Page:Philosophical Review Volume 4.djvu/289

273 It was inevitable that a theory of political absolutism like that of Hobbes,—involving as it did a wholly egoistic system of ethics, the unlovely character of which the philosopher was at no pains whatever to conceal,—should excite the most violent opposition. But while the ethical writers of his own time and country were practically unanimous in their opposition to Hobbes, their methods of attack were by no means the same. Some were more incensed at the brutal egoism of the system, some at the arbitrary character which Hobbes had assigned to moral distinctions; though it is fair to suppose that all were a good deal disturbed by both sides of his doctrine. A general statement like this, however, is apt to be misleading, as it does not suggest the complexity of the facts. It is probable that in periods of controversy, quite as much as in periods of constructive work, the individualities of prominent writers play a determining part in shaping their productions. Hence we must be on our guard against supposing that the conventional division of the opponents of Hobbes into 'schools' is wholly satisfactory. For instance, Whewell classes together: (1) Sharrock, Henry More, and Cumberland, and (2) Cudworth and Clark; while Sidgwick, on the other hand, distinguishes between (1) the "Cambridge moralists," including all the above but Sharrock, Cumberland, and Clark, and (2) Cumberland. This does not imply any essential difference in the way that Whewell and Sidgwick interpret the doctrines of the authors named. Any such classification is largely a matter of convenience and more or less arbitrary. For our present purpose, three men may fairly be taken as typical of the tendencies represented by the opponents of Hobbes, viz., Cudworth, More, and Cumberland.

Cudworth, of course, stands for Intellectualism. He would reduce morality to a system of truths. The result is that, in his unfinished Treatise concerning Eternal and Immutable Morality, we have a noteworthy system of metaphysics, rather than a direct and explicit treatment of what are ordinarily regarded as the problems of ethics. Indeed, so much is Cudworth concerned to establish a system of "eternal and