Page:Philosophical Review Volume 23.djvu/234

218 effort to accomplish this difficult task. It is the product of several years of classroom work, as every such volume should be, is written in a very terse and vigorous style, and can hardly fail to encourage the student to philosophize on his own account—a characteristic of the book which cannot be too highly praised, and which should commend it to the careful consideration of all teachers of philosophy who are interested in finding a suitable text for use with first year students.

The scope of the work can perhaps best be indicated by a summary of its contents. It is divided into four parts. Part I is introductory. Part II is historical, giving a very comprehensive, but very general summary of the views of the principal philosophers from the pre-Socratics through Spencer; the thought-tendencies of the present are indicated. Part III constitutes the body of the work, and is subdivided into two divisions. The first of these divisions is epistemological, discussing the nature of knowledge, the relation between knowledge and reality, and the nature of reality. The second division is devoted to a consideration of the categories, the categories treated being those of Permanence and Change; Individuality; Substantiality; Quality; Quantity; Space; Time; Activity, Rest, and Motion; Causality; Finality; Individuality and Personality; Sociality. Part IV deals with the problems of the freedom of the will and the existence of God.

In the preface the author frankly states that he has a philosophical doctrine, and that that fact "determines the treatment given the questions and opinions" discussed in his book (p. vi). His philosophical doctrine is that of objective idealism, and the conclusions and opinions which his volume sets forth are those which naturally follow from this peculiar point of view. This bias, however, does not lessen the value of the book as a text, since all questions considered are discussed with eminent fairness and opposing views are stated and criticized. Every book must be written from some point of view, but that fact does not necessarily make for dogmatism in discussion. Teachers who agree with the point of view of the present text will find it helpful; those who are forced to dissent from its point of view will find it stimulating.

While I personally agree with the point of view from which the book is written, and while I accept most of the conclusions which it reaches, there is one defect in it which, as it seems to me, will greatly impair its usefulness as a text-book. The historical part of the book will very probably not serve the purpose which the author intends; on the