Page:Mind (New Series) Volume 9.djvu/425

 NEW BOOKS. .j 1 1 .an- la /7f Lonvain. To deal adequately with it indeed, as the industry and reading apparent throughout its pages deserve, would require a reviewer whose Knowledge of the details of the subject was comparable to the author's own ; and to such knowledge I can make no pretension. It is true that (as I shall presently show) the inaccuracy of some of M. de Wulfs his- torical statements is such as to shake one's confidence in his general trustworthiness ; but the book is, apart from that, condemned by the spirit and temper in which it is written. M. de Wnlf, notwithstanding that lie has thought it worth while, in a short preface, to discuss the meaning of ' history of philosophy,' and to suggest a theory of philo- sophical cycles,' has in point of fact no conception of treatingthe subject otherwise than as a theological censor. One can find in his pages the dates and opinions of many philosophers ; but. except that some were more, and some less, in harmony with the ' central scholastic synthesis ' represented by St. Thomas, one does not really learn anything of the organic connexion between their thoughts. Scholasticism is not indeed, according to M. de Wulf, necessarily the only synthesis which would Accordingly, a tendency to deflect from this ' accord ! constitutes a school or type of opinion a ' deviation de la scolastique,' and, if more marked, ' antiscolastique '. This is M. de Wulfs consistent, and practically his only principle of classification. At the same time, he avoids the direct discussion of what he considers to be purely theological, rather than philosophical questions, such as those relating to the Trinity, as not be- longing to a history of philosophy. Hence, even from the theological censor's point of view, the position of the writers discussed is never fairly and fully put before the reader ; and remarks, or even exclamations, which can only be called jejune, often take the place of discussions, where theological sympathy is wholly absent ; as when Behinen is dis- missed, after a very slight indication of his teaching, with the ejaculation ' Quel diH-ergondage d'idi'es ! ' (p. 430;. This absence from M. de Wulfs work of a genuinely scientific and objective attitude is all the more de- plorable, because more significant of the atmosphere in which the author moves, that he gives his reader the impression of a scholar who wishes to study his subject in a serious and liberal spirit, and has taken no small pains to acquaint himself with the literature relating to it. To the part of the book which deals with its main subject media val philosophy is prefixed an account, called on the title page an ' apen;u' of Indian and Greek philosophical systems. In regard to Greek philosophy the theological censor's attitude produces more curious results than in regard to mediaeval. What are we to say to this astonishing account of the death of Socrates ? ' II fnt condamne,' says M. dr ulf, 'u boire la cigue, pour avoir combattu trop ouvertement le polythcisme et affirmr 1'existence d'un dieu unique, 1'immortalite de 1'aine, la recom- pense des bons et la punition des me'chants. Mort pour la confession ilcs grandes vi'rites de la religion naturelle, Socrate aurait cueilli la paline du martyre en plein paganisme, si, an moment de mourir, il n'aurait, en uii moment de di'faillance, recommande & ses disciples d'immoler un