Page:Philosophical Review Volume 2.djvu/389

No. 3.]

This book covers the field described in Germany as Philosophical Introduction or Einleitung, and represented in this country by Professor Ladd's Introduction to Philosophy, published in 1890. The present work suffers from the same general difficulties in its subject-matter and aim as those to which the reviewer called attention in noticing Professor Ladd's book (in Mind 62). The one is, no more than the other, an objective or colorless presentation of the subject; each is obviously intended to 'introduce' the student to the author's own philosophic scheme. The danger is felt also, in both cases, that the book will fail of its useful purpose. On the one hand, the beginner in philosophy will be apt to find himself confused by the effort to follow an argument that calls upon him to occupy in quick succession so many and so novel standpoints; on the other hand, the mature student will probably be inclined to suspect the soundness of positions which, had the pace been less rapid, might have been so substantiated as to free them from any seeming dogmatism which they now possess. While, on such grounds, the utility of these and similar treatises (especially in the text-book form) may be doubted, it is well that the experiment should be made. It is an obvious convenience to have a vade macum of philosophy, and the question of its value will no doubt be answered by the relation of demand and supply in the philosophical market. Professor Eitle's plan is clear and symmetrical. First comes the Grundlegung in Psychology and Epistemology (Seelenlehre and Erkenntnisslehre); then the philosophical superstructure is raised, consisting of (1) Philosophy of Nature (2) Philosophy of Spirit. Under (2) are embraced Æsthetics, Ethics, and the Philosophy of Religion. This scheme suggests several questions. First, is it philosophical to co-ordinate Psychology and Epistemology? Is not Epistemology the obverse side of Ontology, while Psychology is, or seeks to be, strictly scientific and non-metaphysical? Again, no place is found in the scheme for Logic, which cannot be included under Psychology or even under Epistemology. This raises the further question whether, in a classification of the philosophical sciences, it is not proper to distinguish between the 'real' and the 'ideal' spheres of thought. Professor Ladd's scheme was better in this last respect, making Ethics and Æsthetics the sciences of the ideal. In Epistemology Professor Eitle calls himself a "critical realist," in Ontology he is a theist. Personality in God and in man is his ultimate and guiding certainty. As will be expected, he defends teleology and free will.

The standpoint of the book is pretty well indicated by the names of the authors whose influence is fully acknowledged not only in the preface, but in the notes to the text. These are Dilthey, Lotze, Sigwart, and Wundt. Anything like a detailed discussion of the positions taken on the great