Page:Mind (New Series) Volume 12.djvu/560

546 NEW BOOKS.

There is no lack of histories of philosophy giving account of the various philosophers and their systems—some good, some bad, and some indifferent; but an unquestionable desideratum has been a history of the philosophical problems themselves, so executed as to bring out the continuity of philosophic thought and, at the same time, the advance in philosophic thinking. It is surprising that the idea of supplying this want did not occur to any one till now, or, if it did occur, that it was not carried out. The execution of it falls to the authors of the work now before us, who claim for their plan that it is "entirely new". "Our idea is, indeed, simple enough," they say, "but it does not seem to have been easy to light upon or to carry out, for to no one has it occurred before: nowhere—not in France, nor in England, nor in Italy, nor in Germany—is there a work composed on the same, or even on a similar plan." Windelband's history of philosophy at once occurs to the mind in refutation; but even that is no exception, for the plan of the two works is different. Our writers' distinctive feature lies here: "We have taken, one after another in the dogmatic order, the great problems of philosophy and given their history, indicating their origin, their various aspects and forms, and the stage they have reached in our day."

The question, then, is whether the idea thus so clearly enunciated has been satisfactorily carried out.

Take, first, the arrangement of topics. The material hi these two volumes is grouped under four heads, viz.: Psychology, Ethics, Metaphysics, and Theodicy; and under each head leading problems are placed,—such as "The Senses and External Perception," "The Association of Ideas," "Freedom," under Psychology; "Scepticism and Certitude," under Metaphysics, and so on. This practically covers the ground; and thus far everything is quite satisfactory, although at times a topic is a little awkwardly placed, or an authors opinion given in a somewhat truncated form,—which only serves to remind us that neither sections nor topics are mutually exclusive, while, after all, there is a certain disadvantage in breaking up a philosopher's system into parts.

What then, next, of the execution of the main task? Is the historical treatment adequate? So far as presentation of the views of the writers and schools that are here included is concerned, we must say at once that the work is very carefully done. The information is compressed, yet accurate; and, as philosophers are allowed largely to speak for themselves in well-selected quotations, a special value is given to the summaries and the dryness of the bare abstract is thereby avoided. Particularly noticeable are the expositions of the Greek philosophies and of the writings of the Cartesian school. Now and again, indeed, we miss something that ought to have been stated. For example, it is not enough to characterise the Stoic criterion of truth as subjective, being laid in the conviction of the percipient. No doubt, the Stoics laid the criterion of truth in the individual percipient's conviction; but then they required that the percipient should himself be "a wise man" (that is, a man of unclouded mind, calm, careful, unbiassed), and they viewed the impressions, through whose strength and clearness his undoubted conviction came, as consentient. What they seem to have been aiming at was expression of the facts (a) that, in sense-perception, we suppose an