Page:Mind (New Series) Volume 9.djvu/417

 H. HOFFDING, .4 Modern ///story of Philosophy. 403 for us. The burden of this dreadful law no doubt it was which led to the rather hampered statement of what Kant actually understood by his transcendental proof. An analogous point of view with regard to ethics has also obscured Prof. Hoffding's exposition of the way in which Kant conceived the relation of Freedom to the Moral Law. The second weakness of the author's work here is his short way with the logical problem. Prof. Hoffding is not far from declaring that everything which is es- sential in the table of Categories can be simplified to two isolated forms, viz., cause and quantity ; and with these the whole of the immediate constructive logical process, which takes place in the simplest acts of (human) sensuous cognition, is to be performed. While quoting Schopenhauer's criticism of the Kantian Categories, Prof. Hoffding does not draw attention to Schopenhauer's own difficulty as regards the union of thought and sensation : ' thought ' is expressly ousted from 'perception,' and yet 'perception' can only be carried on, we are told, by the aid of ' understanding '. The transition from Fichte's earlier position to his later view is not very fully described. And the whole account of Hegel, but especially of the Logic, is vitiated by that off-hand dismissal of the logical problem which has just been mentioned. The account of Schopenhauer, though very good, contains nothing very distinc- tive. In the whole description of this great period the most interesting thing is Prof. Hoffding's attempt to show that during the full tide of the Romantic Philosophy there was, here and there making itself felt, an undercurrent of criticism. It is impossible to go in detail through the many points which the rest of the book offers for discussion. To sum up, it may be said that in spite of some doubtful things, and perhaps one or two mistakes, Prof. Hoffding's work is throughout full of interest and suggestion. It has the great merit of being an entertaining and most readable book. And, if used with caution, it will un- doubtedly be found of great assistance to beginners in the study of Philosophy. The translation seems on the whole conscientiously done. So many English readers of Philosophy are debarred from making direct use of German books, that we must always feel grate- ful to those who will undertake the labour of translation. This makes it a particularly thankless task to note any slips that there may be in performance. As regards the present work, however, exception must be taken to the use of such compounds as " Anstotelio-MedisBval " (i., p. 78), " Naturo-philosophical " (L, p. 70), and, worst of all, " religio-philosophical " (ii., p. 20), " religio- naturalistic " (ii., p. 26), " religio-historical " (ii., p. 173) and " religio-psychological " (i., p. 78). A certain want of idiom is occasionally observable, e.g., in the use of "his fatherland" and in the use of " inwardness " (" his letters bear witness to religious inwardness," and of Shakespeare, "his rich emotional inward- ness"), and in such phrases as " the so-called encasement theory "