Page:Philosophical Review Volume 5.djvu/343

327

The author of this attempt to popularize some of the main aspects of Kant's system ingenuously admits his ignorance of the ungeheuere Litteratur of the subject, to make acquaintance with which would "swallow up half a lifetime," and proceeds cheerfully to add his contribution to the already existing 'ocean.' Only one previous expositor is noticed, "Kant's only true disciple," Schopenhauer. The exposition abounds in illustrations, but it is improbable that they will make the Critique attractive to the general reader, while for the purposes of the student a more thorough treatment is required.

These works are a continuation of an earlier publication, Introduction à la sociologie, of which two parts were issued in 1886 and 1889, and the third is about to appear. As we are promised in the preface to the first part (p. iii) a series of volumes on the various branches of sociology in the natural order of their classification and culminating in a positivistic political science, it is evident that the present works must be considered as parts of a series.

The author began his writing on philosophical subjects in 1882 with an abridgment of Mr. Spencer's Principles of Psychology, and since that time has published a number of works, most of which may be included in the field of sociology. He has been especially influenced by Mr. Spencer and by Comte, whom he calls (Introduction, p. 5) the two illustrious leaders of the positivist school in France and England, and whose differences regarding the hierarchical classification of the sciences he regards as more apparent than real. That the French writer has exerted more influence over him may be inferred from the fundamental similarity of their positions and from occasional references like the following: "Nevertheless his [Comte's] work is the most important of the century, because it marks the advent of a new era characterized by the decay of metaphysics and the triumph of a purely scientific philosophy" (Trans, soc., p. 223). M. de Greef is an ardent advocate of the hierarchical classification of the sciences, and frequently recurs to this topic in his works. He holds that the order of logical dependence and the order of historical development are in