Page images
PDF
EPUB

Again: Schopenhauer, the pessimist (1788-1860), tried to reconcile idealism and realism, and postulated the Will (used in a wider sense than as a human faculty) as the ultimate reality. The success of these efforts can be best judged of from the writings of such prominent modern scientists as Du Bois-Reymond, and his pupil Professor Rosenthal, who distinguished themselves by brilliant discoveries in nervous phenomena, the very citadel of thought, and yet regard the mind with superstition, plainly showing the influence of the a priori philosophy. We also have the recent assertion of Karl Hillebrand, that "almost all the really great men of science in Germany are neither materialists nor spiritualists, nor skeptics, but critics of the Kantian school."'

But again it is to be remembered that Germany has practically repudiated, little by little, all the post-Kantian philosophy of Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel, whom Schopenhauer courteously calls the three great impostors, and rests her case upon what Kant himself lived to refute and recall, the analysis of mind to be found in the "Critique of Pure Reason."

We are told that Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel endeavored to be true Kantians, but by resting one foot on the "Critique of Pure Reason," and the other on the "Critique of Practical Reason," they were obliged to perform all sorts of logical contortions to preserve their equilibrium.

When all these things are considered are we not, upon the whole, entitled to say that the transcendental production known as German philosophy assumes, to the disinterested student, the appearance of a huge family quarrel rather than a worthy attempt to solve the problems of life; and that, as far as the progress of thought is concerned, the world can well afford to dispense with it?

Hence it is with a feeling of unfeigned relief that we turn to the more mature and gradually developed culture of France and England, in which soil the idiosyncrasies of thought that achieved such rank development in Germany, although frequently making their appearance, have never been able to gain a substantial hold.

1" German Thought," p. 203.

CHAPTER VIII.

THE ECLECTICISM AND POSITIVE PHILOSOPHY OF FRANCE
AND THE SCOTCH SCHOOL.

Gassendi-Malebranche-Condillac-Cabanis-Gall—Royer-Collard-Cousin -Comte-Reid-Hamilton.

AFTER the religious fervor of Europe had expended itself in the Crusades, there remained the three famous orders of chivalry known as the Teutonic Knights, the Templars, and the Knights of St. John. The latter maintained their or ganization by a long and valiant defence of Southern Europe against the Turks. The Templars were disbanded about fifty years after the last Crusade, while the Teutonic Knights turned their attention to Christianizing what was then known as pagan Prussia. This they did by almost exterminating a brave and hardy people, who loved their rude mythology and bitterly opposed the forms of Christian worship and the rule of the Empire. While this was going on, Paris had become the first great seat of learning in Christendom; its University was then a congeries of schools connected with monasteries and churches, but without that corporate unity which afterward made it the model of almost all the Universities of Europe.

As an example of its early importance, Henry II. of England, in 1196, offered to refer his dispute with Becket to the arbitration of the Peers of France, the Gallican Church, or the Nations of the University of Paris. Toward the end of the thirteenth century Pope Nicholas IV. conferred privileges upon the doctors and students which virtually gave the University a government of its own; and in the middle of the fifteenth century it was attended by over twenty-five

thousand students, which at that time was nearly half the population of Paris. It was in Paris that the chief battles. of Scholasticism were fought. William de Champeaux, Abelard, Thomas Aquinas, and Duns Scotus, all lectured there. When the great Luther sounded the alarm of independent thought, which resulted in the emancipation of learned Europe from the papal authority of Plato and Aristotle, Loyola opposed the movement by establishing the Society of Jesus, with its invincible organization and renowned culture. His object was to preserve the Catholic faith in its entirety, including its ancient philosophy. But it was the favorite pupil of the Jesuits, Descartes, who soon afterward dealt the death-blow to Scholasticism, emancipating thought from the tyranny of the church.

Thus it was in the turmoil of the theological war which raged throughout England, France and Germany, and culminated in the establishment of Protestantism, that modern philosophy was born. It was born in the writings of Descartes and Spinoza, and was therefore an avowed attempt to define, not motion, but the nature of God. Thus in severing its connection with theology philosophy exalted its religious character, instead of debasing it. It proceeded, untrammelled by obsolete faiths, to form a true conception of the unity of God,-to bring all thought into harmony with this highest of thoughts,-to establish an ultimate generalization.

But what great influence has been urging the claim of Motion to its position as the highest or most general conception? Is it not the voice of Science, trying to persuade us that God is a principle, not a person? Its method is patiently to classify and arrange all experience into one vast organon of truth. As Science progresses, it becomes more and more conscious that there is but one fact or principle, in which all analysis ends and all synthesis begins.

Bacon, in England, took the sure path of science, feeling that although he might not reach a complete analysis of knowledge, such progress as he made would be in the right

direction. There was but feeble resistance offered to this reform in France; the age felt the need of throwing off the delusions of arbitrary dialectics and reaching out for actual facts. Such, however, is the fascination in seeking the ultimate analysis of life, that the superb scientific achievements of Descartes were neglected for his complicated and unsatisfactory metaphysics, which led to a dual principle, and therefore did not even pretend to unify knowledge.

To the philosophy of Descartes was opposed that of Gassendi, who inaugurated the eclectic philosophy,—a school which subsequently attained to such eminence in France through Royer-Collard, Jouffroy, and Cousin.

Pierre Gassendi was born in Provence, France, in 1592, and became a distinguished astronomer and mathematician, as well as a theologian. At the age of twenty-four he was appointed Professor of Theology at Aix, where he had studied. His first work was a polemic entitled "Paradoxical Essay Against Aristotle" (1624), in which he opposed the Aristotelian Astronomy, but announced his fidelity to the church, maintaining that Christianity was in nowise dependent upon the then Christian philosophy. In 1647, through the influence of the Archbishop of Lyons, brother of Cardinal Richelieu, he was appointed Professor of Mathematics in the College-Royal of France, where his lectures attracted great attention, and were attended by the élite of Paris.

"A System of Epicurean Philosophy" and "The Philosophical System of Gassendi" were his principal works. The latter was a combination of the various systems of antiquity, with a view to showing by their juxtaposition the correct method; which is the plan of Eclecticism.

Gassendi also wrote a criticism of the "Meditations" of Descartes, opposing the innovations of that writer in metaphysics. But his chief power was in the field of scientific investigation, where he had such friends as Kepler, Galileo, and Descartes. His reasonings with regard to the atomic theory are especially interesting and show a great boldness of thought.

Gassendi combined the idea of material substance as taught by Descartes, with the idea of atoms. The weight of the atom he identified with its motion or energy; thus refuting the theory of the imponderability of atoms which we find current among some physicists even of the present day. Motion, which is the fundamental fact in all phenomena, was selected by Gassendi in lieu of Descartes' erroneous theory of an ultimate substance or matter. "The atoms (created and set in motion by God) are the seed of all things: from them, by generation and destruction, every thing has been formed, and fashioned, and still continues so to be."

It is also interesting to observe that Gassendi explained the fall of bodies by the earth's attraction, and yet, like Newton himself, held action at a distance to be impossible.

A reference to the teachings of Democritus and Epicurus will distinctly show the source of Gassendi's speculations, as both these men offer a very refined and, considering their time, a wonderfully advanced theory of the universe, in which all phenomena are reduced to the principle of the related activities of atoms, or the finest imaginable subdivision of matter,—the first step in the direction of an ultimate analysis.

Gassendi also wrote a history of the science of Astronomy, including an account of the lives of Copernicus and other great astronomers,-an excellent description of the state of that science in his day.

The seventeenth century in France was as conspicuous for its theological activity as the eighteenth century was for its general and absorbing interest in philosophy.

Nicholas Malebranche (1638-1715) was the last and greatest of those Oratorian priests and writers who contributed so largely to the religious literature of France.

The philosophy of Malebranche was entirely subservient to the doctrines of the Catholic Church, and developed the ideal or mystical side of Descartes' teachings. It is so full of beauty and high moral purpose, however, that no philosophic

« PreviousContinue »