Page:Philosophical Review Volume 12.djvu/574

558 defects of form that are historically conditioned. Still further, as one understands Spinoza better, one must recognize that his thought is essentially modern, that he is leading the way, in the face of Descartes's dualism, to that idealistic and organic view of the world which did not find clear philosophic expression until more than a century after his death.

It is natural to compare Mr. Joachim's book with Sir Frederick Pollock's Spinoza, which was published more than twenty years earlier, and has since remained the standard work in English. The two books, however, have been written with an entirely different purpose and for a different class of readers. Pollock wrote primarily for the general reader, for those who do not know Spinoza at first hand, or who have been unable to find much meaning in the formally arranged propositions that compose his principal work. It is true that his interpretations of difficult passages and his historical elucidations of particular points have made the work indispensable to special students as well; nevertheless it is, in the best sense, a popular account of Spinoza's life and philosophy. Mr. Joachim, on the other hand, has provided a commentary to Spinoza's Ethics, a book that can only be used in close connection with the text. He has written, as he himself says, 'only for readers who wish to make a special study of Spinoza's philosophy.' He has therefore given a much more technical statement than we find in Pollock, keeping closer to the text, and occupying himself more with the systematic relations of Spinoza's thought.

The result seems to me in every respect a sound and valuable piece of work. The author displays excellent critical judgment and an insight that comes from a thorough acquaintance with Spinoza's writings as a whole, and from the most important literature of the subject. He does not hesitate to admit difficulties and to point out inconsistencies in Spinoza's system, but his criticisms are always of principles, not of petty details or verbal inconsistencies.

From the character of the book it naturally follows that it is impossible to give a summary or a running account of its contents in a review like the present. To take up for discussion particular questions on which the reviewer differs from the author's interpretation would also be unprofitable. I shall only call attention to the results of the author's study on one or two fundamental points that have been recognized as presenting special difficulties in the interpretation of the system. First, regarding the Attributes. Mr. Joachim sums up his interpretation very clearly in four propositions: (1) "Each Attribute is a real character of what is." (2) "Each Attribute is an ultimate