Page:Mind (New Series) Volume 15.djvu/412

 398 CRITICAL NOTICES : jects " the gospel which some at present preach, that reason is only the slave of feeling or the hired servant of will ". There is a word in season both for the orthodox theologian and the devotee of materialistic naturalism. This strain of sober and judicial im- partiality runs through the whole ; and if to some it appears to lack certain qualities of philosophical sweep and daring, in the minds of many more, I believe, compensations for this absence of intrepidity will appear in its pre-eminent moderation and know- ledge. "Some of the best work in the Philosophy of Eeligion," we read at one point, " has been done by those who have treated the pure and the practical reason, the intellectual and the value- judgment, as complementary and mutually supporting, and so have endeavoured to rise to a view of God which satisfies the whole man " (p. 34). This is the temper in which Mr. Galloway also contem- plates the problem. In the account which follows I shall confine myself, in the main, to bringing the author's chief points together, being disqualified as a critic through substantial and admiring agreement with his general argument. The standpoint, then, from which the subject is here studied is very much that occupied by a writer like Pfleiderer. We can never know God perfectly, yet we have some knowledge of Him which is true so far as it goes. Such knowledge is partly speculative and partly practical. " The whole inner side of the divine life is beyond our grasp. And when we try to express the Idea of a Being who is beyond space and time, our thought must perforce be figurative " (p. 12). In the first essay these principles are employed in a critical examination of the tendencies of Eeligious Philosophy from Hegel to the present day. Mr. Galloway finds that for the last seventy years the tide of pure speculation has ebbed steadily, the counter- tendency growing all the while to reduce thought to a quite subor- dinate place, and to view feeling and will as the properly constitutive- elements of the religious mind. However, the movement has not been uniform. Thinkers like the Master of Balliol and Prof. Royce have held unwaveringly to the principles of idealism, with " a real faith in the capacity of reason to deal effectively with the highest problems ". To these may now be added the extremely suggestive and uncompromising negations of Mr. McTaggart, with their calm and fascinating assumption of metaphysical common-sense. At one or two points in a later essay Mr. Galloway touches upon the lines of reasoning with which Mr. McTaggart has made us familiar, in a way which indicates his fitness to treat of the subject at greater length. The whole paper is a very informing one, and the criticisms of Rauwenhoff, Hoffding, and James strike me as specially good. The second essay, which handles the mutual relations of the Natural Sciences, Ethics and Religion, abounds in valuable matter. The general thesis argued for is that while Ethics and Religion utterly transcend the scope of mechanical categories, an immanent teleology resides in Nature itself which convicts the purely scientific view of inadequacy. The universe can only be interpreted from