Page:Philosophical Review Volume 2.djvu/613

No. 5.] is very complete. It begins with the Platonists and neo-Platonists at the first dawn of the Renaissance, and extends quite to our own time. Some of the modern writers, indeed, are given more space than would naturally belong to them, the author's justification being that their systems have not yet become commonly known through other histories of philosophy.

It can not, however, be said, that the inclusion of so many names and systems adds much to the value of the work. The first volume treats of about 130 different philosophical writers. To many of these, of course, very little space is devoted; but the account with which we are favored generally consists of a biographical sketch, a list of works, and a few sentences regarding their philosophical doctrines. This kind of information could be obtained equally well from any encyclopedia or biographical dictionary. If these names are included in a history of philosophy, some attempt should be made to show their place and significance in the development of thought. If they are of no importance they could well be spared – at least from the point of view of the student for whom such an array of systems is apt to prove confusing.

Mr. Burt's book is not only comprehensive and complete, – leaving out of account no important writer, – but it contains so far as I have been able to find no important mistakes or inaccuracies regarding matters of fact. The author must be commended for the careful and painstaking work of which these volumes give evidence. The proportions of the work, when we take into account the author's reasons for treating modern systems more fully, seem fairly good. It is, however, surprising that Berkeley gets no more attention than Hutcheson (5 pages), and still more so that Schopenhauer, – one of the most important philosophers of the century – is disposed of in 6 pages, while Krause, who has exercised almost no influence upon subsequent thought, gets 7, Rosmini 18, and von Hartmann 19 pages.

With all due regard to the excellencies of the work, the author's claim that it is "something more than an account of systems, authors, and their works" is not, I think, borne out by the facts. Readers will find it a careful and accurate compilation of facts regarding philosophers, their writings, and their doctrines, rather than a history of philosophy. If any one expects to find in it an account of the development of society from mediaevalism to modernism, of the advancement of science and the progress of civilization, and of the influences which have led to a complete revolution in man's conception of his place in the universe, and of his relations to God and