas of Chusa, whose mathe- matical speculations furnished material for many of the magical formula3 of the time. Jjut the man in whom the whole intellectual and moral temper of the century was most perfectly embodied is in the erratic person who rejoiced in the name of PJiilippus Aureolus Theophrastus Bomhastes von HoJienheim, though better known by his surname of Paracelsus (1493- 1541). He is a true prototype of the Goethean Faust. The contempt for traditional and academic teaching and teachers, the universal scepticism culminating in the attempt to wring from nature her secrets by magic ; " Ob mich durch Geistes Kraft und Mund Nicht manch Geheimaiss wiirde kund ; " the ceaseless wandering, the alternations of drunkenness and debauchery with real attempts to pluck out the heart of the mystery of nature, make the parallel complete. Some apology may be deemed necessary for introducing the physical speculators, of whom we take Paracelsus as the type, into a manual of the history of philosophy. From a narrow interpretation of the word philosophy it might perhaps be out of place, but the interest attaching to the first dawnings of physical science, and the quaint blending of theosophy and physics, which coloured more or less the whole thought of this epoch will, we fancy, render any formal apology unnecessary to those who take a broad view of the evolution of speculative thought. Paracelsus spent most of his youth in the manner we have described as common at the time, that is, wandering from city to city and country to country, practising astrology, palmistry and magic and alchemy generally. He is said to have been initiated in these pseudo-sciences by sundry ecclesiastics. In the course of his travels he visited nearly all the most prominent universities of Europe. Owing to the reputation gained by some cures effected on important personages, he obtained, in 1526, the professorship of medicine in the Uniyer- sity of Basel. His first act on assuming the chair was 140 ALCHEMISTS AND COSMIC SPECULATOES. to publicly burn the treatises of Aristotle and Galen, for whom be bad a special antipathy. His discourses appear to have been delivered in a manner which, whether Paracelsus originated it or not, has ever since been asso- ciated with his name, the word bombastic dating from the medical lectures of Bombastus Paracelsus at Basel. Drunkenness compelled him to resign his chair, and again take to the life of wandering medicus, divinator and astrologer. He died, like his friend Cornelius Agrippa, in great poverty, at Salzburg, in 1541. Paracelsus was believed by his contemporaries to have unveiled the secret arcana of nature, to have become possessed not only of the power of transmuting metals, but of the philosopher's stone, the elixir of life, and many other things. He is usually decried as a mere charlatan by historians, but probably with insufficient cause. There is little reason for doubting that Paracelsus believed in the main in the principles he was propounding, and at least in the general possibility of obtaining the powers he claimed for himself. Living in a magical age, the whole of Nature presented itself naturally enough to his mind as a system of " occult " properties, affinities and agents. Those who stigmatise Paracelsus as a con- scious impostor must surely forget the state of science at the time, and the universality among the learned of the belief in astrology and alchemy. These beliefs were re- duced to systematic form by Paracelsus. The idea traceable throughout the period is that theosophy supplies a key not only to the theoretical interpretation of Nature, but to the practical application of its laws in medicine, &c. Still, on the confines of the Middle Ages, when everything, from the highest relations of Church and State to those of the trade or handicraft, had a mystic religious significance, it was but natural the new phj^sical science should be conceived in this spirit. A scientific method did not exist, and men had not as yet become accustomed to the habit of special- isation, which characterises our thought in this transitional age of mental and material anarchy. The cosmological system of Paracelsus, for with meta- physic he did not occupy himself, was based on the con- ception of the tripartite division of nature and man. Nature PARACELSUS. 141 was the macrocosm, man the microcosm. Man, as the pinnacle of nature, embraced in his body the elements of all other things. Without astronomical, physical and theological knowledge, it is impossible for the physician to understand the true nature of the human body or its diseases. The trinitarian principle was all-pervading, the prima materia, understanding by this a physical substance, contains within it the potencies of all things ; but even in this may be traced a triple nature, generally designated by Paracelsus as salt, sulphur, and mercury, though sometimes as Balsamum, Besina, and Liquor. Paracelsus is careful to insist he does not mean these substances in the gross bodily form presented to us, but their spiritual essences. All material things contain these princij^les ; thus in wood that which forms smoke is the mercurial princij)le, that which burns is the sulphurous, while what remains as ash is the saline. In man, the body represents salt, the animal soul sulphur, and the intellectual principle mercury. In the combination and separation of these, the variety of things aj^pears. The so-called four elements as we know them are the offspring of the spirit or vulcanus inhering in them. What in the elements is vulcanus, appears in com- posite individual things as their archeus, or individual force. Man, who is the quintessence of all things, is depen- dent upon all : his intellect is divine, his animal soul astral, his body terrestrial. Hence his state in sickness can only be understood by referring it to the particular element which is its cause. A knowledge of water and earth only gives the clue to the body of man. The macrocosm embraces heaven as well as earth, and to man's spiritual nature, which corresponds to the former, a knowledge of the heavenly bodies is requisite, for with these it has its affinity. To investigate this is the function of astrology. The visible stars are to Paracelsus only the body (corpus) of the invisible essences which animate them. But it is need- less to enter further into the details of Paracelsus' system (if it can be termed such), with its sylphs, gnomes, kobbolds and salamanders ; its far-fetched and fanciful analogies ; its strange medley of Cabbalistic, Platonic and Christian doctrines. Its key-note is the corresj^ondence between macrocosm and microcosm. As the macrocosm is divided 142 ALCHEMISTS AND COSMIC SPECULATORS. into its upper and lower parts (the heavens and the earth), - so is the microcosm into body and animal soul. Outside these spheres which constitute the subject-matter of human science is the divine order, the subject-matter of theology, the divine science. To this belongs the rational and moral nature of man, and the creative activity by which the universe is sustained and governed. On this ground human reason is inadequate, and revelation (esoterically inter- preted) is the only guide. A point that strikes one in reading Paracelsus is that with all his hatred of Aristotle and Scholasticism, he is unable to dispense with the w^ell- known Scholastic distinctions and terminology. The school-philosophy, even in its decay, asserted its influence on friends and foes alike. It is an apt illustration of the truth of what we before said as to the tendency of the age, that much the same views as those of Paracelsus were enunciated by an Italian contemporary, also a physician, who, so far as we are aware, had no knowledge of him or his works. Hierony- Mus Cardanus (or Cardano, as it is in Italian), well-known for his interesting and curious autobiography entitled De vita propria, was born in 1500, at Milan. His fame as a mathematician and scientific investigator, which in his own day was great, has not proved enduring, owing to the fact, as observed by a recent writer, that he was compelled to labour, " partly in fields of research where no important discovery was then attainable, partly in those where his discoveries could only serve as the stepping-stones to others by which they were inevitably eclipsed." Like Paracelsus, Cardanus was an ardent believer in astrology, which he sought to establish on inductive principles, as well as in the " occult sciences " generally. His two philosophical treatises are entitled respectively De subtilitate rerum, and De varietate rerum. In these, as we have said, we find much the same order of speculation as in the works of Paracelsus ; the same fanciful analogies ; the same subtle afiinities ; the same haphazard guesses. The " elements " from which, like his elder contemporary^ Cardanus excludes that of fire, though for diiferent reasons, naturally play an important part in his system. Even the elemental spirits and other extra human intelligenci^s assumed by Paracelsus, are to CARDANUS. 143 bo found in Cardanns. At the same time there are re- markable glimpses of later thought which open out now and again in the works of the Italian. Even the doctrine of evolution apjDears in a crude form, while the truth that the end of man's being is social rather than personal, is clearly indicated in more than one place. Cardanus is probably the first wa-iter who hinted at the idea of a philo- sophy of history. In fact, the whole of his thought, even where most fanciful, tends to the recognition of an orderly sequence in events, in short, of the prevalence if not the universality of law, in every sphere of existence. Cardanus, who was also a great traveller, died at Eome in 1576. Among works dealing with the physical speculations of the sixteenth century may be mentioned Kixner und Siber's Leben und Meinungen heruhmten Fhysiker im \Qten und 11 ten Jahrhundert, forming a part of the Gesrhichte der Physiologie. Sprengel's Geschichte der Arzeneikunde, Thiel III. ; Erdmann deals fully with thia subject in Vol. II. of his History. ( 144 ) MODERN PHILOSOPHY. FIRST EPOCH, A. THE ABSTRACT-DOGMATIC SYSTEMS. We have now traced briefly the development of specu- lative thought from its rise in the sixth century B.C. to the close of the ancient world ; we have seen the transi- tion of philosophy in the hands of the Church from its ancient forms into Scholasticism, in which it became the slave of dogma ; we have witnessed the decline and fall of Scholasticism at the Eenaissance, and its replace- ment by the resuscitation of classical systems, through the scholars of Italy, and the crude physical speculations of men such as Agrippa, Paracelsus, and Cardanus. Hence- forth we have done with the Middle Ages, and enter a period with which current thought is directly affiliated ; in short, the period of Modern Philosophy. We noticed that, notwithstanding their declamations against Aristotle and the schoolmen, the writers of the Sixteenth century still employed scholastic expressions and folio ^ved a more or less scholastic order of thought. The great negative characteristic of the earlier stages of the modern period (we say earlier stages, though it is a characteristic which it has retained in some of its most recent developments) is the entire absence of all Aristotelean terminology and method. The reaction against scholasticism had at last done its work. With the quibbling and word-jugglery of the schoolmen were swept away the all-important distinctions of the Stagirite himself. But philosophy was now for the first time since the earlier Roman Empire more or less independent, not only of positive dogma, but of any special and determinate intellectual tendency. In the Seventeenth century the foundations of modern civilization in all its aspects were laid ; the era of " free contract " (so called) had fairly dawned ; the hierarchy of the Middle Ages was spasmodic- Epoch La.] THE ABSTRACT-DOGMATIC SYSTEMS. 145 ally gasping in its death-throes ; authority and status were undermined in all directions ; the middle class was assert- ing its power against all forms of feudal domination ; the battle between Catholicism and Protestantism, which had raged in the preceding century in the various countries of Europe, was now practically decided one way or the other ; in those lands where the middle class was powerful, Protestantism having become the dominant creed. Philo- sophy, although now free from the physical persecution of ecclesiasticism, still indirectly felt the influence of dogma, an influence, however, which affected it less and less as time went on, while the oppression it exercised was more of a moral and social than a legal character. There are two main contemporary streams of philosophic development constituting the speculative history of the Seventeenth and Eighteenth centuries, which may be termed respectively the Abstract-Dogmatic and the Em- pirical-Sceptical. The reputed founder of the first of these lines was the French Descartes, that of the second the English Bacon. The Abstract-Dogmatic schools consist (I.) of the Cartesians proper, (II.) of Spinoza and his followers, and (III.) of Leibnitz and those who drew their inspiration from him, such as the Germans, Wolff, Baumgarten, &c. The Empirical-Sceptical schools embrace the names of Bacon, Hobbes, Locke, Berkeley, Hume, Eeid, and the Scotch psychologists. The French sensationists and ma- terialists of the Eighteenth century are also an offshoot of this line of thought. The Abstract-Dogmatic schools postulate the reality out- side of experience oi the forms of thinJchig which alone possess meaning in the system of knowledge or experience. They assume concreteness in what is really only a detached element of the concrete ; they assume, that is, the condi- tions of the whole synthesis as present, while ex JiyjyotJiesi they are making abstraction from them. The Empirical-Sceptical schools profoundly ignore Metaphysic, and confine themselves to psychology ; yet they in the long run usually fall into the metaphysical assumption of an independent external world as the cause of the individual mind's impressions. The next step is- Scepticism, in which the mere individual impression or L 146 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I.a. idea per se is hypostasised ; that is, made the ultimate reality. In Scepticism the bankruptcy of Empiricism becomes manifest. PhiloS'ophy degenerates into a mere negative criticism. There is, however, one way of escape, and that is Materialism, in which the concrete corpoieal substance of the universe is made al)Solute. In this doctrine a truth is presented, though inadequately, because torn from its connection. It is nevertheless the truth of Empiricism, its logical and, in a sense, valid result. DESCARTES. Eene Descartes was born on March 31st, 1596, at La Haye, in Touraine, and educated in the Jesuit College of La Fleche. The early training of Descartes in mathe- matics and philosophy had the effect for many years to disgust him of all such pursuits. For some time he occupied himself with play and the chase. Subsequently he entered the army of the Netherlands as a volunteer. During this portion of his career he began again to interest himself in intellectual pursuits. He soon ex- changed his commission in the army of the Netherlands for one at first in the Bavarian, and afterwards in the Imperial army then engaged in the " Thirty Years' War." It was now that Descartes began to occupy himself in earnest with mathematical investigations chiefly con- nected with algebra and geometry. He shortly after resigned his commission and devoted himself to travel, as a private individual, visiting in succession Holland, France, Switzerland, and Italy. He afterwards settled in Holland, occupying himself with his studies, until an invitation from Queen Christina of Sweden induced him to remove to Stockholm. The severity of the climate proving too much for his health, never very robust, he dned on the 11th of February, 1650, in the last-named city. The principal philosophical Avorks of Descartes are his Trincipia Philosophi. his 3Ieditationes de prima Philosopliia, his earlier Essais Philosophiques, and his short treatise, the Discours sur la Methode, Epoch I.a.] DESCARTES. 14.7 Descartes' "Doctrines. The system of Descartes starts from the celebrated 'Methodic Doubt,' as it is termed by his followers. Descartes' earlier alienation from philosophy had been largely due to the loose literary spirit of scepticism then prevalent in France among the educated classes, and which is embodied in the writings of Montaigne. It was clear, therefore, that before Descartes could enter with any zeal upon a new course of philosophic investigation, he must make up his account with the scepticism that, with him no less than with others, had discredited the traditional methods of the schools, methods which he had satirically characterised as affording the student the means of " talking glibl}' on all subjects in a manner to excite the wonder of the less instructed." With the object, therefore, of forestalling the destructive effects of sceptical arguments on the system he hopes to rear, he, so to speak, inoculates it with scepticism at birth. The ' Methodic Doubt,' above alluded to, forbade any- thing to be taken for granted that could possibly be questi( >ned. But could not everything be questioned ? " No," answers Descartes, the evidences of the senses may ; the most apparently indestructible declarations of the intellect may ; but there is one thing which all doubt itself presupposes, and that is the doubter. I exist doubting, but doubting is only a form of thinking ; there fore this is as much as to say I exist thinking. Descartes' formula for this fundamental position of his philosophy is the celebrated Cogito ergo sum. The logical form of this proposition was obviously vulnerable, and Gassendi's criticism of it, from his point of view, undoubtedly justified. But the form of statement does not really affect the point at issue. Descartes wished to insist upon the intuitive character of the proposition, " I am conscious." In this he regards as indistinguishable the fact of existence and the fact of consciousness, of the matter, 7, and the form, thought , a circumstance which, as we: shall see later on, has had a bearing on the Kantian L 2 148 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I. a. and post-Kantian philosophy of Germany. Furnished with this primal deliverance of consciousness, Descartes thought he had discovered the one true foundation on which j^hilosophy can stand. The Cogito was the philo- sophic bantling whose system had been purified of debatable matter, such as might subsequently prove soil for scepticism, by the lymph of the " Slethodic Doubt." Here, therefore, was the criterion of truth, all that stood or fell with this axiom partook of its certainty, and partook of it in proportion to its inseparability from the act of consciousness. From the above criterion of truth Descartes^j3^duces_jth^jth£Qrei^ conception is the test o f its truth. This, however, is limited by the possibility that a being superior to myself might deceive me. Hence the necessity before proceeding farther of determining the question of the existence and attributes of such a being. Now, no idea which obtains in the mind can repre- sent more than the object from which it is formed or which causes it. Of some ideas, as for instance that of a doubting or thinking being, it is quite clear that I might have them, even if I alone existed ; for I myself should be their prototype. " But there is one idea," proceeds Descartes, " which it would be impossible could arise within me in the latter case ; to wit, the idea of an infinite Being. This I can neither draw from my- self, since I am finite, nor can it come through an abstraction from anything finite without me." I can very well arrive by abstraction at the conception of a negative infinite, in other words, of an indefinite, but not at the positive concej)tion of an infinite excluding all limitation whatever. I can think, for instance, of an endless space by abstracting from the limits of the known space. But this is infinite only in a particular sense, it is not absolutely infinite. Every conception of the merely negative infinite, the infinite of one kind only (i.e. the indefinite) presu^Dposes that of the positive infinite. The latter idea it is not in my power to diminish by the abstraction or to increase by the ad- dition of anything, and conseqnentl}^, says Descartes, " nothing remains but to admit this idea as coeval with Epoch I.a.] DESCARTES. 149 my creation, in other words, as co-extensive witli the idea of myself." The presence of the idea of the infinite within ns demon- strates, according to Descartes, the existence of an infinite Being without us who is its original, and who has Himself implanted it in us. Even viewing the matter a posteriori, I should require a cause, though I existed from eternity, for without it I could not continue in existence. To be maintained in existence is to be continuously re-created. But the argument for the existence of God upon which Descartes most plumes himself is his celebrated "onto- logical " argument. The existence of God, according to this i&rgument, must be drawn from his very conception itself ; for inasmuch as the idea of a triangle contains that of three sides, so does the idea of the Infinite contain that of necessary existence, since contingent existence would imply dependence or limitation and therefore contradict the notion of infinity. Descartes distinguishes his onto- logical argument from the somewhat similar one of Anselm by the remark that it does not rest simply upon the mere significance of a word, u]3on the fact that we conceive God as existent — since all we think of, in so far as we think of it, is thought of as existing — but upon the necessity which attaches to the thought of existence in this particular case, and upon the fact that this thought is not a mere figment of the mind, but a necessary, because innate, idea. The existence of God is the second position in the Cartesian construction. " Self" and " God " satisfactorily accounted for, the next proceeding is to establish the existence of the " World." Descartes having found as the ultimate postulate of his philosophy the clear and de- terminate conception of himself as a thinking being, and having proclaimed clearness of perception the test of truth, barring the possibility of deception from a superior being, next proceeded to determine the existence and the nature of this being. In the course of the investigation, the notion of an infinite being was shown to exclude all limitation and all imperfection of any kind whatever, in other words, to involve the notion of absolute perfec- tion. But the deception is irreconcilable with moral 150 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I. a. perfection, and hence must be excluded from our con- ception of divinity. Yet were it the case that our per- ceptions which appear to represent an existent world did not really do so, we should be compelled to assume de- ception, i.e. moral imperfection, in our Infinite Author. The canon is therefore now established without reserve, that that of which we have a clear perception exists. To the objection that the above argument proves too much, since it precludes the possibility of human error, Descartes replies, that error does not consist merely in the imperfect apprehension of things per se, but in the individual's act of will by which that imperfect apprehension is accepted as true. In this connection he draws a distinction between the unsophisticated thought which instinctively accepts the dictates of common-sense without hesitation (e.g. the belief in external objects), and the thought which comes of reflection and which is voluntary. Now that the validity of his canon of investigation has been settled, Descartes naturally proceeds more quickly in the construction of his system. He distinguishes between those conceptions which pre-suppose, i.e. are limitations of, other conceptions or ideas, and those which are independent, or which are conceived per se. The only ideas which are capable of being conceived per se, Descartes finds to be those "of extension and thought. Each of these can be thought of without the assistance of the other or of any foreign idea whatsoever except that of infinity. These independent self-existent ideas, Descartes terms attrihuta, which he derives from the etymology a natura tributa sunt. The former class of ideas — those which are derivative, that is, are merely limitations of other ideas — he terms modi.^ Although extension and thought are the only attrihuta of things known to us, Descartes declares that in God, in whom of course there are necessarily no modi, inasmuch as these would* imply limitation, " the attributes are many." This portion of Descartes' system is especially important in its bearing on Spinoza. In this respect also Descartes' definition of the independent subjects of the attributes, which he terms substances, is particularly noteworthy. A substance, says Descartes, is " that which requires nothing else to its being or con- Epoch La.] DESCARTES. 151 ception;" in otlier words, it is an absolutely independent existence ; for, as ho expressly asserts, an incomplete sub- stance is a contradiction. Still further remarkable is it that (in his Principia) he actual 1}^ touches Spinozism in conceding that, according to the literal terms of his defini- tion, there could only be one substance, namely, God. He gets over this somewhat inconsequently by extending the definition as regards the supposed created substances in which the attributes of extension and thought are assumed to inhere, namely mind and matter, by declaring that though not absolutely independent, inasmuch as they have their ground in the Supreme Being, yet they are relatively so, that is, as regards all other created things. The existence of body (^matter) and mind, as substances, Descartes finds guaranteed by his conception of them as such, and a fortiori, by the trustworthiness of the Deity. Inasmuch as they are substances they mutually exclude each other. TJiought is pure inwardness, having no analogy whatever with extension, which is pure outwardness. There can be no question of any community between them. This extreme dualism was the rock upon which Cartesianism split. It is true Descartes thereby separates himself from Spinoza, but he also logicall}'- separates himself from Leibnitz, although there are not wanting indications in his works of a tendency, at times, to Leibnitzianism. The practical consequence of the dualistic character of Descartes' metaphysics is, that the two departments of physics and psychology are entirely severed from one another. Descartes always regarded his physics as the most important part of his work. Its problem was to formulate all that can be discovered in nature by reflec- tion thereupon. In this, it is clear, abstraction must be made from the sensuous qualities of objects, for these sensuous qualities are no more than states or feelings of the perceiving mind, which have as much resemblance to that which causes the feeling as mere words have with the ideas of which they are the signs : " All the sensuous qualities of things lie in us, i.e. in the soul," Descartes repeatedly insists. Hence physical investigation demands that we abstract from all that does not pertain to the objects themselves, or to the modes by which they are 152 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I. a. related to" us, as for instance time, mimber, &c. The only quality whicli, according to Descartes, inheres in bodies themselves is extension in its three dimensions of length, breadth, and thickness. Space and matter are coextensive, an emj)ty space involving a contradiction. Descartes maintains extension as the sole quality of matter per se, not even excluding gravity. The result of this is that he was enabled to identify physics with mathematics, and to claim for his physical doctrine the certitude of geometry. In accordance with this view, he excludes all idea of purpose in nature from his investigations. He, of course, did not deny divine purpose in the world, but declared speculation with regard to it impious. All which follows from the conception of extension, and nothing but this, is to be affirmed respecting this corporeal world. Hence there 'are neither atoms nor limits in the world. The capacity of division, of figure, and of motion, is comprised in the conception of extension. To their realisation these capacities require a cause outside themselves, which cause is God. The first principle of realisation is motion ; the variety of bodies consists in nothing but the different motions of themselves or their parts. A curious anticipa- tion of modern thought is seen in Descartes' principle of the constancy of the sum of matter and motion in the universe. In his Monde, a work containing his theories on physical science proper, he starts with the hypothesis of a new world to be created on mechanical and mathematical princi- ples alone. In this he furnishes many interesting anticipa- tions of modern science, in addition, as might be exjDected, to many untenable hypotheses, such, for instance, as the celebrated " theory of vortices," and some of his theories respecting physiology, though in this department he also achieved some valuable results. Animal bodies, including the human, he regarded, in accordance with his funda- mental physical principles, as purely automatic. It is the psychical principle, or soul, in man, which alone distin- guishes him from the lower animals. This leads us to the Cartesian Psychology, or doctrine of the soul. As the attribute of body is extension, so the attribute of soul is thought ; just as the material substance, Epoch I.a.] DESCARTES. 153 inasmuch as extension is its attribute, can neither exist nor be conceived without extension; so tbe mental sub- stauce whose attribute is thought, can neither be con- ceived nor exist apart from thought. The soul is always conscious — always thinks — ^just as light always illumines, as heat always warms, &c. Even the babe in the womb is conscious. There is no such thing as dreamless sleep ; it is merely memory failing us, which leads us to think this possible, and memory, Descartes is careful to remind the reader, is a purely bodily state. Descartes divides ideas as concerns their clearness into adequate and inadequate, or complete and incomplete ; as concerns their origin, into self-made ideas (fictse), into bor- rowed ideas (adveatitise), and inborn ideas (innatse). The will is always dependent on consciousness, that is, on an act of perception ; but there may be acts of perception apart from any act of will. Error consists in the affirma- tion by the will as true of an inadequate perception or idea. Hence, in God, in whom is no inadequate idea, error is impossible. In the latter case truth consists in his affirmation of it, in the fact that he wills such and such to be true. In the same way goodness is purely determined by the Divine will. Truth and goodness are, therefore, with Descartes, dependent in the last resort solely on the arbi- trary fiat of a supreme being. Descartes, of course, maintains the freedom of the human will, but at the same time regards indeterminateness as the lowest stage of willing. He who possessed clear and distinct ideas of the good and the true, would never hesitate in choosing it, and hence would not be indifferent. The highest freedom and the highest perfection obtains, when error has become impossible through knowledge. The Sokratic doctrine thus once more appears in the history of ethical speculation. When Descartes comes to speak of Anthropology, that is, of man, as a personality in which thought and extension appear in union, his dualism naturally gives him some trouble. The union he declares to constitute only a composition, which is purely empirical, resting upon a super- natural fact, that is a special act of the Divine will. Al- though the soul is in union with the whole body, this union is effected immediately by means of a specific organ, to 15 J: MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I.a. wit, tlie pineal gland, which according to Descartes, is the source of the ' animal spirits,' and for this and sundry other fanciful reasons the most suitable seat for it. On the above theory, Descartes proceeds to explain the effects of the emotions and passions. The contest of the mind with the appetites is not one between a higher and a lower soul, but between the soul and the so-called ' nervous fluids' or ' animal spirits.' The practical side of Descartes' ethics falls to be dealt with in this connection. The most im- portant point, however, in his anthropological doctrine, for the subsequent history of the Cartesian school, is the virtual assumption of a perpetual miracle in the union of body and soul. In the foregoing pages we have endeavoured to give a clear general view of the Cartesian system as it left the hands of its founder. Its strength and its weakness will appear in the course of the succeeding historic de- velopment. Criticism is unnecessary of a doctrine which the average educated reader will now-a-days readily see is fatally vulnerable in many of its cardinal principles. The sceptical attitude assumed at starting gives way, after the first stage in the construction has been reached, to so much obvious sophistry even in essentials, that whether they be right or wrong in fact, we can hardly wonder at the attitude of those critics who have regarded it as a *' blind," consciously put forward to guard certain vulner- able points in the coming construction which had been in reality assumed from the first. Facilis ascensus coeli, to the aspiring philosopher. But be this as it may, Descartes' position, as the founder of modern philosophy, is not to be gainsaid. Of a rather feeble moral nature, he lived in a continual dread of unpleasant notice being taken of him by the Church ; his obsequiousness in this respect being remarked even in an age of theological subservience. This makes it difficult in estimating Descartes and his work, to determine in some cases whether a particular doctrine is to be attributed to mental servility or real conviction. But the historian of philosophy must console himself with the maxim chacun a les defauts de ses qualites. Cartesianism, thougb in the end successful all along the Epoch I. a.] MALEBRANCHE. 155 line, did not pass without encountering a brisk fire of adverse criticism. Descartes himself formally replied to the more important objections raised against his system in a separate work. Amongst the critics with whom he deals w.ere Hobbes and Locke; for in addition to objections from the side of Scholasticism, and the resuscitated Greek phi- losophy of the Eenaissance, Descartes had to encounter the contemporary British movement. The new system made its way notwithstanding. The university of Utrecht, in Holland, was the first official home of Cartesianism. But in Leyden we find the most brilliant series of teachers, foremost among whom is Geulincx. The other Dutch universities soon caught the infection, and Holland, which had long been the home of Descartes himself, became the principal seed-ground of his philosophy. Clerical opposition, more or less successful, there was, of course, but this in the long run rather helped than hindered its ger- mination. In theology, in medicine, in physical science, Cartesianiam became the order of the day throughout Western Europe, Great Britain excepted. The philoso^^hy of Descartes was not wdthout its influence on the decadence in the belief in magic, witchcraft, and the " occult sciences," which took place so rapidly among the educated towards the close of the century. Belthasar Bekker published in 1691 his celebrated work 'The Enchanted World,' in which he attacked these superstitions on Cartesian ' grounds. This treatise, originally written in Dutch, had not been published long before it was translated into all the more important European languages. The celebrated Port-Royal Logic (L'art de penser) was perhaps the principal product of Cartesianism in the land of its founder's birth, upon the culture of which it made a deep impression. MALEBRANCHE. The first successor of Descartes who can be regarded as having at all developed the master's doctrines was the Erench ecclesiastic, Nicholas Malebranche, born at Paris in 1638. His BecJierche de la verite, first published in 1674, passing through six editions during the lifetime of its 156 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I. a. author. It was followed by a large mimber of treatises^ metaphysical, theological, and ethical, up to the time of the death of Malebranche, iu 1715. The main problem for Malebranche was to bridge over the gulf between the two opposed substances of Descartes' Thought and Extension ; to define their relation alike to the finite individual and their infinite ground. Malebranche was not satisfied with the hesitating and superficial manner in which Descartes had attempted to explain away the difficulties which arose on this head. The arbitrary act of the Divine will by which perception was produced was too clumsy an hypothesis for him. The celebrated saying of Malebranche, that he saw " all things in God," of itself indicates the link between the dualism of Descartes and the Pantheism of Spinoza. To the former the relation of the two subordinate substances alike to each other and to the one infinite substance was indefinite and arbitrary. Malebranche sought to give that relation a systematic basis. Starting from the conception of the Infinite Being, which Descartes had formulated, he brought Thought and Extension^ and through them Individuation, nearer this being, deduced them more directly from this being than Descartes had dared to do. Unlike Descartes, he does not separate the idea or notion, from the existence, of the infinite. " We conceive of the infinite being," says Malebranche, "by the very fact of our conceiving of being without thinking whether it be finite or not ; but that we may think of a finite being we are compelled to sever or deduct something from the general idea of being, which we must therefore possess beforehand ; thus, the mind apprehends nothing whatever except in and through the idea it possesses of the infinite ; so far is it from the truth that this idea is formed by the confused mass of our notions of particular things, as the philosophers maintain, that on the other hand, all these particular notions participate in the general idea of the infinite, in the same way that all crea1;ures imperfectly participate in the Divine being, whose existence itself cannot be derived from them." (^Becherche III., Part IL, Chap. 6). The external world is unintelligible in itself, and only becomes intelligible by our perceiving it in and through the being who contains it in an intelligible Epoch. I.a.] SPINOZA. 157 manner. "Hence," says Malebranche, "unless in some sense we saw God, we shonld see nothing else." In short, our consciousness, whether of ourselves or of external objects, is nothing more nor less than a limited portion of the divine consciousness. From this doctrine of Male- branche of all " things in God " to the imica substantia of Spinoza was scarcely a step. The only modus viiencli between TJiougJit and Extension, mind and body, was found in the divine essence or substance ; but Malebranche not merely shrank from the obvious conclusion to which all bis reasoning points, that of identifying them with the substance, but, strange to say (that is, strange were it not so common a phenomenon in history), denounces in scurri- lous language the man who was at once honest and logical enough to draw this conclusion. SPINOZA. Baruch de Spinoza, born Nov. 24, 1632, at Amsterdam, belonged to a well-to-do Jewish family of Portuguese origin settled in Holland. He received a thorough educa- tion in the hands of the Eabbis of his native town in all that pertained to Jewish learning as then understood, besides studying Latin and natural science, under other teachers. Previous reading of the semi-rationalising Jewish philosophers of the Middle Ages, notably Maimonides, had already given Spinoza a speculative groundwork when he took up the study of the works of Descartes. Spinoza occupies a unique position at this time. His heterodoxy had already caused his expulsion from the synagogue, and he thus found himself unpledged to any set of traditional dogmas. To this fact we may attribute the perfect freedom and honesty displayed in his writings. The fawning of Descartes to Christian doctrines naturally disgusted the man w^ho had severed himself from family connections, social intercourse, and even risked life itself for his convic- tions. But, nevertheless, the system of Spinozat^is._±]ie direct_a nd l ogical outcome oft Ee princi ples enunciated b^ l5escartes. After~a generally ^quiet and" uneventful life, occupied either in the pursuance of his livelihood as a 158 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I.a. glass-lens polisher, or in study and wi-iting, Spinoza died at the comparatively early age of forty-five, in the year 1677. The respect with which he was regarded by all who knew him is illustrated in the well-known story of his landlady, who, aware that he belonged to no recognised religious persuasion, asked his opinion as to whether she wa-s justified in going to Church and otherwise practising the rites of the orthodox Calvinistic faith. He had com- paratively but few friends, but among these several corre- spondents, notably Oldenburg, one of the founders of the English Koyal Society. Spinoza's Doctrines. With Spinoza ^the method ,of philosophy if=t identic al with that of math ematics. In his Ethics he places Defini- tions, Axioms, and Postulates, at the head of every book. The Geometrical method a ppeared to him as the aiost 'grji^nijj ^br the" expression ot ^^ clear ana aistinct ^' ideas, and as^ the one wnich mosx etfectually excluded the possibility of the entrance into philosophy of personal or other bias — it was the only purely disinterested method. Hegel observes, that Spinoza, the Jew, first^ mtroduced into European thought the conception of thG.^a3liSju2i35^ in Av hich finite and infinite are merged. It would be per- haps more correct" to say that he was the first to give dis- tinct expression to this j^gjjjs^bDointo^jjigw, which is ynplicitly present in many previous tniiTtCCTgr"^ Spinoza distinguishes two kinds of errors to which the mind is subject, those of ahstraction and those oi imagination. These two errors he finds invariably united in opinion. An abstraction means any imperfect conception in which the elements of a whole are separately treated as wholes. Clear and distinct thought must discern the necessary relation of any finite thing or notion to the whole system of things or notions. This is expressed in Spinc)zistic language by what is termed the distinction between mere modes of substance and substance itself. The progress of knowledge necessarily limits this abstracting tendency. Imagination comes to the aid of abstraction in enabling ^ae mind to picture the thing without its surroundings, or Erocii I.A.] SPINOZA. 159 in other words, apart from the conditions necessary to its real existence. Such coucei)tions as that of a talking animal, a horse with a man's head, an extended figure without weight or resistance, are common and obvious instances of this combined power of abstraction and imag- ination. Teleological explanations of the world have their root entirely in the foregoing tendency of the mind. " All such oiuuions," says Spinoza, " spring from the notion, commonly entertained, that all things in nature act for the same reason as men themselves act, with an end in view." Human will and action are abstracted from the only whole of which they can form a part, namely the human being, and transferred by the imagination to external nature, and even the Absolute itself. The consequence of this is exhibited in religion, in the anthropomorphic conception of God as having " made all things for man, and man that he might worship Him." Jn the Appendix to the first book of the Ethics, Spinoza demolishes this view with hij usual clearness and vigour. In philosophy ^^inoza demands the elimination of all_ Uiiie-i'elations, in other words, that the philosopher should be unaerstooa as viewing the world sub specie aeternitatis. Bj^ this, of course, he meant that the province of meta- physic is to expound the world in its logical, rather than its temporal sequence. Hence, the starting-point of his system is not any first cause of all things in the ordinary sense of the word, but that which all -things Ipgiea^ ly pre- sujrmse ; that by mearisoF which all other things are con- ceived, but which is in itself indej[3endent and ultimate*^ In this great advanT?g''g ^niMeonr"I)escarte s, whose God was li ttle m ore than the firslTcause of the worlds This un- coj3^itioned__ground, the one substance of Spinoza, mntaTn s within Tt the sum-total of a ll reality. Although he did homage to current prejudices by emplt>ying the word God for his conception, it is only fair to remember that he dis- tinctly disclaims using the word in any current sense. Erdmann well observes that those who connect the usual religious significance with the word God, had better, in reading Spinoza, substitute for it the word Nature. It is constantly insisted upon that all things proceed from the One Substance by the same necessity as that by which it 160 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I.a, exists, since they form an essential part of its existence. Of the infinite attributes of the infinite, eternal, and aU- comprehending substance, two only concern us, i.e. Thought and Extension. As Ydth Descartes, they are mutually opposed in every respect, in all save the one fact of their common ground. At last the Cartesian problem is solved in the only way possible on Cartesian principles. Thought and Extension, Mind and Body, assume for the first time a position of mutual equality ; while they at the same time lose the last shred of their independence of the Infinite. The real w^orld is simply made up of modes of these two attributes. By mode, Spinoza understands that which exists through something else, or which is the determi- nation of something else. There are eternal modes, by which is probably meant the necessary determinations of things termed by us laws of nature, and individual or finite things. As, however, the place of individuals in Spinoza's system is not unobscure, we give some of his utterances on this head in his own words. In Proposition XXIII. of Part I. of the Ethics, we read, " Every mode, which exists both necessarily and as infinite must necessarily follow either from the absolute nature of some attribute of God or from an attribute modified by a modification ivhich exists necessarily and as infinite. Proof. A mode exists in some- thing else through which it must be conceived (Def. v.), that is (Prop, xv.), it exists solely in God, and solely through God can be conceived. If, therefore, a mode is conceived as necessarily existing, and infinite, it must necessarily be inferred or perceived through some attribute of God, in so far as such attribute is conceived as exj^ressing the infinity and necessity of existence, in other words (Def. viii.), eternally ; that is, in so far as it is considered absolutely." " A mode therefore which necessarily exists as infinite must follow from the absolute nature of some attribute of God, either immediately (Prop, xxi.), or through the means of some modification which follows from the absolute nature of the said attribute ; that is (by Prop, xxii.) which exists necessarily and as infinite (Prop. xxiv.). The essence of things produced by God does not involve existence. Proof. This proi30sition is evident from Def. i. For that of which the nature considered in itself involves existence is self-caused. Erocii I. A.] SPINOZA. IGl and exists by the sole necessity of its own nature. Corollary. Uence, it follows that God is not only the cause of things coming into existence, but also of their continuing in existence, that is, in scholastic phraseology, God is cause of the being of things (Esseiicli rerum). For whether things exist or do not exist, whenever we contem- plate their essence, we see that it involves neither existence nor duration ; consequently it cannot be the cause of either the one or the other. God must be the sole cause, in as much as to Him alone does existence appertain. (Prop. xiv. Corollary 1.) Q.E.D. (Prop, xxv.) God is the efficient cause not only of the existence of things hut also of their essence. Proof. If this be denied, then God is not the cause of the essence of things ; and therefore, the essence of things can (by Ax. IV.) be conceived without God, This by Prop. xv. is absurd. Therefore God is the cause of the essence of things. Q.E.D. Note. This proposition follows more clearly from Prop. xvi. for it is evident thereby, that given the Divine nature, the essence of things must be inferred from it no less than their existence — in a word, God must be called the cause of all things in the same sense as he is called the cause of Himself. This will be made still clearer by the following corollary. Corollary. Individual things are nothing but modifications of the attributes of God, or modes by which the attributes of God are expressed in a fixed and definite manner."* It will be sufficiently evident to the reader that Spinoza has only carried to its consistent issue the Cartesian prin- ciple which Malebranche had indeed enunciated, but with- out admitting its full bearing, namely, that unless we knew the Infinite, or God, we could know nothing else, inasmuch as the human mind is simply a modification of the Divine Substance. The idea of this absolute unity is involved in the idea of every particular thing, and the only reason ordinary men are unable to discover it is because their ideas are confused, in short, because, owing to the illusions of sense and imagination, they are unable to arrive at a clear and distinct idea of anything. * Xow and always I quote from the excellent translation of Spinoza's works by Mr. Elwes, published in ' Bohn's Philosophical Library.' 162 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I.a. Spinoza insists on the parallellism between the world- order in Thought and the world-order in Extension. " The order and connection of ideas" he says (Ethics, Prop, vii.), " is the same as the order and connection of things."" This is as much as to say the One Substance may be viewed either as thinking or as extended. " Whatsoever follows from the infinite nature of God in the world of extension (forrnaliter), follows without exception in the same order and connection from the idea of God in the world of thought (^ohjective)." And again : " Substance thinking and substance extended are one and the same substance, comprehended now through one attribute and now through the other." " In the same way the mode of ex- tension and the idea of that mode are one and the same thing, though expressed in two ways. For instance, a circle existing in nature and the idea of a circle existing, which is also in God, are one and the same thing displayed through diiferent attributes. Thus whether we consider nature under the attribute of extension, or under the attribute of thought, or under any other attribute, we shall find the same order, and one and the same chain of causes — that is, the same things following in either case." " I said that God is the cause of an idea — for instance, of the idea of circle — in so far as He is a thinking; thing-. and of a circle in so far as He is an extended thing, simply because the actual being of the idea of a circle can only be perceived as a proximate cause through another mode of thinking, and that again, through another, and so on to infinity; so that so long as we consider things as modes of thinking, we must explain the order of the whole of nature, or the whole chain of causes, through the attribute of thought onlj^ And in so far as we consider things as modes of extension, we must explain the order of the whole of nature through the attribute of extension only ; and so on in the case of other attributes. Wherefore of things as they are in themselves, God is really the cause, inasmuch as He consists of infinite attributes. I cannot for the present explain my meaning more clearly." The impressions of the senses and the mind, namely, that which in the world of thought corresponds to the Erocii I. A.] SPINOZA. 1G3 particular or finite modifications of extension, are termed affectiones. There Las been much discussion among students of Spinoza as to the relation of the attributes to the individual mind. In his definition of attributes, Spinoza says (1. Def. iv.) : "By attribute I mean that which the intellect perceives as constituting the essence of substance." This has been by some interpreted in the sense of Psychological Idealism, as implying that the attributes are simply the marks by which the One Sub- stance is individualised in the finite mind, or by which it becomes aware of itself. According to this view, the attiibutes are not essential distinctions in the substance itself, but only indicate its nature to the reflecting intellect, that is, they are the form under which the latter appre- hends it. On the other hand, there are Spinozists who strenuously deny this phenomenal acceptation of the doctrine, and maintain that the attributes represent a noumenal fact. For the first of these views, it may be alleged that Spinoza in his definition (Def. iv.) when he refers to the perceiving intellect, seems to make an inten- tional deviation from Descartes, who speaks of the attribute simply as constituting the essence of the substance. The second view, on the other hand, is supported by the asser- tion of the infinity of attributes. We suspect that the point was one upon which Spinoza was not very clear himself; also that here, as eLsewhere in the Cartesian school, the effects "of the reaction against scholasticism which was manifested in the neglect of Aristotelian dis- tinctions, is responsible for much ambiguity, and possibly some confusion of thought. Extension is spoken of by Spinoza as infinite, no less than Thought; but the relation of the unconditioned to the conditioned form of these attributes is imperfectly indicated. All limitation must be abstracted from the attributes conceived as natura naturans^ and this applies as much to thought as to extension; hence, God is no more to be conceived as will, which is only a particular limitation of thought, than He is to be conceived as body, which is only a particular limitation of extension. Spinoza distinctly repudiates (Ethics, Part II. Prop, xliii.) any such thing as an unconscious idea ; he carefully warns M 2 164 3I0DERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I.a. us against understanding by idea a mere prototype wliicli can never enter into consciousness, and demands that we should regard it as a conscious act of thought. Inasmuch as the One Substance is the foundation of all being, it is the foundation of corporeal no less than of mental pro- cesses. Every such process is conditioned by another such, and that by another, and so on to infinity. (See quotation, p. 162, sujpra.) Of course this occurs only in the same attribute, for we have already seen that there is no passing over from the one to the other ; no more from the mental to the corporeal, than from the corporeal to the mental. By Spinoza's rigid division it is needless to say all idealist explanations in physics, no less than all materialist explanations in psychology, are excluded. Turning now to natura naturata, we find the principles of the corporeal w^orld were, to Spinoza, rest and motion. All modifications of body he attributes to the velocity and direction of motion in its parts. The so-called union of body and sotil only means that the same thing is viewed now^ under one attribute, now under another. The mind is nothing more than the idea of the body, but inasmuch as an idea is only a product of thought-activity, the idea corporis is a conscious act of the mind with which is bound up the reflected knowledge of this act, that is, the idea of this idea, which is nothing other than the idea mentis. Just as the modification of extension, or body, of which the real or empirical world consists, is brought about by differences of rest and motion — in short, as an individual body is a determinate system of the modifications of body or extension — so an individual mind is a determinate system of the modifications of thought, i.e. of ideas. The world of eternal modes, or natura naturata, roughly corresponds to the world of Ideas in Platonic systems. The natura naturata is, of course, also to be conceived under the dual attribute. It consists of motion and rest, and what Spinoza terms the intellectus infinitus.. Just as motion and rest contains the possibility of the actual coq^oreal world in its entirety, so the intellectus infitii- tus is the complex of all ideas and minds, i.e. the possi- bility of the actual ideal world in its entirety. Just as every individual body is conditioned by motion and restj Erocii I.A.] SPINOZA. 105 so is every individual mind conditioned by the intellectns iiijinitus* Inasmuch as Spinoza regards man merely as a portion of nature, his Anthropology and Ethics are one. Man's bodil}" slate is conditioned by the bodies which surround him, his milieu^ as it might now be expressed. He is at once active and passive. His activity is continually obstructed and affected by his surroundings, and his whole career is a continuous striving to realise himself, or, which is the same thing, to assert his own being, against this obstruction. The consciousness of stri^in^ is primarily appetite or desire, which leads, accor(';ing as the struggle fails or succeeds in any particular in- stance, to joy and sorrow ; hope and fear being further modifications of these fundamental emotions (jpassiones). With the passions are directly connected the conceptions of good and evil, which can have no meaning in any other than a human relation. The proposition, " this is good for me," is perfectly justified, but not so the proposition, *' this is good " (absolutely). The presence, with the emotion of joy or sorrow, of the idea of the object causing it, produces love or hatred. The result of Spinoza's Ethics proper (contained in the third part of the treatise under that name, the first two parts being purely metaphysical), which, as we before said, is identical with his Anthropology, is in many points similar to that of his cuntemporar}^, Helvetius. He is a rigid necessarian, and pure disinterestedness he regards as an illusion, since man acts according to the dictates of his nature, the stimulus to action in men being only possible to be mortified or destroyed by a stronger stimulus. This of course forms the foundation for Spinoza's political theory. Spinoza was the first consistent advocate of universal toleration, although he does not recognise formally the " rights of man " as such. Like most political theorists of the seven- teenth century, all his hypotheses were based on the as- * Between tlie individual mind, with its manifold of reality, and the pure undetermined attribute of thought, stands the determination of this attribute as Infinite Intellect, i.e. as comprehending under its eternal modes the infinite complexity of the real world. . 166 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I.a. sumption of the incurable stupidity of the many ; but he at the same time regards that state as most secure in which there is the greatest amount of personal liberty. The great truth which the present century has brought to light of the dependence of the political and other forms of society upon its economical conditions had not then dawned, any more than the truth that the social organism obeys certain definite laws of development just as does the animal organism. Apart from this, however, perhaps what strikes one most in reading Spinoza is the modernness of his style and standpoint as compared with other seventeenth-century thinkers. There are passages in the " Tractatus Theologico- politicus," as well as in the " Ethics," which might have oeen written by a modern scientist. As an instance of Spinoza's capacity for scientific exposition, we quote a passage from a remarkable letter of his to Oldenburg. He is endeavour- ino- to explain to Oldenbnrg the principle that every part of nature agrees with the whole, and is associated with all other parts : " Let us imagine, with your permission, a little worm, living in the bluod, able to distinguish by sight the particles of blood, lymph, &c., and to reflect on the manner in which each particle, on meeting with another particle, either is repulsed or communicates a portion of its own motion. This little worm would live in the blood, in the same way as we live in a part of the universe, and would consider each drop of blood, not as a part, but as a w^hole. He would be unable to determine how all the parts are modified by the general nature of blood, and are compelled by it to adapt themselves, so as to stand in a fi.xed relaiion to one another. For, if we imagine that there are no causes external to the blood, which could communicate fresh movements to it, nor any space beyond the blood, nor any bodies whereto the particles of blood could communicate their motion, it is certain that the blood would always remain in the same state, and its particles would undergo no modifications, save those which may be conceived as arising from the relations of motion existing between the lymph, the chyle, &c. Tho blood would then always have to be considered as a whole, not a part. But, as there exist, as a matter of fact, very !,ErocHjX] LEIBNITZ. 167 many causes, which modify, in a given manner, the nature of the blood, and are, in tuin, modified thereby, it follows that other motions and other relations arise in the blood, springing not from the mutual relations of its parts only, but from the mutual relations between the blood as a whole and external causes. Thus the blood comes to be regarded as a part, not as a whole. So much for the whole and the part." In many points Spinoza anticipates Kant, but his funda- mental conceiDtion is still abstract. The Unica Substantia is, after all, at bottom, the Being-in-general of the Carte- sians and of Malebranche. His system is an ontology, and an ontology, too, in which all traces of " theory of knowledge," as such, are absent. Spinozism found an immediate success in Holland. Numerous works appeared, some containing views ob- viously drawn from the Ethics, others attacking those views. About the close of the seventeenth century, it appears to have gained some ground in France. Spinoza's is the only pre-Kantian system which has been revived in modern times. In fact, the interest in Spinoza dates mostly from Goethe and Schleiermacher. The works which have been published during the last half-century, dealing with the Dutch thinker, would fill a library. There are not wanting, at the present day, men of eminence who declare that in him is contained the fulness of modern science manifested. With Spinoza closes the main line of Cartesian development. We now proceed to consider a subsidiary branch springing from the same stem. Among recent English works treating of Spinoza and his philo- sophy may be mentioned, Willis's ' Spinoza, his Life, Letters and Ethics,' Frederick Pollock's ' Life and Works of Spinoza,' Martine.iu's ' Spinoza,' &c., &c. The German works ou the subject are numerous and well-known. LEIBNITZ. Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnitz was bom, 1646, at Leipsic, and was educated in the university of that town. An omnivorous reader, he early attained considerable ac- 168 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I. a. quaintance witli the history of philosophy. In Jena, where he subsequently studied, he read Hobbes and Locke, in addition to Kepler, Galilei, and other scientific writers. His journey to Paris, though it failed in its immediate purpose of inducing Louis XIV. to undertake an Egyptian expedition, had as its result the mathematical education of Leibnitz. It was in Paris, in 1676, that he discovered the diiferential calculus. Here, also, he first began seriously to study Descartes and Spinoza. In 1684, Leibnitz removed to Berlin, and shortly after undertook a lengthened archaeological expedition to Italy. On his return to Berlin, he became president of the newly con- stituted Prussian Academy, as well as the occupant of a diplomatic post. With the death of the Queen of Prussia in 1711, his connection with Berlin ceased. He died in Vienna, in 1716, loaded with honours. The latter part of his life is said to have been embittered by his quarrels with the Newtonians. Leibnitz's Doctrines. In philosophy Leibnitz stands in one sense at the opposite pole to Spinoza. JTa i« oLiAf r^^pxe sentatiY^ of wj mt. IS coTnTnorj Iy known as Pluralism in metaphysic,_ie. hft rp.tya.f rla iyn]pnVlnf)f.;.n^ as an ultiiuate and irreducijile fact. The result of Leibnitz's scientific studies had led him early to accept the atomistic theory of the ultimate constitution of matter. This atomism he carried into the sphere of metaphysic. To Lei bnitz, substance was mfinitely_jriany. The infinitely'^umerous eternal^ and siniple substan(?es, unities, or forces, as they may perhaps with equal right be termed, Leibnitz designates monads, a word originally employed by Bruno. The inonads being simple, could only come into being by creation, or cease from being by annihilation, and besides them nothing exists. Although destitute of parts, extension, figure, or divisibility, they must, nevertheless, have qualities, " otherwise," says Leibnitz, " they would not even be entities ; and if simple substances did not difi'er in their qualities, there would be no means by which we could become aware of the changes of things, since all that is in compound bodies is derived from simple ingredients ; and Epoch I. a.] LEIBNITZ. 169 moiiads, being without qualities, would be indistinguishable one from another, seeing also that they did not differ in quantity." Every monad must differ from every other, for Leibnitz postulates the axiom that " there g ir e never Uvo beinf jj -s in nature perfectly alike^ and in whicE" it J impossible to find,, an inter nal diiierence, or one found e on i ntrinsic determination." ~liut the metaphysical monads of Leibnitz differ from the physical atoms of Demokritos, in that they are de- termined by an internal principle of change, and are uninfluenced by anything external to themselves. " But besides the principle of change," proceeds Leibnitz, " there must also be a detail of changes, embracing, so to speak, the specification and the variety of simple substances. This detail must involve multitude in litiity or in simplicity, for as all natural changes proceed by degrees, something changes and something remains, and consequently, there must be in the simple sub- stance a plurality of affections or relations, although there are no parts." (Monadologie, 12, 13.) The section which follows is interesting as characteristic of Leibnitz's mode of thought, and as showing the first distinct enunciation of a doctrine which has played a not unimportant part in subsequent speculation — that of the uncousciouj per- ception or idea. " This shifting state, which involves and represents multitude in unity, or in the simple substance, is nothing else than what we call perception, which must be carefully distinguished from apj^erception, or conscious- ness, as will appear in the sequel. Here it is that the .jJartesians have specia lly fai led, making no accou nt of those"per ^ptions~ of ^^Heb-3 ^'5HJ nut Grmsm'm^ jg^ TX^ iMs-^EsithaS led them to suppose that spirits are the only monads, and that there are no souls of brutes or other Entelechies. It is owing to this that they have vulgarly confounded protracted torpor with actual death, and have fallen in with the scholastic prejudice, which postulates souls entirely separate. Hence, also, ill-affected minds have been confirmed in the opinion that the soul is mortal." Leibnitz, of course, strenuously opposes all mech anical explanations of perception, "If we imagine a machine 170 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I.a. SO constructed," he says, "as to produce thought, sensation, perception, we may conceive it magnified — the same proportions being preserved — to such an extent that one might enter it like a mill. This being supposed, we should find in it, on each inspection, only pieces which impel each other, but nothing which can explain perception. It is in the simple substance, therefore — not in the compound, or in machinery — that we must look for that phenomenon ; and in the simple substance we find nothing else — nothing, that is, but perceptions and their changes. Therein also, and therein only, consist all the internal acts of simple substances." Leibnitz recognises a progre-ssion or hierarchy among the monads, from the simj3le monad which is purely unconscious or confused,, to the monad which has attained to self- consciousness or clearness. . The term soul he woujd reserve Tur the latter. When we are in a profound and dreamless sleep, or in a swoon, " the soul does not differ sensibly from the simple monad ; bur'smc'e^thts^ state^iS not permanent, and since' the soul delivers herself from it, she is something more." In much of this we see Leibnitz as a true successor of Descartes ; the Cartesian distinction between confused and clear perception being made nou- menal. The impossibility of the entire absence of perception in the thinking subject here receives a new application, in so far as perception is formally distinguished from consciousness. If there were no distinction in our perceptions, we should continue for ever in a state of stupor : " and this," adds Leibnitz, " is the condition of the naked monad." " Where there is a great number of minute perceptions, but where nothing is distinct, one is stunned, as when we turn round and round in continual succession in the same direction, whence arises a vertigo which may cause us to faint, and which prevents us from distinguishing anything." Memory, accordino; to Leib nitz, gives to the SQula gonsfif^nt, ivft"ant,iori, hut m"u ^t "h*^ fliKtiiio-nishfM l fr^p i reason . Leibnitz is prepared to recognise a large measure oT'Tfuth. in the English Empiricist school. ^1^^2^3^ ^"^ ^'^if"* consecutiv eness of perc e^^t^'"^"; ^'« «h ared in commo n-bv ^^u. ^n^ ani mals. It is th ^ RnipTiti jfic reason which Eiocir I. A.] LEIBNITZ. 171 distinjj2f^^b^^^7 is thft p_n]3 reme mo 'pg.d nr primitiv e nrnj^yTthe _sim ple original subst ance ofwhich^aiCSifi, nrftalgdoT]_j^i^^d— monadjsL- ^ "the^p r orli i cts . and which are"geh erated, " so to speak, by continual fulgurations "oT tEe divimty from moment to moment, bounded by the receptations of the creature of whose existence limitation is an essential condition." Like the God of the schoolman, he is actus purus, to which tho created monads approach in varying degrees, "according to the measure of their perfection." The crea tftd rponindn rnn ^nly riint upnn on^ another throu gh the medii ]m nf f, he divin e monad . It is only through it that one can be dependent upon the other. Leibnitz bases his optimism on the principle of sufficient reason. The principle of suffi,cicnt reason declares thait no fact canBe*^ real, or existent, no statement true, unless t here be a s ufficient reason whyiiTi s thns^ aj|fl_T)nf. others wise, altEgu .a:h these x^so ns very often cannot be know n"^ to us ." 'rhis principle leads us to infer that since out of the infinite number of possible worlds, this one has been created by the Divine mind, it must contain within it the greatest possible measure of perfection. " And this con- nection, or this accommodation of all created things to each, and of each to all, implies in each simple substance relations which express all the rest. Each, accordingly, is a living and perpetual mirror of the universe. And as the same city viewed from different sides appears quite 172 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I. a. different, and is perspectively multiplied, so, in the infinite multitude of simple substances, there are given, as it were, so many different worlds which yet are only per- spectives of a single one, according to the different points of view of each monad. And this is the way to obtain the greatest possible variety with the greatest possible order : that is to say, the way to obtain the greatest possible perfection." Every monad contains the infinity of being in itself. It would lose nothing if all other monads were destroyed, nor gain anything if they could act upon it. The monad is a self-sufficient microcosm, and an omniscient eye might see in its present state the whole past and future of the universe. " But each soul can read in itself only that which is distinctly represented in it. It cannot unfold its laws at ouce, for they leach into the infinite." Every organic body is a species of *' divine machine," surpassing all human mechanisms by the infinite complexity of its relations. Each portion of matter expresses the universe ; that is, each portion of matter has its special formation energj^ or soul. " Every particle of matter," say Leibnitz, " may be conceived as a garden full of plants, or as a pond full of fishes. But each branch of each plant, each member of each animal, each drop of their humours, is in its turn another such garden or pond.' Death, chaos, and barrenness, exist only in appearance, owing to the imperfection of our point of view. It must not be supposed, however, that each entelechy, force, or soul, has a special portion of matter for ever united with it ; for all bodies are in a perpetual flux, like rivers, their particles for ever coming and going. " That which we call generation is development and accretion, and that, which we call death is envelopment and diminution." There is no destruction either of the soul or the body, strictly speaking. They each follow their proper laws, and coincide by virtue of the " pre-established harmony," which exists between all substances as representations of one and the same universe. Leibnitz maintains that had Descartes known the laws of motion, he would have been led to discover this principle of the "pre-established harmony," by which, to quote his words, " bodies act as if there were no souls, and souls act as if there v\ere: Erocii I.A.] LEIBNITZ. 173 no bodies ; and j^et both act as if the one influenced the other." The foregoing exposition we have taken almost verbatim from the summary of his system, written by Leibnitz in 1714, for Prince Eugene of Savoy, and published after his death as the " Monadology." The inconsistency and mutual incompatibility of several of the main joositions taken up are apparent at a glance. Leibnitz is emphatic in declaring that the monads have " no windows," while at the same time postulating a direct relation between them and the supreme monad, and an indirect relation with one another. It is difficult to see, on Leibnitzian principles, how psychological idealism is to be avoided; The self-centred microcosm ex hypotliesi knows only its own universe. In this it is absolutely shut up. How then has it any right to pronounce on the absolute nature of things outside this universe? It may be quite true that other self-centred monads may exist as the centres of different worlds, but of them it cannot possibly know anything. Those who postulate a plurality of ultimate world- principles can never logically answer the questions raised by "theory of knowledge." Leibnitz is involved in additional difficulties by his theism, and above all, by his attempts to render his system compatible with theological orthodoxy. A hierarchy of self-centered and essentially independent beings, extending from the lowest sentiency to the highest consciousness, may be a pretty and sym- metrical conception, but will certainly not bear the test of criticism, as an explanation of the universe. But Leibnitz, who after all was more of a litterateur than a philosopher, gives us, nevertheless, many acute suggestions and able pieces of analysis in his writings. His individualist Pluralism he was fond of placing in opposition to Spinoza's Monism, when charged with the latter by thinkers too logical to conceive the possibility of a serious thinker treating individuation as an ultimate metaphysical fact. Leibnitz, of course, admits freedom of the will, but his freedom is neither absolute indiflference, nor is it determi- nation without motive. It is a free choice of one line of conduct rather than another from among two or more 174 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I.a. that are, physically speaking, equally possible. God alone is absolutely free. Human freedom merely means that the determination of the will is contingent upon the character. In this sense, " the understanding may deter- mine the will according to the prevalence of perceptions and reasons of one kind which, since it is certain and infallible, may incline without necessitating it " (Nouveaux Essais, XXI.). In a certain sense, a ball might be said to be free after it has been struck by a racquet, in so far as its movement is not hindered. In another sense, the motion of the ball is contingent, in other words, not free. Leibnitz warns the student against the misuse of the Cartesian principle of " clearness and distinctness " in idea, as a test of truth. Very often that appears to us clear and distinct, which is really dark and confused. The test of clearness and distinctness is only applicable when it is the result of exact observation and faultless deduction. As we have seen, in one sense nothing is clear and distinct ; for example, our perception of matter is in its nature confused : matter which is composed of an infinity of unextended substances, to our perception appears as a continuously extended whole. Leibnitzianism is in every sense the logical antithesis of Spinozism. To Spinoza there existed naught but the one substance and its modes ; to Leibnitz existence comprised an infinity of monads and their perceptions. To Spinoza, extension is an ultimate fact, co-relative with thought ; to Leibnitz it is an illusion due to confused apprehension. To Spinoza, all teleological explanations are to be rigidly excluded in philosophy ; to Leibnitz, they form an integral part of its method. To Spinoza, philosophy had no part nor lot with theology ; to Leibnitz, the justification of theology is its end and aim. Leibnitz was essentially an eclectic ; an eclectic in religion (he had sought, as one of the great objects of his life, to find a modus vivendi between the Catholic and Protestant churches) ; an eclectic in philo- sophy, an eclectic in science, and last of all, an eclectic in his attempts to reconcile philosophy and theology. The somewhat flashy system of Leibnitz, as was natu- ral, made an immediate and widely extended imj^restiun Epoch I.a.] I LEIBNITZ. 175 on the culture of Europe. It almost entirely su]-»erseded Cartesianism in the university and in the salon, and indeed was the dominant academical philosophy of the Continent until the time of Kant, if not in its original form, in one but slightly modified. We pass over intermediate writers, and come to Christian Wolff, the first follower of Leibnitz who erected an inde- pendent system on the principles of the master. Wolff was born in 1679 at Breslau, and became, in 1706, professor of mathematics in Halle. He subsequently entered upon a professorship at Marburg, but owing to alleged heretical tendencies in his doctrines he was recalled, and retired again to Halle, devoting himself mainly to literary work till his death, on the 9th April, 1754. Wolff is noteworthy as being the first academical thinker who wrote in German. He was the author of a large number of works dealing with every department of philosoph}'. He attempted to combine Leibnitzianism with the older Aristotelian doctrines of the schools. The pre-established harmony he regards simply as an admissible hypothesis. He also denies the unconscious perception of Leibnitz, that is, he refuses to admit perception in any monads below the rank of the Leibnitzian soul. On the other hand, he adheres to the optimism of his master no less than to his doctrine of the will. His division of philosophy into Ontology, or the doctrine of being in general ; Rational Psychology, or the doctrine of the soul as unextended and simple substance ; Cosmology, or the doctrine of the physical universe ; and Eational Theology, or the doctrine of the existence and attributes of God, is interesting and noteworthy in its relation to the " critique " of Kant, as we shall presently see. Practical philosophy (an expression since much used in Germany, of which apparently he was the originator) he divides into Ethics, Economics, and Politics (the old Aristotelian division). Wolff bases his " practical philo- sophy " on the idea of perception, which is the law of our rational nature. Wolff left an extensive school behind him, the most noteworthy name of which is that of Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten (born, 1714, in Berlin, died, 1762, in Frank- fort). Baumgarten is chiefly remarkable for two things; 176 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I.a. firstly for having attempted to construct a philosophy of {esthetics, and secondly for having been the thinker who probably had most share in the earlier philosophical education of Immanuel Kant. Baumgarten was Kant's type of the dogmatic metaphysician, as often appears in his works. The only other member of the school worthy of notice, and for the same reason, is Christian August Ceusius (born, 1712, died, 1776, professor of philosophy at Leipsic). He also had an influence on the philosophical education of Kant, and is often referred to by him. ( 177 ) MODERN PHILOSOPHY. FIRST EPOCH, B. THE EMPIKICAL SCEPTICAL SCHOOLS. BACON. We have now traced the course of the dogmatic schools of the Continent from the rehabilitation of philosophy, after the fall of scholasticism had been succeeded by the brilliant literary revivals of ancient systems, followed by the fantastic physical speculations of the sixteenth century ; and after these in their turn had collapsed — in other words, from the period of Descartes. We liave followed this development to the middle of the eighteenth century, that is, to the time of Immanuel Kant. Here we must retrace our steps to the period at which we started in the survej" just concluded, i.e. to the beginning of the seventeenth century, for the purpose of following the contemporaneous, though essentially distinct Empiricist movement in the British Islands. The first name we meet with in this Empiricist move- ment is that of Francis Bacon, Lord Verulam. "By eliminating the theosophic character which Natural Philosophy had acquired during the transitional period," says Ueberweg (vol. iii. p. 35), " by the limitation of its method to experiences and induction, and by raising the fundamental characteristics of this method to a philo- sophical dignity free from the narrowness attaching to any special circle of physical research, Bacon of Verulam (1561-1626) is the founder, not indeed of the empirical method in natural science, but of the empiricist line of development in modern philosophy." The notion of reorganising human knowledge on a new basis was, it is said, a favourite dream of Bacon, even in his boyhood. Like his younger contemporary, Descartes, he had been early disgusted with the metaphysic of the schools. The growing enthusiasm for physical science had seized him N 178 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I.b. also ; but, unlike the Frenchnian, lie did not dream of bringing knowledge back to the primitive cogito by any drastic scepticism. In his '111 Stan ration of the Sciences,' Bacon makes a survey of knowledge, as it then existed, as a pre- limiuary to the work of reform. It falls under three heads, Memory, Imagination, and Eeason. In this portion of his great work, Bacon points out what he conceived as the fundamental sources of error in the human mind, to which he gives the name of Idols in the Greek sense of the word (ctSwAov). This, perhaps the most interesting and important part of the work in question, is succeeded by a dissertation on the three branches of human science which fall respectively under the above heads, viz.. History, Poetry, and Philosophy. Philosophy, according to Bacon, concerns itself with God, Man, and Nature. The first department, that of natural theology, consists of the attempt to show that the series of physical causes implies a first cause and a Providence. On the positive nature and attributes of God, natural or philosophical theology has nothing to say. Siuiilarly, in the second department, that which has Man for its object, it is not the immaterial soul of man which is immediately breathed into him by the Deity that jDhilosophy deals with, but the animal soul, which is of a thinner, finer, corporeal nature than the body, but not immaterial.* Natural philosophy, the third department, is divided into two sections, speculative and operative. Speculative natural philosophy is again divided into physics and metaphysics; the first in so far as it is concerned with proximate causes, the second in so far as it deals with ends. Operative natural philosophy is divided • into two corresponding sections, as applied physic it is termed mechanic,— as applied metaphysic, natural magic. The fundamental conceptions and axioms which lie at the root of all' philosophy, such as those of being and non-being, similarity and diversity, &c., or such an axiom as that two things that are equal to the same' thing are equal to one another, form the subject-matter of * The coincidence of this with the doctrine of Paracelsus is curious. ErocTi I.B.] BACON. 179 what Bumes as a first principle the very point in dispute with Berkeley and Hume, namely, the existence of external objects. Though he intends to take up the argument against them, they would justly have in- sisted that his whole attack was simply an ignoratio elencM, and that that of which he ostentatiously paraded the assumption they had never questioned. But after all that may be justly said in derogation of Eeid's claims as a thinker, it is not to be denied that there are some acute observations scattered here and there throughout his works, and also that he makes some scores against his more brilliant adversaries, as for instance (Essays I. 1), where he touches the vulnerable point in Hume's doctrine (which he received, by the way, as a legacy from Locke), viz. the formulation of the distinction between the outer and the inner orders of conscious states as one merely of " force and vivaci'y." Eeid truly observes, " To differ in species is one thing ; to differ in degree is another. Things which diff*er in degree only must be of the same species. It is a maxim of common- sense, admitted by all men, that greater and less do not make a change of species. . . . To say, therefore, that two different classes or species of perceptions are dis- Epoch I.b.] THE FRENCH MATERIALIST SCHOOL. 203 tingnished by the different dco^rces of their force and vivacity is to confound the diff«.'ren(e of degree with the difference of species, which every man of understanding' knows how to distinguish." And again : '\ Common-sense convinces every man that a lively dream is no nearer to reality tlian a faint one, and that if a man should dream that he had all the wealth of Croesus, it would not put one farthing in his pocket." All this is very apposite criticism on Hume, so ftir as it goes, but it certainly does not help the Keidian philosophy. The fact is, that Reid saw a flaw in Berkeley and Hume, and his whole system is a bungling attempt to discover its real nature. But it was not iDy wholesale assumptions and pragmatical assertions that this could be done. Poor Reid's sti-Uirgies to extricate himself and human reason from the meshes of Scepticism, only resulted in worse entanglement. There was at this time a young Privat-docent at the Prussian University of Konigsberg, who was also trying his hand on the same theme, but of him we shall hear more anon. Reid's philosophy continued to be taught in the Scotch universities by James Beattie (1735-1803), Dngald Stewart (1753-1820), Thomas Brown (1778-1820), &c. THE FRENCH MATERIALIST SCHOOL. We now pass from Scotland to France, where we shall see the influence of the same movement of thought, namely, that originating with Hobbes and Locke, ex- hibited in the writings of the Abbe de Condillac, Bonnet, Helvetius, &c., leading up to the great French materialist school of the eighteenth century. Etienne Bonnot de Condillac was born in 1715 at Gre- noble. He published his Essai sur Vorigine des Connaissances Humaines, in which he introduced Locke to his countrymen, in 1746. His most important work is, however, his Troite des Sensations (1754), in which his special line of differentia- 204 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I.b. tion from Locke is shown. His Logique appeared shortly before his death in 1780. His completed works (Paris, 1798) comprise twenty-three volumes. After carefnlly sheltering himself from the Church's censure, Condillac proceeds to develop the thesis known as Sensationism, namely, that sensation is the one source and vehicle of knowledge, — the " thought " or " reflection " admitted by Locke being nothing more than transformed sensation. This he illustrates by the fiction of a statue, endowed successively with the five senses. He first admits the sense of smell, and seeks to show the extent of know- ledge this sense alone would suffice to procure. He then proceeds to discuss how the world would appear to a being thus limited, on the addition of taste, hearing, &c. In this he assumes that the simultaneity of an impression with the remembrance of a previous one, in itself constitutes a judgment. The sense of feeling is singled out by Condillac from among the rest, as being that through which alone is obtained the idea of objectivity proper ; the remainder only furnishing us with the impression of our own affections or states. It is only the solid which leads us to the knowledge of a world outside our own organs. The superiority of our sense of feeling primarily distinguishes us from the lower animals. The ideas of good and evil, like everything else, are ultimately traceable to sensation. Condillac criticises Locke's doctrine of the association of ideas, while adopt- ing it in the main. liepeated coincidence of ideas leads to their being necessarily combined. This is the origin of complex ideas, which may thus be said to make them- selves. Nothing facilitates so much the fixation of these complex or combined ideas as the use of signs representing' them. Hence the i)Ower of language. The want of the capacity for language in animals is as great a drawback to their intelligence as regards the combination of ideas as their imperfect sense of feeling is as regaids the elements of such a combination. But though ideas maybe combined and recombined, it matters not in how complex a manner, yet they are all ultimately reducible to sensations. Penser c'est sentir, is the motto of Condillac's system. Condillac's contemporary, Charles Bonnet (1720-1790), Epoch I.b-] HELVETIUS. 205 was independently working out the same line of thought. Curiously enough, Bonnet even hit upon the illustration of the statue, when he became aware of the fact that Con- dillac had worked out the same idea five years previously. Bonnet was in many respects more widely read at the time than Condillac, though his philosophical writings did not exercise so great an influence on the French eighteenth- centuiy movement. Bonnet was in a sense the founder of what is known as physiological psychology. In both his scientific and theological positions he approached Priestley. He endeavoured to show the complete condi- tioning of thought and sensation by cerebral and nervous action ; but, like Priestley, he sought to elude the theo- logical consequences of this doctrine by a resort to the hypothesis of miracle. Claude Adrien Helvetius, another contemporary writer, (1715-17 71), further carried out the ideas of Condillac. Helvetius declines to regard the " soul " as anything else than the sum of its ideas. Since all ideas are ultimately traceable to sensations or impressions of external objects, all mental difierences which we find among men are the result merely of chance and outward circumstance, the most potent influence in the formation of character being education. The end of life is happiness, by happiness being understood the greatest possible amount of animal pleasure. There is no such thing as disinterested conduct. Since society is merely the sum of individuals, individual satisfaction, as such, contributes to the general well-being. Self-love is the only motive of conduct ; its import in the moral world being analogous to that of gravitation in the physical. It is the lever of psychological no less than of practical action. All knowledge is dependent upon the attention and study which arises from the desire to escape ennui. Still more obvious is it that all practical action in life is traceable to self-interested motives. From this it follows that no moral teaching, whose aim is not to show that virtuous conduct is that most conducive to individual happiness, is of any value. The state, by acting on this principle in its system of jurisprudence, that is, by making punishment attend criminal conduct, shows the true philosophic instinct. Helvetius is distinguished by con- 206 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch Lb. siderable literary facility, and his works have been mure than once republished in a complete form. Another influential writer of this period was Julien Offroy de la Mettrie (1709-1751) who was originally led through observation of the delirium produced in fever, to a conviction of the absolute dependence of the psychical on the physical. Like Condillac, Bonnet, and Helvetius, whom he preceded by a few years, he proclaimed the ultimate reduction of thought and will to feeling. Intelli- gence would be impossible in a man brought up outside human intercourse. In ethics La Mettrie was the deter- mined opponent of asceticism, his conception of life being ably set forth in his "L'art de jouir." His polemic against the convention and hypocrisy of human life generally is especially effective. La Mettrie was a great friend of Frederick the Great, who offered him an asylum at his court from the persecutions on account of his materialism which drove him successively from France and Holland, and at his death composed an elegy on him, which was read before the Berlin Academy of Sciences. Voltaire facetiously styles him the " Court atheist." A survey of any department of French eighteenth-century literature would seem incomplete without some notice of the great names of Voltaire and Rousseau. Their signifi- cance for the history of philosoj^hy is, however, of the smallest. Voltaire, whenever he touches on a philosophical subject, does so from the standpoint of mechanical eighteenth-century Deism. Eousseau is satisfied with a sentimental Deism, and is extremely bitter against the materialists. In his Social Contract, as already mentioned, he develops in a remarkable manner hints which were thrown out by Hobbes, Locke, &c. But original reflections on philosophy proper are entirely absent. DIDEROT. The most important original figure produced by the French eighteenth - century movement in its more strictly philosophical aspect is undoubtedly Denis Diderot, born 5th Oct. 1713. Diderot was originally destined for the priesthood, but this career he soon abandoned for Epoch Lb.] DIDEROT. 207 law, and this again for literature. Diderot had a truly encyclopedic mind — a mind eminently adapted to be the organising power of the great literary work with which his name is most intimately associated. He possessed, moreover, what in Voltaire and Rousseau was undoubtedly lacking — a considerable speculative faculty. Diderot may be said to have focuf-sed the materialist movement. The reading and translation of Shaftesbury's works first shook his faith in his early creed, and resulted in the Promenade d^un Sceptique^ which, being impounded by government before publication, did not see the light till after his death. He soon developed into a deist in the ordinary sense of the eighteenth-century man of letters, but was too acute to rest long at this standpoint, and in the course of a few years passed over to a logically cairied-out materi- alism. Diderot, after a life of many vicissitudes, alter- nately persecuted and patronised in France, finding a refuge at the court of the Empress Catherine of Eussia, i&c, died 13th July, 1784. The pieces in which the mature Diderot is most clearly exhibited on his philosophical side are the Interpre- tation de la nature, the Entretien entre D'Alembert et Diderot, and iife Beve de D'Alemhert, in the two latter of which, as may be judged by the titles, his friend and coadjutor on the Encyclojjedie, D'Alembert, plays a prominent part. Several of the articles in the Encyclopedie itself are rendered almost valueless owing to the fact that worldly prudence induced the printer to modify them in an orthodox sense before their publication. Diderot may most accurately be described as a material- istic monist. To him all nature was one ; the difference between organic, inorganic, animal and human, were only differences of degree. There was no such thing as dead matter ; the molecule was no less an active agent than the man. To employ an illustration of his : " the great musical instrument we call the universe plays itself." It does not require a demiuige or deus ex macJmid to evoke its harmonies !8,nd discords. Matter is itself active by its very nature, iitself sentient, itself conscious, potentially when not actuallj^. In other words matter, i.e. physical substance, is the ultimate ground of all existence ; nature is the sum of 208 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch Lb. its combinations. One set of combinations manifests itself as so-called inert, inorganic matter ; another set as organ- ised sentient matter ; yet another as the thinking, feeling, willing, animal or human body. Diderot admits, how- ever, an original diversity in the primal constituents of the various orders of material existences : " I term elements the various and heterogeneous material substances necessary to the general production of the phenomena of Nature, and I term Nature, the actual general result, or the successive general results, of the combinations of these elements " (De F interpretation, Iviii.). Diderot proceeds to suggest that animality had from all eternity its specific elements," " confounded in the mass of matter," that they gradually became united, and that thence vegetable, animal and human life resulted. The materialism of Diderot is rather akin to the doc- trine of Anaxagoras, than to that of Demokritos (it was Dynamism rather than Atomism). It is for this reason that we class him as a monistic materialist, in spite of certain passages which seem to make for a contrary as- sumption ; more particularly since these are mainly to be found in the earlier work just quoted. For instance, in the Entretien we read : " There is but one substance in the universe ; in man or in animal. The bird-organ is of wood ; the man is of flesh. The canary is of flesh, the musician is of a flesh differently organised ; but both have the same origin, the same formation, the same functions, and the same destiny." There is a remarkable passage in the B>eve, where Diderot, speaking through the mouth of the sleeping D'Alembert, gives an almost exact repro- duction of the doctrine of the Homoiomerai. " Everything is more or less some one thing, more or less earth, more or less water, more or less air, more or less fire, more or less of one kingdom or of another; for nothing is of the essence of a particular being. No, assuredly, since there is no quality of which some being is not participant, and it is the greater or less amount of this quality which makes us attribute it to one being rather than to another. You speak of individuals, indeed, poor philosophers ! Let your individuals be ; answer me ! Is there an atom in nature strictly like another atom ? No. Do you not admit Epoch I.e.] DIDEROT. 209 that everything in nature hangs together, and that it is impossible there can be a break in the chain ? How then about your individuals ? There are none ; there is but one great individual, and that is the All. In this All, as in a machine or an animal, there is a part which you call this or that ; and when you give the name individual to this part of the whole, it is by virtue of as false a con- ception as if in a bird you were to give the name individual to a wing or to a feather of the wing. And you talk of essences, poor philosophers ! Let your essences be ! Behold the general mass, or, if your imagination is too narrow to embrace that, behold your first origin and your last destiny. Oh Architas ! you who have measured the globe, what are you ? A little ashes. What is a being? The sum of a certain number of tendencies. Can I be anything else than a tendency ? No, 1 am advancing towards an end (Je vais aim terme). And species ? Species are only tendencies towards a common end which is their own. And life ? Life is a succession of actions and reactions. Living, I act and react in mass ; dead, I act and react in molecules. I do not die then ? No, assuredly I do not die in this sense ; neither I nor anything else. To be bom, to live and to pass away, is but change of form. And what matters, one form or another ? Each form has its own good and ill fortune. From the elephant to the grub, from the grub to the sensible and living molecule, the origin of all, there is no point in all nature which does not suffer or enjoy." And again, in the short essay Sur la Matlere et le Mouvement : " I cast my ej^es over the general aggregation of bodies ; I see everything in action and reaction ; every- thing destroying itself under one form, everything recom- posing itself under another ; sublimations, dissolutions, combinations, of all kinds ; j^henomena incompatible with the homogeneity of matter ; whence I conclude that it is heterogeneous; that there exists an infinity of diverse elements in nature ; that each of these elements, by its diversity, has its particular force, innate, immovable, eternal, indestructible ; and that these forces within the body have their action without the body ; whence springs the movement, or rather the general fermentation of the P 210 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I.b. universe." The force inherent in matter is at once the varying and uniting principle of the whole. It will be readily seen that the materialism of Diderot differs in some not unessential points from the scientific materialism of the present day, and also that his several statements of the doctrine are not always consistent with one another. The first is but natural and to be expected. Our admiration for the luminous suggestions of the eighteeenth-century writer will not be lessened bj^ the few crudities from the point of view of modern science which cling to them ; while as to the second point, it must be borne in mind that Diderot was primarily a man of letters rather than an exact thinker. In method, Diderot is of course a thorough-going empiricist. Materialism is the logical development of empiricism, the tinith which it implicitly contains. In the Entretien, D'Alembert is made to observe that according to the system propounded by Diderot it is impossible to conceive " how we form syllogisms, or how deduce their consequences." To this Diderot replies that we do not deduce them, that the}^ are deduced for us by nature. " We do but proclaim conjoint phenomena of which tbe connection is either necessarj^ or contingent, phenomena which are known to us through experience ; necessary in mathematics, rigorous in physics and other sciences ; contingent in morals, politics and the rest of the specula- tive sciences." To the question whether the connection between phenomena is less necessary in one case than in another, Diderot replies, " No, but the cause is subject to too many particular vicissitudes which elude us, for us to be able to reckon infallibly on the effect which will ensue. The certainty we have that a violent man will be irritated by an insult is not the same as the certainty that a body which strikes a smaller one will set the latter in motion." We have quoted from Diderot at comparative length, inasmuch as he represents the most finished literary expression of the materialist movement. But the classical text-book of this movement is not to be found in the elegant and chatty dialogues and essays of the French litterateur, but in the more systematic thouoh drier pages of the Systeme de la Nature^ originally published under ihe Epoch I.b.] D'hOLBACH. 211 name of the elder Mirabeaii, but now known to be the work of the Baron d'llolbach and the habitues of his salon. D'HOLBACH. D'HoLBACH, or to give him his full title, Paul Heinrich Dietrich, Baron von Holbach, was bom 1721, at Heides- heim, in Germany, and educated in Paris, where he spent the greater part of his life, amid the wits, men of letters, and " philosophers " of the pre-revolutionary era. He died 21st February, 1789. The Systeme de la Nature is a systematic embodiment and exposition of the principles of the dominant mate- rialism. In it we find the Empiricism of the British school, the Sensationism of Condillac, its pendant, the self-interest ethics of Helvetius, the physiology and epi- cureanism of Lamettrie ; the whole forming the bible of materialism as understood in France during the eighteenth century. The only existence is matter, i.e. physical substance and the motion that is inherent in it. The complex of all things is termed nature, which constitutes the whole, inasmuch as all things stand in a causal rela- tion to one another. Hence ever^^thing in nature is necessary. The three conditions of motion in the physical world are inertia, attraction, and repulsion. Motion is brought about through the inequalities in the degrees of attraction and repulsion in bodies. The same forces appear in the moral world as self-interest, love and hate. The only difference between the physical and the moral consists in the difference between the visible motion of masses, i.e. of complex systems of molecules, and the invisible motion of the molecules themselves. Thought, will, and feeling consist in the molecular motion of brain and nerve substance. Owing to this not having been recognised, dualism, or the doctrine of two substances, a mental and a material, with all its train of fallacies, has arisen. Perception is nothing but the setting in motion of the molecular system of the brain and nerves by impact from without. It cannot be decided whether sensibility is, as Diderot suggested, present in every p 2 212 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch I.b. portion of matter, or whether organisation is its essential condition. Moral action is a necessary consequence of temperament, which simply denotes the relative propor- tions of the solid and the fluid matters in the system. There is nothing more spiritual in love and hate, or in the numberless passions of which these two are the foun- dation, than there is in the phenomena of gravitation or of impact. The only diiference is, as before said, that in the one case we can see the material motion which produces the phenomenon, in the other it is hidden from us. It was only natural, after men had constituted them- selves into a double existence, that they should extend this theory to the universe at large. Hence arose the conception of a God over against the world, a conception which explains nothing, does no one any good, frightens the foolish, and the folly of which is manifest in the fact that it can be expressed only by negations. The contradiction of ascribing to the deity human passions and morality, after removing him altogether from the sphere of the conceivable, is dwelt on. To the rational man there is no god beyond the force which moves the universe, appearing now as mechanical motion, now as sensibility, now as thought ; to him there is no providence but the invariable laws of nature. D'Holbach and his friends are uncompromising in their attacks on the eighteenth-century theory, which justified superstition, on the ground of edification. To teach error for the sake of curbing the passions of men, is like instilling poison lest strength and health should be misused. The doctrine of free-will is stigmatised as a cunning device for maintaining the credit of the deity in the face of the evils of the world. The adherents of the doctrine forget that an uncaused event would suppose quite a different world from this, and that a really free agent couid be nothing less than a creator. The immorality of the belief in a future life is also insisted upon as tending to the neglect of the real world and of its pleasures and duties. A thorough-going materialism is alone consistent with common-sense and human dignity, inasmuch as it frees men from the degrading fear of imaginary evils and Erocn I.e.] d'hOLBACH. 213 from useless regrets. The materialist has neither concern for the future, nor remorse for the past ; all that happens, moral no less than mechanical actions, being the necessary outcome of the nature of things. Vice and crime are to the materialist mere disease. The latter would supplant the preacher and the judge by the teacher and the phy- sician. He would be content to make men healthy in body, and to train them to see that their own interest lies in virtue, knowing that crime would thus become ever more rare, until it altogether ceased. The Systeme de la Nature marks an epoch. Though, for obvious reasons, it has been persistently depreciated, its power, honesty and logicality, produced an immediate and widespread effect on contemporary thought. It suc- ceeded in sweeping away the cobwebs of traditional belief from many a mind, and in utterly discrediting the senti- mental Deism then popular. As against the inconsequent doctrines, philosophical and other, which were opposed to it, it was unanswerable, while its noble and humane moral teachings were the inspiring and sustaining power of numbers a few years later, whether in civil conflict or in the tumbril carrying them to the guillotine. The ideas contained in the Systeme de la Nature were developed on their scientific side by various savants, notably Cahanis, Claude, and Testutt de Tracy. Cahanis (1758-1808) made a distinct advance on D'Holbach by identifying psychological processes rather with chemical and organic than with mechanical action. Cahanis is, however, chiefly famed for his crude and singularly unhappy analogy between the cerebral and visceral systems. Of analogous nature to the error of D'Holbach in failing to distinguish between organic or vital processes and mechanical, is that which he exhibits in failing to see the difference between physiological and social processes. He would trace the existence of vice and crime to certain pathological states of the individual's body or mind, rather than to the economic and social conditions into which the individual is born. ( 214 ) [Epoch n MODEEN PHILOSOPHY. SECOND EPOCH. KANT AND THE POST-KANTIAXS. INTRODUCTION. Eetrospective and Prospective. We have now passed in review since the beginning of the modern period, two distinct lines of philosophic thought, the one springing from Descartes and his school, and the other from Bacon and Hobbes. In the first the abstract concept arrived at by reflection is made ' the unconditional test of truth, its validity that is, is apart from and even outside all experience. Descartes began his new departure in philosophy by the illogically constructed proposition, / think, thevpfore I am. This was the funda- mental axiom of all knowledge, the certainty of certainties. But what was this / of which Descartes talked ? Upon this question much hinges. In the view of the present writer, eminent authorities to the contrary notwithstanding, the result clearly showed it to have been the " internal " object arrived at by reflection — the individual mind. At least if Descartes meant anything other than this at starting, he certainly very soon lost sight of it ; for the whole of his philosophy proceeds on the foregoing assumption, and proceeds on it simply enough. The thinking individual once postulated as the prius, " the clearness and distinctness " of its ideas or abstract mental concepts, becomes naturally the basis of truth and its only ultimate criterion, in other words, the reflective reason is the key to the problems of philosophy, unalloyed by the baser matter of sense. The idea of God is attained ia this way, similarly that of an independent Epoch II.] KANT AND THE POST-KANTIANS. 215 though created external world, Sec, Szg. The possession of certain fundamental ideas justified the construction out of them of a dogmatic sj'stem irrespective of experience. Malebrauche, accepting the main Cartesian positions, and taking his stand on the idea of substance, asked how two distinct substances, mind and body, could come into a position of reciprocal relation. This question he answered by constituting the Divine substance which was the origin of both, the modus vivendi between them. The abstract conception substance as defined by Descartes became the fulcrum upon which his philosophy turned. This principle was further and independently carried out by Spinoza, who, taking the same concept, denied, by its very definition, the possibility of a plurality of substances. He accordingly affirmed God to be the one substance, of which mind and body or Thought and Extension were the attributes, the reality and correspondence of which were given only in their relation to this substance. Out of the two psychologically " clear and distinct " ideas of substance and attribute, the system of Spinoza was formed. Leibnitz, starting essentially from the same principle, though endeavouring to give it precision by sundry limitations and corrections, the principle, namely, that the " clearness and distinctness " of the mental concept is the ultimate criterion of all truth, evolved a pluralistic ontology, the antithesis on this historical plane of the Spinozistic Monism. Wolff, Baumgarten, Crusius, &c., all adhered to the same principle of method, though intro- ducing various modifications into the results of the Leibnitzian speculations. These schools, springing from Descartes, are what are termed the Dogmatic or Abstract metaphysical schools. They are systems to be received from the hands of a teacher — what the ordinary man has confusedly in his mind when he rails at all things metaphysical. Side by side with this development on the Continent, there was, as we have seen, another going on in this country. Bacon had laid down the inductive principle, had pronounced the method of all investigation to be the observation, collegation and comparison of individual facts. This Hobbes had adopted in his philosophical investigations, 216 MODEEN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch IL which consisted in the study of what passed in his own mind, in other words, of the manner in which the individual mind opens up (so to speak) to the perception of a fullj^-fledged objective workl — of the world as known. Locke, following on this line, attacked the theory of *' in- nate ideas," as he termed them, by which he probably meant the Cartesian mental concept, this polemic consti- tuting the framework of his essay. For Locke, the main question of philosophy was, is the individual born into the world with any ready-made, concrete ideas in his mind, or does he derive all his knowledge through experience? The question as thus put, it was, of course, not difficult to answer, and to answer in the sense in which Locke did answer it. He said in efi'ect, all knowledge is derived from experience, or to put it popularly, through the senses. Berkeley pursued this idea to its logical con- clusion on the one side, when he denied that an external world of " matter " had any existence except in a perceiving mind, for, said he, we only know it through experience as perceived, any other kind of existence we can only infer, and as he demonstrated, illegitimately infer. Hume, accepting the conclusions of Locke and Berkeley, carried them to an equally" logical conclusion, on another side, when he showed " mind " or " soul " itself, regarded as an entity, to be an illegitimate inference from the succession of thoughts and feelings which is all that experience gives us. Empiricism, the necessary outcome of inductive psj^chology, issued as necessarily when fully carried out in pure phenomenalism or scepticism. The French sensa- tionists and materialists, starting from Locke's incomplete Empiricism, are the counterpart of Berkeley's Idealism, their analysis being equally correct as far as it went, but equally incomplete and inadequate. While Berkeley rejected the entity "matter" but retained the entity " mind," they got rid of the entity " mind " but retained the entity " matter." On the basis of his sole existence, " mind," Berkelej^ sought to establish a dogmatic Theism or Spiritualism. On the basis of their sole existence, " matter," they sought to rear a dogmatic Materialism or Mechanicism. Though we are far from placing the posi- tive results of the two procedures on a level; we must Epoch II.] KANT AND THE rOST-KANTIANS. 217 point out that, philosophically viewed, they are on precisely the same plane. I'he practical difference between their results is, that Berkeley's work, important as it was, was mainly negative, while that of the materialists laid the foundation, to a large extent, of modern science. Both the foregoing lines of investigation, as will be seen, started from the individual mind as object. It was the "clearness and distinctness" of the concept that the individual mind forms, which was the test of truth for the Cartesian. It was the reproduction of a world alreadj^ assumed as existent in the mind of the individual, that was the yjroblem to be investigated for Hobbes and Locke. Even for Berkeley, the "finite spirits " and the " infinite spirit " respectively, in and for which alone matter existed, were concrete individual minds of men, and the similarly concrete and individual, though magnified mind of the creator, which was, so to speak, over against and distinct from them, as they were from each other. Similarly for the Sensation ists the problem was the action of the assumed material world upon the sensory system of the individual. Hence it is that Spinoza's Monism was such a riddle to his contem- poraries and successors till the present century, dogmatic metaphysicians and empirical psychologists alike. The main speculative result of this evolution, both dogmatic and empirical, was the distinction of subject and object, that is, of perceiver and perceived, thinker and thought, knowing mind and known world. This was the main issue of a whole series of problems and distinctions which had never troubled the schoolmen or the ancients, but which rose up before the seventeenth and eighteenth century thinker, once he had decisively turned his back on the classical and mediaeval speculative landscape. Not until Kant, however, did the distinction receive definite expression and become cardinal. The definite fixation of this distinction, which belongs essen- tially to the empirical or psychological plane of thought, discloses the inherent contradiction in Empiricism. Hence Kant represents at the same time the culmination and the bankruptcy of this line of thought. In the Critique he endeavours to treat the deeper issues involved in ' Theorv 218 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. of Knowledge,' of which he was the first to catch a glimpse, on the lines of this mere psychological distinc- tion. His success and his failure were alike written in the history of the subsequent philosophic evolution. The above, then, was the state of philosophy in the second half of the eighteenth century. On the one side were the dogmatic metaphysicians, assuming the clearness and distinctness of the thinkers' concepts, to be a test of their objective truth or reality ; on the other, the em- pirical psychologists, who maintained all concepts to be ^ originally derived from concrete experience, which was hence at once the source and ultimate criterion of truth. Kant, following a hint dropped by Hume, namely, his distinction between the necessity attaching to mathe- matics, and the contingency of " matters of fact and experience," was led to put the crucial question, What is experience ? i.e. what is this concreteness we call reality ? With the Lockeian school, Kant admitted that every concrete concept can come only through experience — indeed, this was of the nature of a platitude to him — but his great merit lies in having seen, if imperfectly, the issue which lay beyond this mere psychological question, the question, namely, as to the conditions of experience itself? In investigating this, Kant found that experience or perception was not wholly sensuous, that the pheno- menon was more than a ready-made impression passively received from without, that it involved a thought or active element — in short, that the mere sense-impression hM-^Ist_of.^^-tQJbe-deteimneiOiy--a^^ ^^^"p^^ concept before it could become experience. Further investigation proved this to lie deeper than the object of reflection, the individual self, with which alone philo- sophers had been hitherto concerned. The pure concept, which entered so intimately into the essence of the concrete, was universal and necessary, while all that existed for the individual as such was merely emiDirical and contingent. Kant proceeded to trace the categories or pure concepts, determining the real (which he had hit upon in a somewhat haphazard manner) back to their source, and original first principle. This proved to be, not the self or mental synthesis determined in time by Epoch II.] KANT AND THE POST-KANTIANS. 219 memory, bnt the I for which time is, and which Kant designates the original synthetic unity of consciousness or apperception. The oKl antagonism of Materialism and Idealism is clearly absorbed in this more thoroughgoing analysis. *' Mind " and " body " cease to be separate entities, mutually exclusive of one another, and are dis- closed as the same fact differently categorised. A short sketch of the successive changes of attitude implied in the passage from the common-sense view of the non-philoso- phical man, through Empiricism to that of Kant and the post-Kantian thinkers, may facilitate an understanding of much that follows, which, without some kind of key, would be scarcely intelligible to the reader unversed in the matter. The ordinary man believes the phenomena of the world to be things existing in themselves and apart from their cognition. The. Berkeleian or Humean philosopher dispels this belief of his by a reductio ad ahsurdum, to wit, by pointing out to him that the thing, object, or matter, all, namely, that is perceived externally to our- selves, is nothing but a congeries of affect ons or deter- minations of consciousness, as much so as the thoughts, feelings, and volitions which are unmistakably peculiar to himself as an individual. He is therefore immediately seized with a sense as of living in a dream-world, a world of phan- tasms, since the outer world is shown to have no more in- dependence of the fact of being known, felt, and perceived, than the inner. Both alike consist of impressions and ideas, and he fails to discover — his old land-mark, independent existence, being removed — any ground of distinction be- tween them. The real table and his recollection of the table are alike determinations of his consciousness. But this state of mind cannot permanently endure. The absurdity of confounding empirical reality and empirical ideality in one category, the instability of an attitude which logically carried out makes the individual absolute, at once centre and periphery of the universe, carries its own reductio ad ahsurdum with it. The world refuses to be philosophised away, and forces to a reconsideration of the problem. The first departure from a state of innocence established one fact, namely, that a world outside consciousness is 220 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch H. nonsense and a contradiction in terms. A return to crude realism therefore is out of the question. The head and front of the offending diflficulty is not to be found in the first position of philosophy arrived at in the departure from common-sense, which reduced the world to a system of determinations of a feeling and thinking subject. May it not lie in a loose employment of the words knowledge, feeling, consciousness? Our philosophical neophyte pro- ceeds to examine them. This examination proves that these words have been used in a different sense in the premises of the argument to that in which they have been used in the conclusion, in short, that it involves the fallacy a dido simpUciter ad dictum secundum quid. The first posi- tion of philosophy merely reduced reality to determinations of knowledge, or feeling and thinking, i.e. of a conscious Bubject. The conclusion implicitly or explicitly drawn as to the illusoriness of reality is based on the assumption that the subject referred to is the subject which is at the same time object, the synthesis determined by memory, that is, reproduced in time, the individual mind. All with- in the sphere of this latter, or psychological synthesis, is of course of merely individual significance, is purely em- pirical. The conclusion arbitrarily imports into the terms used a psychological meaning, as implying the completed actuality immediately present in the individual mind, while in the premises no such limitation is contained. But, says our empiricist, I only know of thought or feeling as appertaining to myself as an individual. No, interposes the speculative thinker, who at this stage steps in to the rescue. In this assumption consists the cul-de-sac in which you find yourself caught. Vou assume know- ledge or consciousness to be identical with the reproductive synthesis constituting the individual mind, but analysis — nay, ordinary experience itself — gives the lie to this as- sumption. The objective world, which 3'ou have already seen to be nothing more than related feelings (or states of consciousness, if you will), refuses to be reduced to a mere series of your personal feelings or states of conscious- ness. You and I alike perceive the table, the same table, not two different impressions of an occult table in itself, as the imperfectly developed empiricist supposes, nor two Epoch IL] KANT AND THE rOST-KANTIANS. 221 different tables, as the psychological idealist must needs suppose ; else thought and language have no meaning. This objective ixyint, at which our consciousness ceases to be distinguishable as mine and yours, but which to me and to you, so far as we are individuals, is given as for all possible consciousness, is not a mere determination of me, i.e. of my mind, like my personal thoughts, feelings, and desires, but is a determination of that ego or subject for which my mind itself is object, of tlie J which is never in con- sciousness, inasmuch as it is the subject of consciousness. The objective, then, is that element or factor in knowledge which though per se extra-individual, the individual makes his own by reproducing in his concepts. Psychology is the science which traces the process of reproduction. For the individual it is mediate, unlike his thoughts and feelings which are immediate. This necessary and universal or object-G\em.ent in knowledge or consciousness, it is, which constitutes its reality. The term real dis- tinguishes it from the merely psychological element which is popularly expressed by* the word ideal. In accordance with the foregoing, there are three points of view from which the world may be regarded. There is the standpoint of physical or natural science, which con- cerns itself exclusively with the objectively real. Here abstraction is made from the self-determining subject, and the processes of the production of the real, as well as those of its reproduction in the individual mind, in other words, of the problems of metaphysic and psychology re- spectively. The abstract real, the fully-fledged object in space and time, but abstracted from the principle of its generic possibility, and treated as an existent, is viewed in the same way as by the unreflective common- sense of the ordinary man and the crude empiricist. The ultimate expression of the objective real is, j^hysical substance, static and dynamic, the " matter and motion " of the materialists. To physical substance and to its categories of determination, and to this alone, the whole sum of things is legitimately reducible from this point of view. Again, there is the standpoint of psychology, which views the world simply as reproduced in the "mind.' 222 MODEEN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch U This is the standpoint of Berkeleian idealism proper, As in science, " matter " is treated as an abstract entity, so here, *'mind" is treated as an abstract entity, as the receptacle of "impressions and ideas," also regarded as independent existences. The universe of psychology is *' mind " and " ideas." Lastly, there is the synthetic point of view of the speculative method, which treats the world under its most comprehensive and concrete aspect, as a system of deter- minations of knowledge or consciousness — or rather of the Subject, the I, or I-ness, which is the ultimate condition of the possibility of consciousness-in-general, and w^hich, as such, can rever, per se, be object of consciousness, like the self or mind of psychology. On this principle the con- crete-real is seen in the last resort to consist in the syntheses of relations, or /-determinations. How from this is deducible the method by which all evolution is determinable we shall see later on. We may observe respecting^ the three ways of ap- proaching the world-problem, that the materia prima of natural science is corporeality, extending- resistance ; its universal form is motion. This is the lowest term to which the universe is reducible on the lines of " common- sense " and "abstract" reality, i.e. the universe in space- and-time. Outside this there is no rational principle of explanation — in other words, there is no phenomenon in space-and-time which cannot be expressed in terms of matter-motion. Again, the materia prima of psychology is mind, its universal form being ideation. The psycho- logical universe which is in time merely, is reducible to terms of mind (impressions and ideas). Finally, the raw material, the matter of " Theory of Knowledge " is I-ness, i.e. the potentiality of consciousness, its universal form being experience, knoivledge, or consciousness - in - general. " Theory of Knowledge," it will thus be seen, embraces, while it transcends the two former standpoints. It must not be supposed that the f )regoing is to be found, in so many words, in Kant. Like all intellectual pioneers, Kant clung to many of the crudities of his predecessors even till the end. He never completely disengaged him- self from crude realism, or a'- least from its survival in Epoch II.] KANT AND THE POST-KANTIANS. 223 the Lockean doctrine ; for the " things-in-themselves " of Kant are essentially a hybrid between the " substance " of Locke and the Leibnitzian monads with which Kant's earlier philosophical training had familiarised him. The whole Critique of pure Reason (Kant's greatest work) is, moreover, cast in a psychological form, although the true nature of the problem it is concerned with continually forces its way through. But though the above exposition is not expressed in so many words by Kant, it is indicated in every page of his writings, and was substantially the result evolved from his main position in the course of the post-Kantian Movement. 224 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. KANT. Immanuel Kant was born April 22nd, 1724, at Konigsberg, in wbich city be resided witb but few intermissions throngbout a long life. He was of Scotcb descent on bis fatber's side, tbe name baving been properly spelt Cant.* Kant entered tbe university of bis native city as a tbeological student, a faculty wbicb be subsequently forsook in favour of pbilosopby. His first work was an academical essay entitled " Tbougbts on tbe true estima- tion of tbe Vital Powers." Sbortly after tbe publication of tbis treatise be left tbe city, and for several years occupied tbe post of private tutor in various aristocratic families. In 1755 be returned to Konigsberg, wbere be obtained tbe position of Privat-docent in tbe university. He now began to devote bimself in earnest to literary ■work. Tbe Latin essay wbicb preceded bis installation in bis academical functions, sougbt to mediate between Wolff and Crucius. His next important w^ork, tbe ' Greneral Natural History and Tbeory of tbe Heavens,' is similarly designed to effect a modus vivendi between Newton and Leibnitz. Various logical, metapbysical, and scientific essays foUow^ed in rapid succession. Tbe Latin disserta- tion " On tbe form and principle of tbe sensible and intelligible world," constitutes tbe turning-point in Kant's pbilosopbical career. Tberein we find tbe awakened Kant endeavouring to formulate tbe problem of w^bicb tbe ' Critique ' was to be tbe attempted solution. Tbis work was bis test-essay for tbe professorsbip of pbilosopby, wbicb be entered upon in 1770. For eleven years sub- sequently, Kant was ceaselessly occupied witb tbe prob- lems indicated in tbis dissertation, tbe result of bis cogita- tions being tbe appearance in 1781 of 'Tbe Critique of * The reason for change of orthography assigned by Kant himself, is the rather enigmatical one that it was in consequence of the tendency of his countrymen to pronounce the name as though it began with Z (Zant). Epoch II.] KANT. 225 the Pure Reason,' a work which, in spite of its long in- ception, in actual writing out only occupied its author five months. This was followed in 1783 by the 'Prolegomena to every future Metaphysic,' an abstract of the last- mentioned treatise ; by a second and somewhat mollified edition of 'The Critique' in 1784; by 'The Foundation for the Metaphysic of Ethic' in 1786 ; by the 'Metaphy- sical Foundations of Natural Science' in 1787 ; and the 'Ciitique of Practical Reason' in 1788. In 1790 appeared the* ' Critique of Judgment,' a work exhibiting a visible falling-off in power, which may also be said oi 'Religion within the boundary of Mere Reason' (1793). The last important work from Kant's own pen was the 'Anthropology,' which saw the light in 1798. Sub- sequently to this, however, Kant's lectures on " Logic," on " Physical Geography," and on " Pedagogic," were all published by his pupils during his lifetime. Kant died the 11th of February, 1804, aged eighty. Three complete editions of Kant's works have been issued, that of Hartenstein (Leipsic, 1838-39, second edition 1866) in ten volumes ; that of Rosenkranz and Schubert, comprising a biography and a history of the Kantian Philosophy (Leipsic, 1840-42) in twelve volumes ; and the latest, that of Kirchmann (Berlin, 1868) in eight volumes, with a supplementary volume of annotations by the editor. "The Critical Doctrine." The guise in which the great problems comprised under what is termed " Theory of Knowledge," problems which touch the foundations of consciousness and reality, pre- sented themselves to Kant, fresh from the reading of Hume and the Empirical school, was the at first sight unpretentious psychological question, " How are synthetic propositions a priori possible?" The classification of propositions into analytic, or those in which the predicate is already contained in the subject, and which are there- fore virtually identical ; and synthetic, or those in which the predicate adds something to the subject which is not already contained in its definition, we have already found Q 226 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. in Locke, although in other words. The distinction is practically the same as that between verbal and real predication. Now there is no doubt that all analytic propositions are a priori, that is, independent of any particular experience ; also that they carry with them a logical necessity and universality. There is equally little doubt, that most synthetic propositions (the Empiricists would say all) have their origin in particular experience, in other words, are a posteriori. Kant, however, found certain propositions, such, to wit, as the fundamental axioms of mathematics, and some others of equal, or even greater importance, whose nature we shall see directly, which by the "universality and necessity" that charac- terised them, proclaimed their origin, as independent of any number of particular or individual experiences whatsoever, in short, as a priori. Experience itself presupposed them ; tbey formed part of the constitution of every particular experience ; without them, experience would be impossible or meaningless ; it would no longer he experience. This universality and necessity was not merely logical, like that of analytic judgments, but entered into the constitu- tion of reality. The apparently simple and unpretentious psychological query thus assumed a far more formidable aspect. The question was now nothing less than : " How is experience itself possible? " what is this " necessary and universal " element that goes to the making of, or that underlies that real experience, which the Empiricists take as a matter of course, and about which they talk so glibly ? What is the principle or principles from which it is deducible, and what is the method and order of deduction ? Such is the problem to which Kant addressed himself in the ' Critique of the Pure Eeason,' and we may add also, to which the series of German thinkers with whom Kant was the starting-point, and which culminated in Hegel, addressed themselves. The disadvantage, as we have already observed in our section on the transition to Kant, which Kant laboured under, in attacking this problem from a psycho- logical base (so to speak), from which he was unable or unwilling to cut himself off, is manifest in every page of his philosophical wii tings. A terminology derived now Epoch II.] KANT. 227 from the old dogmatic systems, and now from empirical psychology, hampers his thought at every turn, making him in some cases inconsistent with himself, and in others scarcely intelligible. Kant sometimes speaks as though he viewed " Theory of knowledge," merely as the vestibule of a possible metaphysic, at least he puts it forward as the preliminary question, which all meta- physicians must answer, before they can properly proceed to construct a system, professing to deal with the time- honoured problems of philosophy. He hesitated to formally insist, as he might have done, and as indeed he frequentl}^ hints, that the answer to this question exhausts the whole problem of metaphysics, and of itself constitutes philosophy. He felt that some place must still be left for the old speculative inquiries. With Kant, the chief end of philosophy still remained the answer to questions, as to God, the Soul, and Freewill. It is true they were not to be answered in the spirit of traditional dogmatism. They had no longer any theoretical locus standi in philosophy, but their determination, direction, and formulation, in the interests of practice, was still its chief function. In this, as in other respects, the separate influences of the two sides of Kant's philosophical education display them- selves. Empiricism proclaimed the limitation of all know- ledge to' experience. The dogmatists of the Leibnitz- Wolfian school, whose works formed Kant's earliest philosophical pabulum, constituted the discussion of the nature of God, of the human Soul as an independent entity, and of the absolute constitution of the World- order, as the sole end and object of philosophy. Although Kant saw that " Theory of knowledge " was concerned with nothing but experience ; although he saw that no speculative science, as such, could be concerned with anything higher than this ; he nevertheless felt himself bound to make up his account, in some way or other, with the old questions. The ingenuity with which he en- deavoured to effect this without invalidating his main speculative position we shall presently see. Just as little as the Empiricists considered what was implied in that experience to which they were so fond of insisting (and with justice) that our knowledge is limited, Q2 228 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch IL did the dogmatists consider the significance and applica- tion of the conceptions which they so freely assumed to transcend all experience. The former assumed experience as a thing given, the latter assumed the absolute validity of certain of the concepts which experience presupposes as part of its own constitution beyond that constitution. The Empiricist never stopped to ask himself what are the conditions which render experience possible. The Dog- matist never stopped to enquire whether hisr abstract concepts had any validity outside experietx;e ; or how he came by concepts which appear to transcend experience. The thinker who wakened Kant from his dogmatic slumber, as he expresses it, was Hume. Hume had shown that the notion of causality does not spring from experience, but is somehow or other imposed by us on the events which are given us in experience. The sceptical attitude assumed by Hume, as regards metaphysics, was merely the result of his imperfect analysis. Had he not limited his researches to the conception of causality alone, he would have discovered that the whole of pure mathematics consists of similar — as Hume would have deemed them — arbitrarily constructed syntheses. This would have sufficed to " give him pause," inasmuch as he must either have straightway abandoned mathematical certainty, or have reconsidered his position with reference to metaphysics. To profit by Hume's genius as displayed in his researches into the causation problem, and to repair the errors arising from his shortsightedness, we must institute the enquiry into how we come to form such combinations or syntheses, which carry with them "necessity and universality," in other words, as to the nature and con- ditions of knowledge or experience-in-general— an enquiry distinct from the merely psychological one, as to what falls within individual experience. Kant, nevei-theless, in spite of his insisting on the distinction, is apt only too frequently, to mix ujd the respective points of view of " Theory of knowledge " and psychology. Epoch II.] KANT. 229 Transcendental ^Esthetic. Kant understands by " Transcendental " all that be- longs to the conditions or possibility of experience as opposed to " Transcendent " by which he understands that which professes to transcend, or pass beyond experience. Transcendental enquiries are simply enquiries into the conditions which experience presupposes, without refer- ence to the content given in any particular or individual experience. The sum of such enquiries constitute what is called Transcendental philosophy. Transcendental ^Esthetic 'denotes therefore, with Kant, the enquiry into the a priori or transcendental conditions of Sensibility. These Kant finds to be space and time, together with all that is directly deducible from them. In these two forms of Sensibility are contained the possibility of the axioms of mathematics. They are not given to us through the senses, like our individual impressions; these latter constitute the matter, or the purely empirical element in our Sensibility. On the other hand, space and time constitute the formal element, which helps to give reality to these impressions. The formal element of space-time combines the manifold matter of sensibility into intuition or perception. Upon the matter, the sense- impression which is received from without, Sensibility imposes its own unifying forms. In space the manifold impressions of sense are united in co-existence, in time in succession. The a priori nature of space and time is proved by the fact that we cannot make abstraction from them even in thought, as we can from all that is merely empirical. That they are different from conceptions ab- stracted by the understanding is evident, since space or time do not presuppose individual spaces or times, but on the contrary, individual spaces or times can only be thought of as parts of the one universal space or time. Further, that they only reside in our Sensibility, and not in the object itself, is evidenced by the fact that purely, spacial distinctions cannot be described objectively, but only with reference to the cognising subject. " What can 230 MODERN PHILOSOPHY, [Epoch II. more resemble my hand or my ear, and be in all points more like, than its image in the looking-glass ? And yet I cannot put such a hand as I see in the glass in the place of its original ; for when the latter is a right hand, the one in the glass is a left hand, and the image of a right ear is a left one, which can never take the place of the former. Now there are no internal differences that could be imagined by any understanding. And yet the differences are internal, so far as the senses teach us, for the left hand cannot, despite all equality and simi- larity, be enclosed within the same bounds as the right (they are not congruent) ; the glove of one hand cannot be used for the other. What then is the solution? These objects are not presentations of things as they are in themselves, and as the pure understanding would cognise them, but they are sensuous intuitions, i.e. phenomena, the possibility of which rests on the relations of certain unknown things in themselves to something else, namely, to our Sensibility." (Kant's ' Prolegomena,' § 13, Bohn's edition.) By means, then, of the forms of space and time, we combine the various impressions of sense together into a whole. Intuitions, presentations, or phe- nomena (i.e. appearances) consist therefore of formed, or in other words, timed and spaced, feelings or impressions. It is, however, only time that can be predicated of all phenomena whatever, for although space and time are alike mere subjective conditions of our Sensibility, yet space only belongs to the impressions of external Sensi- bility, and does not apply to our internal states ; on the contrary, time is immediately only the form of a connec- tion of inward states or affections, in short, of internal Sensibility ; but since there is no external impression that is not accompanied by the internal intuition of self, time is indirectly the form of external intuitions also. The matter of Sensibility, that is, the manifold impressions of sense therein, being the empirical and casual element, it follows that this formal and necessary element of space-time must be pure and a priori. But if space and time are the a priori forms of all phenomena, intuitions, or perceptions, it is obvious that all the temporal and spacial determinations of phenomena admit of prediction in a Epoch II.] KANT. 231 universal and necessary manner. Now these determina- tions constitute the subject-matter of mathematical science. Arithmetic (and those departments of mathematics based upon it) is concerned with the repetition or succession of the unit, in other words, is founded on time. Geometry again deals with the configuration of space. The axioms and postulates of these sciences, inasmuch, therefore, as they are already implicitly present in our Sensibility itself, are universally and necessarily predicable of all that falls within it. But this also proves that mathematical pro- positions are strictly limited in their application to the phenomena given through sense, and in no way apply to things-in-them selves. In brief, according to Kant, Sensibility, with its pri- mordial forms of space and time, is the receptive vehicle of impressions received by it from without, though of this *' without " we can know nothing whatever.* Transcendental Analytic. Transcendental Esthetic, while exhibiting the principles of the passive or receptive side of knowledge or experience, has also answered the question, How are synthetic pro- positions a p'iori possible, in so far as mathematics is concerned ? But as yet we have only one of the elements constituting the completed synthesis of real knowledge. We have next to treat of the active element which all complete synthesis or unification implies. It has been justly remarked that space and time, in " the critical philosophy," are the warp of knowledge, across which the shuttle of thought has to throw its woof before reality, objectivity or experience can obtain. A world of three- dimensioned space, and of one-dimensioned time, forms the warp. This material is supplemented by the spontaneity of the Understanding or pure form of thought. The * This doctrine Kant designates as at once transcendental idealism and empirical realism. He claims that it diifers from what he terms the empirical idealism of Berkeley ; inasmuch as, while Berkeley denied the existence of objects while admitting the existence of space, he would deny the existence of space while admitting the existence of objects. 232 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch IL function of the understanding may be compared to tlie action of tlie electric spark, passing along and illuminating the whole series of sensations. Sensations, even though unified in space or time, are, to use Kant's expression, " blind," until they are reacted upon by the Understand- ing. The Understanding synthesises them, and thereupon a fully-fledged real or experienced world arises. This system of experienced objects — the real world — is the nature with which science is concerned. Science, no less than common experience, is based upon the pure thought- forms or categories, as Kant, following Aristotle, terms them. As in the case of Sensibility and its product, intuition or perception, the pure form or necessary element dis- closed itself after the matter or empirical (i.e. contingent) element had been abstracted from, so here the pure con- cept or category is arrived at, by abstracting from the matter of the logical judgment ; we then see the necessary conditions which every judgment presupposes. The clue to the discovery of these universal categories of conscious- ness Kant thus found in the ordinary logical table of judgments. The following is the list as given by Kant : — Logical Table of the Judgments. 1. 2. According to Quantity, According to Quality, Universal. Affirmative. Particular. Negative. Singular. Infinitive. 3. 4. According to Relation. According to Modality, Categorical. Problematical. Hypothetical. Assertoricul. Disjunctive. Apodictic. Parallel to this table runs the Transcendental table of the categories which Kant derived from it, but of which the logical judgments are, or should be if Kant's derivation is correct, the applied form. Epoch II.] KANT. 233 Transcendental Table of the Conceptions of the Understanding. 1. 2. According to Quantity. According to Quality. Unity. Reality Plurality. Negation. Totality. Limitation. 3. 4. According to Relation. According to Modality. Substance and accident. Possibility. Cause and effect. Actuality. Community (action and reaction). Necessity. As a matter of fact, Kant's derivation of the categories from the judgments is in many cases forced and arbitrary.* The distinctions contained in the original table are them- selves often of doubtful value, and sometimes altogether untenable. This, however, does not affect the philoso- phical importance of Kant's analysis. The accuracy or inaccuracy of the list of categories furnished, does not touch the point that experience is determined by thought in a manner at least generally corresponding to the Kantian categories. But to proceed with our analysis. Having gathered together these categories in the somewhat hap-hazard manner we have seen, it remained for Kant to justify their place in a doctrine professing to be systematic by deducing them from some primary datum or principle of consciousness. This he seeks to effect in his sections on the deduction of the categories, one of the most important portions of the ' Critique.' It is necessary to remember that the deduction is no demonstration, in the ordinary sense of the word, but like every other " transcendental " exposition, is designed to show that reality or experience itself presupposes the successive stages of the argument as its necessary conditions ; that on ultimate analysis, all knowledge is resolvable into these, as its constituent * The student may observe that in the categoiies of Quantity and Qtiality (the mathematical categories, as Kant termed them), the order of the corresponding table of judgments is reversed. 234 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. elements. The sections on the deduction of the categories are very different in the two editions of the ' Critique.' It is here that the crucial point, separating Theory of Knowledge from Psychology, is to be found. We have seen that the phenomena furnished by the Sensibility to the Understanding are simply presentments or presentations, in other words, determinations or limita- tions of Sensibility. Looking at the question from the standpoint of Psychology, with its hard and fast distinc- tion of subject and object, inner and outer, mind and matter, it seems utterly enigmatical that I should have a right to affirm universal or objective validity of the categories ; for instance, to say that the conception of cause and effect can never be contradicted by any expe- rience. " There are only two possible ways," says Kant, *' in which synthetical representation and its objects can coincide with and relate necessarily to each other, and, as it were, meet together. Either the object alone makes the representation possible, or the representation alone makes the object possible. In the former case, the relation be- tween them is only empirical, and an a priori representa- tion is impossible. And this is the case with phenomena, as regards that in them which is referable to mere sensa- tion. In the latter case — although representation alone (for of its causality, by means of the will, we do not here speak) does not produce the object as to its existence, it must nevertheless be a priori determinative in regard to the object, if it is only by means of the representation that we can cognise any thing as an object." (Kant's ' Critique,' p. 77 : Bohn's edition.) We have, it must be remembered, to distinguish between two distinct processes ; two presentations may combine themselves in an individual consciousness, in a certain time-order, i.e. in the empirical ego, which itself consists simply in a synthesised series of impressions on the internal sense determined in time. In this case the judg- ment, together with its contained conception, its root, is merely a, judgment of perception. These have merely a sub- jective and individual validity ; in other words, they are purely empirical and contingent. Or, on the other hand, they may be combined in a manner valid not alone for Epoch II.] KANT. 235 the individual consciousness, but for all possible conscious- ness ; that is, they may be combined in a consciousness-in- general. " The business of the senses," says Kant, " is to intuite, that of the understanding to think. But to think is to unite presentations in a consciousness. This union is either merely relative to the subject, and is contingent and subjective, or is given unconditionally, and is neces- sary or objective. The union of presentations in a con- sciousness is judgment. Thinking, then, is the same aa judging, or referring presentations to judgments in general. Hence, judgments are either entirely subjective, when presentations are solely referred to a consciousness in ono subject, and are therein united, or they are objective when they are united in a consciousness in general, that is, are necessarily united therein. The logical momenta of all judgments are so many possible modes of uniting presentations in a consciousness. But if they serve as conceptions of the necessary union of the same in a con- sciousness, they are therefore principles of objectively valid judgments. This union in a consciousness is either analytic by identity, or synthetic by the combination and addition of different presentations to one another. Ex- perience consists in the synthetic connection of phenomena (perceptions) in a consciousness, in so far as this is neces- sary. Hence, pure conceptions of the understanding are those under which all perceptions must be previously sub- sumed, before they can serve as judgments of experience, in which the synthetic unity of perceptions is presented as necessary and universal." (Kant's 'Prolegomena,* § 22 : Bohn's edition.) But these pure conceptions of the understanding, to which perceptions are immediately referred, before they can become real or objective, themselves presuppose syn- thetic processes lying (so to speak) still deeper in the nature of consciousness. These are the synthesis of appre- hension in intuition, of reproduction in the imagination, and of recognition in the conception itself. The material origi- nally supplied by sense requires a unification other than that furnished by the passive forms of sense. This unity is afforded in the primary act of intuiting, or perceiving the sense-manifold furnished in time and 236 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. space. Each impression given in an instant of time would be lost, were it not gathered up in the act of intuition, and connected with those which precede and follow it. This is what Kant terms the synthesis of ajjpre- hension. More than this is necessary, if a unity is to be formed out of these several points of perception. To this end they must be reproduced in the imagination and retained for combination with fresh impressions. This synthesis of reproduction in imagination is therefore in- separably bound up with the foregoing synthesis of appre- hension, liastly, before the completed categories can come into operation a further step has to be traversed. " With- out the consciousness," says Kant (the passage, I may mention, occurs in the first edition of the ' Critique ' only), *' that what we think is the same as what we thought a moment before, all reproduction in the series of presentations would be in vain. For there would be a new presentation in the actual state, not in any way belonging to the act whereby it must have been gradu- ally created, and the manifold therein would still not constitute a whole, inasmuch as it would lack the unity which this consciousness alone can give it. If I forget in counting that the unities which are at present before my senses have been successively added together by me, I should not understand the creation of multitude through this successive addition of one to one, and hence I should not understand number, a conception consisting simply in the consciousness of this unity in synthesis." The last-named consciousness is what Kant terms the recog- nition in the conception, which is necessarj^ before the cate- gories can obtain. Now we need scarcely say that all these acts or processes are a priori, that is, precede all particular experience; that they are further removed from the latter, even than the categories themselves, not- withstanding that each of them can be distinguished empirically, that is, in its application to given experience. The two first unite empirically in perception, and the third gives us the empirical consciousness of the identity of these reproduced perceptions, T\dth the phenomena whereby they were originally given. But deeper than any of these syntheses, deeper even Epoch II.] KANT. 237 than the unitT/ of ajjprehension in sense, lies the original synthesis of the consciousness, the uniti/ of apperception as Kant terms it. All the unifying acts we have heen considering find their ground in time; this one, on the contrary, is not in time, but time is in it. The necessary and universal identity of the knowing subject in respect of all presentations, or determinations of consciousness whatsoever, is the necessary condition of the possibility of consciousness. This primary synthesis is identified by Kant with the productive or pure ego, the ultimate datum of " theory of knowledge," as opposed to the empirical ego or subject-object with which psychology is concerned. The transcendental synthesis of apperception includes the secondary or psychological synthesis (the empirical self) as it does the whole world of experience. From the synthesis of apperception, the primordial " I think," every other synthesis is deducible. In so far as it refers to the categories and their conditions which we have just been considering, it is the *' pure Understanding " which creates them. Having now arrived at the fundamental and general grounds of the distinction between propositions which are necessary and universal, and such as are contingent and singular, it remains to deal with their application to phenomena. We have now clearl}^ distinguished between the world of sense as such and its ordered connection, which we term Nature. Furthermore, we have seen that the distinction does not lie in that the one resides more, the other less in our consciousness, but that both elements constituting real experience, the world of mere sense- impressions, no less than the same world as modified by Understanding, is in the one case a series, and in the other a system, of determinations of a conscious subject possible or actual. Kant, after repeatedly assuring us that this alone is our world, proceeds somewhat inconsequently to postu- late a world of things in themselves outside this system or world of experience. With this, however, we are not at present concerned. Just as the laws determining intuition of phenomena as sense-presentations, reside in the Sensibility itself and constitute pure mathematics^ so the laws which regulate 238 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. the co-ordination of phenomena must be sought for in the Understanding and constitute Pure natural science. The transcendental Analytic falls into two parts; analytic of conceptions, which is the statement of the ultimate forms to which unification may be reduced, and analytic of principles, which exhibits these elements of unification, as syntheses in the concrete world itself. In this way the question, " How are synthetic propositions a priori possible ?" is answered generally so far as natural science is concerned. But although it has been shown how the universal axioms of experience and of science are possible in general, it remains yet to consider more nearly the manner in which the sense-material is subsumed under the pure conceptions of the Understanding. This is the problem of those sections of the ' Critique ' which are occupied with the schematism of the pure conceptions of the under- standing. The mediator between the radicall}^ disparate elements of sense and intellect is the pure form of time. This, in the words of Kant, " is the third thing, which on the one side is homogeneous with the category, and with the phenomenon on the other, and so makes the application of the former to the latter possible." " This mediating representation," he continues, " must be pure (without any empirical content), and yet must, on the one side, be intellectual, on the other sensuous." But time is at once sensuous and pure, and, therefore, answers this condition. The immediate form of the category as applied to the sense- world must, therefore, be one in which it is united with time, or reduced to a time-determination. This form is what Kant calls the schema, which gives us the category as susceptible of direct application to the phenomenon. As the Sensibility is the faculty which furnishes the sensuous-material of knowledge, the Understanding that which creates the categories, so it is the productive ima- gination which produces the schema, whose function it is to determine time and space by means of the cate- gories. There is naturally a parallelism between the categories and the schemata. For the categories of Quantity the schema is number, which we have already Epoch II.] KANT. 239 seen to be a time-determination ; for those of Relation the schema is the time-determinations — change and con- timiance, succession, simultaneity ; for those of modality the time-determinations — sometime, noio, always. All this is plain-sailing enough, but the category of Quality offers a little difficulty. The empirical element of feeling has here to be introduced, and the category of Quality can only be schematised as that of filled, filling, and empty time. "Between reality (presentation of feeling) and zero, i.e. the complete emptiness of intuition in time, there is a difference which has a quantit3\ For between each given degree of light and darkness, between each degree of heat and complete coldness, each degree of weight and of absolute lightness, each degree of the containing of space and of totally empty space, pro- gressively smaller degrees can be thought of, and similarly between consciousness and complete unconscious- ness (psychological darkness) continually smaller [degrees] exist. Hence no perception is possible that would prove an absolute void ; for instance, no psychological darkness that could be viewed otherwise than as a consciousness, which is but surpassed by another strongei- consciousness, and the same in all cases of feeling." (Kant's ' Prolego- mena,' § 24, Bohn's edition.) This Kant calls the second application of mathematics to natural science (matliesis in- tensorum) ; the first, of course, being the original schema of number {matliesis extensorum). The schemata of Eolation and Modality, which, like the corresponding categories, are of course dynamic, are always subordinate to those of Quality and Quantity, which are mathematic. To the schemata naturally, as to every other stage in the construction of experience, the synthetic unity of apperception, the ever- present " I think," is the ultimate motive power. These a priori categorised time-determinations may be summarised as representing the time-series, the time-con- tent, the time-order, and the time-complex. They seve- rally furnish us with the metaphysical principles of science. The schema of number or of the time-series gives us the axioms of intuition or perception, which express in a general principle the fact that an object of perception is always an aggregate of parts, an extensive magnitude ; the 240 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. anticipations of perception supply the r.'iile for the fact that every sensation, feeling or conscious state, though it have no ea;tensive magnitude, has nevertheless mtensive magni- tude or degree (qumititas qualitatis est gradiis) ; in other words, both these principles are based on number ; in the one case it is a number of parts outside one another, or time-senes, in the other, a number of successive, and there- fore anticipatory, gradations of feeling or time-content. The principles corresponding to the schemata of Eolation, viz. change and continuance, succession, and simultaneity, and which fix the iimQ-order of the phenomenon, Kant calls analogies of experience. Thej^ are, that the quantity of material substance in the universe is unchangeable ; that every change has an external cause, and that in the com- munication of motion, action and reaction must always be reciprocal. Finally, the three postulates of empirical thought in general, based on the categories of Modality, give us the rules for the physically possible, actual, and necessary, or in other words, of the time-complex. These principles Kant insists are all that a metaphysic of nature can furnish us with a priori ; the rest must be left to observation and experiment, according to the method of induction.* There follows on this a long section on the division of all things into " phenomena and nomena," in which Kant develops at length his distinction between the " thiug-in-itself " and the appearance or phenomenon in consciousness — between sensible and intelligible being. The appendix to this section on the "Amphiboly of the concejDtions of reflection," deals with the subject of the confusion of the empirical use of the Understanding with the transcendental. To this confusion Kant traces much of dogmatic metaphysics, notably the doctrines of Leibnitz. At the close of the Transcendental Analytic, Kant, in the second edition of the ' Critique,' aj^pends a dissertation on the relation of criticism to the empirical and dogmatic idealistic theories of Berkeley and Leibnitz which need not detain us. * For a full development of these fundamental principles in their relation to matter and motion, the reader is referred to my translation of Kant's ' Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science,' in Bohn's Philosophical Library. Epoch II.] KANT. 241 We have now reached the conclusion of the con- structive or constitutive portion of Kant's Philosophy, that is, the portion in which he seeks to lay before us what goes to the making of experience, the data or principles which completed or real experience presupposes. The question, How is experience possible ? is now for Kant fully solved. But how about the problems with which dogmatic meta- physics had hitherto been concerned, which had exercised the genius of a Leibnitz and the talent of a Wolff; which were so essential to morality and political stability ; questions as to the first cause, the immortality of the soul, freewill, &c. Up to this point the tendency of" Criticism " had been unmistakably to show the utter absurdity of all such inquiries. In the next portion of the ' Critique ' the " Transcendental Dialectic," which Kant distinguishes from the first part, by affirming it to deal with regulative rather than constitutive conceptions, be proceeds to treat of these problems in his own fashion, first " critically," and afterwards " practically." Transcendental Dialectic. This third division of the ' Critique ' discusses the ques- tion : How metaphj'sics in the dogmatic sense is possible ? just as the two previous divisions had discussed the question : How is experience possible ? We are here con- cerned with the Pure Reason, properly so called, as we have before been dealing with the Pure Understanding and Pure Sensibility. The two latter were the faculties of Perceptions and of Conceptions respectively ; the Reason is the faculty of Ideas. By "Ideas " Kant under- stands those conceptions which, though they do not enter into the constitution of experience like the categories, are nevertheless, according to Kant, universally present in human consciousness as "practical" or "regulative" principles, in the shape of problems, postulates and re- quirements. Just as the material upon which the under- standing exercises itself is Sensibility, so the material upon which the Reason operates is the reality or experience, constituted by the combination of the two former elements. 242 MODEKN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. For tHis reason the Ideas transcend alike sense-forms and categories, while, at the same time, they have a determi- nation entirely ditFerent from either of them. The former are constitutive of experience itself; the latter, on the other hand, are merely speculative, beintr concerned with problems which experience indeed suggests but which do not affect its constitution, and which its nature precludes it from solving. The distinction formulated by Kant himself between the Understanding, the logical function of wdiich is judg- ing, and the Eeason, whose logical function is syllogising (if I may coin a word), is so obviously artificial, and dictated by Kant's love of symmetry, that it need not detain us, more especially as it plays no important part in the subsequent exposition of the " Ideas." Sense and Understanding are concerned with what is, the Eeason on the other hand with what should be. Were we only sense and understanding, we should have no impulse to travel beyond the region of phenomena. This faculty of Ideas, the Eeason, forces us, however, beyond the conditions of the given world of experience. As the phenomenon only exists in its relation to ourselves and to that which produces it, the sphere of experience is essentially the sphere of the relative, the finite, and the conditioned. Now, all the demands of the Eeason turn upon the search for the absolute, the infinite, and the imconditioned. The great error we are liable to in the employment of the Ideas of the reason, is to forget or to ignore their true character, and to treat them as constitutive. The tempta- tion to this is sometimes great, and when yielded to the reason becomes sophistical or dialectical. Whenever the reason dogmatises, that is, ventures assertions on matters outside all possible experience, it falls into this error. There are cases, how^e\er, in which such a proceeding seems inevitable. And in these cases the sophistications, or dialectic of reason, form part of its essential nature, and we can no more help our subjection to them than we can help ourselves being subject to the illusion that the sun moves, or that the moon is larger wdien near the horizon than at other times. But just as in the latter cases, although the sense-illusion itself does not disappear when Epoch II.] KANT. 243- we know that it is the earth and not the sun that moves, and that the moon does not vary in its dimensions, yet it is nevertheless rendered harmless, inasmuch as « we cease to treat it as reality. The same with the illii sions of the reason. As soon as criticism has unmasked their true character, philosophy must cease to rely upon them. The Ideas of the Pure Eeason embrace the Paralogisms, the Antinomies and the Ideal of Pure Eeason. The first concern the absolute nature of the soul, the second the absolute constitution of the world-order, and the third the absolute existence of God. The paralogisms are so called because in them it is sought to show that the soul is simple and therefore immortal ; that it is substance ; that it is distinct from the body; all which propositions are based on so many ]3aralogisms. In his treatment of this subject Kant first deals with the arguments of Men - delssohn and of Eeimarus, and, it may be added, that of his teacher Knutzen, all of whom emphasised the unity of the self-consciousness as the ground of proof of the soul's immateriality and immortality. The paralogism here rests on the fact that by means of the Idea of the uncon- ditioned, the reason demands that the ego shall always occupy the place of subject and never that of predicate ; that all its presentations shall be referred to its own unity ; and finally, that all which it perceives shall be regarded as other than, and external to, itself. It is sought to change these valid requirements, which are all fulfilled in experience, into dogmatic assertions respecting the nature of the soul apart from experience. The confusion at the basis of this, as of the other para- logisms, consists in the failure to distinguish between the ego of the ])rimordial apperception which, inasmuch as it is that which renders experience itself possible, can never become an object of experience, with the sonl, that is, the object of the internal sense (as Kant terms it), or in other words, the individual mind or personality. This latter is as Hnme had shown, given us as a series of " impressions and ideas," but, as Kant added, knit together and realised under the categor}" of "substance " and the schema of " per- manence." This confusion is the parent of other fallacies ; E 2 244 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. thus out of the logical unity of the subject is constituted a real simplicity ; from the fact that I am for myself .identical in every moment of consciousness, it is concluded that the soul is objectively an identical personality ; lastly, from the distinction between the internal and external sense and its object, the subsistence of the soul independently of the body is inferred. " From all this it is evident,'* says Kant, " that rational psychology has its origin in mere misunderstanding. The unity of consciousness, which lies at the basis of the categories, is considered to be an intuition of the subject as an object; and the category of substance is applied to the intuition. But this unity is nothing more than the unity in thought, by which no object is given ; to which, therefore, the category of substance (which always presupposes a given intuition) cannot be a]:)plied." Consequently, the subject cannot be cognized. " The subject of the categories cannot, therefore, for the very reason that it cogitates these, frame any conception of itself as an object of the categories ; for, to cogitate these, it must lay at the foundation its own pure self-consciousness (the verj' thing that it wishes to explain and describe). In like manner, the subject, in which the representation of time has its basis, cannot determine, for this very reason, its own existence in time. Now, if the latter is impossible, the former, as an attempt to determine itself by means of the categories as a thinking beiu!^ in general, is no less so." (' Critique,' Bohn's edition, p. 249.) The sum of Kant's investigations into the paralogisms of the Pure Eeason is that every " rational psychology " which claims to be dogmatic, that is, to establish doctrines concerning the real nature of the soul, rather than to be critical or determinative of our attitude towards the question, is, and must be, a delusion and a snare. The criticism of Cosmology consists in the discussion of the antinomies of the pure reason. The Idea of the uncon- ditioned requires us to expect a completed system of all phenomena, or in other words, a world. This world-Idea is determined according to the four classes of categories, and may thus be split up into eight propositions, consist- ing on the one side of the asseilions of the Wolffian Epoch II.] KANT. 245 cosmology, and on the other, of their sceptical antitheses. They are as follows : — TJiesis. Antithesis. The world has a beginning The world is infinite in time (boundary) in time and space. and space. Thesis. Antithesis. Everything in the world con- There is nothing simple, but sists of simple (parts). everything is composite. Thesis. Antithesis. There are in the world causes, There is no freedom, but all is through Freedom. Nature. Tliesis. Antithesis. In the series of world causes. There is nothing necessary, bu\. there exists a necessary being. in this series all is contingent According to Kant, the natural dialectic of the Pure Reason is exhibited in these propositions ; for, while th« theses are grounded on universally admitted axioms, tlie antitheses, which are equally well accredited, directly contradict them. Each of the eight propositions is thus a correct consequence from self-evident premises. The in- herent contradiction is thereby shown to lie in the nature of the reason itself. For of two mutually contradictory propositions both cannot be false unless the conception at their basis be itself contradictory. Kant's Transcendental or Critical Idealism, which distinguishes between pheno- mena and things -in -them selves, and rescues the word " phenomenon " from its sceptical implication of " illu- sion," is the sword which is to cut this Gordian knot. The two first antinomies (the mathematical) are disposed of by a demonstration of the fallacy alike of thesis and antithesis, inasmuch as jphenomena are here treated as things-in-themselves. It is just as impossible to say the world is infinite as it is finite, for neither of these concep- tions can be contained in experience, " because experience is neither possible respecting an infinite space, or an infinite time, or the boundary of the world by an empty space or a previous empty time ; these things are only Ideas." On the other hand, since both conceptions pertain to the forms of sense, it would be manifestly absurd to 246 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. predicate eitlier of them of the world as thing-in-itself. The same reasoning applies to the second antinomy which concerns the division of phenomena. For here again the parts only exist as given, that is, in the act of division, in other words, in experience, and hence only extend as far as experience reaches. But it is no less impossible for experience to dogmatically fix a limit to the division of phenomena than it is for it to follow out that division to infinity. The two second antinomial pairs are not like the first, mathematical, that is, concerned with the quantum of the world, but like their corresponding classes of categories, dynamical, that is, concerned with a determination of the world-order in a special manner. " In the first class of antinomy (the matliematical), the fallacy of the assump- tion consisted in that what is self-contradictoiy (namely, phenomenon and thing-in-itself), was represented as capable of union in one idea. But as regards the second, or dynamical class of antinomy, the fallacy of the as- sumption consists in that what is capable of union is represented as contradictory, and consequently, as in the first case, both contradictory assertions were false; so here, where they are opposed to one another merely through misunderstanding, both may be true." (Kanx's * Prolegomena,' Bohn's edition, § 53.) In this no less than in the previous instance, it is the distinction between phenomena and thiugs-in-themselves which solves the difficulty, though in another way. Both propositions may here be true, if the thesis be referred to things-in-themselves, and the antithesis to phenomena. It is quite conceivable that, while in the phenomenal world all the actions of man are the necessary con- sequences of his empirical character, outside this phe- nomenal world in his capacity of thing-in-itself, existing out of time, man may be the self-determining cause of his actions. It is thus that Kant reconciles liberty with necessity. Similarly with the fourth antinomy, it may be quite correct according to the assumption of the anti- thesis, that, as in the world of phenomena, every event has a cause — the regressus no less than the ])rogressus of causes being infinite — the idea of a first or uncaused cause is Erocii IL] KANT. 247 absurd, inasmuch as this could only be discoverable could we arrive at the completion of the series of suboidinate causes, which is obviously impossible ; and nevertheless, the thesis may still obtain outside phenomena, i.e. outside the world of experience, in that of things-in-themselves. There is nothing contradictory here in the assumption of a self-existent, necessary being, for although the existence of such a being can never be proved, yet it can be just as little disproved, time and causality only applying to the phenomena of sense, and not to things-in-themselves. The criticism of rational Theology is contained in the section of the ' Critique ' on the Ideal of the Pure Keason. Kant has already led up to it in his discussion on the ■fourth antinomy. In the Ideal of the Pure Benson the Idea of the Unconditioned claims to be presented in individuo but not in concreto, being determined by itself alone. " The idea of humanity in its complete joerfection supposes not only the advancement of all the powers and faculties, which constitute our conception of human nature, to a complete attainment of their hnal aims, but also everything which is requisite for the complete deter- mination of the idea ; for of all contradictory predicates, only one can conform with the idea of the perfect man. What I have termed an ideal, was in Plato's philosophy, an idea of the divine mind — an individual object present to its pure intuition, the most perfect of every kind of beings, and the archetype of all phenomenal existences." Q Critique,' Bohn's edition, pp. 350-1.) This idea of the sum-total of all perfection, and of all reality, conceived as concentrated in an individual being, constitutes the idea of God, or the Ideal of the Pure Eeason. Kant describes the progress of the reason in proceeding first to the hypostasisation, and finally, to the personifica- tion of this conception of a sum-total of all reality; but that the reason itself has a lurking suspicion that in the course of this procedure it has broken altogether with experience, is shown by the desperate attempt to justify itself exhibited in the three arguments (the ontological, the cosmological and the teleological), which it puts forward in proof of the objective existence of its ideal. Kant proceeds to show the illusoriness of all these arguments. 248 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. But if all the pretended proofs of the existence of the Deity are based on illusions of the Pure Eeason, the atheistic demonstrations of the opposite are equally baseless, on the other hand. The non-existence of God can just as little be demonstrated as his existence.* " The reason does not here," observes Kant, (with refer- ence to this third or Theological Idea) " as with the pyscho- logical and cosmological ideas, start from experience, and is not by a [progressive] raising (Steigerung) of the grounds, misled into an endeavour to contemplate the series in absolute completeness, but wholly breaks therewith, and from mere conceptions of what would constitute the absolute completeness of a thing-in- general, consequently by means of the idea of a most perfect original being, descends to the determination of the possibility, and thereby also to the reality, of all other things." (Kant's ' Prolegomena,' Bohn's edition, § 55.) Thus much as to the form in which the Ideal is conceived. As regards its content, its real purport and meaning, it is an indis- pensable regulative conception for our study of nature, no less than for our conduct ; that is, the reason requires that we regard nature as though created and governed by God, and that we act as though we were accountable to God. The regulative, or disciplinary function of the Pure Eeason as regards scientific method, and the systematisa- tion of knowledge, is developed in the closing sections of the ' Critique,' which treat of the " Transcendental doctrine of method." Kant's practical or moral philosophy is contained most fully in ' The Metaphysic of Ethics,' and in the ' Critique of Practical Reason.' The basis of Kant's Ethic is the " categorical imperative " by which the Practical Eeason affirms its domination over the natural impulses. 'Ihe moral man is, according to Kant, not he who is by nature benevolent, but he who acts well against his natural inclinations. The great distinction of Transcendental * From Kant's " practical " standpoint, this fact has an important bearing, and therefore the stress he lays upon it is ju.-tified. Not so with mir modern Positivists, Agnostics, and others with whom it is no more than a verbal quibble, and whose repudiation of Atheism can but denote mere social servility. Epoch II.] KANT. 249 Idealism between noumenon or thing-in-itself and phenomenon or appearance in consciousness, of course plays an even more important role here than in the theoretical side of the critical philoso{>hy. Man's will, as noumenon, proclaims the moral law which man's will, as phenomenon, receives. The categorical imperative, the " ought of that which has never happened," as Kant expresses it, can only have a meaning for me in so far as I feel within me the possibility of my accomplishing the demand made upon me. The fact that it does appeal to me affords all the proof requisite for me that the will is free. Inasmuch as without free- dom no ought or moral law is conceivable, the latter is itself as much a demonstration of the former as the former is the foundation of the latter. The conviction of this moral free- dom must, however, in no way be conceived as extending our theoretical knowledge. It simply affords a subjective demonstration of what the Transcendental Dialectic had already declared possible, though incapable of any positive theoretical proof. We have at the same time a subjective confirmation of another fact, which the I'ranscendental Dialectic had proclaimed conceivable, though not demon- strable, namely, that of our dual nature. While we are sensuous beings in time, we are intelligible beings apart from time. It is in my noumenal, intelligible, or which is the same thing, my moral nature, that I am really free, this freedom consisting in the power of the unconditioned commencement of a series of events in time. Thus practical necessity compels us to make assumptions which would be unwarranted were we to confine ourselves to the theoretical aspect of the case. In this we see the superiority of the Practical over the Pure Reason. These assumptions are the postulates of the Practical Reason by which we are to understand its necessary presuppositions for practical purposes, but which have no theoretical or speculative bearing whatever. In this connection, Kant steadily adheres to his original contention that a man is no more able to increase his knowledge by meie concep- tions, than a merchant is to increase his riches by adding noughts to the balance of his account. It will be seen from the foregoing that Kant's basis of Ethics is absolute intuition. The dictates of conscience 250 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. are ultimate, and not traceable to any higher external source. Kant polemicises against the moral philosophy which places the principle of the action in the object desired, snch as happiness, perfection, &c. It is cjuite evident that that is desired which affords pleasure, but this is obviously only an empirical principle. Even the principle of perfection is open to the criticism that it only puts forward conditional demands, and consequently affords no adequate distinction between expediency and morality. This objection is obviated, once we place the criterion of morality in the commands of the Practical Eeason, and recognise them as ultimate, and per se of universal validity. The formula of this universal princi- ple may be thus stated : so act that the maxims of your conduct may serve as a rule valid for all. The conformit}' of the action with the above formula constitutes the conduct legal, the conformity of the motive makes it moral. The metaphysic of Ethics may be divided accordingly into the doctrine of right (jurisprudence) and the doctrine of virtue (Ethics proper). The first comprises the external and legally binding ; the second, the duties with which conscience is concerned. The one is treated of in Kant's " Theory of Jurisprudence " the other in his " Theory of Virtue." Kant's views on the philosophy of history, the conception of which was at that time recent, are contained in a re- markable little essay entitled, " Ideas for a Universal History from a Mundane Point of View." Kant here enun- ciates the now familiar ide itself." The absolute Ego had already posited objects as the material for its activity to work upon. But they can only serve their purpose in so far as their necessity is given. The seal is affixed on this necessity when the testimony of others is added to my own. The universal Ego or I-ness, which is the condition of all consciousness, mufet therefore posit it>elf as individual Ego in a world of individual Egos, united under the categoiy of reciprocity. The conception of individuality " is obviously a reciprocal conception, that is, one which can only be thought, in and through the thought of another, and it is indeed con- ditioned by the same thought as to its form. It is only possible in any rational being in proportion as it is given as completed by another ; it is therefore never mine, but on my confession mine and his, Ms and mine ; a concep- tion common to both, and in which two minds are united in one. . . . The complete union of conceptions de- scribed, is only possible in and through actions. The consequence therefore is that it consists only in actions, and can only be required for actions. Actions occupy here the place of conceptions, and conceptions in them- selves apart from actions do not and cannot concern us." (Werhe, vol. iii. pp. 47-48.) To each individual Ego a portion of the world- wh(»le is preseived as the sphere of its own exclusive freedom, and the limits of these spheres constitute the rights of the individual. Within its own sphere the individual Ego justly ascribes to itself causality. That portion of my sphere of freedom wliich is the starting- point of all the changes to be wrought by me in the world Erocn II.] FKIHTE. 271 of sense, is my body. This therefore is the immediate object of right or law. Tliere can be no question of any obligation on the part of the individual to enter the statu of h\w, but once entered therein, ir foHows as a natural consequence that be respect this state. We see evidences here of the inevitable social contract theor3\ Like Kant, Ficbte sees in the state the instrument fur giving sanction to rights by force, or, as he miglit define it, the condition of the realisation of right. Fichte's view of the state is that of the protector of the personality, in other words, of in- dividual freedom. Property he considers as necessary to the maintenance of the personality. But the state exists for Fichte merely as a convenience, wliose highest aim should be to abolish itself by rendering itself unnecessary. We must not leave this subject without noticing the remark- able anticipations of Socialism to be found in Fichte. In his early essay on the French Eevolution he proclaims labour the sole basis of wealth, and hence the sole justi- fication f«»r its posse-sion. In speaking of the collective organisation and subdivision of labour, and the posses- sion by each citizen of the full product of his labour and this alone, he says, " Property will thus be uni- versalised ; none would have superfluities while there were any wanting necessaries, for the right of property in articles of luxury has no foundation while any citizen lacks his necessary portion of property. Agri- culturists and workmen will associate themselves for the 'pro- duction of the greatest possible amount of wealth idth the least possible amount of labour. " Other socinlistic passages are to be found in the Geschlossene Handelstaat. " Each desires to live as pleasantly as possible ; and since every man demands this, and no one is either mote or less than man, all have an equal right to make the demand. The division must be made accordingly on the basis of this equality, so that each and all may live as pleasantly as possible." Fichte boldly proclaims it the function of his " state " to secure an equal enjoyment of the products of labour among its members. Fichte's Ethics (Sittenlehre') are, like the " Jurispru- dence " (^Bechtslehre), divided into three sections, the tirst containing the deduction of the principles of morality, the 272 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II second dedncinG!; its reality and applicability, and the third dealing with the sj'stem of duties. Fichte maintains in the liist the necessity, even in the absence of any end, of regulating action in accoidance with a pre-determined standard, to be the fundamental axiom of man's moral nature. He here expresses, in a dry hard formula, the basis of a whole school of Ethic — a school which embraces all the so-called Ethical or universal religions of the world. Wiapped up in imagery, in rhetoric, and concealed b}" theological theories, the corner-stone of the morality of thcise religions, all turn upon this arbitrary premiss, if we do but pursue it far enough. As will be already apparent to the reader, it is a legitimate consequence from what Fichte terms the practical side of his " Theory of Knowledge." He theie showed us the Ego erecting a world over against itself for no other purpose than to realise its power in the subjugation of that world. That the individual should determine his actions for the mere sake of determining them, is the necessary coioUary from this. Fichte has the merit of being the only thinker who has grasped the ground axiom of the morality which has been current among men for ages, and has logically carried it out. He proceeds to develop his doctrine resjDCcting the moral tendency as causal factor in the events of the world, distinguishing between the sensuous impulse, or impulse to happiness, and the moral impuls^e. The moral impulse leads to a satisfaction, a happiness, v/hich could never be obtained were it the object immediately sought after. Ethical theory frees men from the worship of this idol, happiness, and proclaims the end of all action to be the reallocation of the Ego as Idea, viz. the " moral order of the world," to which Fichte applies the teim " God." This is the basis of reli- gion as understood by Fichte, which is identified with the moral impulse in its highest form. Its object, as idea, can of course never be realised in empirical consciousness ; the relation of human life to this Idea nmst ever remain like that of the asymptote to the hyperbole, a continuous approximation, a becominuj which never becomes, which is never finished. Jfichte polemicises ngainst the conception of God as existing object. Those who conceive the Also- Epoch II.] FICHTE. 273 lute as being have really emptied the coiKjeptidn of its content. It is oBvious from the main principle of Ficlite's philosophy that the Absolute must not be considered as an existence over against ourselves. We must rather, in our own peisonality, be it and live it. The conception of the Deity as substance or personality, in however vague or refined a form, Fichte stigmatizes as the last remnant of Taganism from which it is the function of " Theory of Knowledge " to deliver men ; any question as to an author of the " moial order of the world," is to Fichte just as inadmissible as the question as to the cause of the Deity would be to the ordinary Theist. Existence is a sensuous conception which has no locus standi in these matters. \V ith the Ego as Idea, as " the moral order of the world," the system of Fichte reaches its final conclusion. It is not uncommon to divide the Fichtean doctrine into two periods ; the later developments of the syNtem, however, show no essential points of diiference. The terminology employed is sometimes more carefully chosen wdth a view of accommodation to the Theological faculty which had procured his expulsion from the university of Jena, but that is practically all. With Fichte, as with Kant, Ethics is conceived ab- stractly. In this respect the systems of both thinkers may be alike regarded m the light of attempts to reconstitute the Christian and introspective Ethics, threatened by the collapse of the dogmatic system of which they form part, on a more secure basis. In many post-Kantian thinkers, but notably m Fichte, we find this deification of morality as such, this assumption of morality as an end in itself, nay, as the telos of all. A great deal of the enthusiasm called forth by Kant may oe referred to the belief that he had rehabilitated the old theological morality against the mere negations of the revolutionary writers and effectually rendered it independent of any theological basis. This hope, as might oe imagined, proved but short-lived. The impossibility of a Christian Ethic apart from a Christian Theology has been con- spicuously illustrated in the collapse of the Kantian and pobt-Kantian schools, a collapse almost wholly trace- able to their staking their existence upon the achievement T 274 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch U. of tins impossible feat. The fallacy running throughout them may be found in the hypostasis of the mere abstract form of the moral consciousness, viz. freedom. The effect of this galvanised introspective ethics was in the long run decidedly chilling. Well might Maria von Herbert com- plain to Kant that when put seriously to the test, his *' categorical imperative" availed her nothing. It was no abstract "imperative" or "freedom," with a personified " sum-total of all reality," or an impersonified" moral order of the world " as its goal that inspired a St. Bernard, a St. Francis, or a Thomas-a-Kempis. The ethics of inward- ness was in them a living reality, because it grew out of a speculative belief which to them was a living reality also. The distinction between the introspective ethics of the old Christian theology and that of Kant and the post-Kantian s, is as the distinction between life and electricity, between nature and art. The sooner it is recognised that the " ethics of inwardness " is a part of a whole, that it cannot live separately from a particular conception of the world, and of man's relation to the world, . in other words, from a religion of the supernatural or spiritual as such, the better for consistent thought. The non-recog- nition of this is only an instance, albeit a serious one, of the common fallacy of regarding as fundamental in human nature what is merely the characteristic of a special epoch of historic evolution. In the earlier periods of history, — not to speak of the vast pre-historic era — the individual, as such, did not exist, morally speaking, so completely was he ab- sorbed in the social wh(jle — in the gens, the tribe, the *'city." Morality was then purely outward; men sac- rificed themselves for the community as a matter of course ; in active devotion to the community consisted all religion and all duty. The decay of the old social and race ideals was synchronous with the rise of another religion and morality, that of the individual as such. This was the religion and morality taught by the so-called " ethical religions " of the world, and which reached its ultimate expression in Christianity. It formed part of a new conception of the universe, in which the old standing-ground was radically changed, by the intro- Epoch II.] FICHTE. 275 duction of the notion of the spiritual over against the natural. Religion and morality, from being social and natural, became individual and supernatural ; the test of the value of the individual was no longer to be found in his relation to the community existing without him, but in his relation to the divinity revealed within him. The spiritual or the supernatural abhors the natural as mnch as the " nature " of our grandfathers abhorred a vacuum, and hence the essence of the ethics of " inwardness " has alwavs consisted in the negation of the " natural man," in other words, in self-renunciation for its own sake — in asceticism. It is this ethics of " inwardness " which Kant and the post-Kantian s thought to rehabilitate apart from the supernatural theology, with which it is both logi- cally and historically connected. The most pronounced representative of this ill-fated attempt w^as Fichte. The author of the WissenscJiaftslelire proclaimed in all its baldness the doctrine that the negation of the phenomenal individual is the final end of all morality. His desire to assert the ethics of inwardness blinded Fichte to the crudely abstract nature of the doctrine he proponiided. As the outcome of supernatural religion, with its mystical relation of ttie individual to the divinity, it is real enonuh. The necessity of connecting it with something corresponding to the old " spiritual '' ground was vaguely felt by Fichte, as it had been felt by Kant, and is expressed in his con- ception of the " moral order of the world " as idea ; but the support was too weak to hold it. All morality of course involves a j^f^ssible sacrifice of the individual in the interest of something " not himself" as individual. The fallacy of the introspective ethics when proposed as a rational basis for conduct consists in treating this purely abstract element — this negative moment — of the moral consciousness as though it com- prised the whole concrete synthesis of that consciousness. Ethics, concretely viewed, does not, as the doctrine of inwardness " assumes, either begin or end with the lindividual per se, be it as regards affirmation or negation. Its reference to the individual as such is purely secondary and incidental. The Fichtean negation of the natural impulses of the T 2 276 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch n. individual is therefore utterly barren and objectless, since such negation only acquires meaning when directed to a definite social end.* The bare form of the mural consciousness, freedom, the glories of which Kant and his successors trumpet so loudly, is a mere abracadabra apart from a positive content? and such a positive content, if not furnished it by the arbitrary mandates of a supernatural being, revealing himself directly to the individual, must be sujiplied by the needs of the social whole into which the individual enters. The determination given to this '• freedom," or which is the same thing otherwise expressed, to this possibility of subordinating directly personal in- terests to those which may be termed impersonal (i.e. as to w^hat natural impulses shall be suppret^sed, and what not suppressed) is conditioned entirely by the forms of the social environment. Any ethic which leaves this out of account, whether it be based on the " categorical imperative," the idea of the *' moral woi Id-order," or what not, remains abstract and dogmatic, which is as much as to say, it belongs to the past and not to the future. As a matter of fact neither Kant, Fichte, nor their successors really rested satisfied wdth the abstractions they professed to glorify ; they read into their categories, and necessarily so, the current morality. The result was to close up their avenue of vision to a true view of the subject, by making them postulate the morality of the age as absolute. It will ])robably have been evident to the reader, apart from all this, that there is a distinct line of cleavage * In Ethics, if anywhere, we have presented the category of " reci- procity," or mutual determination, rather than that of " causaUty," or one-sided determination. In the individual resides the " moral tendency," the potentiality to the pursuance of impersonal aims. This is only actualised, only receives a determination when the individual is regarded as entering into the constitution of Society. Here the negation of individual interest is realised as affirmation of social inteiest. For Fichte and his school {vide supra) society exists only as food (so to speak) for individual '■ freedom '" (i.e. for the moral impulses of the individual), which is its only 7-aison d'etre. This monstrous hypos- tasis is, we are well aware, the basis of tlie current morality, but it is as fallacious a " subreption " as any which Kant gibbets in his " para- logisms." An act of self-resti aint apart from a definite social end is as barren ethically as a proposition respecting " pure being' ia speculatively Erocn II.] FICIITE. 277 between the speculafive and practical sides of " theory of knowledge" as conceived by Fichte, which he vainly endeavours to conceal. The fundamental opposition between the moral and the natural, by which it is the function of the Ego, as practical activity, to abolish that which the Ego, as theoretical activity, had called into being, can hardly fail, we think, to strike the average student as a result somewhat arbitrarily imposed upon a doctrine which begins by annulling the absohiteness of the dis- tinction between the Ego and the non-Ego, upon which the old dualism rested, and affirming their ultimate unity. One would have imagined such a doctrine should rather have led, as its practical issue, to a " rehabilitation of the body " to a declaration of the unity of man and nature, which it has shown to be, after all, a part of the ultimate essence — a crucial moment in the realisation of con- sciousness — rather than to an Ethic of asceticism and self-negation. The negation of natuie would then mean merely the negation of its antagonism to man, not the absolute negation for which Fichte contended.* The Wissenschaftslehre, as might be expected, found oppositicm not only from the representatives of pre-Kantian views, whose influence and numbers by this time had considerably diminished, but also from the Kantians and semi-Kantians, who were by no means disposed to recognise Fichte for what he himself claimed to be, the representa- tive of the logical development and perfecting of the critical system. Not to mention the disciples of Kant, who all took up the quarrel, the master himself disclaimed all connection or sympathy with Fichte in the most emphatic manner. Jacobi and his school also joined in the onslaught. The Wissenschaftslehre thus found itself simul- taneously attacked by Kantians, pre-Kantians, and religious illuminists. In addition to these, there were of course the popular writers, who, in spite of protestations and expla- * For an interesting account of the life and philosophy of Fichte, the student is referred to Professor Adamson's ' Fichte,' in Blackwood' :< series. This Uttle volume also contains one of the clearest condensed statements in popular English of the *' speculative " principle and method, that we have seen. 278 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. nations, persisted in treating the absolute Ego of Fichte as though it referred to the individual Ego, and who amused themselves and their readers by affirming that " Professor Fichte regarded himself as the Creator of the world." But notwithstanding the opposition raised against him, Fichte succeeded in gathering together a small but enthusiastic circle of disciples. Foremost among these was the thinker with whom we shall next have to deal. SCHELLING. Frederick Wilhelm Joseph Schelling was born January 27, 1775, at Leonburg in Wiirtemburg. In his sixteenth year he entered the Theological Seminary at Tubingen, where, in addition to theology, he occupied himself with philosophical and philological studies. Some years later lie went to Leipzig, where he devoted himself chiefly to Mathematics and Natural Science. In 1798, he taught, together with Fichte, at Jena; in 1803 he was called to the chair of philosophy at Wiirzburg. He became subsequently secretary to the Academy of Sciences at Munich, after which he lectured at Erlangen for some years. The last official position he held was in the university' of Berlin, but this he gave up some years before his death, which took place in Switzerland, August 20, 1854. Schelling's works, which occupy 14 volumes, were published in a complete edition, between 1856 and 1860. System of Identity. Schelling's Philosophy, or " The System of Identity," as he termed it, exhil)its some not inconsiderable variations in its earlier and later form. As already intimated, Schelling was originally a follower of Fichte. His fundamental divergence from the WissenscJiaftslehre consit^ted in an accentuation of the indifference of the basal principle of knowledge as regards the distinctions of subjective and objective, real and ideal, mind and nature. These and all minor distinctions are implicitly contained, and yet resolved, in the original identity, the Absolute. The Idealism of Fichte, Schelling found to be too sub- Epoch II.] SCHELLING. 279 jective. AYe have already seen that Fichte started with the Ego as the primordial activity', which all knowledge presupposed, to end with the Ego as Idea, which all morality presupposed. The Fichtean system is thus to some extent open to the criticism Fichte had himself made as regards the " Critical Philosophy," namely, tliat it did not form, so to speak, a complete circle. The fault is, according to Schelling, that it was one-sided; that although it might lay claim to the title of " Ideal- Realism," it could not be called at the same time " Real-Idealism." Knowledge consisting of an agreement of an objective with a subjective, the problem of Philosophy or " Theory of Knowledge," is, according to Schelling, to determine how the object, the sum-total of which we call nature, can enter into consciousness, and also how the subjective, or rather the sum -total of its determinations, mind, or intelligence, can become object as part of nature. " The sum of all that is purely objective in our knowledge we may call Nature, while the sum of all that is subjective may be designated the Ego, or Intelligence. These two concepts are mutually opposed. Intelligence is originally conceived as that which solely represents Nature, as that which is merely capable of representation ; the former as the conscious ; the latter as the unconscious. There is, more- over, necessary to all knowledge, a mutual agreement of the two — the conscious, and the unconscious per se. The problem is to explain this agreement." Philosophy thus necessarily falls into two main divisions, " Nature- Philosophy," which deals with the problem, so to speak, of the subjectivisation of the object and " Transcen- dental Philosophy," which treats of the objectivisation of the subject. " Transcendental Philosophy," in Schel- ling's seuse, regards Nature as the visible organism of the Understanding, while " Nature-Philosophy " has to explain the Understanding, as a product of Nature. In order to account for the progress of Nature from the inorganic to the organic and psychic, Schelling has recourse to the time-honoured theory of a woiid- fashioning principle or world-soul. " The necessary tendency of all natural science," says Schelling, " is to proceed from Nature to Intelligence, this and nothing else 280 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [ErocH II. lies at the basis of the endeavour to reduce natural phenomena to tiieory. The completed theory of nature would be one which resolved the whole of nature into intelligence. The dead and unconscious products of nature are only the unsuccessful attempts of nature to become conscious of itself. Dead nature is only unripe intelli- gence, hence its phenomena, notwithstanding that they are unconscious, reveal a character of intelligence. The final goal of becoming completely object to irself is attained by nature in its highest and final reflection, which is nothing other than man, or, expressed more generally, than what we term Eeason. It is here that natuie first returns completely in upon itself, whereby it is evident that nature is originally identical with that which is in us recognised as conscious and intelligent." Transcendental Philosophy has for its prol>lem to deduce the necessity of our assumption that things exist outside of us. It is not within everyone's power to do this, but it requires a special faculty, that of " internal intuition." The philosopher seizes the act of self-consciousness in the moment of its becoming. In this of course Schelling is in agreement with Fichte. Inasmuch as iu the free act of the Ego, no other being is posited but itself, it has to make an arbitrary act its object. The task of Transcen- dental Philosophy on its theoretical side is from this act to deduce the necessity present in objective experience. " The one fundamental prejudice to which all others ar& reducible, is this : that there are things outside of us ; an opinion which, while it rests neither on proofs nor on conclusions (lor there is not a single irrefragable proof of it), and yet cannot be uprooted by any opposite proof (naturam furcd ex^eUas, taraen usque 7'edihit), lays claim to immediate certainty ; whereas, inasmuch as it refers to something quite different from us — yea, opposed to us— and of which there is no evidence how it can come into immediate consciousness, it must be regarded as nothing more than a prejudice — a natural and oiiginal one, to be sure, but nevertheless a prejudice. The contradiction lying in the fact that a conclusion which in its nature cannot be immediately certain, is, nevertheless, blindly and without grounds, accepted as Buch, cannot be solved by Evor:u II.] SCHELLING. 281 transcendental philosophy, except on the assnmption that this couclnsion is implicit]}', and in a manner hiiheito not manifest, not founded upon, but identical, and one and the same with an affirmation which is immediately certain ; and to demonstrate this identity will really be the task of transcen dental philosophy." Schelling divides the process of the production of the Keal into three stages; the first extending from original blind feeling to productive intuition. Feeling, as given limitation, has its ground in a previous activity which cannot fall within consciousness, inasmuch as its result, passive limitation of feeling, is the primordial stage of consciousness. The progress from this stage to the following one consists, according to Schelling, in the out- going of the infinite activity beyond its previous point of determination ; what it then was /or us it now is for itself. At this point Schelling seeks to show why the perceived or intuited feeling must appear spacially in three dimen- f^ions, in other words, as matter. Then begins the second period, from p-oductive intuition to reflection. Here again, the course of the deduction consists in showing how the intuition comes to be for itself what it was previously for the act of contemplation. This period contains the whole multiplicity of the objective world as the con- sciousless pioduction of the Ego, besides the deduction of time and space and the categories, which latter, however, are much reduced by Schelling, the categories of relation being indicated as the ground of all the rest. 1 he category of Eeciprocity phenomenalised in time and space is expressed in Organisation. The interconnection of the parts of an organism is not a case of cause and effect, but of action and reaction. The universe viewed under the category of reciprocity may thus be regarded as an organic whole. In this also is given the ground of individuation in the subject, the explanation why the Ego hitherto limited merely by the object in general, passes into a second limitation by which it is compelled to intuite the universe from certain limited points of view, each one of which stands in the relation of accident to the sum of things. The third epoch embraces a third limitation, which is the foundation of Will. It is clear that the 282 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II question wliy I regard a portion of tlie -universe as specially belonging to myself, as my organism, is intimately connected with the question, how I come to regard the remainder of the universe as altogether independent of myself? Schelling's answer to this is that it takes place through an act of will. The transition from the theoretical to the practical sides of Schelling's philosophy are thus effected in a manner precisely analogous to that of Fichte. There is little indeed in Schelling's transcendental deduc- tion which shows any essential variation on the correspon- ding division of the Wissenschaftslehre. The gist of the deduction is well given by Schelling himself when he says, " As natural science produces idealism out of realism, by mentalising the laws of Nature into the laws of intelli- gence, t)r superinducing the formal upon the material, so transcendental philosophy produces realism out of idealism, by materialising the laws of nature, or introducing the material into the formal." In his practical philosophy Schelling is still mainly at one with Fichte. What Fichte calls the deduction of the opposition (Anstoss) constitutes the starting-point. The act of wdll has to be explained, the inherent contradiction between freedom and necessity which must be conceived as united in it has to be resolved. The category of reciprocity effects this, inasmuch as it is shown that this is brought about by the action of intelligences outside the individual Ego. The co-operation of many intelligences produces a world common to all. Through the inter- action of individual intelligences arises the limitation of individuality. The world common to all is the arena of our conscious action, the sphere within which we know ourselves as causal agents. This turns ujDon the fact (and here Schelling's substantial agreement with Schopenhauer comes into view) that what we call action is only a modified form of perception, since perception itself is ultimately nothing but unconscious action. For this reason, i.e. because they are ultimately identical, Nature and Freedom can never really conflict. How at once the objective world conforms itself to ideas in us, and ideas in us conform themselves to the objective world, it is impossible to conceive, unless there exists between the Epoch II.] SCHELLIXG. 283 two worlds (the ideal and the real) a pre-established harmony. But this pre-established harmony itself is not conceivable, unless the activity, whereby the objective world is produced, be originally identical with that which displays itself in volition, and vice versa. "Now it is undoubtedly a (productive) activity that displays itself in volition; all free action is productive and productive only with consciousness. If, then, we suppose, since the two activities are one only in their principle, that the same activity which is productive loith consciousness in free action, is productive without conscious- ness in the production of the world, this pre-established harmony is a reality, and the contradiction is solved.'' Freedom can never transcend the laws of Nature, and the fact that impulse falls within the sphere of Nature, does not aifect its intrinsic character. (This, be it observed, is nothing but Kant's phenomenal necessity united with noumenal freedom otherwise put.) Schelling proceeds to build up on the basis of the above a social, political, and historical theory, which, in spite of occasional suggestive- ness, shows no real advance upon Fichte. The main difference between Schelling and the author of the Wissenschaftslehre appears conspicuously in the " Philosophy of Art," and here again we find a striking correspondence with Schopenhauer. The fundamental distinction between nature and art is that between con- scious and unconscious production. Nature has the appearance of design without being consciously formed according to design. The Ego is /or itself smd in itself, at one and the same time conscious and unconscious, in the art-perception. In art, which is the product, so to speak, of an inspiration which is itself unconscious, consciously exercised, is realised that Ideal which practice or morality is ever striving to attain but never reaches. Art is the resolution of an infinite contradiction ; beauty is the incomprehensible miracle by which the ideal is materialised and the material is idealised, by which Nature is pre- sented as the infinite possibility of freedom, and freedom as the definite reality of Nature. The aesthetic faculty occupies the same pre-eminent position with Schelling that the moral impulse or 284 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. conscience does with Fichte. Artistic perception is the objectivised transcendental. Art and philosophy have it in common that their subject-matter is a reality, but an idealised reality. The production of the artist and of the philosopher is alike a reproduction of the world which is in himself. The eesthetic or artistic consciousness forms therefore the conclusion of the system. Its commence- ment is intellectual intuititm, its close is artistic intuition. Intellectual intuition, inasmuch as it does not fall directly within empirical consciousness, can only be appreciated by the philosopher who can distinguish ir, and hence philo- sophy, as philosophy, will never be available for everybody. The aesthetic intuition, on the contrary, is merely the highest and most complete phase of empirical consciousness, and therefore art is available for all, potentially, if not actually. As Philosophy and Poetry were in the infancy of mankind united in Mythology, so its maturity wdll produce a new mythologj', which wall present in idealised form, not the history of any individual hero, but of the whole human race. The departure of Schelling from Fichte is crucially shown in his constituting " Philosophy of Nature," co- ordinate with *' Transcendental Philosophy." In this, ob- viously, " Transcendental Philosophy " is conceived as a science purel}' of the subjective, to which a corresponding science of the objective is a necessary complement. The opposition between them is resolved by Sclielling's notion of the Absolute as pure " inditit'erence " or '• identity." In philosophy of Nature, Nature is regarded as productive (iiatura naturans), not as product (natura naturata). Nature is here viewed as self-limiting productivity; oa the one hand maintaining its own infiniry, while at the same time crystallising itself in limited products or phenomena. As the stream flows endlessly on, notwith- standing the continuous passage into notliingness of its individual drops, so it is wdth Nature ; it is ceaselessly creating and annihilating itself in its products. Nature may thus be viewed as a struggle between the principles of universalisation and individuation, a struggle mani- fested in a series of attempts, so to speak, to realise an equilibrium. This is called by Schelling the *' dynamic Epoch IL] SCIIELLING. 285 process " of Nature, and is worked out by him in the form of an emanation- theory. Schelling, as we have already seen, defines the Absolute Reason as the complete indifference between object and subject. This conception is attained by distinguishing^ between the act of thinking and the thought. This absolute identity is the true in-it>self-ness of things, and to know "things in themselves," is to know them as they are in the Absolute Reason. The " absolute identity " of Schelling is, in spite of Schelling's protestations to the contrary, in no way distinguishable from the absolute Ego of Fichte, all quantitative diiference, of course, falling within the region of the finite. The fundamental formula for the Absolute being A = A, that for the Relative is A = B, subject and object being combined in various proportions. In itself of course, nothing is relative. Were we able to take in the universe in an " infinite glance," we should discover perfect quantitative equilibrium between isubjective and objective ; it is only in individual things that proportionate differences between these two elements occur. There is nothing outNide the whole ; the notion of anything existing apart from the system of things which is the manifestation of the Absolute is due TO the error of reflection which separates and individualises the inseparable and the universal. The quantitative differences existing in finite things as to the subjective or objective element they contain are termed by Schelling iwtences. The first potence is matter in which the two elements or momenta are united as gravity. Here we have the preponderance of the object ; the second is light, the preponderance of the subject ; the third is the synthesis of both— organisation — wliich, according to Schelling, is common to all matter. The con espondence of Schelling with Leibnitz is apparent when he speaks of inorganic matter as a sleeping plant and animal world. The doctrine of evoluti(m, it cannot be denied, is distinctly present in Schelling's Naturpkilosophie. Man is simply the result of the entire process of organic metamorphosis. "What we term inorganic matter, contains within itself the potentiality of life ; it represents, in its present form, the 286 MODERN PHILOSOrHY. [Epoch H. abortive product of the attempt of nature to become organic. In the ideal sphere the potences are, Knowledge, Action, and Reason. The first gives ns the " true," the subsuming of matter under form ; the second the " good," the subsuming of form under matter ; and the third, the synthesis of these — the " beautiful." The later developments of Schelling show an ever increasing tendency to go off into mere mysticism and theosophy. From 1804 onwards a strong Xeo-platonic bias is shown in all his writings. This culminated after a lengthened study of the mediseval mystics of Germany, and of Jacob Boehme, in literary productions which amount to little more than fantastic rhapsodies of a religio-poetical nature. The exposition of these need not detain us, inasmuch as they have no important bearing on the subsequent history of philosophy in Germany, such influence as they exerted being purely on mystical litterateurs, such as Schlegel, Tieck, Novalis, &c., if we except some slight impulse they may have given to mythological studies. Schelling's system as a whole can hardly be regarded as embodying auy solid advance on Fichte, although there are certain departments in which Fichte was especially lacking upon which Schelling is suggestive. This is notably the case as regards Art. Fichte, like Kant, in his apotheosis of that emptiest of all simulacra " moral freedom," entirely ignores the Art-consciousness. In Schelling's Philosophy of Art, though there is much that is artificial and of no speculative value, there are also some luminous thoughts of which Hegel and later writers on Esthetics have availed themselves. As regards method, Schelling is distinctly retrograde, if indeed he can be said to have any method at all. His system is, moreover, based upon the purely psychological distinction of subject and object, the importance of which Fichte had to some extent gauged at its true value. Schelling assumes the distinction as ultimate, and then endeavoui*s to transcend it by a mere phrase. Well might Hegel complain that Schelling's Absolute appears in his system " as though it had been shot out of a pistol." The l^ter writings of Schelling show him to have been essentially Epoch II.] SCHELLING. 287 rather what the Germans called a sclwngeist — the cultured man of letters with a religio-a3sthetic cast of mind — than the philosopher pure and simple. The " System of Identity " succeeded in obtaining a following, not only in the philosophical world, but, as was to be expected, amongst purely literary men. It was eminently congenial to the spirit of the romantic school, then in the height of its renown. That it should have attracted men of science, may seem somewhat surprising, yet so it was. The naturalist, Oken, the botanist. Von Esenbeck, the physiologist, Buidach, among others may be mentioned as disciples of Schelling. Among the philosophical adherents and expanders of the system may be named, G. M. Klein, J. J. Wagner the theosophist, F. Von Baader and K. C. F. Krause. The two latter, although they are sometimes regarded as the founders of independent systems, have in all essen- tials drawn from Schelling. The celebrated theologian Schleiermacher also belonged to the school of Schelling. Before entering upon an analysis of Hegel's system, which at least, so far as method is concerned, forms the culmination of the line of thought we have been consider- ing, we propose to turn aside in order to take a survey of two other schools of thought, which also have their origin in the " Critical Philosophy." Kant, as we know, makes an absolute distinction between Sensibility and Understanding. Sense is always with Kant the material principle. Understanding, the formative principle, in the synthesis of Eeality. " Esthetic " and " Analytic " are the two co-ordinate pillars on which the structure of the Critical Philosophy rests. The Sense-element in Know- ledge is as incapable of reduction to terms of the Under- standing as the Intelligible-element is to terms of Sense. Fichte, in his deduction of experieoce from the one funda- mental principle of Egoition, took his stand on Kant's formal element, the Understanding, the starting-point of his isystem, being discoverable in the deduction of the cate- gories from the original " unity of apperception." Fichte is, perhaps, not always quite consistent, since he sometimes, 288 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch n. especially in his later writings, seems to identify his primordial activity with a mere alogical impulse ; but nevertheless his sheet-anchor is, as he repeatedly insists, self-consciousness — the formal unity, the "I think" — of Kant. Fichte, in other words, starts with a formal principle ; with him /or-itself-ness is practically ultimate, and includes m-itself-ness ; concrete reality is thus dedu- cible from the formal activity of thouiiht alone, the " I '* is confounded or identified with the " think." It is not proposed to pursue the subject further now, inasmuch as we shall have to recur to it again in treating of Hegel, in whom we find the principle fully and con- sistently carried out. We shall then endeavour to show its inevitable effect, as it appears to us, in the working out of the speculative method. Our only object in mentioning it here is to point out the position occupied by the line of thought, of which Schopenhauer and Herbart represent the two opposite poles, and which is based on the Transcen- dental ^Esthetic. With these schools, the Alogical, whether as impulse (will) or feeling, constitutes the prius of ex- perience. Schopenhauer analyses experience into the momenta of an impersonal all-determining Will; Herbart into discrete self-centered units of feeling. For the one, Eeality is a continuous whole ; for the other, a congeries, so to speak, of separate points ; the basis of the one is Monistic, that of the other Pluralistic. Both these schools alike reject the sj^eculative method, as is only natural, considering that they found on the "Esthetic" side of the " critical philosophy." The idea which is confusedly present in Schelling's system is distinctly formulated by Schopenhauer. Schelling sought for a principle other than thought, and imagined he had found it in the phrase " Absolute Identity," or " Indifference." Schopenhauer asserted that the principle other than thought — the matter of which thought was the form — was Will undetermined by any specific content. Schellinoj seems to have a confused consciousness of what is lacking in Fichte when he charges him with subjectivism, a defect he evidently thinks his principle of " indiffei eiice " supplies. Schelling's grasp of the speculative method was, however, so weak, especially in the later \^ritings, that he has little importance in this connyciiun. Epoch II.] SCHOPENHAUER. 289 SCHOPENHAUER. Arthur Schopenhauer, the founder of Modern ressiniism, was born 22nd February, 1788, at Dantzig. His father, a successful merchant in the old Hanseatio town, was a great traveller for those dsijs, besides being a man of considerable culture. The wandering life of his youth was doubtless not without its influence in the formation of young Schopenhauer's character. He resided for some time both in France and England, the pietism of the latter country proving particularly obnoxious to him. Early in 1805 Schopenhauer entered a merchant's office, where he remained, much against his inclinations, for twelve months ; after which, his father ha^^ng died in the meantime in consequence of an accident, he entered the university of Gotha, with the intention of devoting himself to literature. He subsequently left Gotha for Weimar, then at the zenith of its literary splendour, his own mother, Johanna Schopenhauer, the novelist, being a j^rominent figure there. In 1807 he repaired to Gottingen, where he matriculated in the medical faculty. Alter some further travelling, in the course of which he visited Italy, he finally settled down at Frankfort-on-the-Maine, where he remained, with but little intermission, until his death on September 21st, 1860, and where most of his works were written. Schopenhauer, though not so voluminous a writer as Fichte or Schelling, possesses a literary charm, wanting in all other German philosophers. He was an ardent student of those remarkable products of Oriental thought, the Upanischads, and it is to these, conjoined with Kant, that his conception of a systematic Pessimism must be immediately traced. Schopenhauer's chief work is his ' World as Will and Presentation.' He is also the author of a treatise, ' On the fourfold Eoot of the principle of adequate cause ' (his first work), of two charming volumes of miscellaneous essays to which he gave the name of * Parerga and Paralipomena,' of a treatise on ' Will in Nature,' and other less important pieces. u 290 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. Philosophy of Schopenhauer. In his earliest work, ' The Fourfold Eoot,' Schopen- hauer takes his stand on Kant's reduction of space and time to subjective forms. He, however, blames Kant for having assumed twelve categories where one only, that of Causality, is necessary. He also criticises Kant's sepa- ration of perception from thought, since space and time themselves are but one of the four forms of the principle of causation which is as much sensuous as intellectual. The four forms of the principle of causality, in question, are termed by Schopenhauer respectively the ratio essencU, Jiendi, agendi, et cognoscendi. The two first forms are constructive of the object itself. The ratio essendi is nothing other than the space and time form of the inner and outer sense— succession and co-existence. The ratio fieiidi is the relation of things as cause and effect, properly so called. By this relation, causality con- stitutes the object in time and space, real. Through causality alone can it become object; hence the notion of an object apart from the relation implied in causality (e.g. a first-cause) is a contradiction in terms. The three chief phases of cause-and-effect are mechanical impact (inorganic), irritability or reflex action (organic), and motive (psychic). Every change of state pre-supposes a prior state; hence the absurdity of the assumptions of Theism. Matter is the only reality, inasmuch as a timed, spaced, and caused object, must necessarily be material. The ratio jiendi of Schopenhauer, unlike Kant's category of cause and effect, is not, as it were, thought into the object by the understanding ; the causal relations proper, of the latter, are as much intuited as its time and space relations. The third principle, the ratio cognoscendi, is not, like the two former, constructive of the object, i.e. not creative ; it is the faculty of discursive thought, which by Kant, Fichte, Schelling, and their school, has been falsely, under the name of the " Eeason," given a pre-eminence over those principles which go to the construction of the real. The ratio cognoscendi is, in short, merely the faculty of forming abstract conceptions. The fourth form of the principle of Epoch II.] SCHOPENHAUER. 291 Cause, the ratio agendi, shows us the principle as deter- mined from within, but none the less 7?s presents the Ego in percep- tion as a complete unity. Furthermore, it is a contradiction, since the knowledge of the knowing subject seems to demand in its turn a knowledge of this knowledge, and so on to infinity ; again, there is a formal contiadiction also involved in the identit}^ of the Ego as object with the Ego Erocn II.] HERBART. 307 as subject ; this seeming identity remains therefore to he explained. The sonl, in common with everything real (in Ilerbart's sense), is an absolutely simple and indestructible entity, and hence cannot be the substratum of a plurality of faculties. Its quality is like that of every other entity, unknown, although, as above observed, it is the only entitj^ of which we can know immediately the internal processes, namely tho^o disturbances and resistances or " acts of self-preservation," which give rise to sense- presentation. A thorough investigation of the nature of the soul necessarily begins with the primitive impressions of sound, colour, &c. The fact that these are quanti- tatively distinct, and that " acts of self-preservation " since they are positive cannot destroy, but only limit one another, shows that these latter must be subject to a mathematical regularity, a regularity already acknow- ledged in one class of these reciprocal limitations, namely, the harmony of musical tones. Herbart therefore claims a mathematical treatment for the investigation. The clue to the whole subsequent exposition is contained in the sentence "every limited perception persists in the soul, as an effort to perceive." This justifies, in the opinion of Herbart, an analogy with the laws of elastic bodies, and, other things being equal, even the assumption of the validity of the same laws in Psychology. In accordance with this, a " static of the mind " is furnished in which the equilibrium of perceptions is discussed. Herbart terms the sum of limitation the quantum of per- ceiving contained in two combined presentments. That which is not limited, or converted into effort, is termed the " perceptive remnant," a mathematical calculation demon- strating that no single perception, however strong, suffices completely to displace another, to effect which it requires at least two such perceptions. The jDoint which constitutes the boundary between entity, as striving or effort, and as conscious perception, is termed the "threshold of con- sciousness." The union of perceptions of different classes, as, for instance, sound and meaning in the spoken word, Herbart terms comiolication ; the union of those of the same class, blending. In the " mechanic of the mind," Herbart considers the movement of perceptions, their X 2 308 MODEEN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. sinking and rising, memory, association, &c., in the guise of the same mathematical formulae as before. In the analytical part of his Psychology he endeavours to show how all given psychological phenomena may be explained by the formulee without recourse to the hypo- thesis of special faculties. It is scarcely necessary to say that for Herbart the distinction between the empirical and the pure Ego does not exist. For him, the mind, the psychological object, is the only fact standing in need of" explanation. Herbart, on the ground of his onto- logy, notwithstanding, protests against psychology being confounded with metaphysic or logic. All facts have a psychological side, but this by no means exhausts their whole significance. The confusion of the empirical or psychological space, which is a continuum, with the intelli- gible space, which is an interruptum, was, in Herbart's opinion, one of the greatest errors into which Kant fell. The same applies to time as to space. As to the categories, when correctly viewed they are seen to coincide with the forms of language, and a complete syst&m of them presup- poses a universal grammar. Esthetics is the science treating of that which pleases on account of its beauty apart from any ulterior reason. It has therefore to be distinguished from the desirable and the pleasant, both of which have reference to a sub- jective interest; after this, the problem, here as in every other department, is to resolve the beautiful as given, into its simplest elements. Such an analysis will show us that these elements consist not of entities but of relations; the problem therefore becomes, to exhibit the simplest relations which can call forth a disinterested sense of pleasure. This has, as yet, only been done in one of the arts, namely, Music. What the theory of harmony and thorough-bass does for Music, remains a desideratum as regards the other Arts. Ethics itself may be regarded as a branch of J^sthetics. In Ethics we have to exhibit the simplest relations of will, or combinations of motives which produce the sense of moral beauty. To ask why such motives please and their contraries displease, is as absurd as to ask why one chord is agreeable to the ear and another not ? That these re- ErocH IL] HERBAKT. 309 lations, which may be termed sample-conceptions, or Ideas, are unconditionally valid, Kant felt, and he is much to be blamed for having mixed them up with metaphysical notions, such as power and he'mg, with which they have no connection. Hevbart is especially severe on Kant's *' Transcendental Freedom," an assumption on which neither punishment nor education can be explained, since they both presuppose actions to be the necessary results of character. Duties may be divided into such as concern oneself, such as concein society, and finally such as concern the future of both the individual and society. There are two points in which the theoretical and practical sides of philosophy meet, and the consideration of which pre-supposes a knowledge of both departments. The combination of " practical philosophy " and " philo- sophy of nature," furnishes the "theory of religion;" their combination with Psychology the " theory of pedagogic." The former Herbart did not systematically work out, and his utterances respecting it are conveyed in a somewhat detached form. Pedagogic, or the theory of Education, is his great subject outside philosophy proper. Its end is of course the moulding of the moral character. Freewill and Fatrilist theories are alike to be rejected. The practical ideas and the psychological certainty of the action and reaction of particular per- ceptions are a true guide for the teacher. Eegulation and teaching should be combined. The object of both is training, i.e. to give strength to the nioral character and to enable the pupil in the end to undertake his own education. Herbart sees in Politics merely an extended Pedagogic. Political forms are for him of little account. His sheet- anchor is the individual character. Though it is not to be denied that there are suggestive passages and some clever and just criticisms in Herbart's writings, jQi as a system his philosophy may not unfairly be described as a grotesque abortion. Its mathematical dress has alone saved it from oblivion. An adept mathe- matician can always present an idea in a shape to command the attention of the learned world irrespective of its intrinsic value. The attraction a mathematic mode of treatment possesses for the modern " cultured ' 310 MODEEN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. mind is irresistible, and operates quite independently of any consideration as to the susceptibility of the given subject-matter to such a treatment. To wrap a theory up skilfully in mathematical formula3, though in itself it may be the baldest nonsense, is the surest passport in the jDresent day to acquiring the reputation of a "serious thinker." Herbart is in this happy position. Although he commits all the errors against which Kant's ' Critique ' was directed, although he is essentially a pre-Kantian in his construction, yet the magical charm of his mathematics has sufficed to give him a place in the history of specula- tive thought he certainly would not otherwise possess. Herbart left behind him a school to which the editor of his completed works, Harten stein (also the editor of the well-known edition of Kant's works bearing his name), belonged. HEGEL. Georg WiLHELii Feiedeich Hegel was born at Stuttgart, August 27th, 1770. His father was an officer in the tiscal service ; his mother, whom he lost in his thirteenth year, seems to have been a woman of some little education, and of more than ordinary intelligence. He studied 'at the University of Tubingen, both in the philosophical and theological faculties. As a student he was the author of one or two essays on philosophical subjects, and he also publicly defended two dissertations. His private reading during this period, of the works of Kant, Jacobi, and other philosophers, in addition to those of Herder, Lessing and Schiller, seems to have powerfully influenced him. Besides this, he carried on at the same time A^dth much enthusiasm his studies in Greek literature and history. Like Fichte and Herbart, on leaving the university he took a position as private tutor, and to make the parallel more complete, in Switzerland (at Berne). U'his did not hinder his own studies, which he zealously followed up, engaging at the same time in a correspondence with ErocH n.] HEGEL. 311 Schelling who was still studying at Tiibingen. Curiously enough, his first important work Avas a " Life of Jesus," which was based on the distinction already insisted upon by Lessing, between the doctrines of the founder of Chris- tianity and the dogmas of the Church. The influence of the Auf Mar ling was, however, strong in Hegel at this time, the special form it took being that of Hellenism. In 1797 he entered upon a similar position to that whioh he had held at Berne, at Frankfort-on- the -Maine ; but Hegel was irre- sistibly drawn to Jena, the philosophical metropolis, whither he repaired in Januarj^ 1801. It was here that his thoughts began to assume a systematic form, though he deemed himself at this time, in the main, a follower of his younger contemporary Schelling, with whom he subse- quently worked in common, for the spread of the " System of Identity," on the Krittsche Journal der Philosophies to which he contributed most of the articles. The difterences between the two thinkers soon became apparent on the departure of Schelling from Jena, and with the production of Hegel's first great work, * The Phenomenology of the Mind ' (Phanomenologie des Geistes)^ in 1806, the wide divergence in their intellectual capacities became obvious. In consequence of the Napoleonic war then raging, Hegel left Jena soon after this, and became editor of the Bamberger Zeitung^ a post he subsequently threw up for the directorship of a public school at Niirn- berg. He remained here until the year 1816, and here, among other works, his great " Logic " was written. In the autumn of 1816 Hegel entered the chair of j^hilosophy at Heidelberg, just vacated by Fries. During his stay at Heidelberg he wrote his ' Encyclopedia of the Philoso- phical Sciences.' Finally, on October 22nd, 1818, Hegel became professor in Berlin. During the Berlin period, the only large work completed by him was ' The Elements of the Philosophy of Right ' (^Grundlinien der Fhilosophie des Mechts). His disciples, however, after his death, pxiblished the lectures delivered during this time on the Philosophy of History, Art, and Religion, as well as on the History of Philosophy. Hegel died at Berlin, of cholera, on the 14th of November, 1831. The life of Hegel was written by his disciple Rosen- 312 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. kranz. His complete works (including the lectures) occupy eighteen volumes. The Hegelian System. We now take up again the direct line of thought represented by Kant, Fichte, and Schelling, a line which culminates in the great thinker whose name heads this section. The system of Hegel may be best described as Panlogism. The Real or Concrete is nothing but a s;yTithesis of relations, each of which, taken by itself, and apart from the whole into which it enters, is abstract, and therefore unreal. The ultimate principle of all knowledge is of course the pure form of the unity of the consciousness, the •' Synthetic Unity of Apperception " of Kant, the " Pure Ego" of Fichte. This is the "Concept" (Begriff) oi Hegel. But the synthesis so stated, that is, by itself, is formal ; it is a unity of thought, of consciousness as such, and of nothing else but thought or consciousness. But thought or consciousness is in its nature relative. Think- ing or knowing implies a striking-out of relations, a fixing of contrasts, a limitation of a conscious state, which is in its turn nothing but the limitation of another conscious state, and so on to infinity. But the infinity is not that of an infinitely produced straight line (to employ an analogy), but rather that of the circle ; or, better still, of the spiral. The Concrete or the Eeal which is Experience-in-general, is the system of all possible momenta or determinations of knowledge, thought, or consciousness. This system, which embraces all possible oppositions and antagonisms, considered as a whole, is the Logos or Idee in its reality, the *' Concrete Idea," as Hegel terms it. Considered abstractly, the " Idea " is the formal unity spoken of above, which embraces all differences, which maintains itself in all these differences, and which is their final principle of explanation. "VVe need hardly repeat what we have already said when treating of Fichte, namely, that this unity, inasmuch as the determinations of thought all and severally presuppose it, can never become itself an object, or, which is the same thing, a determination of thought — that is to say, it can never enter the sphere of the empirical consciousness. Epoch II.] HEGEL. 313 Empiricism and Scepticism in j)hilosopliy, in undermining the distinctions of the ordinary consciousness, and of the philosophy which takes its immediate stand upon it, paves tlie "svay for the true synthetic view. Thus Scepticism shows that on the ordinary crude dualistic assumption of the absolute independence of subject and object, mind and matter, perceiver and perceived, knowledge would be im- possible. It forces us therefore to reconsider the prelimi- nary assumption which we have hitherto received as an unquestionable truth. The same with every fixed dis- tinction, great and small, im^^ortant and unimportant;, every such distinction will be found on examination, when consistently carried out, to refute itself — that is, to contain the germ of its own destruction or negation, or, as Hegel has it, its own " internal dialectic." In the word Dialectic we have the key to the whole Hegelian system. The method of Hegel is the dialectical method, and to have discovered the full significance of this method, to have struck upon the innermost dynamic prin-, ciple of the world, gives to Hegel a pre-eminence in a sense above all other thinkers. Herakleitos of Ephesus caught a glimpse of the principle when he said, " all things flow," and " there is nothing that comes into being but it forthwith ceases to be." Zeno of Elea also caught sight of it when he sought to convince the ordinary man, who could not conceive of a world based on contradiction, of the truth of Parmenides' doctrines, by placing him in the dilemma of either admitting the sense-world to be contradictory, or denying its existence altogether, not doubting but that he would accept the latter alternative. The Sophists and Sokrates saw in it respectively, the former the destruction of all certitude, and the latter, a new means for the attain- ment of truth from the very fact of its potency in under- mining the would-be certitudes of current opinion. In Plato, the principle obtained its fullest recognition in the ancient world. Plato's philosophy is essentially an exhi- bition of the dialectic immanent in all knowledge. Aris- totle, although the general bearing of his mind might be supposed to tend in a different direction, nevertheless places it in the fore-front of his system in his distinction of matter and form, and his recognition of all reality as the 314 MODERN PHILOSOPHY, [Epoch II. s^-nthesis of matter and form. In all periods, when the tWo great thinkers of antiquity have held a foremost place in the higher thought of the world — periods, for instance, Kuch as that of the decline of ancient philosophy and of scholasticism — it has never been left quite out of view however much obscured ; but from Descartes and Bacon to Kant it had practically lapsed into oblivion. In Kant's " Transcendental Analytic " and " Transcendental Dialectic,'* it again appears, though overlaid with much extraneous material. In Fichte it receives a fairly definite expres- sion ; but it was reserved for Hegel to recognise its full bearing as the principle of knowledge, and the method of philosophic investigation. Among poets, Goethe has best caught the beat of the world-rhythm when he makes the Erdgeist in Faust exclaim *' In Beiug's floods, in Action's stoi-m I walk and work, above beneath, Work and weave in endless motion! Birth and Death An infinite ocean, A seizing and giving The tire of Living: 'Tis thus at the roaring Loom of Time I ply. And weave for God the Garment thou seest Him by." Hegel claims for his system that all antitheses, all oppo- sing principles, that have ever held sway in philosophy, are therein at once recognised and transcended, that is, shown to be necessary, but incomplete, taken by them- selves. The first, condition of philosophising, as observed in connection with Plato, is to lift ourselves above the immediate — the liere, the this, and the noio of things. All intellectual life is more or less an effort to break away from immediate appearances and immediate interests. Kant has said with truth that the Ptolemaic system of Astronomy is the one naturally most intelligible to us, not because it is simpler than the Copernican system, but because, in spite of confusedness and clumsiness, it accounts for astronomical phenomena on the hypothesis of all things revolving round ourselves, viz. our Earth. The superior simplicity and order of the Copernican system did, notwithstanding, in the long run win the victory over Epoch II.] HEGEL. 315 common -sense consecrated by tradition. The anthropo- morphism and myth of primitive man is an expression of the difficulty man experiences in divesting his view of things of the influence of his immediate surroundings as he conceives them to alfect his interests. There is nothing which presupposes such a revohition in our mental life as tlie ability to view the world from the synthetic or sjieculative point of view — as a dialectical movement. All accustomed habits of thought, all the fixed distinctions in which the intellectual wealth of the average man consists, have to be ruthlessly cast into the caldron of an all-consuming Logic. Their hard outlines then begin to alter shape, and finally to lose shape entirely, as they become mixed in a seething mass where one distinc- tion blends into its 023posite, the whole acquiring for a moment a new shape only in its turn to give place to another, and yet another. " So strong," says Hegel, speak- ing of the exposition of his system, " is the sense of the opposition of true and false, that it has accustomed men to expect either agreement with, or contradiction of, some existing philosojihical system, and, in explaining such, only to see this or that." If we clarify our conceptions of truth and falsehood — that is, subject them to the purifying fire of dialectic — we shall see that they change their con- tent with our jDoint of view, that their content is not fixed, but fluid. " The bud vanishes with the appearance of the blossom, and one may say that the one is contradicted by the other; the fruit again proclaims the blossom a spurious form of the plant's existence, the truth of the one passes over to the other. These forms are not merely distinct, but crush each other out as being mutually incompatible. But their fluid nature constitutes them none the less momenta of that organic unity wherein they not alone cease to conflict, but to which one is as necessary as the other, which equal necessity makes the life of the whole." The Hegelian dialectic is based on the recognition of identity in difference, of the fact that all affirmation implies negation, all negation afiirmation. In all things there is a capacity unrealised, and a capacity realised; the first is the material moment, the second the formal 316 MODEEN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. moment. The acorn is the unrealised capacity of the oak, it is realised as oak. The realisation of the capacity of a thing is the negation of that thing as actually existent. The possibility or capacity present in the child is realised in the man, but manhood is the negation of childhood — child qua child vanishes in the man, he exists no longer, any more than though he were dead. Every step in the growth or progress of the child is a step towards the negation of childhood. Again, animal life exists only by virtue of the continuous destruction or decomposition of the tissues of which it is actually comjDOsed. Arrest this process of destruction or negation, and the animal dies. The fatal effect of many of the mineral poisons is simply due to their action in stopping the natural process of the destruction of the organic tissues, a jDrocess which is essential to animal life. Animal life presupposes organic life ; but the latter is, as Hegel would term it, the negative moment of the former — it is the means only, and not the end. The animal life can only realise or main- tain itself in and through the negation of the nega- tive moment; in other words, the continuous destruc- tion of the organic matte?- (the tissue) is essential to the reality of the animal form (the living body). This dialectic runs through all things ; it is the ultimate ex- pression of all reality, and it may be discovered by analysis on every plane of reality. Its recognition cannot fail to give us a completely new view of the world-order. Uur ultimate aim in every science will be henceforward to discover the course of its dialectic, or rather the dialectic of its subject-matter, since this is the key to its mysteries. The significance of formal logic with its laws of thought will be seen to disappear Avhen experience is viewed from this more comprehensive standpoint. So far from its being the case, as the law of contradiction asserts, that a thing cannot both be and not be, we now know that, in a sense, everything is, and at the same time is not, in so far as it expresses a determinate reality at all — omnis determinatio est negatio. Since reality, i.e. the synthesis of experience, consists alone in the union of contradictories, it necessarily follows that for experience, for consciousness, pui'e affirmation is precisely on a level with pure negation Epoch II.] HEGEL. 317 since tliey are alike unreal and meaningless. This is all Heg-el intends by the, at lirst sight, astounding proposition with which his Logic opens, that " being and non-being are the same." In his first great work, the ' Phenomenology of the Mind,' Hegel traces the natural development of the human mind from the naive consciousness of the ordinary man to the synthetic standpoint of philosophy. The * Phenomenology ' is in fact a kind of philosophical * Pilgrim's Progress.' " Inasmuch," says Hegel,, " as this exposition only has phenomenal knowledge for its subject, it does not exhibit the free movement of knowledge in its scientific form, and must rather be regarded from the present standpoint as the course the natural consciousness takes in its progress towards true knowledge, as the pathway of the soul, passing through the series of forms which its nature prescribes as so many stages of self- purification, until it attains through a complete expe- rience of itself, to a knowledge of that which it is in itself" {Phanomenologie^ Mnleitung, p. 61). The immediate form of our knowledge is the object as being or existent thing. In this we occupy a passive atti- tude, the attitude of naive sense-perception. In this first attitude of consciousness reality seems to be known in its simplest and purest form. All that knowledge here tells us is of the bare existence of the thing. The object is presented, as this thing Jiere and now. The word this itself simply means existence here and now. But what is now ? " Let us say, for instance, noio it is night. To our immediate consciousness this is a truth. We note it down as a truth. At noonday we look upon this ci-devant truth, and lo, it is a meaningless and palpable absurdity ! " The noio, notwithstanding, remains, but with a totally changed content. It proves itself to be what Hegel terms a " universal negative." The same remarks apply to the other form of the this^ namely, the here. " Here is, for instance, a tree. I turn myself round, and this truth has vanished — has , transformed itself into its opposite. Here is not a tree, but rather a house. The here does not vanish, but it is that which remains in the disappearance of the house, the tree, and so forth, and is indifferently 318; MODERN FHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. house or tree" {PTianomenologie, p. 74). "Pure being" is of the essence of this perceptive consciousness; for pure being is its immediateness as abstract form. A com- parison between the relation of knowledge to its object, as it immediately presents itself, with the same relation after it has been acted upon by reflection, shows a consi- derable difference. The universal element, which seemed to belong to the being of the object, is now^ seen to lie in our knowledge of the object. The perceptive certainty is seen to subsist not in the object, but in us. The now and here is preserved in the Ego. " What does not vanish is the I, as universal, whose seeing is neither a seeing of the tree nor the house, but a simple seeing, which is brought about b}^ the negation of this house, and so forth, which is absolutely indifferent to anything outside itself, alike to the house and the tree." Thus Hegel begins his ' Phenomenology,' by showing the contradiction of the empirical consciousness with its own prepossessions, to lead up through the discussion of the scientific con- sciousness, the Understanding — in which the abstract procedure im^^licit in "common sense," or the ordinary consciousness, becomes explicitly formulated — to the philo- sophical consciousness, the Eeason, which sees the true significance of these various standpoints as parts of an organic whole, as related elements of a synthesis. This is the ladder which, according to Hegel, the ordinary con- sciousness has a right to demand, to lead it to the absolute knowledge of itself. The task of the ' Phenomenology ' is thus to show the progress of knowledge from its lowest to its highest stage ; each stage is in its turn shown to involve a contradiction, which necessitates progress to a a higher stage. At each of these stages the immediate certitude or truth of the stage is proved to be illusory, to involve a self-deception. This is corrected in the following stage, the certitude is changed, in its turn to be subjected to the same process, until all these stages are seen to be inadequate in themselves, and to possess meaning and significance only when regarded as the necessary momenta, not of this or that particular limited "or individual consciousness, but of consciousness conceived as one abso- lute all-emb] acing totality — Absolute Geist. ErocH II.] HEGEL. 319 Hegel's dialectic, we must again repeat, is simply the perfecting, as regards its form of Fielite's dialectic. Fichto had shown that the in-itselfness of the one plane of con- sciousness, was the for-itselfness of the next plane. Hegel, however, brings out into clear relief a point on which Fichte was somewhat dubious (but Avhich Plato and Aristotle had recognised), to wit, that the negation of the opposite is not absolute, but is rather double-sided — that is, that the opposite or preceding moment is no less preserved than abolished in the succeeding moment. Hegel's aim is to show that the mind is logically compelled, on pain of its own reductio ad ahsurdum, to force its way on and on until it arrives at the standpoint of absolute knowledge. The six stages which the mind has to pass through in its progress to absolute knowledge are from consciousness to self-consciousness, thence to the scientific understanding " the law making and law-finding reason," in the words of Hegel, thence to the moral consciousness (Geist), thence to the aasthetic and religious consciousness, and thence to the consciousness of knowledge as absolute. But the world- mind, as exhibited on the plane of History, is, equally with the individual mind, under the necessity, by virtue of its constitution, of passing through the same stages. The ' Phenomenology ' shows therefore the stages that humanity has had to pass through, and which the individual must also pass through, before it can attain to absclute knowledge. Knowledge or science in the Hegelian sense consists in the re-reading of experience, in the com^reliending of experience in the fullest sense of the word. Before we leave the ' Phenomenology,' the reader may not take it amiss if we give a few extracts illustrative of the style of this, in some respects, greatest work of Hegel. Such extracts, of course, can give but a v^ry imperfect idea of the whole to which they belong, as may be readily imagined from the nature of Hegel's thought. The impossibility, moreover, of rendering many passages adequately in another language, is generally admitted. In the preface (Phdnomenologie, p. 15) Hegel observes, " The truth is the whole. But the whole is the essence which completes itself in its develojDuient. It may be said of the Absolute that it is essentially result, that not 320 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. before the end is it that which it is iu truth : and herein consists its nature, that of being Eeality, Subject, or Self- becoming. However absurd it may appear to regard the Absolute as in essence, result, a very little consideration will correct this appearance of absurdity. The beginning, the principle or the Absolute, as it is primarily and im- mediately spoken of, is only the universal. Just as little as when I say all animals^ these words can stand in the place of a Zoology, can the words Divine, Absolute, Eternal, &c., express that which is not contained in them. It is true that only such words can express the intuition in its immediate form ; but this is not all ; a word which is only a passage to a proposition contains within it an otherness of becoming which has to be retraced ; it is a mediation ( Vermittlung).^' The Absolute, although it contains within it the syn- thesis of all contradictions, considered as Absolute, of course transcends its own immanent contradictions. Absolute knowledge is the resting-point in which all contradictions are at once preserved and abolished, aufgelioben*^ in the language of Hegel. The word mediation ( Vermittlung) is used by Hegel to denote the negative moment of the Dialectical process, in its purity. This leads us to revert to the question of the concepts true and false. Hegel explains the distinction between them, as viewed from the standpoint of ordinary consciousness, and from that of the philosophical reason. After defining the false as the otherness, the negativity of the substance of the true, as an essential moment in the realisation of the true, and yet as not constituting an element of the true as such, he proceeds : " For the sake of clearness in indicating the moment of complete otherness its terminology must no longer be used where the otherness is abolished (aufgehohen). Thus the expression, the unity of subject and object, of finite and infinite, of being and thought, &c., has the in- convenience that these terms themselves connote what they are outside their unity, and therefore that in their * Hegel's word aufheben, which means both "to preserve " and " to destroy," is a survival of the unity of opposites upon which all primitive languiige is based. (See Dr. Carl Aijel's essay, Ueber den Gegensinn der Urwurte. — Leipzig, 1884.) Epoch II.] HEGEL. 321 unity they do not mean what the phrase implies ; the false, as false, is no longer a moment of truth. Dogmatism as a mode of thought in Science, and in the study of Philosophy, is nothing but the opinion that the true consists in a proposition which is a fixed result, or in that which is immediately known. To such questions, as when Caesar was born, or how many toises made a stadium, a concise answer can be given. Similarly it is definitely true that the square of the hypothenuse equals the sum of the squares of both remaining sides of the right-angled triangle. But the nature of such so-called truth is difi"erent from the nature of philosophical truth " (Phdnomenologie, pp. 30-1). A few pages farther on, after the subject of Mathe- matical truth has been dealt with, and its imperfections shown, we have the following pregnant sentences : " The phenomenon is the coming and going, which yet does not come and go, but is in itself, and whiqh constitutes the reality and movement of the life of truth. The true is a Bacchantian revel, in which there is no member that is not drunken ; but yet because each, in so far as it severs itself from the whole, is at once dissolved, this revel is none the less transparent and simple repose. In judging the movement, though individual forms of the mind do not obtain as determinate thoughts, they are, notwithstanding, just as much positive and necessary as they are negative and evanescent momenta. In the totality of the movement — in the movement conceived as rest — that in it which distinguishes itself and acquires a specific reality, as such, which recollects, preserves itself, whose reality is know- ledge of itself, is the immediate reality " (Phdnomenologie, j)p. 35-6). " In the nature of that which is," says Hegel, *' to realise its conception in its being, consists logical necessity generally. This alone is the rational, and the rhythm of the organic whole ; it is just as much knowledge of the content, as the content itself is concept and essence — in other words, it alone is sppculative. The concrete fact, as self-realising, constitutes itself simple determinateness ; it thus raises itself to logical form, and is in its nature as essence. In this movement consists its concrete reality which is at the same time logical reality. It is therefore unnecessary to affix to the concrete content a formalism 322 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch IL external thereto ; the former is itself the transition to the latter, which latter ceases, however, to be external and formal, since the form has become native to the process of the concrete content itself" {Phdnomenologie, p. 43). One more quotation before we leave the ' Phenomenology.' " Ex- perience," Hegel observes, " is simply this, that the content, that is, consciousness in itself, is substance, and therefore object of consciousness. But this substance, which is consciousness, is the process of its becoming what it is in itself; and it is only as this Becoming, reflected into itself, that it is, in truth, consciousness. In itself it is the movement which constitutes knowledge — the trans- formation of this in-itselfness into for-itselfness, the substance into the subject, the object of consciousness, into the object of self-consciousness — that is, into the object as in its turn abolished, or in other words into the concept. It is a circle returning in upon itself which presupposes its beginning, and yet only attains it as end. Thus, in so far as conscious- ness consists necessarily in this distinction within itself, itself as the perceived whole, confronts its simple self-con- sciousness, and inasmuch as it distinguishes the latter, it is distinguished in its pure perceived concept — that is, in time, and in its content, or in-itselfness. Substance has, as subject, the primary inner necessity to display itself, as what it is in itself — as consciousness. The complete objective preseij.tation is primarily its reflection, or its realisation as self" (PJidnomenologie, p. 585). We now turn to the Logic of Hegel. In the Logic we have the essential articulations, or momenta of conscious- ness presented, not in the order in which they disclose themselves to the reflective understanding, as in the * Phenomenology,' but in the necessary or Logical order of their deduction. The secret of Hegel's method, it will be by this time suflicientl}' clear to the reader, lies in the triple articulation of each stage or plane of reality. Matter or in-itselfness becomes negated as form or for-itselfness. This negation is in its turn negated ; but the negation is not ab- solute in either case, the one form is preserved or, so to speak, held in solution in the succeeding one, notwithstanding its negative character considered j:»er se. Thus, in the third term, which is the negation of the negative of the first, we Epoch II.] HEGEL. 323 have the completed moment as such. Tlegel takes care to observe, what indeed is sufficient!}' obvious, namely, that his Logic might equally well have been termed Meta- physic or Ontology, since, from the point of view of speculative thought, this distinction of departments can no longer be maintained/ The world, reality, experience, consists merely in these logical determinations ; the sum total of these determinations is the Absolute. Thus instead of being able to adequately define the Absolute by a single phrase, as Schelling thought he could, Hegel finds it im- possible to do this, save in the complete exposition of a science. Logic in Hegel's sense is this science ; it is the science of the at once all-embracing, all-determining Logos Idea, or Concept, i.e. of consciousness as absolute. The categories of which the Hegelian Logic treats, of course entirely traverse the empirical distinctions of mind and matter, subject and object, &c., since they are pre-sup- posed in these distinctions. Hegel somewhere calls them " the souls of all reality." But taken by themselves, as spread out before the reflective understanding, they are pure abstractions, and the Logic is thus none the less, as Hegel elsewhere calls it, " the realm of shades." It is necessary to effect an entrance into this realm, notwithstanding, nay, to exj^lore its inmost recesses, in order to attain the true speculative insight, for, since the problem of all science is to recognise the reason on the several planes of reality, this problem can only be solved by knowing, first of all, what' reason is ? — and, secondly, how to find it ? The Logic teaches what the Idea or the Reason is, inasmuch as it exhausts the sum of its determinations as they are pre- sented in the forms of abstract thought ; it teaches how to find the Idea or the Keason in so far as it is a doctrine of method. The Hegelian Logic falls into three main divisions : Doctrine of Being, Doctrine of Essence, and Doctrine of Concept. " The Logical has three sides," says Hegel, "the Abstract, or that of the understanding ; the Dialectical, or that of the negative reason ; and the Speculative, or that of the positive reason. These three sides do not constitute three parts of logic, but are the momenta of every logical real — that is, of every conception or truth . . . thought as Y 2 324 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. understanding cleaves to fixed determinateness, and to its distinction from every other determinateness ; such a limited abstraction counts with the understanding for an independent existence." " The dialectical moment is the special self-negation of such finite determinations and their transformation into their opposite." Just as the previous abstract or affirmative moment is the classical moment for dogmatism, the mode of thought characterised by hard and fast distinctions and one-sided theories, so the dialectical moment is the classical moment for scepticism, the mode of thought characterised by a criticism of the assumptions made by dogmatism and the common understanding, having as its uj)shot the special dogma of the illusoriness of Keality and the vanity of Knowledge. These results of course ensue, when the above momenta are isolated and considered apart from their connection in the trichotomy, or system of momenta. The term Dialectic is often employed, as was the case with the Sophists of old, to denote a mere barren art of confounding an opponent by an appearance of con- tradiction which does not really exist. In the Hegelian sense, however, Dialectic, " is the true nature of the under- standing's determination of things, and of the finite generally. It is the immanent externalising, wherein the one-sidedness and limitation of the understanding's de- terminations presents itself as what it is, namely, as their negation. It is the nature of everything finite to negate itself. Dialectic is therefore the moving soul of the knowing process, the principle, whereby alone immanent connection and necessity enters into the constitution of knowledge ; and whereby the true, as opposed to the external, trans- cendence of the finite is possible " : " The speculative or •positive-rational comj^rehends the unity of the determinations in their opposition ; the affirmative element, which is contained therein, is their dissolution and their trans- formation. Dialectic has a positive result, inasmuch as its result has a determinate content ; inasmuch, that is, as its actual issue is not empty abstract nothing but the negation of certain determinations, which are nevertheless contained in the result, since the latter is not mere nothing, but result. This rationality therefore, notwithstanding that it Epoch II.] HEGEL. 325 is conceptual and abstract, is at the same time concrete, since it is not mere formal unity, but the unity of deter- minations, which are clearly distino-uished as such. With mere abstractions philosophy has therefore nothing what- ever to do ; it is concerned only with concrete notions. In speculative Logic, the formal Logic of the understanding is contained, and can easily be separated from it ; nothing more is required for this than to eliminate the dialectical and rational element therein ; when it becomes what ordinary Logic is, namely, the summary of a variety of co- ordinated thought-determinations which, although finite, pass for something infinite." (Hegel's EncyHopddie der PhilosopMschen WissenscJiaften im Grundrisse, § 79-83.) The first division of the Logic treats of the doctrine of Being, or Consciousness in its immediateness — the concept in itself — in its various forms. These are quality, quan- tity, and measure. Quality may be variously considered as being, actuality, for-itselfness ; Quantity as pure quantity, determined quantum, and degree. Measure is the synthesis of quality and quantity ; it is " a quantum with which is combined an actuality or a quality." This leads to the consideration of the subject-matter of the second division which treats of the doctrine of Essence. Stated briefly. Essence may be defined as Being trans- lated into appearance. The primary momenta of Essence are the essence as ground of existence^ which is again deter- mined as " pure reflection " (identity, difference, and cause) " actuality " and " the thing ; " the phenomenon, which may be reduced to the " world as phenomenon," " content and form," and " relation ; " and, lastly, the unity of " re- flection " and the " phenomenon," reality which is articu- lated as " substance and accident," "cause and effect" and " reciprocity " (action and reaction). " The manifestation of the real," says Hegel, " is the real itself. This mani- festation is, therefore, essential, and is only so far essential as it is in immediate external actuality. Previously being and actuality have appeared as forms of the immediate; being is always unreflected immediateness and transi- tion . . • The real is the positing of this unity, of this relation that has become identical with itself; it is there- fore rescued from transition^ and its energy manifested 326 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. as externality ; in this it is reflected into itself ; its actu- ality is the manifestation of itself not of another." The moment of reality gathers up, so to speak, into itself all previous momenta ; it closes the circle. The highest catagory of the Keal is that of reciprocity. The category of reciprocity indeed carries us out of the sphere of Essence into that of Concept, with which the third division of the Logic is concerned. ^'he concept is the truth of Being and of Essence, and the system of its momenta constitutes the totality of all determinations of Consciousness. The forms of the con- cept Hegel terms, " the living spirit of the Eeal," the truth of the Eeal being given in and by these forms. The leading momenta of the Concept are the subjective concept, which embraces the forms of Logic, the object, which gives the cosmical notions of Mechanism, Chemistry, and Teleology, and the Idea in its totality and complete- ness, which sums up the whole of the Logic. The Idea as such may be viewed in its immediate form as life; in its reflected form, as knowledge; and in its absolute form, as unity of subject and object, or rather as the "object," to employ Hegel's language, "in which all determinations are concentrated." The Idea in this sense is absolute truth, the ultimate end of Philosophy. The absolute Idea is the ^^ pure form of the Concept which contemplates its content as itself." This content, it is scarcely necessary to say, is nothing other than the system of the momenta of Logic which we have just been con- sidering. The general form of the Idea is expressed in the Dialectical method in accordance with which the momenta are deduced, or rather which is the instrument of their deduction. It may be useful to observe, as bear- ing on the historical development from Kant to Hegel, that the first division of the Hegelian Logic, the " Doc- trine of Being," in which the mere immediateness of Eeality is discussed, corresponds, roughly sj^eaking, to Kant's "Transcendental iEsthetic;" the second division, or " Doctrine of Essence " in which the reflected forms which enter into the constitution of Eeality are dealt with, corresponds to Kant's " Transcendental Analytic ; " while the third division, or Doctrine of Concept, which Epoch II.] HEGEL. 327 treats of the categories superimposed upon tlie synthesis of the immediate Real by the Keuson, is represented in the earlier (critical) philosophy, by the Transcendental Dialectic. The general scheme of Hegel's philosophy of nature will best be understood from the following quotation : " Nature,'* says Hegel, " is to be conceived as a system of gradations, of which one necessarily proceeds from the other, and the immediate truth of which is that from which it res'-^ts ; this is not to be understood as meaning that one is naturally generated from the other, the process only taking place in the Idea, which constitutes the innermost ground of nature. The metamorphosis applies only to the Concept, as such, since change in the Concept alone constitutes development. The Concept is in its nature partly inward, partly existent as the living individual ; hence to the latter only is existent metamorphosis limited." {Encyclojpadie, § 249.) This passage, and the one which immediately follows it, in which the doctrine of evolution conceived as natural process in order of time is combated, exhibits one of the most unfortunate blunders into which Hegel could possibly have fallen. The answer of the Evolutionist, even without departing from Hegelian principles, to Hegel's diatribe is obvious. That the develoj^ment which Hegel admits to take place in the order of time in the life of the individual takes place on a larger scale in the life of the world's history, is a direct deduction from experience, as real in the one case as in the other, and no amount of arbitrary dicta, for Hegel's attitude in this matter is purely arbitrary, will deprive it of its reality. Notwithstanding this gratuitously fallacious assumption, Hegel's " Philosophy of Nature " contains some valuable insights, though, on the whole, it is the least original portion of his work, being borrowed largely from Rebel- ling. Following Schelling, Hegel divides " Philosophy of Nature " into Mechanic, Physic, and the synthesis of these. Organic. In nature the Idea or the Absolute, which the Logic has treated of in itself, is exhibited in the form of external existence, of a determinate order. Nature is the mediation ( Vermittlung') by which consciousness comes to a knowledge of itself, and may thus be regarded as zjjso facto 328 MODEKN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. the out-of-itselfness of tlie Idea or tHe Eeason. It stands in direct opposition to tlie Logic, " the reahu of shades," as the region of determinateness, pa7' excellence. Hegel allows his impatience at the fact that there are many natural phenomena not yet reduced to law to manifest itself in the frequent assertion, that nature is impotent to display rational order in everything, and that there is much in nature which we must regard as pure chance, and as destitute of any philosophical significance. His general attitude naturally leads him to be unjust to the claims of natural science and its representatives ; against Newton he is particularly bitter, though this is perhaps partly attributable to the influence of Goethe. The main momenta of mechanics are, " space and time," " matter and motion," and their synthesis " absolute mechanic," in which matter appears as a completed quantum. This leads us to the second division ; qualified matter or Physic, the chief momenta of which are the physic of " universal individuality," of " particular individuality," and of "total individuality," the final determination of the latter, the chemical process, forming the transition to the Organic sphere, the stages of which are " geological nature," " vegetable nature," and the " animal organism." With the consideration of the animal organism we are already on the threshold of the ^Dhilosophy of mind {Philosophie des Geistes), i.e. of the philosophy of Conscious- ness, no longer manifested as out-of-itself, but as returned in upon itself. Hegel closes the *' Philosophy of Nature " with some observations on the death of the individual. " His incom- patibility with the universal," says Hegel, " is his original bane and the innate germ of death. The abolition of this incompatibility is the fulfilment of his destiny. Mind presupposes nature, the truth of which it is. In this truth nature has vanished, and mind has proclaimed itself as the Idea attained to for itselfness, for- which the concept is no less object than subject. This Identity is Absolute negativity, inasmuch as, in nature, the Concept has completely manifested its objectivity, but in mind this its manifesta- tion is abolished, and it has become identical with itself {Encyclopddiey § 381). ErocH II.] HEGEL. 329 The triple division of the " Philosophy of Mind," is as follows : first of all, the Subjective Mind, in which mind is related immediately to itself as the ideal totality, whose being is freedom ; secondly, the Objective Mind, or mind in the form of reality, a world in which freedom is reduced to necessity ; and, lastly. Absolute Mind, which is the unit^T" of the two previous momenta. The first divi- sion embraces " Anthropology," " Phenomenology," and " Psychology," Hegel only employing this term for its concluding section. Psychology considers mind theo- retically as intelligence, practically as will ; and, lastly, as the unity of these, as morality. The intelligence finds itself limited, but posits this very limitation as its own in recognising the all, as realising rational purpose. The essence of morality is, that the will should have a universal rational content for its purpose. The second division, dealing with Objective Mind, shows the realised product of freewill as exhibited in law and right, in a moral code, and in social institutions culminating in the state. The Absolute Mind, with which the third and last division is concerned, is determined in the forms of Art, Eeligion, and Philosophy. The Idea, as the Philosophic Reason, forms the culmination of the entire system; it is the Reason come to a knowledge of itself. In Art it is presented to sense, in Religion to the reflective under- standing, and in Philosophy to the Reason, which pre- supposes yet transcends both. Such is a brief outline of the Hegelian system. It remains to notice briefly the working out of the several depart- ments of its last and most practically important division. Hegel's Ethic is apparently based on the doctrine of freedom which had been common to his predecessors. He rehabi- litates Kant's separation of the legal from the moral, in admitting a sphere in which the individual subject is completely controlled by the objective mind — in short, in which its freedom is reduced to necessity. This is the second of the cardinal momenta of mind. But Hegel does not admit law to be a limitation of freedom ; it is merely a limitation of the arbitrariness of the individual will. Nevertheless, it is opposed to the principle on which morality rests, which is conscience, the power wherein ^oO MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. good is combined with the possibility of evil ; both of these departments are however one-sided, and are united, or find their synthesis in what Hegel terms SittUchlceit, a word generally identical with morality, but which Hegel distinguishes from the latter, and which, employed in his sense, may perhaps best be rendered as Virtue (the ancient civic virtue), the Jjaiin jnetas. It is a morality with a definite social content. The momenta of this substance or content are, the family, the society, the state. In giving the highest place to social obligation, Hegel shows that he is conscious of the barren and abstract nature of the Ethics of Kant and Fichte, for whom mere subjective freedom was the ultimate goal. By this, he virtually surrenders the stand- point of the " ethics of inwardness," as such, together with its correlate, the " religion of the spirit," although profess- ing to have placed them on an inexpugnable footing. The fact that he finds in the state the culmination and realisa- tion of the family and society, rather than in society the realisation of the family and the state, is, however, one of those strange perversions of view for which, we fear, w^e must regard governmental patronage as largely respon- sible. Both logically and historically, the family (or rather the gens) is clearly negated in the state, the tendency of which, qua state, must invariably be to abolish the ori- ginal independence of the family. The complex state- organization is the antithesis of the simple family-organi- zation, which it, so to speak, swallows up. It is plainly then in the negation of the state, in its self-abolition, in which the state {cimtas) is transformed into a free society, a higher family-organization (societas)^ that the synthesis, the telos, of the two previous momenta is dis- coverable. Hegel's philosophy of history is in accordance with a point of view founded on the conception of the political moment being the essential one. For the rest, its leading principle, though it may be easily inferred from the general thought of the system, we give in Hegel's own words : — " The only Thought which Philosophy brings with it to the contemplation of history, is the simple conception of Beason ; that Eeason is the Sovereign of the World ; Epoch H.] HEGEL. 331 that the history of the workl, therefore, presents us with a rational process. This conviction and intuition is a hvjiothesis in the domain of history as such. In that of Philosophy it is no hypothesis. It is there proved by speculative cop;nition that Reason ... is Sahstanre as well as Infinite Power ; its own Infinite Material underlying all the natural and spiritual life which it originates, as also the Infinite Form — that which sets this material in motion. On the one hand. Reason is the substance of the Universe ; viz., that by which and in which all reality has its being and subsistence. On the other hand, it is the Infinite Energy of the Universe ; since Reason is not so powerless as to be incapable of producing anything but a mere ideal, a mere intention — having its place outside reality, nobody knows where ; something separate and abstract, in the heads of certain human beings. It is the infinite complex of things, their entire Essence and Truth. It is its own material which it commits to its own Active Energy to work up; not needing, as finite action does, the conditions of an external material of given means from which it may obtain its support, and the objects of its activity. It supplies its own nourishment, and is the object of its own operations. While it is exclusively its own basis of exist- ence, and absolute final aim, it is also the energizing power realising this aim ; developing it not only in the phenomena of the natural, but also of the Spiritual Uni- verse — The History of the World. That this " Idea " or " Reason " is the True, the Eternal, the absolutely poiverful essence ; that it reveals itself in the World ... is the thesis which, as we have said, has been proved in Philosophy, and is here regarded as demonstrated " * (Hegel's 'Philosophy of History,' Bohn's edition, pp. 9-10). The lectures on the "Philosophy of History," consist mainly in disquisitions on the various forms the state has assumed in the different historic periods. Social and economic conditions are of course viewed as completely subordinated to political. In his younger days Hegel had subscribed to the revolutionary views of Rousseau and of * The reader will have no difficulty in reading between the lines of the theistic or pantheistic colouring of this passage. 332 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. Ficlite, but at tliis time he had no expectations of patron- age from the Prussian Government. For the official philosopher of the great Bureaucratic system which was centred in Berlin — a system the perfection of whose wisdom had shown itself consummated in the choice of its philo- sophic representative — the state as therein embodied could hardly fail to express the highest incarnation of the Reason. The extent of Hegel's adoration of authority, for its own sake, will be estimated when we inform the reader that he professed to regard marriage as more moral when arranged by parents, than when dictated by the inclinations of " parties " themselves ; that, like Schel- ling, he was prepared to apostrophize the Kaiser, as the political " soul of the world ; " that he was the sworn defender (and this on grounds, not of antiquarianism or expediency, but of principle) of monopolies, closed corporations, &c. Erdmann has observed that Hegel's ' Philosophy of History ' combines the anthropological view of Herder, according to which humanity passes through four stages, with the political view of Kant, according to which the Oriental state signifies the freedom of one alone (despotism), the Classical state the freedom of some (slave-holding oligarchy), the Germanic state (presu- mably, as represented by the Prussian system before '48) as the freedom of all (?). Hegel's lectures on ^Esthetic, with the exception of the ' Philosophy of History,' are perhaps the most popular of his works. Hegel felt with Schelling, and in opi30sition to Kant and Fichte, that the moral consciousness was after all not ultimate ; that there was a region in which the -individual mind was freed from the restlessness of natural and moral striving, and that this was the region of Art (compare Schopenhauer, supra, pp. 296-9). The Art work as the presentment of the Beautiful exhibits the Absolute in sensuous existence ; it is an appeal to the heart. It does not merely afford theoretical knowledge or practical satisfaction, but it raises it above these finite forms to a sense of infinite enjoyment. The chief periods of Art are the Oriental, the Classical, and the Romantic. In Oriental Art the special characteristic of which is symbolism, the matter preponderates over the Epoch II.] HEGEL. 833 form; in Classical Art, the characteristic of which is grace, the form and the matter balance each other ; in Eomantic Art, which is spiritual par excellence, sublimity and beauty are combined ; the /orm asserts its pre-eminence. In each of the fine Arts these momenta are discoverable no less than in the Histoiy of Art as a whole. Thus, in architecture, the art which is first in the order of time, the moment of symbolism or sublimity may be seen in the Monument {e.g. the pyramid, the tower, the obelisk, &c.) characteristic of the ancient Oriental civilizations ; the classical moment in the Greek Temple ; the romantic in the Gothic Cathedral. The peculiarly Eomantic Arts of Painting and Music present within themselves the same stages which are all embraced and reduced to unity, in the Art which is the Art of Arts, Art par excellence, viz. Poetry. Hegel defines the form of the Beautiful as the nnity of multiplicity. The progress of Art, according to Hegel, consists in the gradual elimination of the spacial and material element therein. The beginning of Art Architecture, exhibits, as above stated, an enormous pre- ponderance of the sensuous material. In Sculpture, the peculiarly classical Art, the mere material is less oi)tru- sive ; moreover, as embodying a definite form, that of the human body, it is a step towards a higher ideality. Painting, the earlier of the romantic Arts, the perfection of which was reached in the middle ages, inasmuch as it gets rid of the third dimension of matter, implies a further advance towards the ideal, the supremacy of form ; it is the objective art of form. Music, of which the material is pure tone, and whose perfection has been reached in the modern world, finally abolishes the element of space altogether; its content is the inner emotional nature, and hence it is the most subjective of all the Arts. Lastly, Poetry dispenses with any specific material what- ever, its material being simply language, the medium for the expression of thought in general, and Poetry may be truly termed the Art of universal expression. It compre- hends all the other Arts in itself. Painting in the epos, Music in the lyric, and the unity of both in the drama. It is peculiar to no one period of history, but is present in one or more of its forms in all periods. 834 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. Hegel showed a far deeper appreciation of the significance of Art than Schelling. The latter could merely regard it as a special department of modern culture, and the artist as a professional man of talent or genius in no special manner the product of his age or race. Hegel, on the contrary, took an historical view; he saw in Art the expression of the life of a period, or of a people ; he saw that all true Art, all Art that is worth anything, is essentially social and not individual. " Each generation hands its beauty on to the next ; each has done something to give utterance to the universal thought. Those said to have genius, have merely acquired the particular faculty of expressing ihe general social forms in their own work, some in this respect, some in the other. Their product is not their invention but that of the whole nation . . . Each adds his stone to the structure, the artist among the rest, only that he happens to have the fortune to come last, and thus when he lays his stone the arch is self-supporting. ' The close of Hegel's Philosophy of -3i]sthetics as usual contains an indication of the next division of the philoso2:)hy of Absolute Mind, viz. that of Eeligion. Religion is the form in which the Absolute is presented, not only to the perceptive consciousness or feeling, but also to the reflective understanding. The historical momenta of Eeligion are, the nature-religions in which God is regarded as mere natural substance (Fetichism and the lower forms of Polytheism) ; those Religions in which the Deity is conceived as Subject which comprise the Jewish Religion or the religion of sublimity, the Greek Religion or the religion of beauty, and the Roman Religion or the religion of utility ; and, finally, the synthesis of nature-religion, and of subjective-religion, viz. Absolute religion, the ultimate expression of which, it is needless to say, Hegel somehow or other manages to find in the special form of Protestant Christianity established in Prussia. The dexterous evolutions performed to arrive at this end are more curious than instructive; especially the case as regards the manner in wliich the leading Christian dogmas are twisted into conformitj^ with the Hegelian doctrine. As Art found its issue in Religion, so Religion finds its culmination in Philosophy. Philosophy is truth in its Epoch II.] HEGEL. 335 absohiteiiess, the thought of the self-thinking Idea, of the self-comprehending Eeason. The development of Philosophy shows a progress from the abstract to the concrete ; the philosophy of the pre-Socratists, of the Eleatics, of Herakleitos, and of the Atomists represents respectively the momenta of Being, Becoming, and For- itselfness; the i^hilosophy of Plato, the categories of Essence ; that of Aristotle, those of the Concept ; that of the Neo-Platonists, the totality of the Concrete Idea. Similarly, the philosophy of the middle ages and of modern times, is the philosophy of the Idea as self- conscious, or as mind. The Cartesian philosoj)hy occupies the standpoint of unreflective consciousness ; the Kantian, that of self-consciousness ; the Hegelian, that of the Eeason or Absolute knowledge. Hegel claims therefore that, in his system, all earlier philosophies are implied and embraced as essential momenta, at the same time that they are superseded. " In the peculiar form of external history^'' he says, " the origin and development of philosophy is presented as the history of this science. This form gives to the Idea's stages of development, the appearance of accidental succession, and of mere diversity of principles, with their working out in philosophical systems. But the craft- master of this work of ages is the one living spirit whose thinking nature it is to bring what it is, to its conscious- ness, and immediately this has become object to have already in itself attained a higher stage, a stage which ig above and beyond it. The History of Philosojphy shows us, in a^^parently diverse philosophies, on the one hand, only a philosophy at different stages of development, and on the other, only the special principles, one of which under- lies one sj^stem, and one another, but which are only branches of one and the same whole. The last philosophy in the order of time is the result of all previous philoso- phies, and must hence contain the principles of them all ; it is therefore, in so far as it is philosophy at all, the most developed, the richest, and the most concrete of all philosophies." Hegel ianism had for some years previous to the death of Hegel in 1831, overshadowed the intellectual firmament 836 MODEKN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. with its colossal structure. As before with Kantianisin, its parent, so now, though even to a greater extent, with Hegelianism, it was the dominant philosophy taught throughout Germany, and asserting its influence in all departments of culture. The term of Hegel's life coin- cided with the culmination of the authority of his school, and the C(jmmencement of its decline, considered as repre- senting a system one and indivisible, as the doctrine of the master, in its orthodox form, claimed to be. Soon after Hegel's death, his disciples published his completed works. But dissensions speedily became apparent. The first crisis in the school occurred about 1835. "The school of Hegel," says' Eosenkranz, writing in 1844, " in the sense that others must seek his instruc- tion as that of an immortal master of speculation, not only exists, but will continue to exist in the future, just in the same way as after Aristotle there were still Aristo- telians, and after Spinoza, Spinozists. But the school, in the sense of a social union of disciples — in the sense, that is, of a kind of corporate responsibility of one Hegelian for his neighbour, has ceased. The Berlinerjalirhilcher, its outward meetlDg-place, can moreover no longer be con- sidered as the expression of the development of the Hegelian philosophy, nor as the organ of its apologetics and polemics. The most violent divergencies of disciples from the master, as well as of disciples from each other, have become notorious." This break-up of the school, as a school, Eosenkranz, although himself one of the original disciples of Hegel, justly regards as inevitable, and indeed as a hopeful reaction against the worship of phrases, and of the system as a system, towards which there was a tendency in its halcyon days. The collapse of the Hegelian school, he asserts, does not mean the collapse of the Hegelian philosophy, but rather the necessary condition of its continued life and activity. There is a passage of Hegel's own a-proj)os of this, which is worthy of being inscribed in letters of gold, and which the " man of the world," — who, strong in his smug ignorance of history and " sound common-sense," jeers at the internal difterences accompanying the growth of a Epoch n.] HEGEL. 337 movement as signs of decay — would do well to remember : *' A party shows itself to have won the victory first when it has broken up into two parties ; for then it proves that it contains in itself the principle with which at first it had to conflict, and thus that it has got beyond the onesidedness which was incidental to its earliest expression. The interest which formerly divided itself between it and that to whicli it was opposed, now falls entirely within itself, and the opposing principle is left behind and forgotten, just because it is represented by one of the sides in the new controversy which now occupies the minds of men. At the same time, it is to be observed that when the old principle thus reappears, it is no longer what it was before, for it is changed and purified by the higher element into which it is now taken up. In this point of view, that discord which appears at first to be a lament- able breach and dissolution of the unity of a party, is really the crowning proof of its success." The success of Hegelianism as a distinct system was no doubt partly due to its eclectic, and hence to some extent conservative, and even reactionary tendencies. Hegel restored to philosophy in a new form what Kant had demolished in its older form, viz. Metaphysic proper or Ontology. His Logic identified " Theory of Knowledge" and Ontology in seeking to show that existence was only one of the momenta of consciousness, and not vice versa. Again, Hegel had sought to re-establish a modus vivendi between Theology and Philosophy (albeit at the cost of the former) in his Beligionsphilosophie, by an ingenious esoteric interpretation of leading dogmas, and also by taking under his wing the Prussian Church organization. But Hegel difiered from his predecessors on a most important point, the practical side of his philosophy, to wit, the virtual surrender of the individualistic Ethics so strongly accentuated by Kant and Fichte, and the rehabilitation of the ancient conception of social virtue, the morality which has for its end the family, the city, and the state. That he was led to this partly by his zeal on behalf of Prussian bureaucracy, does not alter the intrinsic importance of the change of stand- point. With the events consequent on the revolutionary z 338 MODEKN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch n. year, 1830, the conservative side, and therewith the system as a system of the Hegelian philosophy became shaken. The political ascendency of the middle class, which was now everywhere the order of the day — the temporary reaction consequent on the French revolution havino' spent itself — ill accorded with the system which, in a sense, apotheosized class-despotism of a different kind. Hegelianism began to work out in opposite directions ; a right and a left wing formed in the school ; and the in- tellectual life of Germany during the seventeen years from the period of Hegel's death to the revolution of 1848, is mainly taken up with the controversies liberated by the dissolution of the original Hegelian school, which resulted in a severe struggle between the various sections of the party. These controversies, religious, social, and political, we shall briefly notice in the following pages. The Hegelian School. Attacks on the Hegelian system had already begun before the death of Hegel, from standpoints which were not opposed to the speculative method in general. Weisse, professor of Philosophy at Leipzig, in an essay on the " Present Standpoint of Philosophical Science," published in 1829, criticised the Logic in a theistic sense, and subse- quently attacked the system in detail in a series of works. The Hegelian right consisted, among others, of Gans, Heinrichs, Goschel, Michelet, Kosenkranz, and Vischer. These men, all pupils of Hegel, adhered to the doctrine, more or less, in its original form, though for the most part emphasising the conservative side. Michelet, who is still living, has recently published a summary of the system. Of these more orthodox and conservative disciples of Hegel, there is little to be said in a work like the present, save that they took an active -psui in the controversies of the period. The most remarkable development of the Hegelian doctrine was that accomplished in the left wing, and which is associated with the names of Strauss, Feuerbach, Bruno Bauer, Ruge, &c. Hegelianism, as a system, at ErocH II.] THE HEGELIAN SCHOOL. 339 once tended to promote and to check the free tendencies of the age in Theology, Politics, Sec. Its most noteworthy- product in Theology, however, was the ccleljrated Tiibingen school of biblical criticism, the best known names connected with which are Ferdinand Christian Baur, and David Friedrich Strauss. The first actual crisis in the Hegelian party was indeed brought about by the publication of Strauss's Lehen Jesii, although, considering that the notion of the supernatural in Eeligion and History had been practi- cally absent from the educated German mind since Kant, it is difficult to understand the sensation produced by the definite working-out of a "mythical theory" as to the origin of Christianity by Strauss. But the main issue in the religious sphere resolved itself into the question of the compatibility of the Hegelian system with theism at all. Hegel himself had of course maintained it to be the only possible form of theism ; but this, it must be remem- bered, was as he understood theism. He also (vide supra^ p. 334) affirmed its complete accordance with Christian doc- trine, as established in Prussia, again with the important reservation, however, that philosophy was to interpret that doctrine, a reservation which effectually "kept the word of promise to the ear," but as effectually broke it the hoj)e of the orthodox. So with the theistic question ; it was not long before the more advanced Hegelians made u^^ their minds to expose and disavow what justly seemed to them a merely verbal accommodation. In Strauss's second great work, the ' Christian Dogmatics in their Development, and in their Conflict with Modern Science,' the narrower and the wider issue were brought out into clear relief, and the view insisted on that Christian Eeligion and Modern Philo- ''• sophy are opposed to one another as Theism to Pantheism. There is a sly hit at the master where Strauss, playing upon the German word Grund (ground or reason), says that a jDhilosopher may have very good grounds (Griinde^ for calling himself a Christian, but he can have no reason [Grund). To the philosopher, for whom there is no ^^\ lard and fast distinction between this and the other Kvorld, for whom all such distinctions, as mind and natter, subject and object, divine and natural, are at once mbraced and transcended in a higher unity there is no z 2 340 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch H. greater enemy than a doctrine which affirms and perpetu- ates this dualism of conception. Inasmuch as the resolution of these oppositions has already accomplished itself, the criticism of dogma becomes identical with its history. The aim of Strauss in the work in question is therefore to point out the precise manner in which the ecclesiastical dogma moulded itself out of the biblical doctrine ; how with the Reformation the dissolution began; how the tentative doctrines of the Eeformers were in their turn reformed by the Socinians, Sj^inoza, and the English Deists ; how the conclusions of these latter were pushed forward by the French and German Aufkldrung, till Schelling drew and Hegel formulated the conclusion that there is no other Divinity than the thought in all thinking beings ; no Divine attributes other than natural laws ; and that the All knows no addition and no diminution, but is continually manifested in the infinity of individuals. Bruno Bauer, who originally belonged to the extreme right, being bitterly attacked as a representative of this direction by Strauss, and who had been accused of being on the high road to join the then well-known pietist, Heng- stenberg, startled every one, when, in 1839, he published his "Herr Doctor Hengstenberg, a contribution to the critique of religious consciousness," in which the arti- fices of the orthodox apologists were scathingly exposed. In a subsequent work, the notion of a Church organization is treated as a survival, and religion declared to exist only as religiosity — that is, the sentiment of devotion to a higher power ; but at present, Bauer declared, there is no power to which the individual can devote himself higher than the state. Between the civil and the antiquated ecclesiastical organization stands Science on the side of the former, and where the State seeks to limit Science in the interest of Theology, it is really fighting against itself. Bruno Bauer was joined later on by his brother Edgar, who put forward a doctrine, worked out in a meta- physical form by Max Stirner, of whom we shall speak presently, which may be regarded as the prototype of modern Individualism. It proclaimed the individual supreme, and denounced all government and organizations whatever as destructive of the individuality. Thus Bruno's EPOcm n.] THE HEGELIAN SCHOOL. 341 divinity, the state, was nidely swept away. Bruno and Edgar Bauer were alike untiring in proclaiming that in the individual human being was summed up all truth and all reality. The most prominent name in connection with this movement was that of Ludwig Andreas Feuerbach, who was undoubtedly the most popular exponent of the in- dividualist and empiricist reaction against the Hegelian Monism. It is perhaps hardly fair to call the movement a reaction, for strange as it may at first sight seem, it was the natural working out of one of the sides of Hegel's doctrine. Owing to the very synthetic nature of that idoctrine, it only required a very slight change to transform lit, on the one hand into pantheism, and on the other into individualism. The moment the fundamental point of view of " Theory of Knowledge " fell out of sight, and to minds which could see in the distinctions it expresses, mere word-jugglery, absolute individualism was the necessary issue. Of course subjective Idealism of the Leibnitzian type must have been the inevitable outcome in a meta- physical point of view, but metaphysic was at a discount just at this time, and in consequence, it was in practical departments rather than in the region of pure speculation, "that the new development manifested itself. All Feuer- 'bach's works have a distinctly practical tendency ; with roure speculation he concerns himself little. His strength tties in negative criticism. The salient points of Feuer- Ibach's theory will be found in the " Essence of Christianity," tthe English translation of which, by George Eliot, is well Iknown. Bruno Bauer and Feuerbach were naturally in opposition to Strauss, who held strongly to the Pan- iiheistic side of Hegelianism ; for Strauss, the individual •mind was the reflection of " the All," the immanent divine principle ; for Feuerbach, the divine principle was simply •the reflection within itself of the individual mind. On ithe political side the difference between them was even more accentuated— Strauss was the Tory, Feuerbach and tthe Brunos were Revolutionists. In a small hrochure^ entitled * The Holy Family Bauer,' the eminent Socialist writers, Karl Marx and Friedrich En gels, criticised the foregoing writers with characteristic humour. 342 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. The most remarkable product albeit tbe reductio ad absurdum of tlie ex-Hegelian individualists, was the little work of Max Stirner (Dr. Schmidt), entitled the ' In- dividual and His Possession ' (Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum), in which the author seeks to show the heresy from their own point of view, even of Feuerbach and Bauer themselves ; how, that is, even in their later writings the religious principle still clings to them, as shown in their admission of the Ideal of society or humanity as an object of devotion for the individual. " The Individual and His Property" might serve as a text-book for our modern individualist-anarchists. The principle of Individualism is there pushed to its only logical conclusion. The " self- consciousness " of Bauer, the " humanity " of Feuerbach, the *' society " of the Communists, are all stigmatised as relics of superstition, as objects of worship. From these stand- points, all and severally, the individual as such is lost sight of, and yet only the individual is real. He who devotes himself to aught outside himself, without receiving an equivalent for his devotion, surrenders his individuality — he is superstitious. The individual Ego is the only concrete, all else is abstract and unreal. " The Ideal, the Man, is realised when the Christian conception becomes converted into the proposition, ' 1 this individual am the man.' The conceptual question ' what is the man ? ' has then resolved itself into the personal one * who is the man ? ' with ' what ' the conception was sought to be realised ; with * who ' there is no longer any more question, but the answer is immediately present in the question, the question answers itself of itself ... I am the owner of my power, and I it is who know myself as individual. In the individual this owner returns to the creative nothing out of which he was born. Every being that is above me, be it God, be it man, weakens the feeling of mj^ individuality, and pales before the sun of this consciousness. I place my interest in my- self, the individual ; it stands then on the same footing as its transient mortal creator, who thus feeds upon himself. I may therefore say, * I have placed my interest in nothing'" (Der Einzige und, sein Eigenthum, p. 491). This is certainly a novel way of arriving at the Stoic " apathy," for such is practically the result of Max Stirner's reasoning, Epoch H.] THE HEGELIAN SCHOOL. 343 as will be apparent from tlie concluding sentences of his book, which we have jnst quoted. But the preposterous result, and much besides in the work, which is merely paradoxical and bizarre, does not detract from the fact of there being much also that is valuable in the shape of criticism scattered up and down the volume. The reply of Feuerbach to this attack was hardly up to his usual standard. The chief organ of the Hegelian left at this period was the Hallesclien JalirhiicJier, the editor being Arnold Kuge, who was one of the foremost leaders of the German revolu- tionary movement of 1848. Unlike Strauss, the Bauers, and Feuerbach, who can hardly be regarded as belonging to the Hegelian school at all, Ruge was, at least for a long time, comparatively orthodox in the essentials of his Hegelianism ; the Jahrhilcher nevertheless formed the general meeting-ground for all groujDS of the party ; and indeed it was in their pages that some of the earlier essays of Edgar Bauer appeared. A manifesto, published in the year 1840, by Euge and his co-editor, Echtermeyer, nominally on " Eomanticism and Protestantism," but which was really a thinly veiled political essay, had a wide-reaching influence at the time. The Jahrhilcher now began to directly attack the old Hegelians for their superstitious reverence for the master's doctrine, as well as for their political indifferentism. They were accused of treating the Logic as a kind of Veda, while Euge prophesied the rapidly approaching end of the kingdom of the Hegelian Brahma. Hegel himself was vigorously assailed for his reactionism. In July 1841 the Halleschen Jahrhilcher appeared as the Deutschen Jahrhilcher, the change of name being accompanied by a declaration of principles in which the strict Hegelian orthodoxy was formally renounced in its threefold character, philosophic, religious, and political. All the fetters of superstition, which had hitherto clung to the Jahrhilcher, were hence- forward to be discarded. Henceforth it would openly occupy the position of Strauss and Feuerbach in Theology, while a determined war was to be waged against Feudalism in all its surviving forms. The great merit of the Hegelian philosophy would be recognised to consist in its 344 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch IL having freed men from traditional prejudice. The time had come, Euge declared, in a subsequent number, when the Church should become the School, and Liberalism give place to Democracy. The publication of the Jahrhiicher ceased in 1843, and Ruge repaired to Paris, where, in con- junction with Marx, he brought out a few numbers of another journal, the Deutschfranzosischen Jahrhiicher. Ee- turning to Saxony, in 1846, he produced his third venture, the Beform^ and sat for some time in the parliament of Frankfort. On the subsidence of the revolutionary move- ment, in 1850, Euge came over to England, where he continued to reside till his death, which occurred at Brighton early in the year 1881. Euge is unquestionably the leading figure of the Hegelian left on its political side, and, as already observed, on the dissolution of the school practical questions assumed a more and more exclusive importance. We have only mentioned a few of the more striking names, connected with this period, the interest of which, from a purely speculative jooint of view, is secondary. With the revolution of 1848 conditions were changed ; the Hegelian school was finally dissolved, and those who had constituted it were scattered. Among the surviving academical " monuments " of the older Hegelianism may be mentioned, Erdmann, the author of the well-known * History of Philosophy,' professor at Halle ; Kuno Fischer, professor at Heidelberg, and Michelet of Berlin. Hegel's pupil and biographer, Eosenkranz, died in 1883. THE DEVELOPMENT FROM KANT TO HEGEL. KETROSPECT AND CRITICISM. We have now reached the close of the movement inaiigTirated by Kant, and therewith the close of the History of Philo- sophy properly so called. The later speculation, that is, such as is subsequent to the Hegelian movement, belongs to current thought, and cannot as yet be assigned a place in history. Of this we shall treat in the following and concluding division of the present work. Our object in this section is to take a general survey of the Kantian and post-Kantian movement, and to endeavour to extract from it its historical meaning. Kant, we have seen, was the pioneer of a line of specu- lative thought, which restored to philosophy the larger basis it had occupied under the ancients, by re-opening those wider issues, which had furnished the themes of the treatises of Plato and Aristotle, issues which form part of one problem — that as to the meaning and constitution of reality. We have noted how Kant's simple psycho- logical query. How are synthetic propositions a priori possible? directly involved the question, How is ex- perience itself possible ? and how this brought us back to the fundamental inquiry of philosophy. The order in which Kant discusses this problem in the ' Critique,' and elsewhere, was immediately determined by the course of his own thought. The key to the whole is however, to be found in the deduction of the categories from the ultimate unity of apperception or consciousness. The question now arises. Is this thought-unity from which Kant starts really ultimate ? Is the ultimate form of the category absolute ? Is pure thought subject? Does not con- sciousness presuppose that which becomes conscious ? In other 346 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. words, Is not tlie " I think " itself susceptible of further analysis ? Is not this ultimate I distinguishable from its thinking ? * We believe it is, and that the treatment of this principle as final, and as a purely logical or formal unity, is the origin of the tendency in speculation hitherto, even where professing to be most synthetic, to become onesided. The synthetic unity of the consciousness, the logical element, presupposes the alogical element, the J, or the principle, which becomes unified. This principle which, considered per se, consciousness or knowledge itself presup- poses, may hence be regard as the matter of which thought or consciousness is the form. Now we contend that this ultimate, all-penetrating material moment — the subject as such — has been ignored by most of the leaders of specu- lation from Plato to Hegel, and an appearance of having transcended the distinction been obtained by the hypos- tasis of form. At first sight this may seem a subtlety which can have very little speculative, and certainly no practical, importance ; but we shall endeavour to show that it does, as a matter of fact, give a colouring to the whole course of thought, being the general speculative expression of an entire code of ideas ; and that the antagonism of Materialism and Idealism, using these terms in their widest sense, is involved in it. In the speculative or generic method, which deals with a process out of relation to time, the starting-point is also the goal, the beginning and the end meet as in a circle. The ultimate principle which in- volves and includes all others is necessarily the determinant of the entire system of principles. Hence, whether that ultimate principle be formal or material, logical or alogical,! makes a profound difference, and decides indeed the whole character of the system. In Plato, what we are here contending for, is very plainly * Descartes, in his famous Cogito, gave modern speculation at starting a formalist impulse. (See p. 146, supra.) t The word '* alogical," it has been suggested to me is objectionable, as conveying the idea of an " unknowable," a " surd " outside the system of experience rather than an element therein. The terms "positive logical" and "negative logical," might be substituted for "logical" and " alogical," though we venture to think the context will preclude misconception on this head. ErocH II.] KANT TO HEGEL. 347 exhibited. The iinifyiiip; tJiought-form the logos is abstracted from its alogical matter, the Hylc, and hypostasized through- out, as the system of Ideas, which reaches its cuhuination in the all-embracing supreme Idea. Aristotle lights upon the abstraction .so glaringly and consistently carried out b}' Plato and energetically denounces him for it. But, nevertheless, Aristotle himself falls into substantially the same attitude. For him also pure form — in other words, the Ideal, the ' creative intellect,' as actus purus — was the determining element — the all-embracing fact — in the constitution of the real. All systems founded on Plato and Aristotle exhibit the same tendency, that namely, to the hypostasis of the pure form of consciousness and a fortiori of Thought or the Ideal as such. We pass over those lines of development, such as the Dog- matic and the Empirical, in which, since they are not based on speculative or transcendental analysis, the abstraction in question is not so obvious, or so easily pointed out in a few words ; and coming to Kant, who re-affirmed the analysis of experience or reality as the first problem of philosophy, we find the same abstraction made at starting,* the abstraction namely of the form of knowing, or thinking from its matter, the alogical subject which it presupposes, and whose self-determination thought is. Fichte, at first sight, appears to adopt a more concrete standpoint. This is even confirmed, as it would Seem by certain statements and certain portions of his analysis. But when the system is viewed as a whole (not to speak of reiterated assertions to the same effect), it is seen that experience with Fichte, no less than with Kant (in his transcendental deduction), is analysed only into the formal unity of con- sciousness, that Fichte's " ego " is pure thought, and not that which thinks and which is the possibility of thought. The moment of actual self-consciousness is the determining moment of the whole. To Schelling the same remarks apply, at least as far as the earlier form of his system is con- cerned ;. the synthetic unity of apperception in Schelling's system appears as the formal indifference or identity * As regards this , it must be remembered, however, that the deduction of the categories, with Kant himself, only concerned one side of his system. 348 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch U. between subject and object. There are modes of state- ment in Schelling as there are in Fichte, which would seem to indicate that they had a presentiment of the abstraction involved in the procedure which they had inherited from Kant. But these were not strong enough to alter the fundamental character of their systems. Their ultimate principle remained self-consciousness, that is, not the Ego, but the Ego's consciousness of itself. They w^ere formal, and abstractly Idealistic. The principle which Fichte and Schelling were vaguely cognisant of, but the real bearing of which they failed to grasp, was seized by Schopenhauer, and placed in the fore- front of his philosophy under the name of Will. We do not of course mean to imply that Schopenhauer was led to his principle by a systematically reasoned-out conception of the defect of his predecessors, or that it adequately supplies those defects. Schopenhauer was more the man of letters than the exact thinker, and his " Will- to-live " was rather a poetical expression than a result arrived at by any strict process of analysis ; but his system embodies unmistakably among other things a protest against formalistic Idealism. This explains the favour with which he regards all materialistic views of the universe. Schopenhauer felt that in pure thought, considered per se, there was no dynamic 'principle; that the categories of consciousness, even the highest, did not of themselves constitute reality, but pre- supposed a matter — a subject — of which they were the determinations. Essentially the same revolt against the formalism of the thinkers in the direct line of development from Kant underlies, as we take it, the system of Herbart. The consciousness of the purely formal nature of thought pel- se, it is only fair to remember, also underlies Kant's own distinction between Sense and Understanding. The ele- ment of feeling was to Kant as necessary to the constitu- tion of Reality as thought itself. It is also expressed in his distinction between Thing-in-itself and Phenomenon, at least in one of its aspects. The encyclopedic mind of Hegel, with its Titanic grasp of method, could hardly be oblivious of the fact we are here pointing out, leaving its track, as it does, throughout the whole history of Philosophy. But Hegel KrocH II.] KANT TO HEGEL. 349 evades, in his own case, the obviousness of the formal nature of the standpoint he occupies in common with his predecessors, at least as regards the working-out of his system by his dexterous manipulation of terminology. But it only requires the most cursory glance to see that thfe taint of Idealistic formalism pervades the whole Hegelian construction. With Hegel, the Concept or the Idea — pure consciousness — is the totality of the Real. This alone is the sharpest and most distinct pronouncement of Thought as the prtus of the world-order. The way in which Hegel covers up his formalism is ingenious, but hardly convincing. Let us take as an instance, the passages on page 29 of the ' Encyclopedia,' where Hegel defines the Ego as " the universal in and for itself; " and again as " pure self-reference," " the abstract universal " *' the abstractly free," &c. Hegel here refers to the synthetic nnity of apperception, the universal form — consciousness, which is, as he insists, formal and abstract ; but in this he clearly ignores that from which it is abstracted, the " self '* of the "reference," the I which determines itself as thinhing. In his anxiety to grasp the whatness of experience, he let go the thatness. The Hegelian would, of course, reply that the fact referred to, inasmuch as it represents the possibility of consciousness, that its whole positive determination is exhausted in being the possibility of consciousness, it is legitimate to regard merely as one of the momenta of con- sciousness. To this we reply, that such a treatment in- volves hypostasis, a seizure of the formal instead of the material moment as the primal determinate of the realy which although it matters little in pure speculation, amounting to little beyond a difference of emphasis, has important consequences when carried out in more concrete spheres. The difference may be compared to two lines gradually diverging from one starting-point. At first the space between them is scarcely discernible, but the end shows a wide discrepancy. Mere subtle refinement, as it seems, this distinction between the absoluteness of the actual, formal moment, or consciousness itself, and of the possible, material moment, or that which is conscious, that which thinks, reappears, as 350 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. [Epoch II. already indicated, on another plane in the distinction between the Idealist and Materialist views of the universe. As a natural consequence, the Ethical problem of free-will and necessity, of determination from within or without the empirically-conscious personality, hinges largely upon this. That man is able consciously to determine his actions is the theory of free-will ; that his empirical conscious- ness merely registers a determination, of which it is not productive, is the doctrine of necessity as now understood. If the real be simply a system of logical determinations alone, if its totality is exhausted in the Logical ; if in its leading momenta, the formal is their determining side; then the philosophical-theistic, and free-will theory of the Hegelians of the right is established ; if on the other hand, consciousness is not creative ; if the Logical neces- sarily involves an alogical element, and it is this alogical element which determines, which is the 8wa/x.i9 in the production of the experienced world, then we have dis- covered the root-meaning of the protest of the left wing of the Hegelian school against the theistic and ideal- istic guise in which the doctrine was presented by the conservative side. Hitherto in all synthetic systems of philosophy it is the moment of form of limitation, oi for-itselfness which has dominated the whole ; it has been made both telos and dynamis. For Plato, it was the Ideas which informed the unreal matter of the sense- w^orld. For Aristotle, again the logos, the entelecheia, was the determining principle of the Hyle. For Hegel lastly the formal moment was absolute exjDlicitly ; the Concept was self-existent. But from another point of view, the matter may be regarded as self-determining, and the form as its self- determination ? The hypostasis of the formal moment which has so long dominated the speculative world then disappears. The ultimate principle of " Theory of Knowledge," or philosophy, the science which. alone deals with firs,t principles properly so-called, is no longer " Consciousness," or thought as such, but the alogical subject which determines itself as conscious, which is the materia prima of consciousness. A little reflection, we think, will enable the student to see that this initial Epoch n.] KANT TO HEGEL. 851 chan<:^o of attitude shifts (so to speak) onr point of view throughout every department of thought. The material rather than the formal heneeforth becomes the determining moment in the synthesis of all and every reality.'^ *' Thus nature is self-determining {jnd not determined ah extra by its mere formal moment which constitutes what we term "natural law." 352 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. RECENT AND CDEEENT PHILOSOPHY, In this concluding portion of the handbook, we propose to consider the state of Philosophy during the second half of the nineteenth century. In doing so we shall pass over lightly those writers whose general influence and impor- tance is secondary in order, to afford more space for the exposition of the views of men who may be regarded as in some sense leaders of contemporary thought. Since the break up of the Hegelian school, Germany has fallen somewhat into the background in the matter of speculation. Philosophical literature pours forth abundantly from the press, but it represents for the most part merely the survival or the revival of older standpoints, without exhibiting any new development. The views of Herbart and of Schopenhauer have met ^\ith amplification and modification at the hands of fluent and able 'v\Titers. As representative of these may be taken, on the one hand, Von Hartmann, and on the other, Lotze. Eduard von Hartmann (born 1842, at Berlin) claims to be the reconciler of Hegel and Schopenhauer, but is really in all essentials the follower of the latter. In his leading work, ' The Philosophy of the Uncon- scious,' Hartmann maintains the Spinozistic thesis of an unconscious Absolute, with the dual attribute of "Will and Idea. He rejects the Dialectical method, and claims for his philosophy the inductive basis of physical science. " Ac- cording to Hegel," says Hartmann, " only the Logical the Idea is ultimate, while according to Schopenhauer, the Alogical, the Will, is ultimate." The conception of the Absolute, the prius of all reality, as including both Will and Idea, reconciles the antagonism between them. " It is the gi*eat service," as Hartmann thinks of Schelling, " to have Epoch II.] MODERN rillLOSOPHY. 353 shown the possibility of a modus vivendi between the two standpoints." Schelling, however, spoilt the fertility of his conception by coquetting with theology, which misled him into fantastic qnasi-porsonifications of these principles. Hartmann will know of no distinction between the method of philosophy and that of physical science : to jDroceed from the known to its as yet unknown ground of explanation is the true method in both cases. Hartmann's exposition of his philosophy falls into three divisions, headed re- spectively, " The phenomenon of the Unconscious in corporeality;" "the Unconscious in the human mind;" and " the metaphysic of the Unconscious." In the first two divisions Hartmann seeks to sub- stantiate and illustrate his fundamental assumption in the regions of physiology and pathology ; in the third, in the human mind and in society. The term " Conscious- ness " with Hartmann, as with Schopenhauer, means the empirical consciousness, and hence, like Schopenhauer, Hartmann properly insists on the correlation of conscious- ness "^dth cerebral and nervous action. But although conscious activity (in the empirical sense) is inseparable from organic function, this does not preclude us from regarding unconscious activity of a subjective nature from being the sine qua non of brain-function as of every other material process, which may hence be regarded as its pro- duct. This " unconscious " principle of Hartmann is not to be identified with Schopenhauer's "Will." Schopen- hauer, in proclaiming " AVill " the jprius of the world-order, banished Intelligence, as a primary principle, altogether from his system. This was the weak point, according to Hartmann, in his doctrine, for Will alone, apart from In- telligence, as the basis of the Eeal can furnish no rational explanation of the experienced world, nor a fortiori of the final purpose of such a world. In this particular the Hegelian doctrine of the Idea or the Reason, as the ultimate principle of Eeality, has the advantage over the doctrine 3f Schopenhauer; but Hegel, on his side, is unable to explain the irrational element in the world-order, which le glosses over under the name of chance. I'he true inductive method which Hartmann claims to ipply to speculation reveals to us, that instinct, i.e. uncon- 2 A 351 MODERN PHlLOSOrHY. scious Will in inseparable combination with nnconscions Intelligence creates the world : organic and animal func- tions, arbitrary and reflex motions, sexual love, character, genius, language (in its origin), nay, conscious thought and perception themselves, are all reducible to manifestations of an unconscious Will-Intelligence. The form, the adap- tability to its end of the phenomenon, shows us Intelligence ; the ]Dhenomenon itself in its activity shows us Will. The conjunction of both, Will, which is jper se unintelligent, and Idea or Intelligence, which is per se powerless, as the dual attribute of one substance, suffices as the sole ground of ex^Dlanation of the phenomenal world. The absence of the principle of Intelligence in Schopenhauer's system prevented his arriving at an explanation of the rationality displayed in the order of the world ; the absence of the motive power. Will, prevents Hegel from passing out of the region of the merely logical into that of the real or the existent. The conception of the union of Will and Idea, of the realisation of the logical rational Idea by the alogical non-rational Will, reconciles both systems by supplying the defective element in them. Now, according to Hartmann, the rational is real, and the real is rational. The rational and intelligent order in the real is expressed in a series of stages. The first is constituted by the simple, attractive and repulsive force-centres, which are the foundation of the corporeal world. They are the first product of the will-im]oregnated Idea, and form the first rung of the ladder which culminates in the conscious organism. Each successive step expresses a victory of the Idea over the Will, of Intelligence over blind im23ulse or force, of the Logical over the Alogical. The easiest possible way to the attainment of its immediate end is the one chosen by the Idea. Thus nature prefers to bring about improvement in species by *' natural selection," and the *' struggle for existence," rather than to attain the same object by a more cumbersome, even though a less wasteful method. The goal of this w^orld-evolution is the complete subjugation of the (non-rational) Will, by the (rational) Intelligence. But the complete victory of the Logical over the Alogical presupposes consciousness, and hence the pro- gressive series of being in the order of evolution gravitates IIARTMANN. cJOO towards one point, to the point, viz., where the organism has the conditions of consciousness complete within itself. This completeness is first attained in the human brain and nerve system. Conseionsness may be called the final emancipation of the Intelligence or Keason from its bondage to the Will. The conscious organism once given, its happiness be- comes henceforth the more or less immediate purpose of the world ; but this notion of happiness is an illusion which hides from us the higher and ultimate end of consciousness, which is not human happiness, but the emancipation of the world-principle. Here the coinci- dence of Hartmann with Schopenhauer comes into view. To Hartmann, as to Schopenhauer, existence is a huge blunder. The more intelligence grows, the clearer it becomes that the pleasure of the world is vastly out- balanced by the pain ; and this applies alike to the indi- vidual life, and to the life of the race. A crucial instance of it is afforded by a comparison of the amount of pleasure present in the animal which eats, as compared to the amount of pain present in the animal which is eaten. In human history the illusion of the possibility of realising human happiness presents itself in three phases. In the classical world happiness was believed to be attainable in the present life of the individual. In the Christian world happiness is believed to be attainable in a future life of the individual. This belief, which modern science has shattered, is now succeeded by the third phase of the illusion, which conceives happiness as possible in the future of the race. Once this illusion has been lived through, the truth will be apparent ; there will be no room for any further illusion as to the possible realisation of happiness. The one end will henceforth be Nirvana, though not the Nirvana of Schopenhauer, who takes account of the individual merely, and not of the race. The quietism which Schopenhauer preached is simply a phase of the Christian religious spirit. There is no short cut to Nirvana, such as Schopenhauer imagined, attainable by the individual. The pietistic results of Schopenhauer's philosophy must be given up for a more extended view, which shows us the individual as powerless to arrest the 2 A 2 356 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. world-process, which exhibits the act of reminciation as "brought about through the desire of happiness having been, in the natural order of things, quenched, not in the individual alone, but throughout all conscious beings. Even the highest of all pleasures, literary and artistic activity, in this third stage of the illusion into which Ave are njow entering begins to wear itself out. All tends to a low level of mediocrity. The combination of selfishness and sympathy, which sees in the future happiness of the whole, a reward for the sacrifice of individual well-being, will have had its day, according to Hartmann, when wealth and comfortable circumstances — in short, all that can be effected alike for the race or the individual — is seen to be of no lasting value in producing happiness, and this expe- rience is being made by increasing numbers (?) in propor- tion to the spread of civilization. This on the one hand. On the other, the teaching of experience shows us that the sum of actual pain in no wise tends to diminish. Side by side with the advance of medical knowledge, illness, more especially obscure and chronic maladies, increase in greater proportion. Hunger consumes an ever- widening social area with the necessary progress of population. " The most contented peoples are the rude nature races, and of the civilized races, the uneducated classes ; with the growing culture of the people, grows, as experience shows us, discontent." We must nevertheless, by the force of an invincible and irresistible destiny, press on along the road which inevitably leads to the dispersion of our most cherished hopes, to the recognition of those hopes as illusions. Nothing will be left then, the last illusion having vanished, than the desire for euthanasia, a painless extinction. " The Logical," says Hartmann, " directs the world-process in the wisest manner towards its goal — the highest possible development of consciousness — which, once attained, consciousness sufSces to hurl back the whole actual Will into nothingness, whereby at once the process and the world comes to an end without leaving so much as a fragment behind with which a further process could begin. Thus the Logical constitutes the world in the best possible way that it may most readily attain to emancipation, and not in one whereby its pain would be HARTMANN. 357 infinitely perpetuated " (Philosojphie des Unhewussten, 3id ed., p. 756). Wo do not propose to attempt any detailed criticism of Hartmann's system. It is vulnerable at a hundred points. Ilartmann, nevertheless, has a significance with relation to the development of German speculation, and this significance consists in his having emphasised the dis- tinction already alluded to between the point of view which analj'ses all experience into logical or jyositive thought-determinations, and that which sees in the alogical an element of prior necessity to the logos. This is the point from which Hartmann's metaphj^sic starts. But his system exhibits a hopeless confusion between the spheres of "Theory of Knowledge," Physics, and Meta- physics, which inevitably leads to a fantastic semi-theo- sophicai treatment of the problem. His initial rejection of the dialectical method and nane announcement of the attainment of speculative results, according to the method of natural science, many will think, puts the subse- quent construction out of court at once, so far as serious criticism is concerned. The " Philosophy of the Uncon- scious," and indeed, more or less, all Hartmann's works are without doubt suggestive, and apart from their readable style, they will well repay perusal. Hartmann's pessimism, which has descended straight from Schopenhauer, with, however, the not unimportant modification already men- tioned, is one of the most natural literary expressions of the efiete civilization of an age of transition. This comes out more especially when Hartmann criticises the jDresent order of society with its dull level of mediocrity and growing inequality of social conditions, as though it represented the final stage of human progress. A 'part at least of his argument in the cha2"»ter on the third stage of the illusion, rests upon the assumption that the present basis of society is necessarily permanent. Hartmann sees that things perforce tend from bad to worse, proceeding on current lines, but he ignores the possibility of a fundamental change in the constitution of society, and therefore of human life generalty. The all-degrading black coat of the Bourgeois, covering, as it does, a mental and physical constitution, sodden by profit-mongering in its various 358 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. phases, it does not seem to occur to Hartmann, may possibly account for his pessimism as it does for many other things ; and that pessimistic views of the universe may pass away as a tale that is told, together with the aforesaid black-coated creature, whom he justly takes as the sign and symbol of universal mediocrity. KuDOLPH Hermann Lotze (bom May 21, 1817, died July 1st, 1881) represents another phase of dogmatic reaction against the formalism of Hegel. Just as Hartmann's philosophy is a following out of the doctrines of Schopen- hauer, so Lotze's may be considered as related to those of Herbart, though the connection is, perhaps, not so close in the latter as in the former case. Lotze entirely repudiates the dialectical method and all speculation immediately based on that method, though without on the other hand regarding the methods of physical science as in themselves ultimate. To understand the wait- ings of Lotze, of which ' The Metaphysic ' and ' The Logic ' were the earliest, though the ' Microcosmos ' is the most important, it is necessary to bear in mind that his mind was essentially double-sided. Possessed of a consummate reverence for the methods of physical science, he had an artistic side which could not rest satisfied with those methods considered as final. The following statement of his position is taken froin Herr Merz's article " Lotze," in the ' Encyclopgedia Britannica,' 9th edition : " Lotze's definition of philosophy is given," says Herr Merz, " after his expo- sition of logic has established two points, viz. the existence in our mind of certain laws and forms according to which we connect the material supplied to us by our senses, and, secondly, the fact that logical thought cannot be usefully employed without the assumption of a further set of connexions, not logically necessary, but assumed to exist between the data of experience and observation. These connexions of a real, not formal, character are handed to us by the separate sciences, and by the usage and culture of everyday life. Language has crystallized them into certain definite notions and expressions, without which we cannot go a single step, but which we have accepted without knowing their exact meaning, much less their origin. In LOTZE. 359 consequence the special sciences and the wisdom of common life entangle themselves easily and frequently in contra- dictions. A problem of a purely formal character thus presents itself, viz. this — to try to bring unity and harmony into the scattered thoughts of our general culture ; to trace tlicm to their primary assumptions and follow them to their ultimate consequences ; to connect them all together ; to remodel, curtail, or amplify them, so as to remove their apjoarent contradictions, and to combine them in the unity of an harmonious view of things, and especially to make those conceptions from which the single sciences start as assumptions the object of research, and fix the limits of their applicability. This is the formal definition of philosophy. Whether an harmonious conception thus gained will represent more than an agreement among our thoughts, whether it will represent the real connexion of things, and thus possess objective not merely subjective value, cannot be decided at the outset. It is also un- warranted to start with the expectation that everything in the world should be explained by one principle, and it is a needless restriction of our means to expect unity of method." Lotze's metaphysic starts with an examination of causality, and the categories, in accordance with his defi- nition of metaphysics, as the same which has for its objects of investigation those conceptions and propositions which in ordinary life and in the special sciences are applied as principles of investigation. It is divided into Ontology, Cosmology, and Phenomenology. In entering upon the third division of his Methaphysic, Lotze says (Grimclzuge der Metaphysic, § 26) : " Ontologically we have spoken of the ' essence and states of the existent,' without being able to indicate wherein they either of them properly consisted. Cosmologically, we have assumed that from the.se unknown reciprc^cal effects of things proceeds for us the perceptive world of phenomena. Finally, at the close of the Cosmology, requirements of the mind have made themselves apparent which presumably are only to be satisfied hj an insight into the real nature of the things which constitutes that which the formal conditions of Ontology and Cosmology demand. Now the inner states 360 MODEEN PHILOSOPHY. of all other tilings are impenetrable b}^ ns ; only those of our own soul which we regard as one of these essences do we immediately experience. The hope arises to learn by this example what properly constitutes \h.Q positive essence of other things. We might therefore term the last section of the Metaphysic as hithei to ' Pyschology,' were it not that the soul is only of essential interest to us Jiere in so far as it is the subject of knowledge." In spite of his repudiation of Herbartianism, there is no thinker from whom Lotze has borrowed more than from Herbart. The method formulated by Lotze, that of the reduction of conceptions to distinctness and consistency, is almost identical with that of Herl^art. The extreme pluralism of Herbart is indeed abandoned in favour of what is in essence, a kind of Spinozistic Monism, though it subsequently assumes the regulation theistic guise led up to by " the idea of the Good." As its result Lotze's Metaphysic gives three ultimate ideas, "(1) that of one infinite essence, to whose necessity the ontology points; (2) that which we have developed in brief that all true reality) is possible only in the form of spirituality ; (3) the one just indicated, although properly-speaking indemon- strable by metaphysic itself, that the highest ground for the determination of the world and of our metaphysical thoughts thereupon must be sought in the idea of the highest good." " The union of these three projDOsitions," continues Lotze, " gives the result that the substantial ground of the world is an intelligence whose essence our cognition can only indicate as the living actual good. Everything finite is the action of this infinite. Eeal beings are those of its actions which it continuously maintains as the active and passive centres of out-and-in-going effects; and their 'reality,' that is the relative independence accruing to them, consists not in a ' being outside the infinite ' (which no definition can make clear), but only therein that they are for themselves as spiritual elements ; this for-itselfness is the real in that which we inadequately formulate as ' being outside the infinite.' What we ordinarily call ' things ' and ' events,' are the sum of those other actions which the highest principle in all minds carries out in DUHRING. 361 SO systematic and orderly a connection that this must appear to constitute a spacial workl of substantial and active things. But the meaning of the universal laws in accordance with which the infinite mind proceeds in the creation, maintenance, and regulation of this apparent world of things are consequences of the idea of the good in which its nature consists." (^Grundziige der ^letaphysic, § 94.) The physiological researches of Lotze it is which have given him his position in the world of thought. There is little that is original in the purely philosophical side of his speculation, which, after all is said, amount to no more in the last resort than a quasi- Leibnitzian Theism, dressed up with results derived from Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel (albeit the speculative method b}" which those results are obtained, and in the light of which they alone possess meaning is rejected), and last, but not least, of Herbart. The cleverness with which these ideas, derived from different systems, are pieced together and the whole made to acquire plausibility by being dexterously interwoven with the results of the latest scientific research, has sufficed to give the system a certain importance, which it would not otherwise possess, in current i^hilosophical literature. The best short account of Lotze is that given by Erdmann at the close of the second volume of his history. Among other representatives of current German philo- sophy may be mentioned Eugen Duhring, whose standpoint, that of a somewhat crude materialism, is worked out in" his Cursus der Philosophie, Duhring attaches a high value to Comte and Feuerbach as well as to Buckle and the English empirical thinkers, with the exception of Herbert Spencer, for whom he has a profound contempt. The law of identity is the ultimate law of all reality. (This is of course aimed at the Hegelians. ) It is a fallacy to regard the conceptions of universality and law as ex- changeable ; an individual fact may have the notion of law or necessity attaching to it. Duhring is an 'Atomist. The atom is the ultimate real. The complementary principle to matter in the construction of reality is that of change and permanence. For the cause of the primal 862 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. origin of motion or change in material substance, science is at present unable to offer any satisfactory account ; this is the task for Mechanics in the future. Antagonistic motion is the sole method of progress. Diihring would explain all phenomena on strictly mechanical principles. Like all other cosmic processes, feeling is reducible to the opposition of forces ; all feeling involves a sense of resis- tance. In sense-perception nature, so to say, repeats her- self, hence the natural assumption that perception corre- sponds to objectivity is justified. What the feelings are for knowledge, the emotions are for action. It is not, however, in his philosopliy proper that such importance as Diihring possesses is to be found ; but rather in his criticism of society and in his insights into the future, in which he has borrowed largely from Marx and Lasalle, whom he at the same time attacks for their Hegelianism. We must not omit to notice also the eminent author of the History of Materialism, Fpjedrich Albert Lange (1828-1875). Lange's great work falls into two divisions. Materialism before Kant, and modern Materialism. The first is divided into four sections, which treat respectively of antiquity, the transition period, the seventeenth century, and the eighteenth century. In the first of these Lange explains how the earliest philosopical attempts necessarily led to a materialism, of which the highest development was in the theory of Demokritos, who undoubtedly gave expression to some of the most important doctrines of modern science. The complementary antithesis to materi- alism in antiquity Lange finds in the sceptical sensualism of Protagoras. These are alike opposed to the Sokratic- Platonic philosophy. This portion of the work contains much valuable and interesting criticism. The second section, which deals, beside, with the attitude of the three monotheistic religions to Materialism, shows the essentially antipathetic nature of the Aristotelian philosophy, to the pure empiricism of natural science, which latter indeed only became possible, on the fall of Aristotelianism from the supremacy it held during the middle ages. The third section treats of Gassendi and Ilobbes as the fathers of modern Materialism, and of their influence on the empiricist LANGE. 363 movement in England ; also of the devleopment of the Cartesian mechanical theory of the universe on the conti- nent, into the thorough-going Materialism of La Mettrie and his successors. This last is dealt with in the fourth section of the first book, which also contains Lange's state- ment of his own position towards Materialism. While acknowledging the materialistic attitude to be the only- one comj^atible with the true scientific view of the universe, he finds its weak point in the non-recognition of the fact that the scientific as2:)ect of things is not the only one, but that there are other ways of envisaging the universe which if ignored make man one-sided. The second book treating of the history of Materialism since Kant, is also arranged in four sections, the first deal- ing with Kant himself and his relation to Materialism, together with the post-Kantian materialists, Feuerbach, Moleschott, Buchner, Czolbe, &c., in the course of which Lange clearly shows Kant to be the dividing line which has cut off the possibility of any return to the old naive Materialism of the last century. The second section is concerned more particularly Avith the questions raised by recent scientific research. The result arrived at is that while we have to thank Materialism for the banishment of the notions of miracle and arbitrariness from nature, and for its deliverance of men from the fear of super- natural powers and agencies ; that notwithstanding, its central positive dogma of the absoluteness of corporeal substance cannot stand in face of the advances of modern thought alike in physic and metaphysic. The law of the persistence of force is altogether incompatible with the dogmatic side of materialism. Johannes Mliller's researches into the physiology of the senses bring us back from a standpoint of physical science to the essentially meta- physical result, that the sense-world, our own body of course included, is only a product of our sense-organisa- tion. The latter portion of the work contains an able criticism of the current political economy. Lange strongly deprecates the tendency to confound truth in the sense of mere theoretical truth with worth or desirability. Man has not only the impulse to attain to truth, but also to the good in the sense of the worthful in-itself. Kant's 364 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. Ideas are an instance of confusion between tliese two essentially disparate things. Our notice of Lange's book, one wliicli is perhaps more widely read than any other philosophical work in Germany at the present time, and which has been translated into most European languages, aptly closes our brief sketch of current German philosophical literature, since the philo- sophical activity of Germany at the present time signalises itself rather in the department of historical research than in that of constructive thought. The names of Kuno Fischer, of Erdmann, of Urberweg, of Zeller, and many more, now living or but recently dead, that is well-nigh all the most important German philosophical writers of the present day, illustrate this remark. This tendency of German philosophical thought to turn for its aliment to historical studies is by no means an unmixed evil, if an evil at all. The time has passed, if indeed it ever was, when independent thought was of itself almost sufficient for serious and lasting philosophical work. Henceforward every new departure or development in philosophy must not merely take casual account of, but be consciously based on, the general evolution of philosophy in the past. He who aspires to be a serious thinker and neglects the history of philosophy seals the fate of his work. For this reason the research of the Germans into the history of philosophy is a necessary element in the future progress of philosophy. We now leave Germany to consider the recent and current movement of philosophy in France and England. The French as a nation have never been remarkable for originality in speculative thought, setting aside one or two noteworthy exceptions, of which Descartes is the most striking. As a result, there is only one modern French thinker who will fall within the scope of the present work, and he not so much because of his originality as on account of his relations to contemporary English thought and of the influence he has exercised directly or indirectly on the average "cultured" Englishman of the present generation. The thinker referred to is Auguste Comte. Comte was born at Montpellier in 1798, and died at Paris COMTE. 365 in 1857. Originally a disciple of Saint-Simon, the most learned and original of the Utopian-Socialist thinkers of the first half of the present century, Comte's joolitical and social speculations hear the unmistakable impress of their original, though it may be fairly doubted whether this has been improved by the transformation it has undergone. The philosophical side of " Positivism," as Comte designated his system, consists in a classification of the mathematical and natural sciences and a systemati- sation of the conclusions of scientific method. The net result is not altogether unlike the system of Hegel in- verted. The great polemic of the Philosophie Positive is against what Comte terms the metaphysical spirit and metaj^hj^sical entities, but which, translated into other language, are simply the hypostasized abstractions proper to the absiract-dogmatic phase of thought. This is all that is meant by the second of the three stages through which Auguste Comte claims the human mind to pass. The parallel between Comte and Hegel, just referred to, has been noticed elsewhere. " It is worthy of remark," says Mr. Shadworth-Hodgson (' Time and Space,' p. 399 et seq.), " that there are many points of resemblance between the Logic of Hegel, the protagonist of Ontology, and the Philosojyhie Positive of Comte, the protagonist of Positivism. There is first the similarity of Hegel's Absolute Mind and Comte's Vrai Grand Eire, or Humanity, each of which is the concomitant result, if I may so speak, of the evolution of the world-history; each of which is personified as a single individual ; and each of which is the object of divine honours; and these three points of similarity suppose several minor ones. Then again, there is the progression by triplets in Hegel, in which the first member is the an sich, the last the an unci fiir sich, and the middle the transition between them ; while the last stage, when reached, throws back light upon the nature of both the previous stages, not understood before they had pro- duced their results. To this answers Comte's doctrine of a triple stage in the actual history of all development, the middle of which is but a transitional state, which cannot be judged of till the last stage has been reached, for which it was a preparation ; for instance, in the fields of the 866 MODERiq PHILOSOPHY. intellectual, the active, and the affective functions of man, three stages may be observed : in the first, the fictive, the abstract, and the positive stage ; in the second, the con- quering, the defensive, and the industrial ; and in the third, the domestic, the civil, and the universal." Poli- tique Positive, vol. 4, chap. iii. p. 177. And again ('Time and Space,' pp. 401-2), Mr. Shadworth-Hodgson continues : " Both writers, each from his own point of view, and in his own half of the world, move round the same centre ; for the principle which they share is the central truth of their two systems. This truth in Hegel is, that the universe can only be described, analysed, and known within itself. In the Philosophie Positive, the ruling thought, as exhibited in the Law of the Three States and elsewhere, is, that the search after causes is vain, and is superseded by the search after laws. In other words, analyse the order of co-existence and the order of sequence of phenomena within the world of phenomena, but seek no cause for any of them that is not itself a phenomenon. Both conceptions are the same, namely, to keep within phenomena, to analyse their order and interdependence, and to abstain from going beyond or seeking the Why of the universe; instead of this, to seek only for the necessary or universal antecedents of particular objects, as parts of the whole. A difference between them there is, and a wide one, namely, that this mode of philosophising is in Comte a renunciation of an attempt as useless, while in Hegel it is a claim to have succeeded in that attempt, the attempt to seize the Absolute. Look only for laws and not for causes, say they both ; philosophy is the dis- covery of laws and not of causes ; the absolute is not to be seized, remain within your fixed limits. But ^Nh.J is the absolute not to be seized? With Hegel because it has been seized already, is defined, and contains all causes within it ; with Comte, because it cannot be seized at all, and we must content ourselves without causes. Equally however in both cases is the search for cause given up."* * While quoting tlie above passages as expressing an undoubted parallel between the two thinkers in question, the present writer must not be understood as accepting every statement contained in them. COMTE. • oC7 To this may be added that even Conite's polemic against what he calls materialism, that is the explanation of the phenomena of a higher plane of natnre by those of a lower, e.g. the treatment of social phenomena on physio- logical principles alone, or of vital phenomena on chemical principles, and so on, has its parallel in the potences of Schelling and the determinate momenta of the Natur- philosophie of Hegel. Comte's law of the three stages with which the Positive Philosophy opens is as follows : " That each of our leading conceptions — each branch of our knowledge — passes successively through three different theoretical conditions : the Theological, or fictitious ; the Metaphysical, or abstract ; and the Scientific, or positive. In other words, the human mind, by its nature, employs in its progress three methods of philosophising, the character of which is essentially different, and even radically opposed, viz. the theological, the metaphysical, and the positive method. Hence arise three philosophies, or general systems of concep- tions on the aggregate of phenomena, each of which excludes the others. The first is the necessary point of departure of the human understanding ; and the third is its fixed and definite state. The second is merely a state of transition " CComte's ' Positive Philosophy,' Martineau, vol. i. pp. 1-2). The employment of the word metaphysical to denote the second of these stages is entirely arbitrary. The originality and importance of the doctrine itself has moreover been greatly exaggerated. Students of Hegel will be familiar with the truth embodied in the conception, although otherwise expressed. In the first of the three stages, the modifications of phenomena are referred to the arbitrary wall of a being or beings believed to be present in or ruling over those phenomena ; in the second of the three stages, the cause of the phenomena and their modifications is referred to certain properties inherent in bodies, but which are abstracted from the body or whole to which they belong, and conceived as distiuct entities or powers acting upon that body independently. The third, the so-called positive or scientific stage, abandons the search for causes which had characterised the two previous stages, and restricts itself to the endeavour to discover the law, that 368 MODEEN PHILOSOPHY. is the order of succession and co-existence obtaining within the various groups or departments of natural phenomena. According to Auguste Comte, all sciences have reached the positive stage, to a greater or less extent according to the complexity or simplicity of their subject-matter, with the exception of the last and most complex of them all, the science of man considered as a social and a moral being. Of this last science, as a science, he claims to have been the founder, and to it he gives the name of Sociology. Comte had inherited from Saint-Simon the idea that all mere theoretical knowledge, and indeed all special departments of human activity whatever, should be subordinate to one great practical end ; the reorgani>sation o£ human life and society. This it is only fair to remember was the goal he set before him from the first, and to this goal, there can be no doubt, he meant all his scientific work to lead. Hence the filiation of the sciences in the form of a hierarchy culminating in Sociology, and hence the importance attached to the elaboration of the latter science. The positive method hitherto had been confined in its appli- cation to special groups or orders of phenomena, in other words, the separate sciences, without those sciences ever having been co-ordinated into a whole or complete philo- sophy in accordance with that method. This co-ordination it is the aim of the Positive Philosophy to accomplish. The key to the arrangement of the sciences Comte finds in the notions, (1) that the order of scientific study follows the order of phenomena: and (2) that the more special and complex phenomena depend upon the more general and simple. The most general facts will therefore be the first that will be studied, and the first to reach perfection as regards their formulation, i.e. the positive method. The hierarchy followiug these principles is ar- ranged thus : Mathematics, Astronomy, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, and Sociology; each step in this arrangement involves something specially its ovra over and above that involved in the previous step. It should be premised that Comte makes a primary distinction between abstract and concrete sciences ; the first (science proper) with which the hierarchy is alone concerned, treats of the abstract COMTE. 369 relations or general laws of the various groups of pheno- mena, the second with the history or description of the phe- nomena themselves, and with the special application of those laws. The Philosopliie Positive is comprised in six volumes, of which the first three treat of the simpler or inferior sciences, and the last three of Sociology, which, as we have said, it is the great aim of Angnste Comte to establish on a positive, that is, inductive, basis. The law of the three states and the conception of the hierarchy of the sciences together constitute the framework of the Comtian system. The one shows us the necessary course of human know- ledge ; the other the necessary dependecce of phenomena, and brings the phenomena of human society as much under the domain of law as those of Chemistrj^ or Physics. This does not mean with Comte, that social phenomena can be adequately treated on the methods of any of the lower sciences ; on the contrary, he especially insists on each science having its own special logic, terming the non- recognition of this fact — the treatment of a higher science on the methods of a lower — materialism ; all he means is that social science is impossible a|3art from Biology, that this again presupposes Chemistry, while Chemistry pre- supposes Physics, &c. ; the whole series of the sciences resting on the fundamental laws of number, proportion, magnitude, &c., that is, on Mathematics. Having given a brief view of the general principles on which Positivism rests, we projoose to say a few words, first on Comte's view of historic evolution and afterwards on the scheme of social reconstruction, in the elaboration i.if which the later period of his career was occupied. The fundamental idea of Comte's philosophy of history is the coincidence of the first or theological stage of the nnman mind with a military state of society. This, on -sing into Avhat Comte terms the metaphysical stage, is ■ompanied by a conflict between the military and the industrial spirit, which last is the social expression of the rial stage, the positive or scientific. Briefly expressed, the division is into offensive militaiyism, defensive aiilitaryism, and industry. The key to Comte's theory of history is thus to be found in his law of the three stages, 2 B 370 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. from which it is further obvious that he regards the cardinal factor in human development (a point in which the re- doubtable founder of Positivism is in full accord with the much decried " metaphysical " thinkers of the eighteenth century) to be man's intellectual side. " Though the elements of our social evolution are connected and always acting on each other, one must be preponderant, in order to give an impulse to the rest, though they may, in their turn, so act upon it as to cause its further expansion. AVe must find out this superior element, leaving the lower degrees of subordination to disclose themselves as we proceed ; and we have not to search far for this element, as we cannot err in taking that which can be best conceived of apart from the rest, not- withstanding their necessary connection, while the con- sideration of it would enter into the study of the others. This double characteristic points out the intellectual evo- lution as the prejDonderant principle. If the intellectual point of ^dew was the chief in our statical study of the organism, much more must it be so in the dynamical case. If our reason required at the outset the awakening and stimulating influence of the appetites, the passions, and the sentiments, not the less has human progression gone forward under its direction. It is only through the more and more marked influence of the reason over the general conduct of Man and of society, that the gradual march of our race has attained that regularity and persevering continuity which distinguish it so radically from the desultory and barren expansion of even the highest of the animal orders, which share, and with enhanced strength, the ajjpetites, the passions, and even the primary sentiments of Man " (Comte's ' Positive Philosophy,' Martineau, vol. ii. p. 156). After stating the principles of the new science, Comte proceeds to give a sketch of historic evolution in the light of these principles. The theological and military system already begins with the primitive stage of universal fetichism in which every object is personified or endowed with will. Its immediate development is the ascendency of star-worship (astrolatry) merging into polytheism, the most perfect type of which is to be found in the theocratio civilisations of the East, which represent its first phase, COMTE. 371 and of which the ancient Egyptian civilisation may be taken as a model. In the second phase presented in the earlier classical civilisation of Greece, we have what Comte terms an intellectual polytheism. No priestly caste exists snch as in Egjq^t. As a consequence, intellectual activity has a free outlet. In the third or Eoman period, that of the later classical polytheism, we have a civilisation in which military ism is supreme, and conquest the all-power- ful motive-power, nnd not as in Greece a mere co-ordinate factor in social lilo, or as in Egjq^t subordinate to a sacerdotal class. The old polytheism already undermined by the metajDhysical thought of Greece, could now no longer offer any resistance to the incursion of Semitic monotheism. The prevailing conception itself even had come to assume in the popular mind a form somewhat analogous to this. "The popular idea of monotheism," says Comte, " closely resembles the latest polytheistic con- ception of a multitude of supernatural beings, subjected directly, regularly, and permanently to the sway of a single will, by which their respective offices are appointed; and the popular instinct justly rejects as barren the notion of a god destitute of ministers. Thus regarded, the transi- tion, through the idea of Fate, to the conception of Provi- dence, is clear enough, as effected by the metaphysical spirit in its growth." The civilisation in which the new monotheism issued was the feudal-catholic organisation of the middle ages. This, the ideal period of Positivism, is characterised first and foremost by the separation of the spiritual and temporal powers, which is accompanied by the conversion of slavery into serfdom, by the institution of chivalry, by the domination of morality over polity, &c. With the decline and break-up of mediaeval society commences the transitional era of the " metaphysical sj)irit " par excellence^ which reaches its culmination in the revolutionary philo- sophy of the eighteenth century, and in the ideas, such as " natural religion," "popular sovereignty," " liberty," &c., characteristic of the revolutionary epoch of which the great crisis was the French Eevolution, but through which we are still passing. This is destined in its turn to issue in the positive regime^ social, political, and religious, as 2 B 2 oi2 MODERN PHILOSOPHY described in Comte's work, * The Positive Polity,' and in a condensed form in the ' Positivist Catechism,' and the ' General View of Positivism.' This, as the reader is doubtless aware, has been described as Catholicism minus Christianity ; with how much of justice may be gathered from what follows. Comte's aim in the constructive portion of his work was to reconstitute human life " without God or King " * (sans Dieu ni Roi). It has been alleged by a certain section of Comte's disciples that there is a diiference of attitude, amounting, indeed, to a change of front, between the earlier and the later sides of Comte's doctrine. An examination of the works themselves will, we think, convince the candid outsider that there is no adequate ground for this assertion. In the later works, it is true, the less pleasing sides of Comte's temper and character assume greater prominence than in the earlier. Views which in the Philosophie Positive are expressed with the modesty and reserve of the philosopher, reappear in the Politique Positive and other writings, belonging to this period, with all the asperity of dogmas pronounced ex cathedra by a pontiff, and to dispute which is impious. Comte's religious disciples would probably defend this attitude as becoming the prophet-priest of a new cultus ; but that of course is their affair. It must also be remembered that the hypo- thetical construction of a social order must necessarily involve a play of the imagination which would be altogether out of place in what claims to be a scientific exposition. Comte divides this portion of his system into the " worship," the " doctrine," and the " regime,^' or " mode of life." The worship has for its object Humanity considered as a corporate being, past, present, and to come. For this worship, public and private, an elaborate ceremonial is mapped out, rivalling the Catholic ritual. The priesthood of the Comtian cultus are to be entrusted with the functions of teaching and moral exhortation. * Not as Mr. Bridges reudefs it on the titlepage of his translation of the ' General View of Positivism ' (presumably with a wholesome dread of tlie British Philistine before his eyes) irrespectively of God or Kin":. COMTE. oY.J They are to constitute a great spiritual power, resembling the Catholic hierarchy of the middle ages, but posses- sing neither wealth nor material influence. The doctrine tiiught, the creed of the new religion, consists of course of the Positive Philosophy. The third part, "the life," embraces a description of the Comtian social and political organization which is to be the material basis of the whole. Politically the Positivist world is to consist of a commonwealth, at first composed of the five western nations of Europe, though ultimately destined to absorb the whole world. Socially, the modern distinction of classes with some modification is to be maintained. The middle classes are to form a hierarchy on an ascending scale, proceeding from the agricultural interest, which is the lowest, to the manufacturing interest, thence to the mercantile interest, and culminating in the banking interest. Outside this hierarchy is the bulk of the peo^Dle, the proletariat together with the women who are to be rigorously excluded from all industrial as well as public function, and of course the priestly class. The various minute, and to the non- PositiAdst, exceedingly funny regulations of public and private conduct, may be perused in the works above mentioned. As regards the philosophical side of Positivism, it may be and has been criticised from a variety of standpoints. The most important ad liominem criticism is that of the scientific specialist who declares Comte's treatment of the special sciences in the first three volumes of the Philosojjhie Positive to display inadequate knowledge of the several subjects treated, and a dogmatism as to results, which was not justified by the then state of those sciences, as is proved by the fact that many of them have failed to stand the test of later research. The hierarchy itself, as laid down by Comte, has been severely challenged in various quarters, and the artificial character of any purely linear arrangement has been more than once pointed out. Turning to what many of his disciples think Comte's greatest title to philosophic fame, the foundation and elaboration of the science of Sociology, we should begin by denying his claim to originality. Kant clearly had the conception of such a science, as already mentioned (see 374 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. above, p. 251); tlie same may be said of Herder ; while Hegel distinctly formulated a sociological doctrine, besides working out a philosophy of history on its lines. The notion, therefore, of a continuity between the order of nature and that of human society was certainly not new. Just as little original was the notion of the main deter- minant of human progress being the speculative side of things; this was the view of the French eighteenth- century thinker, of a Turgot and Condorcet, no less than of the German metaphysician. That there are true and valuable suggestions to be found in Comte's philosophy of history, it would be unjust to deny ; but it Avould be vain to deny that alike its fundamental principle and much of its working-out belongs to an antiquated method of dealing with history, and will not stand in face of the light thrown upon social development by later thought, in which, for the first time, we have the clue to a really scientific theory of historical development — a theory which finds the determining factor in progress, to lie in economical and social condition rather than in speculative thought — in short, which treats political, religious and social forms as primarily growing out of material conditions, and not vice-versa, as in all preceding philosophies of history. Having said thus much in derogation of the exaggerated claims to recognition sometimes made on behalf of Comt^ as regards Sociology, it remains to notice the real step he undoubtedly effected ; this consisted in emphasising the truth that the highest significance of the individual is to be found in Society and a fortiori in Humanity. No one before so distinctly seized the fact of the essential unreality of the individual considered per se — the fact that his end is social. The travesty of this doctrine furnished in the religious cultiis of Positivism must not blind us to its intrinsic importance. There is one claim made by the Positivists on behalf of their master, which we think every non-Comtian ac- quainted with the information we possess as to his character will be inclined to meet with an unqualified denial. We are asked to admire, and indeed to regard as in eifect a paragon of moral excellence, the personality of Comte himself as exhibited in his life. Now we do not COMTE. o75 hesitate to say that to most persons who have read Littre's biography of Comte, and are tolerably familiar with the later works, Comte's personality will appear as an exceed- ingly repulsive one, judged by all ordinary standards. Possessed of a personal vanity so oifensive in its manifesta- tions and grotesque in its proportions, as to make us almost pardon it on the ground of disease, a superficial reader might be excused for supposing that the one object of the founder of Positivism was its satisfaction. This of course would be an unfair judgment, but the fact remains that before this vanity no relation in life was sacred. After having absorbed the thought of a man of far greater genius, if of less learning and capacity for hard work than himself; a man who had befriended him in his youth, when he most needed friend- ship, he not only found no difficulty in casting him aside, when he saw the way clear for posing as an independent thinker, but with incredible baseness could stoop to vilify his former friend, lest perchance that friend should carry off a scintilla of the merit there was in his own works. A somewhat similar occui-rence took place with regard to John Stuart Mill, on whose generosity he lived for a considerable time. When Mill found it impossible to continue the assistance he, in conjunction with Grote and Molesworth, had been affording, all the recognition received was a rebuke savouring of the worst type of pretentious charlatanry. These may be old charges, but they have never been satisfactorily refuted, and the opinion one unavoidably forms of the moral dis- position they indicate is confirmed not only by number- less other small traits (even if we exonerate Comte from all blame in his relations to his wife), but by the tone of many passages in the ' General View,' by almost every page of the ' Catechism,' and by much in the ' Corre- spondence.' In this particular instance one may be excused noting these things, since it is by way of protest against the attempt that is sometimes made to convert one of the most morally inferior of mortals, into something like an object of adoration. The quite theological reverence with which Positivists regard the scriptures of their Messiah is well known. Since Auguste Comte wrote, and even since his death, 376 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. advances have been made in science, which to a great extent have revolutionised conclusions accepted during the earlier half of the century. It is not Comte's fault there- fore if there is much in the scientific aspects of his doctrine which is hopelessly obsolete. But the same cannot be said of certain of his followers, when in their zeal for the infalli- bility of the sacred text they resent advances in science and even denounce those whose names are connected with them. After this it can only excite a smile, that Comte having been gifted with a particularly bad literary style, it should be the mark of the good Positivist to underrate matters of style in general. Positivism, we may remark in conclusion, partakes of the nature of those systems, the inevitable product of great periods of transition, which are imperfect assimilations of a new principle, and which appear as hybrids between the existing yet decaying order of things and ideas and the new tendencies which are beginning to destroy it, manifesting itself of course in its main strength on the particular side of human affairs on which the pro- gressive movement primarily turns. During the period of the decline of the Eoman empire the most prominent aspect of the movement of change was Ethical and Speculative ; its expression being in the Christian religion as opposed to Paganism. Hence we have the Semi- Pagan, Semi- Christian, Gnostic systems and subsequently that of Manes, all of which combine elements belonging both to Christianity and Paganism. The dominant aspect of the new tendencies in our present period of transition is more fundamental ; it is, that is to say, toward a material reconstrudion of society on a basis of equality, apart from the theological and ethical sanctions which have hitherto obtained. Positivism in part recognises this; its main interest lies in social renovation, but in this it seeks to preserve the material basis of the present society while rejecting its speculative counterpart. Even its ethics it retains. The change is to be efi'ected on the old principles of individual ethical initiative and regeneratiou from within, rather than through economic and social recon- struction. Its non-theological attitude, its profes.-ed devo- tion to human progress as the supreme end of all institu- MILL. o77 tions, ill accords with the superstitious reverence attached to certain traditional social forms. The immolation of human happiness before the Comtian Moloch " social order " is in keeping with a cultas in which humaiiity is transformed into a supreme fetich, demanding a drastic asceticism as the highest expression of her worship, and of which the prospective virgin mother is the symbol and ideal. The contemporary British philosophical movements were until the advent of Herbert Spencer almost exclusively confined to Psychology and formal Logic. In the past generation the main i)hilosophical controversey was that between the Empirical Associationists and Psychological Intuitionists, represented on the one side by the younger Mill, following the footsteps of his father, and on the other, Sir William Hamilton, in conjunction with whom may be mentioned his i)upil, Henry Longueville Mansel. The results of Aesociationism and of the Scotch school of Psy- chology, generally, have been s^^stematized and presented a form adapted to university students by Alexander Bain. The philosophy of Mill, and the modern empirical school, generally, is really but little more than a restate- ment of the principles laid down in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries by Hobbes, Locke, Berkeley and Hume. The reduction of all mental phenomena to the em2:)irical association of ideas is its characteristic. The intuitional school, of which Hamilton may be regarded as the chief exponent, was a development with modifications along the lines of Reid. Both schools alike reject the ten- dencies of German speculation, which at this period was represented in this island by one writer only, namely Terrier, the author of the ' Institutes of Metaphysic,' who, although an original writer, had but imperfectly assimi- lated its results. Probably no one, with the exception perhaps of Herbert Spencer, is more connected with philosophical studies in the mind of the average Englishman than John Stuart Mill. During the latter ]3art of his life he was eminently the English philosopher. He undoubtedly contributed to popularise the results of the associational school to an 378 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. extent whicli no one had done before him. The lucidity of his style was sufficient to place the problems with which he dealt before the minds of persons altogether un- used to abstract thought. Nevertheless, Mill cannot be said to have contributed any new development even to psychology, much less to philosophy in general. His father, James Mill, was in the direct line of the Scotch Psychological School, in which the younger Mill in conse- quence received a thorough training from his earliest years. As a young man Mill met with the works of August Comte, and acknowledges having received a powerful stimulus from them. All Mill's work is essen- tially critical. Nearly all his independent contributions to Psychology are contained in his ' Examination of Hamilton.' It is here that the dissertation on perception is to be found, the result of which is Mill's well-known definition of the objective-real as " permanent possibility of sensation." The philosophical polemic of Mill's life as expressed in his two great works — the ' System of Logic ' and the ' Examination of Sir William Hamilton's Philo- sophy ' above referred to — is with the somewhat crude psychological theory of innate ideas against which Locke had protested. The diiference is, however, that whereas in Locke's time nobody had ever conceived such monstro- sities, nor would have conceived of them had not Locke found it convenient to set up the theory as a target to attack ; Locke having once started the doctrine as the object of his polemic, a school of intuitionists naturally grew up who made it their business to champion this doc- trine. Hamilton and his school were the upholders of this rival psj^chological theory. We believe thinking men will generally agree when we describe the main result of Mill's work as that of a powerful stimulus. He stirred up the minds of many to the consideration of problems which had previously Jain outside their range of mental vision. Alexander Bain is probably the best knoAvn and most voluminous of contemporary British writers of the psychological school. His ' Sensations and Intellect,' and ' Emotions and Will,' his ' ]\lental and Moral Science,' and his ' Logic, are more or less familiar to every student, and any analysis of them will therefore be unnecessary. LEWES. 379 We may, however, mention as the chief original result arrived at by Bain his elaborate attempt in the second volume of his ' Logic ' to identify the notion of the " per- sistence of force " with that of causality, or more accurately, to deduce causality from the "persistence of force." The versatile writer and critic George Henry Lewes (1817-78), although in his earlier years he maybe con- sidered simj^ly as an adherent of the ' Philosoj)hic Positive,' towards the close of his life elaborated a system of his own, embodied in a work entitled ' Problems of Life and Mind,' which although not completed in detail at the time of his death, was sufdciently advanced to aiford a general view of its leading principles. Lewes's deviations from *' Positive" method lie rather in the direction of extend- ing its scope. Problems which his master Comte, and he himself previously, would have declared insoluble, he now claims to treat according to the principles of science. "While the first rule of his philosophy is : "no problem to be mooted unless it be presented in terms of experience, and be capable of empirical investigation," he refuses to admit that problems hitherto regarded as essentially metaphysical, such as matter, force, cause, law, soul, &c., cannot be presented in those terms, and solved on the methods of induction. Lewes even retains the name Metaphysics for these probleais, inventing the term Metempirics for their treatment on non-empirical methods. Each problem has what Lewes terms an " unexplored remainder," that is to say, an unknowable element which has to be eliminated before the problem can be dealt with on the Positive method. No science is more than sym- bolical of reality. " Its most absolute conclusions," says Lewes, " are formed from abstractions expressing modes of existence which never were and never could be real ; and are very often at variance with sensible experience." Scieace thus represents a transformed reality, an ideal world of its own. " Science is in no way a plain transcript of Eealit}^, in no respect a picture of the External Order, but wholly an ideal construction, in which the manifold relations of Reals are taken up and assimilated by the mind and then transformed into relatious of ideas, so that the world of sense is changed into the world of thought.^* 880 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. The aim of philosophy is not, therefore, to give a magnified picture of the workl, as it might appear to enhanced powers of sense, but to reconstruct an ideal world of abstract relations. The difference between the recon- structed ideal world of science and that of the Metaphy- sicians, or Metempiricists, as Lewes would call them, is, therefore, that the one can be verified and the other not ; the one starts from experience and returns to experience, the other altogether leaves the region of experience. The result of Lewes's attempt to treat philosophical problems on scientific methods, can hardly be described as satisfac- toiy, as to some extent indicated in the comparatively small success which, in proporti(m to the importance of its claims, the work attained. The treatment of the cardinal question of the relation of subject and object, as one might expect from the standpoint occupied, exhibits confusion between the scientific fact of the union of mental and material ]>henomena in one organism, and the meta- physical fact of all phenomena being determinations (jf consciousness. The Monistic position is arrived at in the form of an inference from the parallelism discoverable between physical and psychical processes. This fundamental con- fusion between the physical and the metaphysical stand- points, naturally pervades the treatment of each of the 'Problems of Life and Mind.' Lewes's accentuation of the disiinction between the ideality of science and the reality of " common sense " denotes nevertheless an undoubted abvance on the previous thought of the empirical school. It remains now to give a somewhat more detailed notice of the system of Herbert Spencer, whose influence has been and still is wide-reaching and considerable. Spencer, like Lewes, Mill, and the other English T^TL'iters of his generation, has been strongly influenced by the writings of A.uguste Comte. 'i'he philosophy of Herbert Spencer starts with the distinction between the knowable and the unknowable, the absolute and the relative. This pronounced de- marcation, amounting almost to dualism, is the foun- SPENCER, 381 dation of Spencer's system. The first and smallest division of his philosophy, which deals with the unknow- able, proclaims the existence of the Absolute or the absoluteness of Existence (for the two expressions are in Spencer's case almost interchangeable), outside the phenomenal world, but at the same time Spencer proclaims our nescience of all that concerns this Absolute. Our very recognition of the relativitj' of knowledge is meaningless except in contradistinction to a non-relative or Absolute. "We have seen," he says in summing up liis argument, " how in the very assertion that all our knowledge properly so called is Eelative, there is involved the assertion that there exists a Non-relative. We have seen how, in each step of the argument by which this doctrine is established, the same assumption is made. We have seen how, from the very necessity of thinking in relation, it follows that the Eelative is itself incon- ceivable except as related to a Non-relative. We have seen that unless a Non-relative or Absolute be postulated, the Eelative itself becomes absolute; and so brings the argument to a contradiction. And on contemplating the process of thought, we have equally seen how impossible it is to get rid of the consciousness of an actuality lying behind appearances ; and how, from this impossibility, results our indestructible belief in that actuality." (' First Principles,' pp. 96-7.) In a chapter on " ultimate scientific ideas," Herbert Spencer endeavours to show how all scientific conceptions rest ultimately on the insoluble. Matter, force, space, time on ultimate analysis, abut on incomprehensibility, in other words, they commit us to what Spencer terms "alternative impossibilities of thought." He has already shown this to be the case with ultimate religious ideas. The reconciliation Spencer professes to effect between science and religion consists in the recognition by the former of the existence of an Absolute behind phenomena, and by the latter of the absolutely inscrutable nature of this existence. The relation of philosophy to science is that of the general to the particular ; just as the relation of science to ordinary knowledge is that of the general to the par- ticular. " As each widest generalisation of science com- 382 MODEEN PHILOSOPHY. prelicnds and consolidatos the narrower generalisations of its own division; so the generalisations of Phih'Soplij- comprehend and consolidate the widest generalisations ol science. It is therefore a knowledge of the extreme opposite in kind to that which experience first accumu- lates. It is the final product of that process which begins with a mere colligation of crude observations, goes on establishing piopositions that are broader and more sej^a- rated from particular cases, and ends in universal propo- sitions. Or to bring the definition to its simplest and clearest form : — knowledge of the lowest kind is un-unified knowledge; science is 2^cirtially-unified knowledge; philo- sophy is completely -unified knowledge." (' First Princi- ples,' pp. 133-4.) The positive or constructive side of the Spencerian philosophy is based upon the doctrine of Evolution. The data of science, space, time, matter, motion and force, are treated at the outset from a psychological standpoint. The psychological definition given of reality is interesting and important. " By reality we mean persistence in consciousness : a persistence that is either unconditional, as our consciousness of space, or, that is conditional, as our consciousness of a body while grasj^ing it. The real, as we conceive it, is distinguished solely by the test of persistence ; for by this test we separate it from what we call the unreal." On the strength of this definition conjoined wdth what has preceded, the conclusion is once more drawn that we have " an indefinite consciousness of an absolute reality transcending relations, which is pro- dnced by the absolute persistence in us of something which survives all changes of relation." Also, that we have a definite reality, which unceasingly persists in us, under one or other of its forms, and under each form so long as the conditions of presentation are fulfilled. The distinction between the two is consequently not one as between greater and less reality, for both are alike real, but between two different kinds of leality. Spencer's test of truth — the ultimate criterion in philo- sophy — is the " inconceivability of the opposite ; " that is to say, where the opposite of a given proposition is inconceivable, that proposition is true. This, be it observed, SfENCEIi. 3S3 is only a roundabout way of affirniiug that self-consistency of thought on -which the speculative or generic method is founded. Reality has already been defined as persistence in consciousness ; on the strength of this, Spencer is of course a realist. He terms his doctrine transfigured realism as opposed to the naive realism of popular conception. The " indestructibilit}^ of matter," like the " persistence of force," is deduced from the fundamental postulate of the "inconceivability of the opp(»site," the contrary of each of the.se assumptions being shown to involve an impossibility of thought. No less axiomatic is the idea of the continuity of motion. " The first deduction," says Spencer, " to be drawn from the ultimate universal truth that force persists, is that the relations among forces persist. Supposing a given manifestation of force, under a given form and given conditions, be either preceded by, or succeeded by some other manifesta- tion, it must, in all cases where the form and conditions are the same, be preceded by or succeeded by such other manifestation. Every antecedent mode of the Unknow- able must have an invariable connection, quantita- tive and qualitative, with that mode of the Unknowable which we call its consequent. For to say otherwise is to deny the persistence of force. If in any two cases there is exact likeness, not only between those most conspicuous antecedents, which we distinguish as the causes, but also between those accompanying antecedents, which we call the conditions, we cannot affirm that the effects will differ, without affirming either that some force has come into existence or that some force has ceased to exist. If the co-operative forces in the one case are equal to those in the other, each to each, in distribution and amount, then it is impossible to conceive the product of their joint action in the one case as unlike that in the other, without con- ceiving one or more of the forces to have increased or diminished in quantity ; and this is conceiving that force is not persistent." (' First Principles,' p. 193.) The transformation and equivalence of force, the direction of motion, which is shown to be in the line of least resis- tance and in the direction of the greatest force ; the Thythm of motion, by which is meant the oscillations 384 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. invariably accompanying motion in every department of phenomena, are deduced fiom the ultimate principle of the Persistence of force. 1 hese things are what Spencer terms the components of phenomena. It now remains, after " having seen that matter is indestructible, motion con- tinuous, and force persistent ; having seen that forces are everywhere undergoing transformation, and that motion, always following the line of least resistance, is invariably rhythmic ; it remains to discover the similarly invariable formula expressing the combined consequences of the actions thus separately formulated." The formula sought may be defined as the law of the continuous redistribution of matter and motion. All objects individually and collec- tively are undergoing every instant some change of state. In other words they are absorbing motion or losing motion. The question to be answered is therefore what dynamic principle obtaining at once in general and detail, expresses this constant change of relation. All processes of change may be divided into two classes, those of integration or evolution, and those of dis- integration or dissolution. Evolution always means in the last resort the concentration of matter accompanied by the dissipation of motion ; while dissolution means the reverse process, that is, the diffubion of matter and the absorption of motion. One or other of these processes is going on in every perceived whole. Evolution may be furtlier described as the progress from an indefinite and homogeneous state to a definite and heterogeneous state. Evolution may be simple or compound. Where the onl}^ forces at work are those directly tending to produce aggregation or diffusion, there will be no more than the approach of the components of the aggregate or whole towards the common centre ; in other words, the process of evolution will be simple ; such will be the case, more- over, where the forces tending towards the centre are greatly in excess of other forces ; or when, on account of the smallness of the mass, or the smallness of the quantity of motion it receives from without, the process proceeds rapidly. But when, on the contrary, from whatever cause, the process proceeds slowly, then the mass will be appreciably modified by other forces. In addition to SPENCER. 885 the chief primary change of integration, secondary and supplementary changes will be produced ; the process of evolution will, in other words, be compound. This principle Spencer proceeds to illustrate at length in the course of the discussion, some important facts being brought out, as that the quantity of secondarj' redistribu- tion in an organism varies according to the contained quantity of the motion we call heat, &c. The principles of evolution are then discussed in detail ; first, in their primary aspect of simple evolution, and afterwards more especially with respect to the secondary redistributions constituting compound evolution. It having been shown that all existences must reach their ultimate shape through processes of concentration. it remains for Spencer to show how different orders of phenomena do actually exhibit the process of the integra- tion of matter, and the dissipation of motion. " Tracing, so far as we may by observation and inference, the objects dealt with by the Astronomer and the Geologist, as w^ell as those which Biology, Psychology and Sociology treat of, we have to consider what direct proof there is that the Cosmos, in general and in detail, conforms to this law." In the course of the ensuing discussion it is shown that the same process is going on in the several parts or members of aggregates, as in the wholes. Thus, while there has been a gradual concentration of the Solar system from its primitive nebulous state, there has been none the less a concentration going on in each planet. The same applies to the geological development of the earth regarded as itself an aggregate ; to that of the animal from the embryo ; to the differentiation of species and to the development of society. '' Alike during the evolution of the Solar system, of a planet, of an organism, of a nation, there is progressive aggregation of the entire mass. This may be shown by the increasing density of the matter already contained in it ; or by the drawing into it of matter that was before separate, or by both. But in any case it implies a loss of relative motion. At the same time, the parts into which the mass has divided, severally consolidate in like manner. We see this in that formation of planets and satellites which has gone 2 c 386 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. on along witli the concentration of the nebula out of which the Solar system originated ; we see it in the growth of separate organs that advances, pari passu, with the growth of each organism ; we see it in that rise of special industrial centres, and special masses of population, which is associated with the rise of each society. Always more or less of local integration accompanies the general integration. And then, beyond the incieased closeness of juxtaposition among the components of the whole, and among the components of each part, there is increased closeness of combination among the parts, producing mutual dependence of them." (' First Principles,' p. 328.) The secondary process which accompanies the primary in evolution may be formulated as one from the homo- geneous and indefinite to the heterogeneous and definite. Spencer shows this exhaustively a posteriori in the departments of Astronomy, Geology, Biology, Philology, Psychology, and Sociology, &c. In the chapter on the *' instability of the homogeneous," is illustrated with characteristic wealth of examples the tendency of the homogeneous and indefinite towards change ; how impos- sible is the continuance of an aggregate in the state of homogeneity. Another factor in the evolutionary process is the " multiplication of eifects," that is, the tendency of the incident force acting upon a uniform aggregate to become itself differentiated in a ratio corresponding with the differentiation of the aggregate. Thus, when one body is struck against another, besides the visible mechanical result, sound, or a vibration in the bodies and in the surrounding air, is produced ; the air has moreover had currents raided in it by the passage of the bodies through it ; there is a disarrangement of particles of the bodies around their point of collision ; heat is disengaged; in some cases a spark or light is produced by the incan- descence of a portion, while occasionally this is associated with chemical combination. " Thus," says Spencer, " by the original mechanical force expended in the collision, at least, five and often more different kinds of forces have been produced." Thus far an explanation has been afforded of the change from homogeneity to heterogeneity, from uni- SPENCER. ^87 formity to miilfiforinity ; but tlic8e explanations do not, of themselves, accoimt for the change from indefiniteness to definiteness. The ground of explanation of this is to be found in the principle of " Segregation." This principle of Segregation, by which is meant the union of like with like, and a consequent separation from the unlike, may be variously illustrated ; a strong wind in the autumn sweeps the dead leaves in masses to the ground, while the living are left on the trees ; a similar process takes place in the separation of dust and sand from small stones, as we may see on any road in March. In every river, again, the materials are deposited in separate layers — boulders, pebbles, sand and mud. The winnowing of chaff from wheat also illustrates this principle, which is of common application in the indus- trial arts. Spencer as usual traces it through the several orders of phenomena, from the Astronomical to the Social. With the principle of Segregation, the discussion on the factors constituting Evolution is terminated. The next question is as to the final goal of the evolutionary process. Does this process go on for ever, or is there a point beyond which it can proceed no farther? Spencer replies that there is such a point : — in short, that all evolution tends toward equilibration ; that it finally comes to anchor in absolute quiescence or equilibrium. The last point is illustrated, in the usual manner, and it is then shown how all this is a deduction from the primary principle of the persistence of force. " Thus from the persistence of force follows not only the various direct and indirect equilibra- tions going on around, together with that cosmical equili- bration which brings Evolution under all its forms to a close ; but also those less manifest equilibrations shown in the readjustments of moving equilibria that have been ed listurbed. By this ultimate principle is provable the by tendency of every organism, disordered by some unusual nfluence, to return to a balanced state. To it also may 36 traced the capacity, possessed in a slight degree by ndividuals, and in a greater degree by species, of becoming idapted to new circumstances. And not less does it fford a basis for the inference, that there is a gradual 2 8-8 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. advance towards harmony between man's mental nature and the conditions of his existence. After finding that from it are dedncible the various characteristics of Evolution, we finally- draw from it a warrant for the be- lief, that Evolution can end only in the establishment of the greatest perfection and the most complete happiness." ('First Principles,' p. 517.) Lastly remains the question of dissolution. The equilibrium once attained, the point having been reached when evolution ceases, the tendency must always be to a reversal of the process. All change henceforth must be in the direction of disintegration, of dissolution. This, which is illustrated in detail by the life and death of planetary systems, of individual animals, of societies, &c., is true no less of the nniverse as a whole; this also, on the foregoing principles — its evolutionary process having reached its term — must tend to dissolution. This portion of the 'First Principles' recalls to our mind the theories of the early Greek speculators, of Herakleitos, Empedokles, and Anaxagoras, &c., with their eternally alternating processes of world-formation and destruction. For though Herbert Spencer finds Universal Evolution to point to Universal Dissolution, yet this latter itself, none the less, foreshadows a recommencement of the proces.s, on the same reasoning. The summary and con- cdusion of the ' First Principles ' consists of a restatement of the doctrine of the Unknowable in antithesis to the Knowable with which the book opened. " Over and over again it has been shovkTi, in various ways, that the deepest truths we can reach, are simply statements of the widest uniformities in our experience of the relations of Matter, Motion, and Force, and that Matter, ^lotion, and Ft^rce are but symbols of the Unknown Ee ility." We refrain ftom entering on the carrying out of the " first jDrinciples " indicated in the foregoing pages, in detail in the departments of Biology, Psychology, So- ciology, &c., as embodied in the later works of Herbert Spencer. The ' Principles of Biologj^ ' is universally admitted to be a masterpiece of scientific generalization ; but we venture to think that Herbert Spencer's most devoted admirers will hardly seriously deny that the SPENCER. 389 ' Principles of Sociolog:y ' shows a falling off— a falling off which others might add, that results in an inadec^uacy of treatment verging at times on the pueiile. Of Herbert Spencer's great powers fis a generalizer of the results of modern scientific thonght, there can be no doubt. These powers he indeed possesses in an almost unique degree, but side by side with them, we find a total incapacity to appreciate modes of thought foreign to the special grooves in which his way of speculative life has been cast. The most flabbjT- pretences of the Laissez-faire economy are argued from as dogmas universally accepted, to dispute which is imj)ious, much in the same way as the Methodist preacher argues from the dogmas of his Calvinistic theology. Again, his attempted reconciliation of Science and Theology, of Materialism and Idealism, on the basis of a mechanically conceived abstiact Monism, betrays a crudity of conception which argues a strange lack of the speculative faculty. This is confirmed by the singular ignoratio elenchi involved in his would-be refutations of the Germans. But Spencer is n< t always consistent with himself in treating of the abstractum he has set up as a receptacle for "religious sentiment," "ultimate facts," &c. The Positivists and the orthodox Empiricists would fling aside the metaphysical problem altogether. Herbert Spencer provides a home for it in the bosom of the Unknowable. We say the Unknowable, since Spencer tells us that the Absolute is unknowable; but, strangely enough, it reappears on occasion in guises not quite so unknowable as they might be. The most usual shape which it assumes in the course of the exposition is Force — the force behind phenomena — which is manifested to us in the phenomena themselves. Yet another time it is insi.'^ted upon that it is not to be identified either with the sj)iritual or mateiial sides of the phenomenal world — the world of relativity— although it is the ground-princi23le of them both. The Spencerite Unknowable, view it as we may, is a surd entirely cut off from the sj-stem of ex- perience, notwithstanding that it is the cause of the phenomena given in experience. The influence of Herbert Spencer's system has been very 390 MODEKN PHILOSOPKY. Avide. In tin's country and America lie is pre-eminently the philosopher. His very failings no less than his merits contribute to his popularity among the English-speaking races ; but indeed the importance of the cosmical truths Herbert Spencer has taught might well blind many of his admirers to his defects. The supremacy of the orthodox Biitish Philosophy, Empiiicism, like the orthodox British economy Laissez- faire, has been rudely shaken of late. The one doctrine like the other has been practically driven to adopt the defensive. In philosophy the new movement has been at present chiefly confined to academical circles, but it is already beginning to extend itself beyond this necessarily limited area. The characteristic of this movement is the attempt to rehabilitate in this country philosophy proper, that is the great problem as to the constitution of ex- perience or reality, which occupied the attention of Plato and Aristotle in the ancient world and which was revived in its full meaning by the main line of the German post- Kantian thinkers. Among the names most prominently connected with this movement may be mentioned those of Eobert Adamson, Edward Caird, the late T. H. Green, E. B. and J. S. Haldane, Andrew Seth, William and Edwin Wallace, &c. These writers, though diiiering in some respects among each other, have all made it their task to present in as intelligible a form as possible to the English mind the principle of the speculative method, and to state in clear terms the problem which " speculation " or "theory of knowledge" has to resolve — that namely as to the meaning and constitution of reality. This school is sometimes called the Neo-Hegelian school; and its doctrine may be said to consist in a restatement of the philosophical positions of the Hegelian right. We have already (pp. 3i5-3ol) indicated what we conceived to be the shortcoming of this standpoint. This shortcoming we do not think is obviated in the more recent statement of the doctrine. Briefly expressed, it is as follows : In the synthetic unity of consciousness it is said the opposition of the momenta of matter and form, potentiality and actuality, &c., immanent in consciousness — i.e. the most NEO-IIEG ELIAN SCHOOL. 391 ultimate vf all oppositions — is transcended. This being ad- mitted, it is contending that the Iieal consists in a synthesis of positive tlionght-determinations alone, in other words, the position corresponds to that of Plato — the system of ideas subsumed under the supreme idea ; or that of Aristotle — the "creative intellect," the actus purus or first principle of pure form which knowledge presupposes. The present writer would suggest that so far from the opposition being transcended in the ultimate unity of the consciousness, it rather finds therein its supreme expression as the distinc- tion between consciousness and its sul)ject, between the 1 of apperception and the think of apperception, or, otherwise ex2:)ressed, between the primal thatness and the primal ivhat- ness* From this ultimate expression of the antithesis of matter and form all other expressions of the same antithesis are deducible. The final interpretation of the universe is thus pure potentiality. One other point. The concep- tion of the world-synthesis as pure actuality naturally leads to the dogma of the completed realisation of the world-principle in man as organic individual, in other words, in the individual mind or soul. Nature on this view comes to a complete knowledge of herself in the present human consciousness ; but have we any right to make such an assumption? Is such an assumption com- patible with a recognition of the social pur2")0se implied in the moral tendency ? Does not this imply that the organic synthesis, the human individual, the self-realisation of nature is as yet incomplete, and awaits a higher de\'elop- ment? Such a conception as that here hinted at it is difficult to represent to one's self in thought, much more to express in words, but the suggestion will not be an altogether useless one, even though it merely acts as what Kant would have termed a limitative notion in checking the dogmatic assumption above noticed. It may also jDOssibly have some bearing in connection with an objection which Professor Caird observes (art. " Metaphysic," Encyc. Brit , 9th ed.) is frequently urged against an Hegelian Metaphysic : " The great objection to * Of course the thatness here spnken of is not equivalent to the emptiness of the concept pure being, inasmuch as it has a determination, that of constituting tlie ground-principle ox ])ossihility of consciousness. 392 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. a inetapliysic like this, at least an objection which weighs much in the minds of many, is that which springs from the contrast between the claim of absolute knowledge which it seems to involve, and the actual limitations which our intelligence encounters in every direction. If the theory were true, it is felt we ought to be nearer the solution of the problems of our life, practical and specula- tive, than we are ; the riddle of the painful earth ought to vex us less ; we ought to find our way more easily through the entanglement of facts, and to be able to deal with practical difficulties in a less tentative manner." This conception of the world-synthesis as form and actuality, and of its final realisation in the psychological unity re^Dresented by the organic individual, has, we think, much to do with the apparent opposition of Hegelianism not only to common-sense but also to the scientific intellect. Let us take an instance of the inadequacy of the last-mentioned point of view from the treatment it involves of the problem of liberty and necessity. " Man," says Professor Caird, " is determined' by his desires only so far as he makes their object his object, or seeks his own satisfaction in them. \Ve may admit that there is a sense in which the common spying is true that a man's action is the result of his character and circumstances. But this does not make him a necessary agent ; for the cii-cumstances are what they are for him by the action of consciousness, and the character is the man as he has framed to himself an idea of good, of a universe of satisfactions, in which he seeks to be realised." ('Mind,' vol. vi. p. 550.) In the argu- ment of which this passage is a sample, ihe action of the social medium in framing for the man the universe of satisfactions referred to is entirely ignored. The *' idea of good " is regarded as framed by the man himself, rather than by the social whole, past and present, into which he enters. The formal principle, consciousness, as such, is moreover treated as per se creative. Now it may with fairness be contended that the man does xiot identify the desired object with himself, as the late Professor Green would have it, by any conscious act of self- determination on his part, but that with his mental concept of the object is already given the notion of it as NEO-IIEG ELIAN SCHOOL. 393 an " end," which, if not counterbalanced by the presence of other more potent ends, dotei mines his action, a fact which is registered in the empirical consciousness, together with the correlative possihilify of other ends having under other circumst inces become motives, which formal registration we term Freedom ! But notwithstanding all criticism, the usefulness of the work done by these writers for English students of philosophy can hardly be oveirated.* The Neo-Hegelians, even if they have not said the last word on the speculative problem, are ])y far the most important school existing at present. The fact that they have intro- duced the sjieculative problem at all to the English reading public is of itself a by no means insignificant service. The writings of the school form the best possible introduction to Philosophy, and at least furnish a basis for the discussion of its problems, which did not exist before outside Germany. * There is one point upon which we would like to hear an explana- tion from one of the authoiitative leaders of the more pronouncedly right wing of the school — that is, as to the theolo^acul terminology affected, and especially as to the employment of the word "God!" On the principles admitted by Professor Caird, for example, this word, as popularly used, implies an antithesis to Nature and Man ; it is used to express the opposition of finite and infiuite. This, we take it, will not be tienied. Now we would ask, by what right is a term sug- gestive of, and associated with, the most decisive aspect of the opposi- tion employed in a connection where the opposition is abolished? A similar line miyht be taken up as regards the reading of Hegeliani.'im into Christian dogmas. 394 MODERN PHILOSOPHZ. CONCLUSION. In tlie course of the history we have just traversed, the ordinary reader may see little but a chaos of theories. fSuch a view, however, can only obtain where a super- ficial glance has been taken of the whole. We have again and again had occasion to point out the continuous reappearance of the same doctrines in thinkers, widely separated in time and intellectual surroundings, and who approached the problem from altogether different and even opposed standpoints. Such indications of what to the superficial reader might appear coincidences could have been almost indefinitely multiplied. This of itself would lead to the suspicion of a central truth around which the most seemingly antagonistic philosophies were revolving. The History of Philosophy is indeed no medley of mere opinions, but represents in various guises, determined immediately by personality, age, surroundings, &c., the several stages through which the human mind must pass in its endeavours to arrive at the complete for- mulation of the world-problem, together with its solution, which is nothing other than the final rational exj)lanation of the world. By the last expression is me;mt an expla- nation which, while it includes all other explanations attained from more limited points of view, yet neverthe- less transcends them. Philosophy in the exact sense of the word — philosophy jpar excellence — is, in short, the final and most comprehensive interpretation of Eeality. It is not a theory of how things may be, but the theory of how tilings are. Strictly speaking, we have no right to talk of philo- sop>hies at all, any more than we have to talk of chemistries or physiologies. The history of Chemistry shows us a CONCLUSION. 395 series of attempts more or less crude, more or less success- ful, to treat the problem of chemistry, i.e. the constitutioa of bodies ; similarly the history of iiiolop^y offers a series of attempts to treat the problem of Biolojzy, i.e. to arrive at the theory (the most perfect interpretation or explanation) of organic matter as such. But we do not, nevertheless (nor would it have been fair to do so for that matter, even in the days of " Phlogiston," or of the *' animal spirits"), regard Cliemistry or Biology as a body of more or less probable or improbable opinion; and this, notwitlistanding the divergences of view existing among scientific specialists in many cases on essential points in their respective sciences, even at the present day. We have no more right to regard philosophy as simply made up of a mass of conjectural theories. There is but one Philosophy as thei'e is but one Science; the history of philosofihy, we again repeat, is the history of the struggles of the human mind to attain the truth of philosophy, that is the philosophic point of view. It is important in dealing with the history of philosophy always to distinguish between those systems or parts of systems which mark distinct steps in the analysis of experience and in the recognition of its meaning, and those which are traceable merely to some bias of nationality, religion, or personal temperament ; the former alone have any true significance for history. Ordinary electicism or syncretism pretends to find philosophic truth implied or expressed in all systems collectively, forgetful of the fact that philosophic reason or thought is always adulterated more or less with local temporary or personal prejudice, and that the true philosophic insight msij quite possibly be whoU}^ absent from any particular system. Emerson's distinction between man thinking and the theologian, the attorney or the scholar thinking, applies here if any- where. Here, more even than elsewhere in the attainment of truth, it is only where the individual thinker becomes the mere exponent of the universal thought that a genuine insight is obtained. Only in very exceptional cases has such an insight extended even imperfectly over the whole range of the philosonhic problem; far oftener it has only been a glimpse of a particular asjoect of that problem that 396 MODEKN PHILOSOPHY. has been seized. What is more, such is the difficulty of keeping the true nature of the problem and its interpreta- tion Avithin the intellectual purview, that although it has been disclo.-ed in its main outline more than once in the history of speculation, the effect of such disclosure has been like that of a flash of lightning — it has seemed only to leave a more impenetrable subsequent darkness. Plato, Aristotle, Spinoza, and the post-Kantian thinkers of Germany, of whom it is usual to take Hegel as the type, severally had the soluti<'n of the problem within their grasp, but the inner meaning of the systems of these thinkers was imperfectly seized by their successors, and in some cases altogether lost. A crucial instance of this is the treatment of Aristotle by the schoolmen with whom, for the most part, he was whittled down to a mere Psychologist and formal Logician. As regards Spinoza, it mu!-t be admitted that the abstract dogmatic mould in which he cast his speculation, almost courted miscon- ception from the first; yet this can be hardly said of Hegel, who is, nevertheless, to the " popular" no less than to the "scientific" mind a kind of subjective idealist who would make his own individual thoughts the criteria of things. The above explains the charge of circularity of movement brought by scientist thinkers against philo- sophy. While science, it is said, ceaselessly progresses, Philosophy is alwaj^s returning to the same point. A very obvious explanation of this is, that the difficulty involved in the mind's seizure and retention of the philosophical point of view in its completeness, is so much greater, that in the case of the more limited doctrine of Phy.^ical Science, and also that in the case of philo- sophy where the completeness of the view is lost, the point of vantage gained is itself apt to be lost altogether. Speculation in this case goes stumbling back into the old beaten paths to which it had been accustomed, which lay below and around the true jDhilosophical point of view, and it is not until another speculative genius arises that the lost t^tandpoint is recovered. There is gain of course in this seeming fluctuation ; each time that the synthesis of philosophy reappears it is enriched; it is clearer, more explicit, possessed of a fuller content. CONCLUSION. 397 The common notion is that Science and Philosophy or metaphj'sic, represent two rival theories of the universe — two not merely opposed but mutually incompatible methods of approaching one problem. Nothing can be farther from the tiuth. Tlie problem of pViilosoiDhy is not identical with the problem of science (although it includes it), and hence the methods are not the same. It is really as absurd for science to rail at philosophy, because philosophy in a sense transforms its conclusions and supersedes its categories, as it would be for " common- sense " to rail at science, because Si^cience transforms the notions which common-sense is accustomed to employ. Philosophy, it is true, does not stop at the categories of science, but neither does science stop at the crude reality of sense-perception. We can easily fancy the uncultured man of sense sneering at the scientist as a dreamer, because, forsooth, he declares that the earth moves and not the sun, or because he asserts the rotundity of the earth and the exis- tence of antipodes. The amount of transcendentalism, in the popular sense of that much-abused word — if by it be meant distance from the " solid ground " of sense-percep- tion — in the higher mathematics, is truly something ap- palling. In a sense, the conclusions of philosopliy are not real, but then no more are those of science. Both alike involve a departure from the concrete real of the ordinary consciousness. Each, so to speak, moves in a world of its own, which (according to the relative perfection attained in the formulation of the respective standpoints) is a world more or less perfectly coherent within itself, and with the standpoint or standpoints which fall under it or which it embraces. Science at once embraces and tran- scends common-sense in the higher unity which consti- tutes scientific truth; philosophy embraces, while it transcends the standpoints alike of science and common- sense in the ultimate all-comprehensive unity which constitutes philosophic truth. Hence, as it has been justly said, every serious philosophy, that is, every statement of philosophic truth which claims to be even approximately adequate, must include materialism — materialism being the final expression of an interpretation of the universe on strictly scientific lines. Any statement or pretended S98 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. statement of the philosophic position v/hich conflicts with any of the positive doctrines of a scientific materialism may therefore be without hesitation ignored. "Philosophy," as Professor Seth has it, " is ready, accordingly, to accept and patronise any theory which science and history may establish. Idealism accepts all that Physiology has to say about the dependence of thought on the organism, and is not discomfited by the most materialistic statements of the facts. It admits, as a matter of course, the empirical deri- vation of all our conscious life from feeling or sensation."* From the philosophical standpoint the old antagonisms and controversies lose meaning, or at least their nature is entirely changed ; they are sublimated, so to speak, and reappear in a higher atmosphere. Distinctions which tinder their former aspect appeared sharp, clearly de- finable and irreconcilably opposed, now resolve themselves into a mere question of emphasis. Such, as we take it, is the case with Materialism and Idealism, Theism and Atheism, &c. A formulation of the philosophic, interpre- tation of the world which shall entirely abolish them remains as yet a desideratum; but from even a more or less inadequate statement of philosophic theory, such as Hegeliani&;m, all their former importance has vanished ; neither side is confirmed or refuted, but they are deprived of interest in proportion as their opposition tends to become insignificant. To attain to a complete view of the worhl, such is the end of philosophy. Science rationalises the material furnished by common experience ; philosophy rationalises the material furnished by science. The rationality of either is not the coinage of our brain, but a part of the nature of things. The categories of science are real, not- withstanding that they may conflict with the cruder notions of common-sense ; but, viewed from the standpoint of common-sense, they are, nevertheless, ideal. The same with philosophy; its categories also are real at the same time that they are ideal. From the points of view of common- * Of course it remains an open question whether current statements of the HegeUan position do not have a formal bias wliich in effect gives the whole an anti-materialist character. This question has been already discussed. CONCLdSION. 3fl9 sense and the sci(,'ntific intellect respectively, they ore ideal. Philosophy .-ecs an n]tin)atu identity in the contradictions which from lower planes of thought are irreconcilable ; it sees idenlity in opposition, being in becoming, the poten- tial in the actual, the matter in the form. These distinc- tions are only maintained as aspects of a whole, and their significance as opposites consists meiely in the generic priority or jiosteriority of their respective momenta as constitutive of the essence of this whole. The meaning of the history of philosophy then consists in its being an effort of the human mind to attain a view of this Essence — Eeality— in the generic order of its deduction, by which alone the truo meaning of the synthesis as a whole, no less than that of the elements constituting it, is discernible. There is, therefore, as we said before, but one philosophy as there is but one physical science. Metaphysic like Physic is a certain way of envisaging and transforming the real world of .-ensible experience. Every system of any historical significance has differentiated itself from other systems by emphasizing some point or aspect which the rest had neglected. Its defect as a system consists in its having sought to give exclusive prominence to this particular aspect to the exclusion of others — m its endeavouring to constitute this abstracted element a whole in itself. By the inner necessity of ]ts own nature the mind is bound to pass through certain successive stages, such as dogmatism, empiricism, scepticism, in one form or another before it is in a position to grasp the properly philosophic point of view. It is what we may term a part of the natural freemasonry of things that the mind cannot reach the superior without having previously passed over the inferior steps. In the mysteries of the ancient reli- gious cults during the earlier stages of his initiation, the ultimate doctrine to the reception of which those stages were preparatory, was carefully hidden from the neophyte. In philosophy, on the other hand, there is no need of artificial concealment ; the whole of Hegel may be an open book to the student, so -far as paper and print is concerned, and yet it will be absolutely sealed lore to him, as regards discovering any meaning in it, if he have not passed through the preliminary stages of his speculative initiation. 400 MODEKN PHILOSOPHY. In the first blush of youth the mind unhesitatingly accepts all things in their immediateness, be it " common-sense," *' morality," or what-not. The period of reflection follows, in which common-sense and naive moral sentiment are negated in scepticism and cynicism ; this phase of thought, which the Germans term the AufkJdrung, is followed by another which consists in the recognition that these things are not entirely empty of all content as was at first sup- posed, albeit the content they possess is entirely different from that crudely attributed to them in the naive stage of innocence.''' Having once come to know the world in the generic order of its articulation as a rational whole, we are iiTesis- tibly driven to moot the problem of the end, purpose or telos of this world ; that whither it — and a fortiori man, the highest product up to date of natural revolution — is tend- ing. The only way in which the final aim or ideal of pro- gress can be formulated in a single sentence, is that it consists in the realisation — the bringing to consciousness of the world in its full meaning. This is, of course, only another way of repeating that the end of progress is the actualization of the immanent pui pose of the world. But can we discover any adequate formula for this absolute world- telos itself. The thinker who has faced the problem must unhesitatingly answer no. We may, of course, make use of phrases such as the time-honoured " good " of Plato, but without nearer definition tliey must remain little more than j^hrases. Turrhe]-, we are bound to regard, ex hypothesis this telos as absolute finality, while we are conscious of * To lake an illustration of this hap-li:izaid ; the unsophisticated mind never doubts the existence of pure disinterestedness in moral action; a follower of Helvetius demonstrates the non-existence of purely disinterested action, the unsophisticated mind resents this demonstration and endeaxours to defend its orthodox opinion, but in vain — the cynic triumphs and the unsophisticated mind resigns itself to despair. The philosopher at last appears, and proves the triumph and despair to be alike irrational, since although it is true that the bare abstract and immediate form of all motive whatever is self-interest, yet that this does not in any way atfect the fact that ilxa content of the motive, and therefore the real end of the action, may be wholly without reference, or even opposed to the personal interest of the individual performing the action, and that this is all that is really meant when pure disiutore^tedness is spoken of. CONCLUSION. 401 the fact that finality in this sense — a being in which there is no becoming, a form with no material content — involves an abstraction, and therefore no longer possesses the con- ditions of a real synthesis. Let ns approach the problem from another point of view. Cannot we regard human happiness, it may be asked, as the purpose of progress? To this it may be answered that pleasure or happiness, be it individual or social, can never be an end in itself, although, it is true, it must form an element of every end, where human action is concerned. It is a triter observation that the search for pleasure qua pleasure invariably defeats its own object. Pleasure or happiness is consequent on the attainment of an end which constitutes, so to speak, the substance or essence of which pleasure is a determina- tion. The immediate pursuit of pleasure, therefore, con- sidered as an end in itself, is the pursuit of an unreal abstraction. The desired object, end, or ideal of action is hence, we repeat, a substance or essence of which pleasure must indeed be a predicate, but which is primarily pursued for its own sake. On the hypothesis of pleasure per se ex- hausting the whole content of the end sought after, the ultimate distinction between higher and lower in taste or in aim remain unaccounted for ; the old problem of the pig happy and Sokrates miserable, in spite of all special pleading, is left unresolved. But while contending thus far against the view of Hedonism as commonly formu- lated, we must not forget that the opposite school ignore the fact that our only criterion of the intrinsic worth of an action can but be as to whether it conflicts or not with the free development of ourselves or others, or of society collectively ; and that a fortiori the highest end of action consists in the removal of the impediments in the way of that free development — in other words, in that which tends to the greatest possible satisfaction of the immediate wants and aspirations of all men — which, it may be said, is only another way of putting the hedonistic criterion. To argue otherwise is to revert to a dogmatic standpoint which arbitrarily fixes the purpose of Eeality. The admission that hapjoiness per se cannot rationally be conceived as constituting the telos of the world-order does 2 D 402 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. not preclude tlie conviction that it is logically indissoluble from it ia itself, or that it is the primary condition of its realisation. To imagine that this can yield to any a priori assumption as to what tends to or is involved in the ultimate realisation of the world-pnrpose, as is done by the late Thomas Hill Green, and other Neo-Hegelians of his school, can only be regarded as a disastrous attempt to treat a purely regulative conception as con^titutive. The endeavour to formulate the absolute end of con- sciousness, or the immanent purpose of the world, and to make this the basis of ethics, is tl:e great charac- teristic of the ethical or quasi-universal religions. These have one and all endeavoured, so to speak, to strike out a short cut by which the grand denouement might be placed within reach of the individual soul. Divers are the methods in the various creeds by which perfection, the perfect good, Nirvana, union with God, or what-not, is to be attained, but they all lie in the severance of the in- dividual from nature and society and the pleasures of the phenomenal world, in the destruction of his natural appetites and aifections, and in his complete withdrawal within himself. In the individual sonl, the world-principle is believed to realise itself. The primal impulse toward regeneration and the realisation of the world-purpose is hence supposed to come from within. The consciousness is now awakening in men that there is no short cut to perfection or to the Absolute, whether on its speculative side, as first principle, or on its practical side, as final end of the world, and that the attempt of impatient humanity to make one is an illusion, in brief, that it involves an unreal abstraction. The day of the etliical religions is visibly weaning, and one can only view with regret the futile efforts of able and earnest men like the late Professor Green, who, following in the steps of Kant and the post- Kantians, would stake their whole intellectual career in the forlorn hope of resuscitating the " ethics of inward- ness." With the decline of the religions of introspective individualism, the significance of the individual as such pales, and the consciousness grows, that only in and through a weary course of social development, lies the path of progress, the way of the woi Id-destiny. Freedom, CONCLUSION. 403 wliicli im]ilies the satisfaction of existent want for each and for all — first and foremost the animal wants the intro- spectivist disdains — is the first condition of that higher social life which is the farthest visible summit of progress. This consciousness involves a radical change in our ethical and religious attitude. Morality, as it becomes political and social, loses its exclusively personal character. »Sin and Holiness, the supreme ethical categories of " introspection," are superseded henceforth in reality if not in name. The attempt to formulate the telos of the Eeal, the im- manent purpose of the world, is surrendered ; much more the vain etfort to reach it by the old methods. We expect no longer to attain it as individuals by ecstasy, contemplation, or inward illumination : " Immer holier muss ich streben, Immer weiter mussich schaun," may still be our motto, but our strivings and our constant looks are directed not to possible heights enshrouded in cloudland, but to the limit only of our clear and distinct vision. We know, at all events, that this summit must be reached, whatever may be beyond, before that beyond can become, in its turn, a distinct ideal, much more a reality. This point of view in its own way demands in very truth the sacrifice, the negation, of the individual, but it is not as with the intro.s2:>ective religions, the first step in a circular process which begins with the natural indivi^lual, and ends with the apotheosized individual, and hence which, its primary negation of the individual notwithstanding, remains individualistic ; but a negation of the individual onl\' in so far as this is essential to the realisation of that higher social whole into which he enters. In short, the abnegation of self becomes on this view a mere accident of morality, and not, as before, a part of its substance. " Philosophy," says Hegel, "deals only with the universal individual ; " the general form of individuation or person- ality may be deducible, but not the concrete personality determined in a specific time-content. " The individual in this sense," as Fichte has well said, "belongs to the element of the purely contingent ; " and we would add its meaning, its reality, is to be found in so-iety; for society 404 MODERN PHILOSOPHY. represents the highest actual realisation of the world principle, by whatever name we call it, " nenn's Gliick, Herz, Liebe, Gott." There is nothing above or beyond society. Society or humanity stands for that universal personality which is permanent and abiding in the tiux of the particular, the individuals, constituting it. Whether this larger life manifesting itself on the plane of history as for-itself in the individual subjectivities, which are its evanescent components, is destined to attain to in-and- for-itse\fness in the time order, in other words, to be its own subject, is a question which ever and anon recurs to 0]ie, more especially when one reflects on the ruthlessness with which historic evolution sacrifices the individual man on the altar of progress, and above all when one feels that the noblest type of individual character is that which is prepared for this sacrifice when the occasion firises. Such a speculation, if we like to entertain it, is as worthy as any which conceives of a perpetuity of individual existence as such. A word may be expected in conclusion, as to the immediate future and prospects of philosophy. Since the death of Hegel there has been no great original philo- sophic genius, no thinker who has thrown any essentially new light on the ultimate problem of philosophy. Dog- matic Pessimism, that product of effete civilization, has had a passing success. Great scientific generalizers like Herbert Spencer have formulated the ultimate princij^les of Cosmology, in the light of the two great scientific achievements of the age, the doctrines of the " Persistence of force " and of " Evolution." But, save for the recent academic movements of Neu-Hegelianism, there is little noteworthy to record. The immediate future of philo- sophy, the next foi mulation of the ultimate world- problem of being and knowledge, which Nhall appeal to the think- ing portion of mankind, to a greater extent than even Plato, Aristotle, or Hegel ever did, must, we believe, be sequent on the realisation of that vast transformation with which the current order of things is big. " The republic has no need of chemists," Lavoisier was told. Thus with brutal frankness was the truth expressed, that in periods CONCLUSION. 405 of g;reat political and social change, Theory, as such, be it .scientific or philosophical, must cede to the all- absorbing questions of Practice. The stud(3nt as he lays down this little volume, should he by chance take up a newspaper, will inevitabl}?- light on accounts of great strikes, of armaments, of the struggle for colonics called imperial expansion, of vast popular revolutionary move- ments, etc., all of which point to one thing, when followed out in all their, bearings, the steady approach of the great class struggle. Let him ponder on this and bethink himself of the part even he, or if not he, his children, may be forced to take in the resolution of that great living contradiction — the contradiction between individual and society — expressed in what we term Modern Civilization. INDEX. Note. — The names of philosophical works are printed in italics. Abelard, 116; his doctrine, 117 Abstract-Dogmatic systems of modern philosophy, 144 ; reac- tion against scholasticism, 144; Descartes, 146 ; Malebranche, 155 ; Spinoza, 157 ; Leibnitz, 167; Wolff, 175; Baumgarten, 175 ; Crusius, 176 Aim Baker, 121 Academics, the, 77 Achilles-puzzie to prove the im- possibility of motion, 34 Adamson, Kobert, 390 j!Ene>idemus, 86 Esthetic, Aristotle's, 74; Her- l^art's, 308 ; Hegel's lectures on, 332 Airrippa Saturninns, 86 Albertus Magnus, 124 Albigensianism, 102 Alchemists and cosmic speculators of the sixteenth century, 137 ; the epoch of the "occult sciences," 138 ; Eeuchlin, 138 ; Agrippa, von Netteslieim, 138 ; Paracelsus, 139 ; Card anus. 142 ; authorities, 143 Alexander the Great a pupil of Aristotle, 66 Alexandria, the seat ctf Neo-Plato- nism, 89 Alexandrian Gnostics, the, 100; Basilides, 100 ; Karpokrates, 100 ; Talentinus, 100 ; doctrines, 101 Alexandrian trinity, the, 94 A'farabi. 120 Al Ghazzali, 121 Alkendi, 119 Ammonius Saccas, 92 ; reputed a Christian, 107 Annxao;ora8, life, 39 ; philosophy, 39, 68 ; teacher of Sokrates, 44 Anaximandros, 24, 68 ; inventions, 25 ; speculations on the primal substance, 25 ; on evolution, 25 Anaximenes, life, 26; doctrines, 27 Anselm, 114; his philosophy subservient to theology, 114; doctrines, 114 ; dispute with Roscellinus, 115 Antinomies of the pure reason, 244 Antiochus of Askalon, 77 Antisthenes, 49; founds the Cynic school, 49 ; virtue to be attained by asceticism, 49 Anytos, 46 Apocrypha, tendency to Greek thought in the, 89 Apollodorus, 82 Apollonius of Tyana, 88 Aquinas, Thomas, 125; his doc- trinep, 125 ; two sources of knowledge, 125; hid influence on later thought, 126 Arabian philosophers, 119; Al- kendi, 119; Alfarabi, 120; Avi- cennn, 120; Al Ghaz/ali, 121; Abu Beker, 121 ; Averroes, 121 Aristippus, 48 ; founds Cyrenaic school, 48 ; writings lost, 49 Aristophanes, ignorant satire of phih'sophy, 44 INDEX. 407 Aristotle, birtli nnd education, 65 ; tutor to Alexander the Great, G() ; led uring and death, 66 ; early writinsjs, 66 Aristotle's philosophy, definition of philosophy, 3, 67 ; his doc- triues not derived from Sokrates, 21 ; his school complementary, not opposed, to that of Plato, 51 ; Aristotle the founder of the in- ductive method and of natural science, 53 ; editions of his writings, 67 ; division of philo- sophy into logic, physics, and ethics, 67 ; what is a principle ? 67 ; on matter and form, 68 ; on efficient and final causes, 69, 70 ; on reality, 69 ; cosmologii-al ar- gument, 71 ; on Nature, 71 ; happiness the goal of human j activity, 72 ; virtues, 73 ; the [ Politics, 73 ; art-philosophv, 74 ; j theory of formal logic, 75 ; the range of his writings, 75 ; bib- liography, 76; referred to, 60, 91, 112, 117, 120, 124, 396 Aj-istoxenus, 77 Arius, heresy of, 107 Arkesilaus, 77 Art, a quietude of the will, 298 ; the chief periods of, and their characteristics, Hegel on, 332 ; the progress of, Hegel on, 333 Art, philofeophv of, Aristotle's, 74 ; Schelling's, 283, 286 Athanasius, 107 Athenagoras, 104 Afomists, philcsophical system of the, 40; nature and action of atoms, 41 ; explanation of per- ception, 41 Atoms, nature and action of, 41 Augustine of Hippo, 108 ; his be- lief, 108; his Platonism, 108; his orthodoxy only apparent, 109 Aurelius, IVlarcus, 80, 87 Autliorities for. Oriental thought, 20 ; Greek philosophy, 23 ; Hera- kleitos, 38 ; Plato and Aristotle, I 76; the Stoics and Epicm-eans, I 84 ; the Gnostics and Christian Fatliers, 110; tlie philosophy of the Middle Ages, 130; the Ger- ma-i jNIystics, 131 ; the sixteenth century speculators, 143 ; Spinoza, 167 Averrocs, 121 Avicebron, 123 Avicenna, 120 Baadee, F., von, 287 Bacon, Francis, 177; founder of the Empiricist movement, 177; survey of knowledge, 178 ; philo- sophy, 178, 215 Bain, Alexander, and his works, 378 Bardesanes, 101 Bardili, 254 Basilides, 100 Bauer, Bruno, 338, 340 Bauer, Edgar, 340 Baumgarten, Alexander Gottlieb, 175 Baur; Ferdinand Christian, 339 Bayle, Didionnaire, 10 Beattie, James, 203 Beck, 254 Bekker, Balthasar, 155 Berkeley, George, 188; account of his work, 188, 216; no universal idea, 189; what we mean by " material substance," 189 ; con- clusion from Ilia analysis, 191 ; his aim and writings, 192 ; works, 193 Blakey, Robert, histoiy of philo- sophy, 13 Boehme, Jacob, 286 Boethius, 96 " Bombastic,"' origin of the word, 140 Bonnet, Charles, 204 ; works, 205 Brown, Thomas, 203 Brucker, Johann Jacob, history of philosophy, 10, 13 Bruno, Giordano, 134, 137; wan- derings, 134; death, 135; philo- sopliy, 185 Buddha, 98 408 INDEX. Buhle, J. G., history of plnlosopliy, 11 Burdach, 287 Cabanis, 213 Caird, Edward, 390, 391. 392 Canijianella, Thomas, 137 Cardamis, Hieronymus, and his works, 142 Carvaka, school of, 119 Causality, Schopenhauer's four forms of the principle of, 290 Causation, Hume's theory of, 196 Champeaux, William of, 116 Chosroes, 96 Christ, Gnostic idea of the, 101 Christian Dogmatics in their De- velopment, Strauss's, 339 Christian trinity distinguished from the Neo-Platonic, 9-4 Christianity ; influence of Neo- Platonism on, 92; of the sixth century, 97 ; the anti-worldliness of, 98 : the reason of its supre- macy, 99 ; its dogmas formulated by Athauasius, 107 ; at Nicaea, 107 Chrysippus, 79, 80 Cicero and his philosophical works, 87 Claude, 213 Clement of Alexandria, 104 Common sense, attached by Plato, 55 ; recognised by Aristotle, 67 Comte, Auguste, definition of philo- sophy, 4 ; life, 364, 374 ; parallel between the doctrines of Comte and Hegel, 365 ; the Positive Fhilosopliy, 367 ; Comte's law of the three stages ot philosophy, 367 ; Sociology the goal of all sciences, 368 ; arrangement of the sciences, 368 : Comte's view of historic evolution, 369 ; his scheme of social reconstruction, 372 ; Sociology not founded by Comte, 373 ; the real advance he made, 374 ; his defective charac- ter, 374 ; revered by his followers, 375 ; natm-e of positivism, 376 Condillac, Etieime Bonnot de. 203 ; works, 203; Sensationism, 204 Cosmological argument of Aristotle, 71 Cosmology of the Pythagorean system, 32 ; of Aristotle, 71 ; of Paracelsus, 140 Cousin, Victor, history of philo- sophy, 13 Critique of Practical Reason, Kant's, 225, 248 Critique of Pure Reason, Kant's, 217, 2:^3, 224, 234, 236, 238, 241, 244, 247 Critique of the Faculty of Judgment. Kanfs, 225, 252 Cromaziano, history of philosophy, 11 Crusius, Christian August, 176 Cynic School, 49 ; origin of the name, 49 ; its sole end the avoidance of pleasure, 49 Cyrenaic Scliool, 48 Damascits, 96 De anima, Aristotle's, 72 Degerando, history of philosophy, 13 Demiurge, the, 61, 101 Demokritos, 40 ; founder of the Atomistic system, 40 Descartes, Ke'ne, and his works, 146 ; doctrines, 147 ; character, 154 Descartes' philosophy, 147 : ' Me- thodic Doubt,' 147; the existence of self, 147, 214; of God, 149; canon of investigation, 149, 214; independent conceptions, 150 ; Descartes' dualism, 151 ; his physics, 151 ; physical theories, 152 ; psychology, 152 ; anthro- pology, 153 ; influence of his doctrines, 155 ; referred to, 156, 159, 170, 186, 214 Deslandes, hi.^tory of philosophy, 10 Dialectic, the Hegelian, 313; use of the term, 324 Diderot, Denis, life, 206 ; works, 207 ; materialism, 207 ; method, 210 INDEX. 409 Dikoarchus, 77 Dioirenes Laertius, history of philo- sophy, 10 piogenes of Apolloiiia, birthpLice, 27 ; phHosophy, ^7 ; the fiivt to stiite the principle of Monism, 28, /)1 piogenes of Sinope, 50 Diogenes the Stoic, 80 Diihring, Eugen, history of philo- sophy, lii; dootrin<-s. 861 Duns Scotiis, 127 ; writings, 127 ; doctrine, 128 ECKHART, 131 Ego, activity of the, 260 Eidology, 3("!6 Eloatic school. 33 : XenOi/Iianes, 33 ; Parmeuide.-i, 33 ; Meliosos and Zeno, 34 Emotions, Hume's classification of the, 199 Empedokles, birth, 38 ; doctrine of four elements, and uniting and separating principles, 38, 68 ; ex- planation of Sense perception, 38 ETupirical-Sceptical schools of mo- dern philosophv, 177 ; Baci^n, 177; Hobbes, 180; Locke, 182; Berkeley, 188; Hiune, 193; Raid, 201 Encyclopedie^ the. 207 EncyUofiddie, &c., Hegel's, 325, 327, 328, 349 Enfield, condensation of Brucker's history, 11, 13 En gels, Friedrich, 341 Fvtretien evire D'Alemhert et Diderot, Diderot's, 207, 208, 210 Ej.ictftus, 80, 87 Epicureans, doctrines of the, 81 ; their kanonik, 81 ; pbysics, 81 ; ethif^s, 81 ; their doctrines not original, 82 Efticurus, definition of philosophy, 3, 67 ; life. 80 Epiphanes, 103 Erdmann, J. E,, history of philo- sophy, 12, 314 Erigena, Jolinnnes Scotus, 111, doctrines, 112 E;tntle's, 73 : Spinoza's, l.nS, 159, 160. 1(52, 163. 106, 167 Euklid of Megaru, 48 ; founds Megcirie school, 48 ; writings lost, 49 Evolution, anticipation of, by Anaximandros, 26 ; Hegel's error concerning, 327; Spencer's defi- nition of, 384 ; principles of, 885 ; tendency towards equilibration, 387 Experience, nature of, 67, 196 ; all knowledge derived from, 183 ; how possible, 226 Fathers, tbe Christian, 103; the philosophic Fathers, 103; Justin Martyr, 103; Athenagoras, 104; Theo'philus, 104; Irenajus, 104; Hippolytus, 104 ; Minucius Felix, 104; clement of Alexandria, 104 ; Oiiiien, 105 ; the dogmatic Fi.thers, 106; Athanasius, 107; Augustine of Hippo, 108 ; autho- rities, 110 Favorinus, 86 FeiTier, 377 Feuerback, Ludwig Andreas, 341 Fichte, Johann Gottlieb, life, 256 ; works, 257 Fichte's philosophy. 258 ; ' Theory of Knowledge,' 258 ; the task of philosophy, 258 ; fundamental axiom of the Theory of Know- ledge, 259 ; second axiom, 261 ; third axiom, 261 ; division of the Theory of Knowledge into specu- lative and practical, 262 ; ' Specu- lative Theory of Knowledge,* 263 ; standpoint and system of the ' Theory of Science,' 263 ; its method, 266; 'Practical Tiieory of Knowledge,' 2(i7 ; liow the Ego comes to ascribe causality to 410 INDEX. itself, 267 ; freedom of the indi- vidual, 270 ; aniicipations of Socialism, 271 ; Fichte's ethics, 271 ; the fallacy of the intro- spective ethics as a basis for conduct, 275; opposition to Fichte's philosophy, 277 ; retro- spect and criticism, 317 ; referred to, 278, 280, 282, 284, 286, 287, 300, 319, 347, 403 Ficinus, Marsilius, 133 Figulus, Nigidius, 88 First Principles, Spencer's, 381, 382, ■ 383, 38(5, 388 Fischer, Kuuo, 344 Force, Principle of the pers^istence of, and its consequences, 382 Form, as understood by Aristotle, 68 Fouille'c, Alfred, history of philo- sophy, 13 Foundation for the Metaphysic of Ethic, Kant's, 225, 248 Fourfold root of the principle of adequate cause, Schopenhauer's, 289, 290 Frauensfadt, 301 Free-wilL, upheld by Aristotle, 73 ; admitted by Leibnitz, 173 ; Hmne on, 196; d'Hulbach on, 212; Herbart on, 309 French materialist school, 203 ; Condillac, 2iJ3 : Bonnet, 204 ; Helvetius, 205 ; La Mettrie, 206 ; Diderot, 206; d'Holbach, 211 Fries, 254 Gadants, 77 Gans, 338 German mysticism of fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, 130 ; Eckhart, 131 ; Tauler, 131 ; 'A German theology,' 131 ; autho- rities, 131 Gersonides, 124 Gnosticism, 100: origin and pro- gress, 100; Alexandrian Gnostics, 100; Syrian Gnostics, 101; doc- trines, 101 ; idea of the Christ, 101 ; refuted by Irenaeus, 104 God, Descartes' argument for the existence of, 149; the God of Leibnitz, 171 Gorgias, 42, 49 Gorgias, Plato's, 56 Goschel, 338 Greek philosophy, periods of, 21 ; authorities, 23; I. Pre-Sokratic Schools, 23; IL Sokrates, 44; III. Plato and Aristotle, 51; IV. Academies and Peripatetics, Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics, 77 ; V. Roman and Antiquarian period, 85 ; VI. Neo-Platonism, 89 Green, T. H., 390, 392 Gwinner, Dr., 301 Haldane, J. S., 390 Haldane, E. B., 390 Hamann's opposition to Kant's philosophy, 253 Hamilton, Sir William, 377, 378 Hartenstein, 310 Hartmann, EdAvard von, 352; his, philosophy, 352 ; reconcilhig the doctiines of Hegel and i^chopen- hauc, „_:■; conjunction of will and intelligence, 353 ; the happi- ness of the conscious individual, not the purpose of the world, 355 ; the possibility of realising this happines;> an illusion, 355 ; defects of Hartmann's system, 357 Hebrew prophets, the, and the " gospel of inwardness," 98 Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, life, 310 ; work with Schelling, 311 ; works, 311 Hegelian school, the, 338 Hegelian system, the, definition of philosophy, 4 ; the ultimate princif >le of knowledge, 312 ; dia- lectical method of Hegel, 313; basis of the Hegelian dialectic, 315; the progress of knowledge sliown, 317 ; stages which the mind and humanity pass through before attaining absolute know- INDEX. 411 Icrlge, 319; extracts from the 'Phenomenology' in illustration of Hegel's style, 310 ; his logic, 322 ; its throe main divisions, 323; use of the word dialectic, 324 ; first division of logic, the doctrine of being, 325 ; second division, the doctrine of essence, 325 ; third division, the doctrine of concept, 32G ; correspondence of these divisions with Kant's, 326; Kegels philosophy of na- ture, 327 ; his error concerning evolution, 327; his division of the philosophy of nature, 327 ; on the death of the individual, 328 ; his philosophy of mind, 329 ; its triple division, 329 ; his ethic, 329 ; lectures on the philosophy of history, 330 ; Erd- mann's opinion of them, 332 ; lectures on aesthetic, 332 ; the chief periods of art and their characteristics, 332 ; progress of art, 333; Hegel's view of the significance of art, 334 ; phi- losophy of religion, 334 ; har- monisation between his system I and the Prntestant Christianity I of Prussia, 334, 337, 339 ; history of philosophy, 12, 335 ; collapse ! of Htgelianism as a school, 336 ; I its success as a distinct system, I 337 ; controversies after Hegel's ' death, 338 ; retrospect and criti- cism, 348 ; referred to, 288, 300, 347, 352, 365, 396, 403 leinrichs, 338 leloise, 116 lelvetius, Claude Adrien, 165, 205; I doctrines, 205 lerakleitos, life, 36 ; cardinal I doctrine of eternal fiux of things, 36, 52 leraklides of Pontus, 77 lerbart, Johann Friedrich, 301 lerbart's philosophy : definition of philosophy, 4 ; position of his philosophy, 288 ; influence of Kantism on it, 302, 303 ; results furnished by logic, 302 ; two cliisses of conceptions, 302; re- lation of physics and metaphysics, 303; division of metaphysics, 304 ; general metaphysics, in- cluding logic and ontology, 304 ; applied metaphysics, 305 ; syne- chology, 305 ; eidology, 306 ; psychology, 307 ; aesthetics, 308 ; tlieory of religion, 309 ; theory of pedagogic, 309 ; politics, 309 ; success of Herbart's doctrines due to their matiiematical dress, 309 ; retrospect and criticitman and Antiquarian period ol philosophy, 85 ; characterised bj exposition of older doctrines, 85 -^uesidemus, 86; the later Seep' tics, 86 ; the Sextians, 87 ; Cicero 87 ; Neo-Pythagoreans, 88 Eoscelliuus, 115 Kosenkranz, 312, 336, 33S, 344 Eousseau, 206 Euge, Arnold, 343 Sabelli^ns the, 107 St. Auguatine of Hippo : see Augus- tine Sankhya, the, of Kapila, 18 Saturninus, 101 Scepticism, arguments in favoui of, 86 Sceptics, the, 83; their doctrines 83 ; not original, 84 ; authorities 84 Schelling, Frederick William Jo' seph, 278 Schelling's philosophy : definitior of pldlosophy, 4 ; the ' systeu of identity,' 278 ; the problem o philosophy, 279 ; nature-philo sophy, 279 ; transceudenta philosophy, 280; division of th< process of the production of tht real into three .>tage8, 281 category of reciprocity, 281 Schelling's practical philosophy 282 ; the main difference betweer Schelling and Fichte, 283; philo- sophy of art, 283; philosophy oj nature, 284; correspondence oi Schelling with Fichte and Leib- nitz, 285; Schelling's later ten- dency to mysticism, 286 ; his system no great advance on Fichte's, 286 ; his followers, 287 ; INDEX. 417 retrospect and criticism, 347; referred to, 288, 300, 334, 3i7, 353 k'hiller, Kant's influence on, 253 >chlegel, 286 Schmidt, Dr. : see Stimer, Max Schoolmen, the earlier, 111 ; Eri- gena. 111; Anselm, 114; Abe- lard, 116 choolmeu, the later, 124; Al- bertus Macrnus, 124; Thomas Aquinas, 125 ; Duns Scotus, 127; William of Occam, 128 Schopenhauer, Arthur : life, 289 ; works, 289 Schopenhauer's philosophy : defi- nition of philosophy, 4 ; position of Schopenhauer's philosophy, 288 ; the four forms of the prin- ciple of causality, 290; separation of the will from the intellect, 291 ; use of the term ' will,' 293 ; the body the objectivation of the will, 294 ; on the nature of will, 295 ; pessimism, 296 ; place of the fine arts in the presentment of the will's objectivation, 296 ; of art, 297 ; of music, 298 ; art a quietude of the will, 298 ; the will-to-live, 299 ; the merit of Schopenhauer's work, 300; his followers, 301 ; retrospect and criticism, 348 chulze, 254, 258 ■>chwegler, Albert, history of philo- sophy, 12, 14 "science and ])hilosophy, relations between, 381, 397 Science, special, distinguished from philosophy, 2 Segregation, principle of, 387 Beneca, 87 ^ensationism of Condillac, 204 5eth, Andrew, 390 Sextian school, 87 Sextius, 87 5extus Clodius, 88 ^extus Empiricus, 86 Shakespeare, Bruno's possible in- fluence on, 135 Simonians, the, 100 Social Contract, Kousseau's, 182, 206 Society, Hobbes' theory of, 182 Sociology not founded by Comte, 373 Sokrates : birth, 44 ; studies and public life, 44 ; philosophy, 45 ; method, 45 ; condemnation and death, 46 ; the blame of his ac- cusers exaggerated, 46 ; the revo- lution in thought due to him, 47 ; the apostle of self-knowledge, 52 Sokratic Schools: philosophv of Sokrates, 45 ; his philosopliy a method rather than a doctrine, 47; minor Sol^ratic scliools, 48; the Megaric school, 48 : the Cyrenaic school, 48 ; the Cynic school, 49 ; referred to, 57, 64, 91 Sophistes, Plato's, 57 Sophists, school of the, 42, 52 ; its teachers, 42; its opposition to earlier philosophies, 43 ; decline, 43 Sophroniskos, 44 Space, according to Aristotle, 71 Spencer, Herbert ; definition of philosophy, 4 ; his philosophy, 380 ; distinction between the absolute and the relative, 380 ; ultimate scientific ideas, 381 ; relation of philosophy to science, 381 ; definition of reality, 382 : his test of truth, 382 ; principle* of the persistence of force and its consequences, 383; definition of evolution, 384; principles of evolution, 384 ; change from homogeneity to heterogeneity, 386 ; change from indefiniteness to definiteiiess, 387 ; tendency of evolution towards equilibration, 387 ; tendency after equilibration to dissolution, 388 ; his Principles of Biology and later works, 388 ; his merits and defects, 389 Speusippus, 77 Spinoza, Baruch de, 157; his capa- city for scientific exposition, 166; 2 E 418 INDEX. Spinoza's philosophy, 158, 215 ; his method, 158 ; errors of abstraction and imagination distinguished, 158 ; starting-point of his system, 159 ; account of his system, 160 ; anthropology, 165 ; ethics, 165 ; success of Spinozism, 167 ; autho- rities, 167 : his system contrasted with that of Leibnitz, 174; re- ferred to, 168, 214, 396 Stanley, Thomas, history of phi- losophy, 10 State, function of the, 63, 200 Stewart, Dugald, 203 Stilpo, 78 Stirner, Max, 340 ; the Individual and his Property, 342 Stoics, the, their definition of phi- losophy, 3 ; their doctrines, 78, 80 ; their logic, 78 ; physics, 79 ; ethics, 79 ; Stoicism pri- marily an ethical movement, 80 Strato. 78 Strauss, David Friedrich, 338, 339, 341 ; his Lehen Jesu, 339 ; Chridian Dogmatics in their Development, &c., 339 Stromata, the, of Clement of Alex- andria, 104 Substance, Descartes' definition of, 150 Syncretists, work of the, 85, 87 Synechology, 305 Syrian Gnostics, 100 ; Menander, 101 ; Satuminus, 101 ; Tatian, 101 ; Bardesanes, 101 ; doctrines, 101 Systeme de la Nature, d' Holbach's, 210, 211, 213 Tatian, 101 Tauler, Johannes, 131 Teunemann, history of philosophy, 11,13 Thales : life, 23 ; knowledge, 23 ; his claim to be the founder of philosophy, 24 ; his central doc- trine, 24 Tlmtaitusy Plato's, 55, 57, 62 Theology distinguished from phi losophy, 2 Theology, Kant's criticism of ra^ tional, 247 Theophilus, 104 Theophrastus, 77 Theory of Knowledge, fundamental . axioms of the, 258 Therapeutse, the, 90 Thomasius, Jacobus, history of philosophy, 10 Thrasymachos, 43 Tieck, 286 Tiedemann, history of philosophy, 11 TimoRus, Plato's, 60, 61, 62 Time, according to Aristotle, 71 Tracy, Testutt de, 213 Transcendental, meaning of the word, 229 Transitional thought, 98 ; the attitude of Christianity, 98 ; the Gnostics, 100; the Christian Fathers, 103 Treatise of Human Nature^ Hume's, 193, 196, 197, 199 Trinity ; the Neo-Platonic, dis- tinguished from the Christian, 94 ; the doctrine of the, the foundation of dogmatic Christi- anity, 106 Ueberweg, history of philosophy, 12,14 Unknowable, the, 383 Upanischads, the, 17 Vaisehika, the, of Kanada, 18 Valentinus, 100 Vedanta, the, of Badarayana, 18 Virtue, Plato's definition of, 63; Epicurean idea of, 81 Vischer, 338 Vision, Berkeley's theory of, 192 Voltaire, 206 Wagner, J. J., 287 Wallace, Edwin, 390 Wallace, William, 390 Weber, Alfred, history of philoso- phy, 13 INDEX. 419 lii Veifise, criticism of the Hegelian system, 338 iVill : Schopenhauer's use of the word, 293 : nature of the, 295 ; art a quietude of the, 298; Hartmanii on the conjunction of will and intelligence, 353 Vill in Nature, Schopenhauer's, 289 292 jVill-to-live, the, 299 Wissenscliaftslehre, Ficht^'s, 257, ! 261, 277 jVolff, Christian, definition of phi- losophy, 3 ; life, 175 ; his doc- I trines, 175 W'orld as Will and Presentation, Schopenhauer's, 289, 293, 290, 298, 299, 300 Xenocrates, 77 Xenophanes ; life, 33 ; theistic tendency of writings, 33 Xenophon, 44, 48 Yoga, the, of Patanjali, 18 Zeller, definition of philosophy, 4 Zeno of Sidon, 82 Zeno the Cyprist, 78 Zeno the Eleatic, philosophical work, 34 CATALOGUE OF BO HNS LIBRARIES. X.B.—It is requested that all orders be accompanied by paymefit. Books are sent carriage free on the receipt of the published price in stamps or otherwise. The Works to which the letters ' N. 5.' {denotijig New Style) are appended are kept in neat cloth bindings of various colours, as well as in the 7'egular Library style. All Orders are executed in the New binding, unless the contrary is ex- pressly stated. Complete Sets or Separate Volumes can be had at short notice, half-bound in calf or morocco. New Volumes of Standard Works in the various branches of Literature are constantly being added to this Series, which is already unsurpassed in respect to the number, variety, and cheapjiess of the Works contained in it. The Publishers have to anfiounce the following Volumes as recently issued or now in preparation : — Bos well's Life of Johnson. New Edition. 6 vols. [^Ready, see p. i. Vasari's Lives of tlie Painters. Additional Notes by J. P. Richter. Ready, see p. 8. Koger Ascham's Scholemaster. Edited by Prof. Mayor. Grimm's German Tales. 2 vols. With the Notes of the Original. \_Rcady^ sec p. 5. Coleridge's Table-Talk, &c. IReady, seep. 4. Coleridge's Miscellaneous "Works. \_In the press. Manual of Philosophy. By E. Belfort Bax. i vol. Goldsmith's Works. Vols. I. and II. \_Ready, seep. 5. Fairholt's History of Costume. \_In the press. Hoffmann's Stories. Translated by Major Ewing. [//^ the press. London : G. BELL & SONS, 4 York Street, Covent Garden. /tiiiuaiy, 18S5. BOHN'S LIBRARIES. STANDARD LIBRARY. 294 fWo. a/ Jx. 61/. tach, fxce/^iing i/iosc marked otheriuise. (51/. 10^-. (yd. per set,) ADDISON'S Works. Notes of Bishop Hurd. Short Memoir, Portrait, and 8 Plates of Medals. 6 vols. .V. .S". This is the most complete edition of Addison's Works issued. ALFIERI'S Tragedies. In English Verse. With Notes, Arguments, and In- troduction, by E. A. Bowring, C.B. 2 vols. N.S. AMERICAN POETRY. — .9.6 Fociry 0/ A)Hcrica. ASCHAM'S Scholemaster. Edit, by by Prof. J. E. B. Mayor. \_Iu tJte press. BACON'S Moral and Historical Works, including Essays, Apophthegms, Wisdom of the Ancients, New Atlantis, Henry VII., Henry VIII., Elizabeth, Henry' Prince of Wales, History of Great Britain, Julius Caesar, and Augustus Caesar. With Critical and Biographical Introduc- tion and Notes by J. Devey, M.A. Por- trait. N. S. — See also Philosophical Library. BALLADS AND SONGS of the Pea- santry of England, from Oral Recitation, private MSS., Broadsides, &c. Edit, by R. Bell. N. S. BEAUMONT AND FLETCHER. Selections. With Notes and Introduction by Leigh Hunt. BECKMANN (J.) History of Inven- tions, Discoveries, and Origins. With Portraits of Beckmann and James Watt. 2 vols. N.S. BELL (Robert).— .5"<7y^. CONDE'S History of the Dominion of the Arabs in Spain. Trans, by Mrs. Foster. Portrait of Abderahmen ben Moavia. 3 vols. COWPER'SCompleteWorks, Poems, Correspondence, and Translations. Edit, with Memoir by R. Southey. 45 En- gravings. 8 vols. COXE'S Memoirs of the Duke of Marlborough. With his original Corre- spondence, from family records at Blen- heim. Revised edition. Portraits. 3 vols. *^* An Atlas of the plans of Marl- borough's campaigns, 4to. 10s. 6d. COXE'S History of the House of Aus- tria. From the Foundation of the Monarchy by Rhodolph of Hapsburgh to the Death of Leopold II., 1218-1792. By Archdn. Coxe. With Continuation from the Accession of Francis I. to the Revolution of 1848. 4 Portraits. 4 vols. CUNNINGHAM'S Lives of the most Eminent British Painters. With Notes and 16 fresh Lives by Mrs. Heaton. 3V01S. N. S. DEFOE'S Novels and Miscellaneous Works. With Prefaces and Notes, in- ducing those attributed to Sir W. Scott. Portrait. 7 vols. N. S. DE LOLME'S Constitution of Eng- land, in which it is compared both with the Republican form of Government and the other Monarchies of Europe. Edit., with Life and Notes, by J. Macgregor, M.P. EMERSON'S Works. 3 vols. Most complete edition published. N. S. Vol. I.— Essays, Lectures, and Poems. Vol. II. — English Traits, Nature, and Conduct of Life. Vol. III. — Society and Solitude — Letters and Social Aims — Miscellaneous Papers (hitherto uncollected) — ^May-Day, S:c. FOSTER'S (John) Life and Corre- spondence. Edit, by J. E. Ryland. Por- trait. 2 vols. N. S. Lectures at Broadmead Chapel. Edit, by J. E. Ryland. 2 vols. A''. S. Critical Essays contributed to the ' Eclectic Review.' Edit, by J. E. Ryland. 2 vols. N. S. Essays : On Decision of Charac- ter ; on a Man's writing Memoirs of Him- self; on the epithet Romantic; on the aversion of Men of Taste to Evangelical Religion. N. S. Essays on the Evils of Popular Ignorance, and a Discourse on the Propa- gation of Christianity in India. N. S. Fosteriana : selected from periodical papers, edit, by H. G. Bohn. 55, N. S. FOX (Rt. Hon. C. 3.)— See CarreL GIBBON'S Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Complete and unabridged, with variorum Notes ; including those of Guizot, Wenck, Niebuhr, Hugo, Neander, and others. 7 vols. 2 Maps and Portrait. N.S. GOETHE'S Works. Trans, into English by E. A. Bowring, C.B., Anna Swanwick, Sir Walter Scott, &c. &c. 12 vols. N. S. Vols. I. and II.— Autobiography and An- nals. Portrait. Vol. III.— Faust. Complete. STANDARD LIBRARY. JOETHE'S '^ox\iS.-Continued. Vol. IV.— Novels and Tales : containing Elective Aftlnities, Sorrows of Werther, The German Emigrants, The Good Wo- men, and a Nouvelette. Vol. v.— Wilhelm IMeister's Apprentice- ship. Vol. VI.— Conversations v/ith Eckerman anJ Soret. Vol. VII. — Poems and Ballads in the ori- ginal Metres, including Hermann and Dorothea. Vol. VIII.— Gotz von Berlichingen, Tor- quato Tasso, Egmont, Iphigenia, Clavigo, Wayward Lover, and Fellow Culprits. Vol. IX. — Wilhelm Meister's Travels. Complete Edition. Vol. X. — Tour in Italy. Two Parts. And Second Residence in Rome. Vol. XI.— Miscellaneous Travels, Letters from Switzerland, Campaign in France, Siege of Mainz, and Rhine Tour. Vol. XII. — Early and Miscellaneous Letters, including Letters to his Mother, with Biography and Notes. Edited by Edw. Bell, M.A. ! — Correspondence with Schiller. 2 vols. — Sec Schiller. GOLDSMITH'S W^orks. 5 vols. K.S. Vol. I.— Life, Vicar of Wakefield, Essays, and Letters. Vol. II.— Poems, Plays, Bee, Cock Lane Ghost. [VoIs.'III. and IV. in the f>ress. i^REENE, MARLOW, and BEN JONSON (Poems of). With Notes and Memoirs by R. Bell. N. S. fREGORYS (Dr.) The Evidences, Doctrines, and Duties of the Christian Re- ligion. rRIMM'S Household Tales. With the Original Notes. Trans, by Mrs. A. Hunt. Introduction by Andrew Lang, M.A. 2 vols. N. S. rUIZOT'S History of Representative Government in Europe. Trans, by A. R. Scoble. — English Revolution of 1640. From the Accession of Charles I. to his Death. Trans, by W. Hazlitt. Portrait. — History of Civilisation. From the Roman Empire to the French Revolution. Trans, by W. Hazlitt. Portraits. 3 vols. lALLS (Rev. Robert) Works and Remains. Memoir by Dr._ Gregorj' and Essay by T. Foster. Portrait. lAWTHORNE'S Tales. 3 vols. A'. S. Vol. I. — Twice-told Tales, and the Show Image. Vol. II.— Scarlet Letter, and the House with Seven Gables. Vol. III. — Transformation, and Blithe- dale Romance. HAZLITTS (W.) Works. 6 vols. A'. 6-. Table-Talk. The Literature of the Age of Elizabeth and Characters of Shakespeare '.-i Plays. N.S. English Poets and English Comic Writers. N. S. HAZLITT'S (W.) 'WOYliB.— Continued. The Plain Speaker. Opinions ob Books, Men, and Things. N. S. Round Table. Conversations of James Northcote, R.A. ; Characteristics. A'. .S-. Sketches and Essays, and Winter- slow. A'. 6-. HEINE'S Poems. Translated in the original Metres, with Life by E. A. Bow- ring, C.B. 5J. A^ S. HUNGARY : its History and Revo- lution, with Memoir of Koesuth. Portrait. HUTCHINSON (Colonel). Memoirs of. By his Widow, with her Autobio- graphy, and the Siege of Lathom House. Portrait. N. S. IRVING'S (Washington) Complete Works. 15 vols. A^. 6'. Life and Letters. By his Nephew, Pierre E. Irving. With Index and a Portrait. 2 vols. A''. S. JAMES'S (G. P. R.) Life of Richard Coeur de Lion. Portraits of Richard and Philip Augustus. 2 vols. Louis XIV. Portraits. 2 vols. JAMESON (Mrs.) Shakespeare's Heroines. Characteristics of Women. By Mrs. Jameson. A^. ^. JEAN PAUL.— 6-^^ Richter. JONSON (Ben). Poems ot.— See Greene. JUNIUS 'S Letters. With Woodfall's Notes. An Essay on the Authorship. Fac- similes of Handwriting. 2 vols. N. S. LA FONTAINE'S Fables. In English Verse, with Essay on the Fabulists. By Elizur Wright. JV.S. LAMARTINE'S The Girondists, or Personal Memoirs of the Patriots of the French Revolution. Trans, by H. T. Ryde. Portraits of Robespierre, Madame Roland, and Charlotte Corday. 3 vols. The Restoration of Mpnarchy in France (a Sequel to The Girondists). 5 Portraits. 4 vols. The French Revolution of 18 i8. 6 Portraits. n LAMB'S (Charles) Elia and Eliana. Complete Edition. Portrait. A". S. Specimens of English Dramatic Poets of the time of Elizabeth. Notes, with the Extracts from the Garrick Plays. N.S. BONN'S LIBRARIES. LAPPENBERG'S England under the Anglo-Saxon Kings. 'J Vans, by B.Thorpe, F.S.A. 2 vols. .V. S. LANZI'S History of Painting in Italy, from the Period of the Revival of the Fine Arts to the End of the i8th Century. With Memoir of the Author, Portraits of Raffaelle, Titian, and Cor- reggio, after the Artists themselves. Trans, by T. Roscoe. 3 vols. LESSING'S Dramatic Works. Com- plete. P>y E. Bell, M.A. With Memoir by H. Zimmern. Portrait. 2 \ols. X. S. • Laokoon, Dramatic Notes, and Representation of Death by the Ancients. Frontispiece. X. S. IiOCKE'S Philosophical Works, con- taining Human Understanding, \yith Bishop of Worcester, Malebranche's Opinions, Na- tural Philosophy, Reading and Study. With Preliminary Discourse, Analysis, and Notes, by J. A. St. John. Portrait. 2 vols. X. S. Life and Letters, with Extracts from his Common-place Books. By Lord King. LOCKHART (J. G.)-S£e Burns. LONSDALE (Lord).— .S^t-c Carrel. LUTHER'S Table-Talk. Trans, by W. Hazlitt. With Life by A. Chalmers, and Lither's Catechism. Portrait after Cranach. .V, S. ■ Autobiography.— .TtY Mkhclct. MACHIAVELLI'S History of Flo- rence, The Prince, Savonarola, Historical Tracts, and Memoir. Portrait. -V, 6". TvIARLOWE. Poems of.— .9^^ Greene. MARTINEAU'S (Harriet) History of England (including History of the Peace) from 1800-1846. 5 vols. X.S. T.I EN Z EL'S History of Germany, from the Earliest Period to the Crimean War. 3 Portraits. 3 vols. TI I C H E L E T ' S Autobiography of Luther. Trans, by W. Hazlitt. With Notes. X.S. The French Revolution to the Flight of the King in 1791. ..V. S. MIGNET'S The French Revolution, Irom 1789 to 1814. Portrait of Napoleon. -V. S. MILTON'S Prose Works. With Pre- face, Preliminary Remarks by J. A. St. John, and Index. 5 vols. MIT FORD'S (Miss) Our Village. Sketches of Rural Character and Scenery. 2 Engj-avings. 2 vols. X. S. MOLIERE'S Dramatic Works. In Knglish Prose, by C. H. Wall. With a Life and a Portrait. 3 vols. X. S. ' It is not too much to'a^y that we have l-ere probably as good a translation of Molierc as can be given.' — Acade/uj. MONTESQUIEU'S Spirit of Laws.. Revised Edition, with D'Alemberi's Analy- ' sis, Notes, and ^lemoir. 2 vols. .V. S NEANDER Dr. A.) History of the Christian Religion and Church. Trans, by J. Torrey. With Short Memoir. 10 vols. Life of Jesus Christ, in its His- torical Connexion and Development. _\". .V. The Planting and Training of the Christian Church by the Aposiles. With the Antignosticus, or Spirit of Ter- tuUian. Trans, by J. E. Ryland. 2 vols. Lectures on the History of Christian Dogmas. Trans, by J. E. Ry- land. 2 vols. • Memorials of Christian Life in; the Earlv and Middle Ages; including Light in' Dark Places. Trans, by J. E. Ryland. j OCKLEY (S.) History of the Sara- cens and their Conquests in Syria, Persia, and Egypt, Comprising the Lives of Mohammed and his Successors to the Death of Abdalmelik, the Eleventh Caliph. By Simon Ockley, B.D., Prof, of Arabic' in Univ. of Cambridge. Portrait of Mo-! hammed. PERCY'S Reliques of Ancient Eng- lish Poetry, consisting of Ballads, Songs, and other Pieces of our earlier Poets, with some few of later date. With Essay on Ancient Minstrels, and Glossary'. 2 vols. X.S. PHILIP DE COMMINES. Memoirs of. Containing the Histories of Louis XI. and Charles VI I L, and Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy. With the History of Louis XL, by J. de Troyes. With a Life and N^otes by A. R. Scoble. Portraits. 2 vols. PLUTARCH'S LIVES. Newly Trans- lated, with Notes and Life, by A. Stewart, ALA., late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, and G. Long, M.A. 4 vols. A^. S. POETRY OF AMERICA. Selections from One Hundred Poets, from 1776 to 1876. With Introductory Review, and Specimens of Negro Melodj-, by W. J. Linton. Portrait of W. Whitman. X. S. RANKE (L.) History of the Popes, their Church and State, and their Conflicts with Protestantism in the i6th and 17th Centuries. Trans, by E. Foster. Portraits of Julius II. (after Raphael), Innocent X. (after ^'■elasquez), and Clement VII. (aftei Titian). 3 vols. X. S. History of Servia. Trans, by Mrs. Kerr. To which is added, The Slave Pro- vinces of Turkey, byCyprien Robert. ^V. .S". REUMONT (Alfred de).— ^-^v: Cara/^is. f Law;, Tofth itsHii .ining itory .'■IS iLife ie SaK entEii! Poeti, . Essay i 7. Menoii s the Boil Histoiy \'6i]l Pm- jly Te fe, ly of HM M,l lelectioi Jin 177* mew, a bvW, ;e Pope! , Porra 5 VII. (a:3 ■ Sliveft STANDARD LIBRAR \ lEYNOLDS'(Sir J.) Literary "Works. With Memoir and Reinaiks by H. W. F.eechj-. 2 vols. -\'. 6". LIGHTER (Jean Paul). Levana, a Treatise on Education ; together with the Autobiography, and a short Memoir. N.S. — Flower, Fruit, and Thorn Pieces, or the Wedded Life, Death, and Marriage of Siebenkaes. Translated by Alex. Ewing. N. S. Txt only complete English translation. XOSCOE'S (W.) Life of Leo X., with Notes, Historical Documents, and Disser- tation on Lucretia Borgia. 3 Portraits. c \ ols. — Lorenzo de' Medici, called ' The Magrnficent,' with Copyright Notes, Poeius, Letters, &c. With Memoir of Roscoe and Portrait of Lorenzo. I US SI A, History of, from the earliest Period to the Crimean War. By V\'. K. Kelly. 3 Portraits. 2 vols. $OHILLER'S Works. 6 vols. A'. .S. \'ol. L — Thirty Years' War — Revolt in the Netherlands. Rev. A. J. W. Morrison, M.A. Portrait. Vol. II. — Revolt in the Netherlands, cw;/- //V/fi/— Wallenstein. By J. Churchill and S. T. Coleridge.— William Tell. Sir Theo- dore rslartin. Engraving (after Vandyck). Vol. III.— Don Carlos. R. D. Boylan — Mary .Stuart. Mellish — Maid of Or- leans. Anna Swanwick — Bride of Mes- sina. A. Lodge, M.A. Together with the L'se of the Chorus in Tragedy (a short Essay). Engravings. These Dramas are all translated in metre. Vol. IV. — Robbers — Fiesco — Love and Intrigue — Demetrius — Ghost Seer — Sport of Divinity. The Dramas in this volume are in prose. Vol. v.— Poems. E. A, Bowring, C.B. Vol. VI.— Essays, iEsthetical and Philo- sophical, including the Dissertation on the Connexion between the Animal and Spiri- tual in Man. 5CHILLER and GOETHE. Corre- spondence between, from a.d. 1794-1805. V\'it'.i Short Notes by L. Dora Schmitz. 2 vols. N. S. CHLEGEL'S (F.) Lectures on the Philosophy of Life and the Philosophy of Language. By A. J. W. Morrison. — The History of Literature, Ancient and Modern. — The Philosophy of History. With I^Ienioir and Portrait. SCHLEGEL'S Works — Continued. Modern History, with the Lectures^ entitled CH;sar and Alexander, and The Beginning of our History. By L. Puree!, and R. H. Whitelock. .^Esthetic and Miscellaneous Works, containing Letters on Christiar> Art, Essay on Gothic Architecture, Re- marks on the Romance Poetry of the Mid- dle Ages, on Shakspeare, the Limits of the Beautiful, and on the Language and Wis- dom of the Indians. By E. J. Millington. SCHLEGEL (A. W^.1 Dramatic Art and Literature. By J. Black. With Me- moir by A. J. W. Morrison. Portrait. SHAKESPEARE'S Dramatic Art. The History and Character of .Shakspeare'.-- Plays. By Dr. H. Ulrici. Trans, by L. Dora Schmitz. 2 vols. N. S. SHERIDAN'S Dramatic Works. Wit!^ Memoir. Portrait (after Reynolds). N. S. SKEAT :Rev. W. W.)-6\r Chancer. SISMONDI'S History of the Litera- ture of the South of Europe. With Notes and Memoir by T. Roscoe. Portraits of Sismondi and Dante. 2 vols. The specimens of early Erench, Italian, Spanish, and Portugese Poetry, In English Verse, by Cary and others. SMITH'S (Adam) Theory of Moral Sentiments ; with Essay on the First For- mation of Languages, and Critical Memoir byDugald Stewart. SMYTH'S (Professor) Lectures on Modern History ; from the Irruption of the Northern Nations to the close of the Ameri- can Re\"olution. 2 vols. Lectures on the French Revolu- tion. With Index. 2 vols. SOUTHEY.-.S-rr Co-.vper, Wesley, and {liliistfated Library) Nelson. STURM'S Morning Communings with God, or Devotional Meditations for Every Day. Trans, by W. Johnstone, M.A. SULLY. Memoirs of the Duke of, Prime Minister to Henrj- the Great. With Notes and Historical Introduction. 4 Por- traits. 4 vols. TAYLOR'S (Bishop Jeremy) Holy Living and Dying, with Prayers, contain- ing the Whole Duty of a Christian and the parts of Devotion fitted to all Occasions. Portrait. K. S. THIERRY'S Conquest of England by the Normans ; its Causes, and its Conse- quences in England and the Continent. ByW. Hazlltt. With short Memoir. 2 Por- traits. 2 vols. X, S. BOHN'S LIBRARIES. II TROYE'S (Jean A.e).—SeeP/ulipdeCom- })iines. ULRICI '\Dx.')—See Shakespeare. VASARI. Lives of the most Eminent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects. By Mrs. J. Foster, with selected Notes. Por- trait. 6 vols., Vol. VI. being an additional Volume of Notes by J. P. Richter. N. S. I "WESLEY, the Life of, and the Rise I and Progress of Methodism. By Robert Southey. Portrait, ^s. N. S. WHEATLEY. A Rational niustra- tion of the Book of Common Prayer, being the Substance of everything Liturgical in all former Ritualist Commentators upon the subject. Frontispiece. N. S. HISTORICAL LIBRARY. 21 Volumes at ^s. each. (5/. ^s. per set.) EVELYN'S Diary and Correspond- dence, with the Private Correspondence of Charles I. and Sir Edward Nicholas, and between Sir Edward Hyde (Earl of Claren- don) and Sir Richard Browne. Edited from the Original MSS. by W. Bray, F.A.S. 4 vols. N. S. 45 Engravings (after Van- dyke, Lely, Kneiler, and Jamieson, &c.). N.B. — This edition contains 130 letters from Evelyn and his wife, contained in no other edition. FEPYS' Diary and Correspondence. With Life and Notes, by Lord Braybrooke. 4 vols. N. S. With Appendix containing additional Letters, an Index, and 31 En- gravings (after Vandj'ke, Sir P. Lely, Holbein, Kneiler, &c.). JESSE'S Memoirs of the Court of England under the Stuarts, including the Protectorate. 3 vols. With Index and 42 Portraits (after Vandyke, Lely, &c.). Memoirs of the Pretenders and their Adherents. 7 Portraits. NU GENT'S (Lord) Memorials of Hampden, his Party and Times. With Memoir. 12 Portraits (after Vandyke and others). .V. 6". STRICKLAND'S (Agnes) Lives of the Queens of England from the Norman Conquest. From authentic Documents, public and private. 6 Portraits. 6 vols. N.S. Life of Mary Queen of Scots. 2 Portraits. 2 vols. N. S. I PHILOSOPHICAL LIBRARY. 15 Vols, at ^s. each, excepting those marked othencise. (3/. 95-. ol. per sci^ BACON'S Novum Organum and Ad- vancement of Learning. With Notes by J. Devey, M.A. COMTE'S Philosophy of the Sciences. An Exposition of the Principles of the Cours de Philosophie Positive. By G. H. Lewes, Author of ' The Life of Goethe.' DRAPER (Dr. J. W.) A History of the Intellectual Development of Europe. 2 vols. N. S. HEGEL'S Philosophy of History. By J. Sibree, M.A. KANT'S Critique of Pure Reason. By J. M. D. IMeiklejohn. N. S. Prolegomena and Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science, with Bio- graphy and Memoir by E. Belfort Bax. Portrait. N. S. LOGIC, or the Science of Inference. A Popular Manual. By J. Devey. MILLER (Professor). History Philo. sophically Illustrated, from the Fall of the Roman Empire to the French Revolution. With Memoir. 4 vols. y. 6d. each. SPINOZA'S Chief Works. Trans, with Introduction by R. H. M. Elwes. 2 vols. N.S. Vol. I. — Tractatus Theologico-Politicus — Political Treatise. Vol. II. — Improvement of the Under- standing — Ethics— Letters. TENNEMANN'S Manual of the His- tory of Philosophy. Trans, by Rev. A. Johnson, M.A. ij THEOLOGICAL AND ANTIQUAIUAN LIBRARIES. THEOLOGICAL LIBRARY. IS Vols, at 5j. each^ excepting those marked othcmnse. (3/. 13^. 6d. per set.) 3LEEK. Introduction to the Old Testament. By Friedrich Bleek. Trans, under the supervision of Rev. E. Venables, Residentiary Canon of Lincoln. 2 vols. N.S. Religion of 'Ourt liig tin : H I LLI N GWORTH'S Protestants. 35-. 6d. 3USEBIUS. Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Pamphilius, Bishop of Ca^sarea. Trans, by Rev. C. F. Cruse, IM.A. With Notes, Life, and Chronological Tables. IVAGRIUS. History.of the Church. — See Thcodorct. "5 anf SARD WICK. History of the Articles of Religion ; to which is added a Series of Documents from a.d. 1536 to a.d. 1615, Ed. by Rev. F. Proctor. N. S. rials '::iyl HENRY'S (Matthew) Exposition of the Baok of Psalms. Numerous Woodcuts. esoftbi Norm PEARSON (John, D.D.) Exposition i of the Creed. Edit, by E. Walford, M.A. ^[i With Notes, Analysis, and Indexes. N.S. f Scots . PHILO-JUD^US, Works of. The Contemporary of Josephus. Trans, by C. D. Yonge. 4 vols. PHILOSTORGIUS. Ecclesiastical History of. — See Sozoiiien. SOCRATES' Ecclesiastical History, Comprising a History of the Church from Constantine, a.d. 305; to the 38th year of Theodosius IL With Short Account of the Author, and selected Notes. SOZOMEN'S Ecclesiastical History. A.D. 324-440. With Notes, Prefatory Re- marks by Valesius, and Short Memoir. Together with the Ecclesiastical His- tory OF Philostorgius, as epitomised by Photius. Trans, by Rev. E. Walford, IvLA. With Notes and brief Life. THEODORET and EVAGRIUS. His- tories of the Church from a.d. 332 to the Death of Theodore of Mopsuestia, a.d. 427 ; and from a.d. 431 to a.d. 544. With Memoirs. W^IESELER'S (Karl) Chronological Synopsis of the Four Gospels. Trans, by Rev. Canon Venables. N. S. ANTIQUARIAN LIBRARY. 35 V^ols. at 5^-. each. {81. i$s. per set.) ference. ryPhilo Falloftfe BINGLO-SAXON CHRONICLE. — See Bede. asSER'S Life of Alfred.— ^"^^ Six O. E. Chronicles. BEDE'S (Venerable) Ecclesiastical History of England. Together with the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. With Notes, Short Life, Analysis, and Map. Edit, by J. A, Giles, D.C.L. '*«1bOETHIUS'S Consolation of Philo- sophy. King Alfred's Anglo-Saxon Ver- sion of. With an English Translation on opposite pages. Notes, Introduction, and Glossary, by Rev, S. Fox, M.A. To which is added the Anglo-Saxon Version of the Metres of Boethius, with a free Translation by Martin F. Tupper, D.C.L. BRAND'S Popular Antiquities of England, Scotland, and Ireland. Illus- trating the Origin of our Vulgar and Pro- vincial Customs, Ceremonies, and Super- stitions. By Sir Henry Ellis, K.H., F.R.S. frontispiece. 3 vols. 'Br.5.\»' :Uni CHRONICLES of the CRUSADES. Contemporary Narratives of Richard Coeur de Lion, by Richard of Devizes and Geof- frey de Vinsauf ; and of the Crusade at Saint Louis, by Lord John de Joinville. With Short Notes. Illuminated Frontis- piece from an old MS. DYER'S (T. F. T.) British Popular Customs, Present and Past. An Account of the various Games and Customs asso- ciated with different Days of the Year in the British Isles, arranged according to the Calendar. By the Rev. T. F. Thiselton Dyer, M.A. EARLY TRAVELS IN PALESTINE. Comprising the Narratives of Arculf, Willibald, Bernard, Sajwulf, Sigurd, Ben- jamin of Tudela, Sir John Maundeville, De la Brocquiere, and Maundrell ; all un- abridged. With Introduction and Note? by Thomas Wright. Map of Jerusalem. BONN'S LIBRARIES. ELLIS (G.) Specimens of Early En- glish INIetrical Romances, relatine: to Arthur, Merlin, Guy of Warwick, Richard Coeur de Lion, Charlemagne, Roland, S:c. S:c. With Historical Introduction by J. O. Halliwell, F.R.S. Illuminated Frontis- piece from an old ]MS. ETHELWERD. Chronicle of. — Sec Six O. E. Chronicles. FLORENCE OF W^ORCESTER'S Chronicle, with the Two Continuations : comprising Annals of English History from the Departure of the Romans to the Reign of Edward I. Trans., with Notes, 1)y Thomas Forester, M.A. GESTA ROMANORUM, or Enter- taining Moral Stories invented by the Monks. Trans, with Notes by the Rev. Charles Swan. Edit, by W. Hooper, M.A. GIRALDUS CAMBRENSIS' Histori- cal Works. Containing lopography of Ireland, and Histoiy of the Conquest of Ireland, by Th. Forester, MA. Itinerary through AVales, and Description of Wales, by Sir R. Colt Hoare. GEOFFREY OF MONMOUTH. Clironicle of. — Sec Six O. E. Chronicles. GILD AS. Chronicle of.— Sec Six O. E. Chronicles. HENRY OF HUNTINGDON'S His tory of the English, from the Roman In- vasion to the Accession of Henry II. ; with the Acts of King Stephen, and the Letter to Walter. By T. P'orester, M.A. Frontispiece from au old MS. INGULPH'S Chronicles of the Abhey of Croyland, with the Contintation by Peter of P.lois and others. Trans, with Notes by H. T. Riley, 13.A. KEIGHTLEY'S (Thomas) Fairy My- thology, illustrative of the Romance and Superstition of Various Countries. Frontis- piece by Cruikshank. N. S. LEPSIUS'S Letters from Egypt, Ethiopia, and the Peninsula of Sinai ; to which are added. Extracts from his Chronolog>' of the Egj-ptians, with refer- ence to the Exodus of the Israelites. By L. and J. B. Horner. Maps and Coloured \'iew of Mount Barkal. MALLET'S Northern Antiquities, or an Historical Account of the Manners, Customs, Religions, and Literature of the Ancient Scandinavians. I'rans. by Bishop Percy. With Translation of the Pkosk Edu.\, and Notes by J. A. Blackwell. Also an Abstract of the ' Eyrbyggi.-i Saga ' by Sir Walter Scott. With Glossary and Coloured Frontispiece. MARCO POLO'S Travels ; with Notes^ and Introduction. Edit, by T. Wright. MATTHEW PARIS'S English His- tory, from 1235 to 1273. By Rev. J. A. Giles, I). CL. With P'rontispiece. 3 vols. — Sec also Kp£^er 0/ Jl'c/ulczrr. MATTHEW OF W^ESTMINSTER'S Flowers of History-, especially such as re- late to the affairs of Britain, from the be- ginning of the World to A.D. 1307. By C. D. Yonge. 2 vols. NENNIUS. Chronicle ot.— Scj Six O. E. Chronicles. ORDERICUS VITALIS' Ecclesiastical History of England and Normandy. With Notes, Introduction of Guizot, and the Critical Notice of M._ Delille, by T. Forester, M.A. To which is added the Chronicle of St. Evroult. With Gene- ral and Chronological Indexes. 4 vols. PAULI'S (Dr. R.) Life of Alfred the Great. To which is appsnded Alfred's An-gi.o-Saxox Version of Orosils. With iiteral Translation interpaged, Note-, and an Anglo-Saxon Grammar and Glossary,, by B. Thorpe, Esq. Fro.-.tispiece. RICHARD OF CIRENCESTER. Chronicle of. — Sec Six O. E. CJironiclcs. ROGER DE HOVEDEN'S Annals of English History, comprising the History of England and of other Countries of Eu- rope from A.D. 732 to A.D. 1201. With Notes by H. T. Riley, B.A. 2 vols. ROGER OF W^ENDOVER'S Flowers of History, comprising the History or England from the Descent of the Saxons to A.D. 1235, formerly ascribed to Matthew Pai-is. With Notes and Index by J. A. Giles, D.C.L. 2 vols. SEX OLD ENGLISH CHRONICLES : viz., Asser"s Life of Alfred and the Chroni- cles of Ethelwerd, Gildas, Nennius, Geof- frey of Monmouth, and Richard of Ciren- cester. ?".dit., with Notes, by J. A. Giles, D.C.L. Portrait of Alfred. WILLIAM OF MALMESBURYS Chronicle of the Kings of England, from the Earliest Period to King Stephen. By Rev. J. Sharpe. With Notes by J. A. Giles, D.C.L. Frontispiece. YULE-TIDE STORIES. A Collection of Scandina\ian and North-German Popu- lar Tales and Traditions, from the Swedish, Danish, and German. Edit, by B. Thorpe. giiihaii « lit be. /ZZ USTRA TED LIBRA R \ '. II ''•'•J. A, 85 Vols, at 5J-. ^ar//, excepting tho. " ivols,-J LLEN'S (Joseph, R.N.) Battles of the British Navj-. Revised edition, with Indexes of Names and Events, and 57 Por- traits and Plans. 2 vols. UNDERSEN'S Danish Fairy Tales. By Caroline Peachey. With Short Life and 120 Wood Engravings. -J i &§.RIOSTO'S Orlando Furioso. English Verse by W. S. Rose. With Notes and Short Memoir. Portrait after Titian, 'Miasticali ^"d 24 Steel Engravings. 2 vols. ^^'f ^ECHSTEIN'S Cage and Chamber :, ,.'? Birds: their Natural History, Habits, &c. 'n j ''i Together with Sweet's Bkitish War- SnJ '^^■^'^^- ^2 Plates and W^oodcuts. N. S. 4 vol), I or with the Plates Coloured, 75. 6d. ILLUSTRATED LIBRARY. marked othe}-7uise. (23/. 2s. 6d. per set. ) JONOMI'S Nineveh and its Palaces. The Discoveries of Botta and Layard applied to the Elucidation of Holy Writ, 7 Plates and 294 Woodcuts. .V. S. Ifred the Will !iG!osar)^UTLER'S Hudibras Notes and Biography Illustrations. ESTER Innals oi ^ATTERMOLE'S Evenings at Had- don Hall. Romantic Tales pf the Olden Times. With 24 Steel Engravings after Cattermole. Maiikf. kl.A, «CLES; -.eCkoni- ;!D!, Geof' ofCireH' ,A.Gile: with Variorum Portrait and 28 fEnJCHENA, Pictorial, Descriptive, and Historical, with some account of Ava and the Burmese, Siam, and Anam. Map, and nearly 100 Illustrations. .^"^JCRAIK'S (G. L.) Pursuit of Know- iM "1 ledge under Difficulties. Illustrated by- Anecdotes and Memoirs. Numerous Wood- cut Portraits. N. S. ■CRUIKSHANK'S Three Courses and a Dessert ; comprising three Sets of Tales, West Country, Irish, and Legal ; and a Melange. With 50 Illustrations by Cruik- shank. A'. S. ollectioJ — - Punch and Judy. The Dialogue of the Puppet Show ; an Account of its Origin, &c. 24 Illustrations by Cruikshank. A'. ^. — With Coloured Plates. 7^-. 6d. DANTE, in English Verse, by I. C. Wright, M.A. _ With Introduction and Memoir. Portrait and 34 Steel Engravings after Flaxman. A\ 6". DIDRON'S Christian Iconography; a History of Christian Art in the Middle Ages. Trans, by E. J, Millington. 150 Outline Engravings. DYER (Dr. T. H.) Pompeii : its Build- ings and Antiquities. An Account of the City, with full Description of the Remain^ and Recent Excavations, and an Itinerarj- for Visitors. By T. H. Dyer, LL.D. Nearly 300 Wood Engravings, Map, and Plan. -rs.Cd. A\S. Rome : History of the City, with Introduction on recent E.xcavatioas. 8 Engravings, Frontispiece, and 2 Maps. GIL 6LAS. The Adventures of. From the French of Lesage by Smollett. 24 Engravings after Smirke, and 10 Etch- ings by Cruikshank. 612 pages. 6^. GRIMM'S Gammer Grethel; or, Ger- man Fairy Tales and Popular Stories, containing 42 Fairy Tales. By Edgar Taylor. Numerous Woodcuts after Cruik- shank and Ludwig Grimm. 3J. 6d. HOLBEIN'S Dance of Death and Bible Cuts. Upwards of 150 Subjects, en graved in facsimile, with Introduction and Descriptions by the late Francis Douce and Dr. Dibdin. js. (xi. HOWITT'S (Mary) Pictorial Calen- dar of the Seasons ; embodying Aikin's Calendar of Nature. Upwards of 100 Woodcuts. INDIA, Pictorial, Descriptive, and Historical, from the Earliest Times. 100 Engravings on Wood and Map. JESSE'S Anecdotes of Dogs. With 40 Woodcuts after Harvej", Bewick, and others, N. S. With 34 additional Steel Engravings after Cooper, Landseer, &c. 7^. td. N. S. KING'S (C. W.) Natural History of Gems or Decorative Stones. lUiastra- tions. 6s. Natural History of Precious Stones and Metals. Illustrations, ts. Handbook of Engraved G«ms. Numerous Illustrations, ts. KITTO'S Scripture Lands. Described in a series of Historical, Geographical, and Topographical Sketches. 42 Maps. With the Maps coloured, -js. 6d. KRUMMACHER'S Parables. 40 lllus- trations. LINDSAY'S (Lord) Letters on Egypt, Edom, and the Holy Land. 36 Wood Engravings and 2 Maps. 12 BOHN'S LIBRARIES. LODGE'S Portraits of Illustrious Personages of Great Britain, -vvith Bio- graphical and Historical l^Iemoirs. 240 Portraits engraved on Stepl, with the respective Biographies unabridged. Com- plete in 8 vols. LONGFELLOW'S Poetical Works, including his Translations and Notes. 24 full-page Woodcuts by Birket Foster and others, and a Portrait. N. S. Without the Illustrations, 35.6^. N.S. - Prose Works. With 16 full-page Woodcuts by Birket Foster and others. LOUDON'S (Mrs.) Entertaining Na- turalist. Popular Descriptions, Tales, and Anecdotes, of more than 500 Animals. Numerous Woodcuts. N. S. MARRY AT'S (Capt., R.N.) Master- man Ready ; or, the Wreck of the Pa<:ijic. (Written for Young People.) With 93 Woodcuts. 3^. dd. N. S. Mission; or, Scenes in Africa. (Written for Young People.) Illustrated by Gilbert and Dalziel. y. 6d. N. S. Pirate and Three Cutters. (Writ- ten for Young People.) With a Memoir. 8 Steel Engravings after Clarkson Stan- field, R.A. 35. 6d. N. S. Privateersman. Adventures by Sea and Land One Hundred Years Ago. (Written for Young People.) 8 Steel En- gravings. 35. 6d. N. S. Settlers in Canada. (Written for Young People.) 10 Engravings by Gilbert and Dalziel. 3J. 6d. N. S. Poor Jack. (Written for Young People.) With 16 Illustrations after Clark- son Stanfield, R.A. 3^. 6d. N'. S. MAXWELL'S Victories of Welling- ton and the British Armies. Frontispiece and 4 Portraits. MICHAEL ANGELO and RAPHAEL, Their Lives and Works. By Duppa and Quatremere de Quincy. Portraits and Engravings, including the Last Judgment, and Cartoons. N. S. MILLER'S History of the Anglo- Saxons, from the Earliest Period to the Norman Conquest. Portrait of Alfred, I\Iap of Saxon Britain, and 12 Steel Engravings. MILTON'S Poetical Works, with a Memoir and Notes by J. Montgomerj^, an Index to Paradise Lost, Todd's Verbal Index to all the Poems, and Notes. 120 Wood Engravings. 2 vols. N. S. MUDIE'S History of British Birds. Revised by W. C. L. Martin. 52 Figures of Birds and 7 Plates of Eggs. 2 vols. N.S. With the Plates coloured, "js. 6d. per vol. NAVAL and MILITARY HEROES; of Great Britain ; a Record of British ! Valour on every Day in the year, from j William the Conqueror to the Battle of! Inkermann. By Major Johns, R.M., and Lieut. P. H. Nicolas, R.M. Indexes. 24 Portraits after Holbein, Reynolds, &c. 6^-. NICOLINI'S History of the Jesuits : their Origin, Progress, Doctrines, and De- signs. 8 Portraits. PETRARCH'S Sonnets, Triumphs, and other Poems, in English Verse. With Life by Thomas Campbell. Portrait and 15 Steel Engravings. PICKERING'S History of the Races of Man, and their Geographical Distribu- tion ; with An Analytical Synopsis of , THE Natural History of Man. By Dr. Hall. Map of the World and 12 Plates. With the Plates coloured, 75. 6d. PICTORIAL HANDBOOK OF Modern (xeography on a Popular^ Plan. Compiled from the best Authorities, English and Foreign, by H. G. Bohn. 150 Wood- cuts and 51 Maps. 6s. With the Maps coloured, 7^. 6d. Without the Maps, 3jr. dd. POPE'S Poetical Works, including Translations. Edit., with Notes, by R. Carruthers. 2 vols. Homer's Iliad, with Introduction and Notes by Rev. J. S. Watson, M.A. With Flaxman's Desig.ns. N. S. Homer's Odyssey, with the Battle OF Frogs and Mice, Hymns, &c., by other translators, including Chapman. In- troduction and Notes by J. S. Watson, M.A. With Flaxman's Designs. N. S. Life, including many of his Letters. By R. Carruthers. Numerous Illustrations. POTTERY AND PORCELAIN, asd other objects of Vertu. Comprising an Illustrated Catalogue of the Bernal Col- lection, with the prices and names of the Possessors. Also an Introductory Lecture on Pottery and Porcelain, and an Engraved List of all Marks and Monograms. By H. G. Bohn. Numerous Woodcuts. With coloured Illustrations, 10^. 6d. PROUT'S (Father) Reliques. Edited by Rev. F. Rlahony. Copyright edition, with the Author's last corrections and additions. 21 Etchings by D. Maclise, R.A. Nearly 600 pages. 5^. N. S. RECREATIONS IN SHOOTING. With some Account of the Game found in the British Isles, and Directions for the Manage- ment of Dog and Gun. By ' Craven.' 62 Woodcuts and 9 Steel Engravings after A. Cooper, R.A. CLASSICAL LIBRARY. 13 Jesuits ^e. Will leRact REDDING'S History and Descrip- tions of Wines, Ancient and Modern. 20 Woodcuts. RENNIE. Insect Architecture. Re- vised by Rev. J. G. Wood, ]\I.A. 186 Woodcuts. ^V. 6". ROBINSON CRUSOE. With Memoir of Defoe, 12 Steel Engravings and 74 Wood- cuts after Stothard and Harvey. — — Without the Engravings, -^s. 6d. ROME IN THE NINETEENTH CEN- tury. An Account in 1817 of the Ruins of the Ancient City, and Monuments of Modern Times. By C. A. Eaton. 34 Steel En- gravings. 2 vols. SHARPE (^.) The History of Egypt, from the Earliest Times till the Conquest by the Arabs, a.d. 640. 2 Maps and up- wards of 400 Woodcuts. 2 vols. N. S. SOUTHEY'S Life of Nelson. With Additional Notes, Facsimiles of Nelson's Writing, Portraits, Plans, and 50 Engrav- ings, after Birket Foster, &c. N. S. STARLING'S (Miss) Noble Deeds of Women; or. Examples of Female Courage, Fortitude, and Virtue. With 14 Steel Por- traits. N. S. STUART and REVETT'S Antiqixities of Athens, and other Monuments of Greece ; with Glossary of Terms used in Grecian Architecture. 71 Steel Plates and numerous Woodcuts. SWEET'S British^ Warblers. ^s.—See Bechstein. TALES OF THE GENII; or, the Delightful Lessons of Horam, the Son of Asmar. Trans, by Sir C. Morrell. Numer- ous Woodcuts. TASSO'S Jerusalem Delivered. In English Spenserian Verse, with Life, by J. H. Wiffen. With 8 Engravings and 24 Woodcuts. .V. S. WALKER'S Manly Exercises; con- taining Skating, Riding, Driving, Hunting, Shooting, .Sailing, Rowing, Swimming, &:c. 44 Engravings and numerous Woodcuts. WALTON'S Comp.lete Angler, or the Contemplative Man's Recreation, by Izaak Walton and Charles Cotton. With Me- moirs and Notes by E. Jesse. Also an Account of Fishing Stations, I'ackle, &c. , by H. G. Bohn. Portrait and 203 Wood- cuts. N. S. With 26 additional Engravings on Steel, •]s. 6d. Lives Of Donne, Wotton, Hooker, &c., with Notes. A New Edition, re- revised by A. H. Bullen, with a Memoir of Izaak Walton by William Dowling. 6 Portraits, 6 Autograph Signatures, &c. N.S. W^ELLINGTON, Life of. From the Materials of Maxwell. 18 Steel En- gravings. ■ Victories oi.—See MaxivcU. WESTROPP (H. M.) A Handbook of Archaeology, Elgyptian, Greek, Etruscan, Roman. By H. M. Westropp. Numerous Illustrations. 7^. 6d. N. S. WHITE'S Natural History of Sel- borne, with Observations on various Parts of Nature, and the Naturalists' Calendar. Sir W. Jardine. Edit., with Notes and Memoir, by E. Jesse. 40 Portraits. N. S. With the Plates coloured, -]$. 6d. N. S. YOUNG LADY'S BOOK, The. A Manual of Recreations, Arts, Sciences, and Accomplishments. 1200 Woodcut Illustra- tions, "js. 6d. cloth gilt, gilt edges, gs. CLASSICAL LIBRARY. Translations from the Greek and Latin. 95 Volss at ^s. each, excepting those marked othevwise. (23/. *js. per set,) .ffiSCHYLUS, The Dramas of. In English Verse by Anna Swanwick. 3rd edition. N. S. The Tragedies of. In Prose, with Notes and Introduction, by T. A. Buckley, B.A. Portrait. 3^. 6d. AMMIANUS MARCELLINUS. His- tory of Rome during the Reigns of Con- stantius, Julian, Jovianus,Valentinian, and Valens, by C. D. Yonge, B.A. Double volume. TS. 6d. ANTONINUS (M. Aui'elius), The Thoughts of. Translated literally, with Notes, Biographical Sketch, and Essay on the Philosophy, by George Long, M.A. 2s. 6d. N. S. APULEIUS, The Works of. Com- prising the Golden Ass, God of Socrates, Florida, and Discourse of Magic. With a Metrical Version of Cupid and Psyche, and Mrs. Tighe's Psyche. Frontis- piece. 14 BOHN'S LIBRARIES. \ ARISTOPHANES' Comedies. Trans., with Notes and Extracts from Frere's and other Metrical Versions, l:y W. J. Hickie. Portrait. 2 vols. ARISTOTLE'S Nicomachean Ethics. 'Trans., with Notes, Analytical Introduc- tion, and Questions for Students, by Ven. Archdn. Browne. Politics and Economics. Trans., with Notes, Analyses, and Index, by E. Walford, M.A., and an Essay and Life by Dr. Gillies. Metaphysics. Trans., with Notes, Analysis, and Examination Questions, by Rev. John H. M'Mahon, M.A. History of Animals. In Ten Books. Trans., with Notes and Index, by R. Cresswell, I\I.A. Organon ; or. Logical Treatises, and the Introduction of Porphyry, With Notes, Analysis, and Introduction, by Rev. O. F. Owen, ]\I.A. 2 vols. 3s. 6d. each. ■ Rhetoric and Poetics. Trans,, with Hobbes' Analysis, Exam. Questions, and Notes, by T, i3uckley, B.A, Portrait. ATHEN.fflUS. The Deipnosophists ; or, the Banquet of the Learned. By C. D, Vonge, B.A. With an Appendix of Poeti- cal Fragments, 3 vols. ATLAS of Classical Geography. 22 large Coloured Maps. With a complete Index. Imp. 8vo. 7^". dd. BION.— .Sc-r Theocritus. CSSAR. Commentaries on the (iallic and Civil Wars, with the Supple- nientarj- Books attributed to Hirtius, in- cluding the complete Alexandrian, African, and Spanish Wars. Trans, with Notes. Portrait. CATULLUS, Tibullus, and the Vigil of Venus. Trans, with Notes and Bio- graphical Introduction. To which are added. Metrical Versions b}' Lamb, (."irainger, and others. Frontispiece, CICERO'S Orations. Trans, by C. D. Vonge, B.A. 4 vols. On Oratory and Orators. With Letters to Quintus and Brutus. Trans., with Notes, by Rev. J. S. Watson, M.A, On the Nature of the Gods, Divi- nation, Fate, Laws, a Republic, Consul- shi-p. Trans., with Notes, by C. D. Yonge, B.A, Academics, De Finibus, and Tuscu- lan Questions, By C. D. Yonge, B.A. With Sketch of the Greek Philosophers mentioned by Cicero. 1 CICERO'S Ox&X\ox\&.— Continued. ; Offices; or, Moral Duties. Cato j INIajor, an Essay on Old Age ; Lselius, an Essay on Friendship ; Scipio's Dream ; i Paradoxes ; Letter tu Quintus on Magis- trates. Trans., with Notes, by C. R. Ed- monds. Portrait. 3^-. 6d. ! DEMOSTHENES' Orations. Trans., ; with Notes, Arguments, a Chronological Abstract, and Appendices, by C. Rann Kennedy. 5 vols, j DICTIONARY of LATIN and GREEK Quotations ; including Proverbs, Maxims, Mottoes, Law Terms and Phrases, With ; the Quantities marked, and English Trans- j lations, I With Index Verborum (622 pages), 6.S-. I Index Verborum to the above, with the I Quantities and Accents marked (56 pages), j limp cloth, IS. I DIOGENES LAERTIUS. Lives and I Opinions of the Ancient Philosophers. j Trans., with Notes, by C. D, Yonge, B,A. EPICTETUS. The Discourses of. 1 With the Encheiridion and Fragments, With Notes, Life, and View of his Philo- 1 sophy, by George Long, M,A. N. S. i \ EURIPIDES. Trans., with Notes and In- troduction, by T. A. Buckley, B.A. Por- trait, 2 \ols, GREEK ANTHOLOGY. In English 1 Prose by G. Purges, M.A, With Metrical Versions by Bland, Merivale, Lord Den- man, S:c. GREEK ROMANCES of Heliodorus, I>ongus, and Achilles Tatius ; viz,, The Adventures of Theagenes and Chariclea ; Amours of Daphnis and Chloe : and Loves of Clitopho and Leucippe, Trans., with ! Notes, by Rev R, Smith, JNI.A. HERODOTUS. Literally trans, by Rev. Henry Cary, iNI.A, Portrait. i HE SI op, CALLIMACHUS, and ! Theognis. In Prose, with Notes and Biographical Notices by Rev. J. Banks, [ M.A, Together with the Metrical Ver- ' sions of Hesiod, by Elton ; Callimachus, by Tytler ; and Theognis, by Frere. ! HOMER'S Iliad. In English Prose, with j Note, by T. A, Buckley, B,A, Portrait. Odyssey, Hymns, Epigrams, and I Battle of the Frogs and Mice, In English j Prose, with Notes and Memoir by T. A. I Buckley, B.A. HORACE. In Prose by Smart, with Notes selected by '1". A, Buckley, B.A. Por- trail, 3.N-. 6d. CLASSICAL LIBRARY. 15 JUSTIN, CORNELIUS NEPOS, and Eutropius. Trans., with Notes, by Rev. J. S.Watson, M.A. JUVENAL, PERSIUS, SULPIGIA, and Lucilius. In Prose, with Notes, Chronological Tables, Arguments, bj-- L. Evans, Al.A. 'I'o which is added the Me- trical Version of Juvenal awd Persius by Giftbrd. Frontispiece. LIVY. The History of Rome. Trans, by Dr. Spillan and others. 4 vols. Por- trait. LUCAN'S Pharsalia. In Prose, with Notes by H. T. Riley. LUCRETIUS. In Prose, with Notes and Biographical Introduction by Re\-. J. S. Watson, M.A. To which is added the Metrical Version by J. M. Good. MARTIAL'S Epigrams, complete. In Prose, with Verse Translations selected from English Poets, and other sources. Dble. vol. (670 pages). 7^-. 6d. MOSCHUS.— 5f^ Theocritus. OVID'S Works, complete. In Prose, with Notes and Introduction. 3 vols. PHALARIS. Bentley's Dissertations upon the Epistles of Phalaris, Themisto- cles, .Socrates, Euripides, and the Fables of /Esop. With Introduction and Notes by Prof. W. Wagner, Ph.D. PINDAR. In Prose, with Introduction and Notes by Dawson W. Turner. To- gether with the Metrical Version by Abra- ham Moore. Portrait. PLATO'S "Works. Trans., with Intro- duction and Notes. 6 vols. • Dialogues. A Summary and Analysis of. With Analytical Index to the Greek text of modern editions and to the above translations, by A. Day, LL.D. PLAUTUS'S Comedies. In Prose, with Notes and Index by H. T. Riley, B.A. 2 vols. PLINY'S Natural History. Trans., with Notes, by J. Bostock, M.D., F.R.S., and H. T. Riley, P..A. 6 vols. PLINY. The Letters of Pliny the Younger. Melmoth's Translation, revised, with Notes and short Life, by Rev. F. C. T. Bosanquet, M.A, PLUTARCH'S Morals. Theosophical \ Essays. Trans, by C. W. King, M.. A.. X.S. Lives. Sec page 6. ] PROPERTIUS, The Elegies of. With \ Notes, Literally translated by the Rev. P. ■ J. F. Gantillon, M.A., with metrical ver- j sions of Select Elegies by Nott and Elton. 33-. (id. j QUINTILIAN'S Institutes of Oratory. | Trar.s., with Notes and Biographical 1 Notice, by Rev. J. S. Watson, M.A. 2 vols. I SALLUST, FLORUS, and VELLEIUS Paterculus. Trans., with Notes and Bio- graphical Notices, by J. S. Watson, M.A. SENECA. \,Prcf>aring. SOPHOCLES. The Tragedies of. In Prose, with Notes, Arguments, and Intro- ■ daction. Portrait. \ STRABO'S Geography. Trans., with ■ Notes, by W. Falconer, M.A., and H. C. ; Hamilton. Copious Index, giving Ancient and Modern Names. 3 vols. SUETONIUS' Lives of the Twelve Csesars and Lives of the Grammarians. The Translation of Thomson, revised, with ■ Notes, by T. Forester. : TACITUS. The Works of. Trans., \ with Notes. 2 vols. 1 TERENCE and PH.EDRUS. In Eng- i lish Prose, with Notes and Arguments, by | H. T. Riley, B.A. To which is added | Smart's Metrical Version of Phaedrus. . With Frontispiece. \ THEOCRITUS, BION, MOSCHUS, \ and Tyrtaeus. In Prose, with Notes and | Arguments, by Rev. J. Banks, M.A. To which are appended the Metrical Ver- j SIGNS of Chapman. Portrait of Theocritus. ' THUCYDIDES. The Peloponnesian ! War. Trans., with Notes, by Rev. H. ' Dale. Portrait. 2 vols. 3^. (id. each. j TYRT.flBUS.— .S-^t; Theocritus. j VIRGIL. The Works of. In Prose, j with Notes by Davidson. Revised, with ; additional Notes and Biographical Notice, I by T. A. Buckley, B.A. Portrait. 3^. (id. I XENOPHON'S Works. Trans., with j Notes, by J. S. Watson, M.A., and others. , Portrait. In 3 vols. j BONN'S LIBRARIES. COLLEGIATE SERIES. 10 Vols, at ^s. each. (2/. los. per set.) DANTE. The Inferno. Prose Trans., with the Text of the Origuial on the same page, and Explanatory Notes, by John A. Carlyle, M.D. Portrait. .V. 6-. The Purgatorio. Prose Trans., with the Original on the same page, and Ex- planatory Notes, by W. S. Dugdale. ^V. S. NEW TESTAMENT (The) in Greek. Griesbach's Text, with the Readings of Mill and Scholz at the foot of the page, and Parallel References in the margin. Also a Critical Introduction and Chronological Tables. Two Fac-similes of Greek Manu- scripts. 650 pages, -^s. 6d. or bound up with a Greek and English Lexicon to the New Testament (250 pages additional, making in all 900J. 55. The Lexicon may be had separatelj', price 2S. DOBREE'S Adversaria. (Notes on the Greek and Latin Classics.) Edited by the late Prof. Wagner. 2 vois. DONALDSON (Dr.) The Theatre of the Greeks. With Supplementary Treatise on the Language, Metres, and Prosody of the Greek Dramatists. Numerous Illus- trations and 3 Plans. By J. W. Donald- son, D.D. N.S. KEIGHTLEY'S (Thomas) Mythology of Ancient Greece and Italj'. Revised by Leonhaxd Schmitz, Ph.D., LL.D. 12 Plates. iV. 6\ HERODOTUS, Notes on. Original and Selected from the best Commentators. By D. W. Turner, M.A. Coloured Map. Analysis and Snnimary of, with a Synchronistical Table of E\>ents — Tables of Weights, Measures, Money, and Dis- tances — an Outline of the History and Geography — and the Dates completed from Gaisford, Baehr, &c. By J. T. Wheeler. THUCYDIDES. An Analysis and .Summary of. With Chronological Table of Events, &c., by J. T. Wheeler. SCIENTIFIC LIBRARY. 57 Vols, at ^s. each, excepting those vmrlced otherwise. (15/. 2s. per set.) AGASSIZ and GOULD. Outline of Comparative Physiology touching the Structure and Development of the Races of Animals living and extinct. For Schools and Colleges. Enlarged by Dr. Wright. W^ith Index and 300 Illustrative Woodcuts. BOLLEY'S Manual of Technical Analysis ; a Guide for the Testing and Valuation of the various Natural and Artificial Substances employed in the Arts and Domestic Economy, founded on the work of Dr. Bolley. Edit, by Dr. Paul. IOC Woodcuts. BRIDGEWATER TREATISES. —- Bell (Sir Charles) on the Hand ; its Mechanism and Vital Endowments, as evincing Design. Preceded by an Account of the Author's Discoveries in the Nervous System by A. Shaw. Numerous Woodcuts. Kirby on the History, Habits, and Instincts of Animals. With Notes by T. Rymer Jones. 100 Woodcuts. 2 vols. Kidd on the Adaptation of Ex- ternal Nature to the Physical Condition of Man, principally with reference to the Supply of his Wants and the Exercises of his Intellectual Faculties. 35. 6d. BRIDGEWATER TREATISES.— Contintced. Whewell's Astronomy and General Physics, considered with reference to Natural Theology. Portrait of the Earl of Bridgewater. 3^. 6d. Chalmers on the Adaptation of External Nature to the Moral and Intel- lectual Constitution of Man. With Memoir by Rev. Dr. Gumming. Portrait. Front's Treatise on Chemistry, Meteorology, and the Function of Diges- tion, with reference to Natural Theology. Edit, by Dr. J. W. Griffith. 2 Maps. Buckland's Geology and Miner- alogy. With Additions by Prof. Owen, Prof. Phillips, and R. Brown. Memoir of Buckland. Portrait. 2 vols. 15^. Vol. I. Text. Vol. 11. 90 large plates with letter- press. • Roget's Animal and Vegetable Physiology-. 463 Woodcuts. 2 vols. 6s. each. BROWNE. Manual of Geology. By A. J. Jukes Browne. With numerous Diagrams and Illustrations, 6s. SCIENTIFIC LIBRARY. 17 tie of Table table CARPENTER'S (Dr. "W. B.) Zoology. A Systematic View of the Structure, Ha- bits, Instincts, and Uses of the principal Families of the Animal Kingdom, and of the chief Forms of Fossil Remains. Re- vised by \V. S. Dallas, F.L.S. Numerous Woodcuts. 2 vols. 6^. each. Mechanical Philosophy, Astro- nomy, and Horology-. A Popular Expo- sition. 181 Woodcuts. Vegetable Physiology and Sys- tematic Botany. A complete Introduction to the Knowledge of Plants. Revised by E. Lankester, M.D., &c. Numerous Woodcuts. 6^. Animal Physiology. Revised Edi- tion. 300 Woodcuts, bs. CHEVREUL on Colour. Contahiing the Principles of Harmony and Contrast of Colours, and their Application to the Arts ; including Painting, Decoration, Tapestries, Carpets, Mosaics, Glazing, Staining, Calico Printing, Letterpress Printing, Map Colouring, Dress, Land- scape and Flower Gardenmg, &c. Trans, by C. Martel. Several Plates. With an additional series of 16 Plates in Colours, -js. 6d. ENNEMOSER'S History of Magic. Trans, by W. Howltt. With an Appendix of the most remarkable and best authenti- cated Stories of Apparitions, Dreams, Second Sight, Table-Tuming, and Spirit- Rapping, &c. 2 vols. HIND'S Introduction to Astronomy. With Vocabulary of the Terms in present, use. Numerous Woodcuts. 3.?. 6d. N.S, HOGG'S (Jabez) Elements of Experi- mental and Natural Philosophy. Being an Easy Introduction to the Study^ of Mechanics, Pneumatics, Hydrostatics, Hydraulics, Acoustics, Optics, Caloric, Electricity, Voltaism, and Magnetism. 400 Woodcuts. HUMBOLDT'S Cosmos; or, Sketch of a Physical Description of the Universe. Trans, by E. C. Otte, B. H. Paul, and W. S. Dallas, F.L.S. Portrait. 5 vols. 35. 6d. each, excepting vol. v., 55. • Personal Narrative of his Travels in America during the years 1799-1804. Trans., with Notes, by T. Ross. 3 vols. Views of Nature ; or, Contem- plations of the Sublime Phenomena of Creation, with Scientffic Illustrations. Trans, by E. C. Otte. HUNT'S (Robert) Poetry of Science ; or. Studies of the Physical Phenomena of Nature. By Robert Hunt, Professor at the School of Mines. JOYCE'S Scientific Dialogues. A Familiar Introduction to the Arts and Sciences. For Schools and Young People. Numerous Woodcuts. Introduction to the Arts and Sciences, for Schools and Young People. Divided into Lessons with Examination Questions. Woodcuts. 35. 6d. JUKES-BROWNE'S Student's Hand- book of Physical Geology. By A. J. Jukes-Browne, of the Geological Survey of England. With numerous Diagrams and Illustrations, 65-. N.S. KNIGHT'S (Charles) Knowledge is Power. A Popular Manual of Political Economj'. LECTURES ON PAINTING by the Royal Academicians, Barry, Opie, Fuseli. With Introductory Essay and Notes by R. Wornum. Portrait of Fuseli. LILLY. Introduction to Astrology. With a Grammar of Astrology and Tables for calculating Nativities, by Zadkiel. MANTELL'S (Dr.) Geological Ex- cursions through the Isle of Wight and along the Dorset Coast. Numerous Wood- cuts and Geological Map. Medals of Creation ; or, First Lessons in Geology : including Geological Excursions. Coloured Plates and several hundred Woodcuts. 2 vols. js. 6d. each. Petrifactions and their Teach- ings. Handbook to the Organic Remains in the British Musexm. Numerous Wood- cuts. 6s. Wonders of Geology ; or, a Familiar Exposition of Geological Pheno- mena. A coloured Geological Map of England, Plates, and 200 Woedcuts. 2 vols. 75. 6d. each. MORPHY'S Games of Chess, being the Matches and best Games played by the American Champion, with explanatory and analytical Notes by J. Lowenthal. With short Memoir and Portrait of Morphy. SCHOtrW'S Earth, Plants, and Man. Popular Pictures of Nature. And Ko- bell's Sketches from the Mineral Kingdom. Trans, by A. Henfrey, F.R.S. Coloured Map of the Geography of Plants. SMITH'S (Pye) Geology and Scrip- ture ; or, the Relation between the Scriptures and Geological Science. With Memoir. STANLEY'S Classified Synopsis of the Principal Painters of the Dutch and Flemish Schools, including an Account of some of the early German Masters. By George Stanley. STAUNTON'S Chess-Player's Hand- book. A Popular and Scientific Intro- duction to the Game, with numerous Dia- grams and Coloured Frontispiece. N.S. iS BOHN'S LIBRARIES. STAJTSi'TO'N.—Cojitmned. Chess Praxis. A Supplement to the Chess-player's Handbook. Containing the most important modern Improvements in the Openings ; Code of Chess Laws ; and n Selection of Morphy's Games. Annotated. 636 pages. Diagrams. 6s. Chess-Player's Companion. Comprising a Treatise on Odds, Collection of Match Games, including the French ISlatch with M. St. Amant, and a Selection of Original Problems. Diagrams and Co- loured Frontispiece. Chess Tournament of 1851. A Collection of Games played at this cele- brated assemblage. With Introduction and Notes. Numerous Diagrams. STOCKHARDT'S Experimental Chemistry-. A Handbook for the Study of the Science by simple Experiments- . Edit, by C. W. Heaton, F.C.S. Ni- merous Woodcuts. A''. S. URE'S (Dr. A.) Cotton Manufacture^ of Great Britain, systematically invest: gated ; with an Introductory* View of it- Comparative State in Foreign Countrie.-. Revised by P. L. Simmonds. 150 Illus- trations. 2 vols. Philosophy of Manufactures,^ or an Exposition of the Scientific, Mora! and Commercial Economy of the Factory System of Great Britain. Revised b\- P. L. Simmonds. Numerous Figure^. 800 pages, -js. 6d. ECONOMICS AND FINANCE. GILBART'S History, Principles, and Practice of Banking. Revised to i33i A. S. Michie, of the Royal Bank of Scotland. Portrait of Gilbart. 2 vols. lo^. ^V. REFERENCE LIBRARY. 27 Volumes at 'Various Prices. {^L ^s. per set.) BOHNS Dictionary of Poetical Quotations. P'ourth Edition. 6^. BUCHANAN'S Dictionary of Science and Technical Terms used in Philosophy, Literature, Professions, Commerce, Arts, and Trades. By W. H. Buchanan, with v^upplement. Edited by Jas. A. Smith, bs. BLAIR'S Chronological Tables. Comprehending t-he Chronology and His- tory- of the World, from the Earliest Times to the Russian Treaty of Peace, April 1856. ByJ.W. Rosse. 800 pages. \os. Index of Dates. Comprehending the principal Facts in the Chronologj" and History of the World, from the Earliest to the Present, alphabetically arranged ; being Ci complete Index to the foregoing. Bj- J. W. Rosse. 2 vols. 5^. each. BOHN'S Dictionary of Quotations i'tom the English Poets. 4th and cheaper Edition. 6s. BUCHANAN'S Dictionary of Science and Technical Terms. With Supplement. 820 pp. 6s. CLARK'S (Hvigh) Introduction to Heraldry-. Revised by J. R. Planche. 55. 950 Illustrations. With the Illitstrations coloured y 155-. N. S. CHRONICLES OF THE TOMBS. A Select Collection of Epitaphs, with Essay on Epitaphs and Observations on Sepiil chral Antiquities. By T. J. Pettigrev, , F.R.S., F.S.A. 5^. COINS, Manual of.— 6"^^ Hnuiphrcys. DATES, Index of. —Sec Blair. DICTIONARY of Obsolete and Pio- vincial English. Containing Words fron: English Writers previous to the 19th: Century. By Thomas Wright, M.A., F.S.A., &c. 2 vols. 55-. each. EPIGRAMMATISTS (The). A Selec- tion from the Epigrammatic Literature ot Ancient, Mediaeval, and Modern Time-. With Introduction, Notes, Observation.-, Illustrations, an Appendix on Works con- nected with Epigrammatic Literature, by Rev. H. Dodd, M.A. 6^. N. S. GAMES, Handbook of. Comprising Treatises on above 40 Games of Chance Skill, and Manual Dexterity, including Whist, Billiards, &c. _ Edit, by Henry G. Bohn. Numerous Diagrams. $$. K. S. HUMPHREYS' Coin Collectors^ Manual. An Historical Account of the Progress of Coinage from the Eariiest Time, by H. N. Humphreys. 140 Illu:?- trations. 2 vols. 5,?. each. A". 6". NO VELISTS' JJBKA R \ \ 19 2.0WNDES' Bibliographer's Manual of English Literature. Containiii": an Ac- count of Rare and Curious Books pub- lished in or relating to Great Britain and Ireland, from the Invention of Printing, with Biographical Notices and Prices, by W. T. Lowndes. Parts I.-X. (A to Z), ii^. 6if. each. Part XI. (Appendix Vol.), ss. Or the 11 parts in 4 vols., half morocco, 2/. 2s. MEDICINE, Handbook of Domestic, Popularlj' Arranged. By Dr. H. Davies. 700 pages. 5^. NOTED NAMES OF FICTION. Dictionary' of. Including also Familiar Pseudonyms, Surnames bestowed on Emi- nent -Men, &c. By W. A. Wheeler, M.A. ^s. X.S. POLITICAL CYCLOPAEDIA. A Dictionary of Political, Constitutional, Statistical, and Forensic Knowledge ; forming a Work of Reference on subjects of Civil Administration, Political Economy, Finance, Commerce, Laws, and Social Relations. 4 vols. 3^-. 6d. each. PROVERBS, Handbook of. Con- taining an entire Republication of Ray's Collection, with Additions from Foreign Languages and Sayings, Sentences, ."Maxims, and Phrases, collected by H. G. Bohn. 5^. A Polyglot of Foreign. Com- prising I'rench, Italian, German, Dutcli, Spanish, Portuguese, and Danish. With English Translations. 5^-. SYNONYMS and ANTONYMS; or. Kindred Words and their Opposites, Col- lected and Contrasted by Ven. C. J. Smith, M.A. 5:?. N. S. WRIGHT {'Th..)-Sce Dictionary. NOVELISTS' LIBRARY. 10 Volumes at y. 6d. eacli, excepting those inaj-ked otherwise, (r/. i2is. fer set.) BURNEY'S Evelina ; or, a Young Lady's Entrance into the World. By F. Eumey (Mme. D'Arblay). With Intro- duction and Notes by A. R. Ellis, Author of 'Sylvestra,' &c. X. S. ■ Cecilia. With Introduction and Notes by A. R. Ellis. 2 vols. N. S. FIELDING'S Joseph Andrews and his Friend Mr. Abraham Adams. With Roscoe's Biography. Cruikshank's Ilhts- trations. N. S. - — - History of Tom Jones, a Found- ling. Roscoe's Edition. Cruikshank's UlustraiioHs. 2 vols. N. S. TlEIAyJNG.—Ccniim^ed. ■ Amelia. Roscoe's Edition, revised, Cruiksiiank's Illitstrations. 5,?. N. S. Visconti. Trans. GROSSI'S Marco by A. F. D. N. S. 1 MANZONL The Betrothed: being I ; a Translation of ' I Promessi Sposi.' Numerous Woodcuts, i vol. (732 pages), i Ss. y-S. I j STOWE (Mrs. H. B.) Uncle Tom's i Cabin ; or. Life among the Lowly. S full- | I page Illustrations. JV. S. 1 ARTISTS' LIBRARY. 5 Volumes at Various Prices, (i/. 8^. 6d. per set.) EELL (Sir Charles). The Anatomy and Philosophy of Expression, as Con- nected with the Fine Arts, s^- -'^^' -S. DEMMIN. History of Arms and Armour from the Earliest Period. By Auguste Demmin. Trans, by C. C. Black, M.A., Assistant Keeper, S. K. Museum. 1900 Illustrations, js. 6d. N. S. FLAXMAN. Lectures on Sculpture. I With Three Addresses to the R.A. by Sir i R. Westmacott, R.A., and Memoir of Flaxman. Portrait and 53 Plates. 6i-. A'.^". LEONARDO DA VINCI'S Treatise on Painting. Trans, by J. F. Rigaud, R.A. With a Life and an Account of his Works by J. W. Brown. Numerous Plates, ^i•. N.S. PLANCHE'S History of British Costume, from the Earliest Time to the 19th Century. By J. R. Planche. 400 Illustrations. j. N. S. ( 20 ) BOHN'S CHEAP SERIES. PRICE ONE SHILLING EACH. A Series of Complete Stories or Essays, mostly reprinted from Vols. in Bohn^s Libraries, and 7ieatly boimd iii stiff paper cover, with cut edges, suitable for Railway Reading, ASCHAM {ROGER).— SCHOLEMASTER. By Professor Mayor. CARPENTER {DR. Jr. B.).— PHYSIOLOGY OF TEMPERANCE AND TOTAL AB- STLNENCE. EMERSON.— ENGLAND AND ENGLISH CHARACTERISTICS. Lectures on the Race, Ability, Manners, Truth, Character, Wealth, Religion, &c. &c. NATURE : An Essay. To which are added Orations, Lectures^ and Addresses. REPRESENTATIVE MEN : Seven Lectures on Plato, Swe- DENBORG, Montaigne, Shakespeare, Napoleon, and Goethe. TWENTY ESSAYS on Various Subjects. THE CONDUCT OF LIFE. FRANKLIN {BENfAMlN).— AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Edited by J. Sparks. HAWTHORN.E {NATHANIEL).— TWICE-TOLD TALES. Two Vols, in One. SNOW IMAGE, and other Tales. SCARLET LETTER. HOUSE WITH THE SEVEN GABLES. TRANSFORMATION ; or the Marble Fawn. Two Parts. HAZLITT {W.).— TABLE-TALK : Essays on Men and Manners. Three Parts. PLAIN SPEAKER : Opinions on Books, Men, and Things. Three Parts. LECTURES ON THE ENGLISH COMIC WRITERS. LECTURES ON THE ENGLISH POETS. BOHN'S CHEAP SEKIES. 21 ; HAZLITT ( W.).—Contimicd. I LECTURES ON THE CHARACTERS OF SHAKE- \ SPEARE'S PLAYS. | LECTURES ON THE LITERATURE OF THE AGE OF ! ELIZABETH, chiefly Dramatic. j IRVING {WASHINGTON).— I LIFE OF MOHAMMED. With Portrait. ! LIVES OF SUCCESSORS OF MOHAMMED. ; LIFE OF GOLDSMITH. SKETCH-BOOK. TALES OF A TRAVELLER. TOUR ON THE PRAIRIES. CONQUESTS OF GRANADA AND SPAIN. Two Parts. LIFE AND VOYAGES OF COLUMBUS. Two Parts. COMPANIONS OF COLUMBUS: Their Voyages and Dis- coveries. ADVENTURES OF CAPTAIN BONNEVILLE in the Rocky Mountains and the Far West. KNICKERBOCKER'S HISTORY OF NEW YORK, from the Begiiining of the World to the End of the Dutch Dynasty. TALES OF THE ALHAMBRA. CONQUEST OF FLORIDA UNDER HERNANDO DE SOTO. ABBOTSFORD AND NEWSTEAD ABBEY. ] SALMAGUNDI; or, The Whim -Whams and Opinions of | Launcelot Langstaff, Esq. i BRACEBRIDGE HALL ; or. The Humourists. ! ASTORIA ; or, Anecdotes of an Enterprise beyond the Rocky Mountains. WOLFERT'S ROOST, and Other Tsles. LAMB {CHARLES).— ESSAYS OF ELIA. With a Portrait. LAST ESSAYS OF ELIA. ELIANA. With Biographical Sketch. ^ MARR YA T ( CAPTAIN). \ PIRATE AND THE THREE CUTTERS. With a Memoir of | the Author. i ( 22 ) The only authorised Edition ; no others published in England C07itai?i the Derivations and Etymological A'otes of Dr. Mahn^ who devoted several years to this portion of the Work. ^WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE. Thoroughly revised and improved byCHAUNCEY A. Goodrich, D.D., LL.D., and Noah Porter, D.D., of Yale College. THE GUINEA DICTIONARY. New Edition [1880], with a Supplement of upv.ards of 4600 New Words and Meanings. 1628 Pages. 3000 Illusti'ations. The features of this volume, which render it perhaps the most useful Dictionary for general reference extant, as it is undoubtedly one of the cheapest books ever published, are as follows : — 1. Completeness. — It contains 114,000 words — more by 10,000 than any other Dictionary ; and these are, for the most part, unusual or technical terms, for the explanation of which a Dictionary is most wanted. 2. Accuracy of Definition. — In the present edition all the definitions have been carefully and methodically analysed by W. G. Webster, the Rev. C. Goodrich. Prof. Lyman, Prof. Whitney, r.nd Prof. Gilman, under the superintendence of Prof. Goodrich. 3. Scientific and Technical Terms. — In order to secure the utmost completeness and accuracy of definition, this department has been sub- divided among eminent scholars and experts, including Prof. Dana, Prof. Lyman, &c. 4. Etymology. — The eminent philologist, Dr. C. F. Mahn, has devoted five years to completing this department. o. The Orthography is based, as far as possible, on Fixed Principles. In all cases of dotibi an alternative spelling is given. 6. Pronunciation. — This has been entrusted to Mr. W. G. Webster and Mr. Wheeler, assisted by other scholars. The pronunciation of each word is indicated by typographical signs printed at the bottom of each page. 7. The Illustrative Citations. — No labour has been spared to embody such quotations from standard authors as may throw light on the defini- tions, or possess any special interest of thought or language. 8. The Synonyms. — These are subjoined to the words to which they belong, and are very complete. 9. The Illustrations, which exceed 3000, are inserted, not for the sake of ornament, but to elucidate the meaning of words. Cloth, 2is. ; half-bound in calf, 30^'. ; calf or half russia, 31^-. (xi.', russia, 2/. To he obtained tlu-ough all Bookselkrs, H ( 23 ) WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY. * Seventy years passed before Johnson was followed by Webster, an American writer, who faced the task of the English Dictionary with a full appreciation of its requirements, leading to better practical results.' . . . j ' His laborious comparison of twenty languages, though never pub- I lished, bore fruit in his own mind, and his training placed him both in I knowledge and judgment far in advance of Johnson as a philologist. I Webster's American Dictionary of the English Language was pub- j lished in 1828, and of course appeared at once in England, where I successive re-editing Jias yet kept it in t/ie highest place as a practical ! Dictionary.'' I * The acceptance of an American Dictionary in England has itself I had immense effect in keeping up the community of speech, to break ! which would be a grievous harm, not to English-speaking nations alone, but to mankind. The result of this has been that the common Dictionary must suit both sides of the Atlantic' . . . 'The good average business-like character of Webster's Dictionary, both in style and matter, made it as distinctly suited as Johnson's was distinctly unsuited to be expanded and re-edited by other hands. Professor Goodrich's edition of 1847 is not much more than enlarged and amended ; but other revisions since have so much novelty of plan as to be described as distinct works.' . . . ' The American revised Webster's Dictionary of 1864, published in America and England, is of an altogether higher order than these last [The London Imperial and Student's]. It bears on its title-page the names of Drs. Goodrich and Porter, but inasmuch as its especial im- provement is in the etymological department, the care of which was committed to Dr. Mahn of Berlin, we prefer to describe it in short as the Webster-Mahn Dictionary. Many other literary men, among them Professors Whitney and Dana, aided in the task of compilation and revision. On consideration it seems that the editors and contributors have gone far toward improving Webster to the utmost that he will bear improvement. The vocabulary has become almost complete as regards usual words, while the definitions keep throughout to IVebster's simple careful style, and the derivations are assigned with the aid of good moderti authorities.'' ' On the whole, the Webster-Mahn Dictionary as it stands is most respectable, and certainly the best Practical English Dic- tionary extant.'— From the Quarterly J^eview, Oct. 1873. London : G. BELL & SONS, York Street, Covent Garden. ( 24 ) New Edition, with a New Biographical Supplement of upwards of 900 Names. WEBSTER'S COMPLETE DICTIONARY AND BOOK OF LITERARY REFERENCE. 1919 Pages. 3000 Illustrations. Besides the matter comprised in the Webster's Guinea Dictionary, this volume contains the following Appendices, which will show that no pains have been spared to make it a complete Literary Reference-book : — A Brief History of the English Language. By Prof. James Hadley. Principles of Pronunciation. By Prof. Goodrich and W. A. Wheeler, M.A, Including a Synopsis of Words differently pronounced by different authorities. A Short Treatise on Orthography. By A. W. Wright. Including a com- plete List of Words that are spelt in two or more ways. Vocabulary of Noted Names of Fiction. By W. A. Wheeler, M.A.^This work includes Mythical Names ; including also Pseudonyms, Nick-names of eminent persons and parties, &c.