On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    474 Tjg _ 3B _ L,E A D E H. ' [No. 373, ...

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    History Of Philosophy. The Jiiwjraphicnl...

    • weekly series . These volumes were an experiment , the success of which at the outset seemed very doubtful , the History of Philosophy being at that time a drug in the market . The only two work s which had recently appeared on the subject had proved auspicious failures . Both were translations " and each , for djffei'ent reasons , almost equally repulsive to the English reader ; the onej aversion of Bitter's History , being heavy , voluminous , and expensive ; the other , a version of Tennemann ' s Manuel , doubly unintelligible , iis the translator knew neither the language in which the work was written nor the vocabulary of the philosophical sect to which the writer belonged . These , it is true , were importations , retaining in their laboured dulness and philosophical obscurity a strong smack of ttieir foreign origin , and the history might still therefore be attempted from an English point of view , and in a" decent English style . But however well done , it was a question attiactive to ustifits intro

    ¦ whether the subject could be made sufficiently - j y - duction into a popular series like that of the shilling volumes . Was it possible to interest the general reader in the history of thought , the growth and progress of ideas , the conflict of rival systems of speculation , the position imd * prospects of philosophy ? Few would have augured well as to the result of such an attempt . Mr . Lewes , however , believing that it would be useful , determined to make the experiment , and the event fully justified his confidence . The work was welcomed by a large class , both amongst students and general readers ; it became widely popular , and soon attained a large circulation—larger , we believe , than any popular philosophic work during the present century , not excepting the most popular of all , Dr . T . Brown ' s Lectures . Many causes no doubt contributed to produce this result . The mere circumstance of appearing in a popular series was of course an

    advantage in the way of introduction , many having thus an opportunity of seeing the work who might otherwise never have heard of its existence . This was an advantage , too * , in another way : the book was a small one , and at the worst a . small book is but a small evil , while a big book must be very good indeed to avoid being a great evil . Mr . Lewes , in the preface to his first volume , expressed his decided antipathy to big books , and he certainly reaped the advantage of this very rational dislike . That the volumes , while well printed , were compact , portable , and cheap , was certainly a great recommendation . The price placed them within the reach of all , and the size could appal none . Many who had turned away in despair from larger works on such an abstruse and unknown subject willingly speculated on a shilling volume in the hope of adding to their stock of knowledge ; while students rejoiced at the innovation which gave them a History of Philosophy digested into pocket volumes instead of being diffused in bulky and unreadable

    works of reference . But the real causes of its permanent success are , of course , to be found in the nature of the work itself : its peculiar and altogether novel character determined its unprecedented success . Mr . Lewes ' s History of Philosophy is thoroughly original ; a novelty in the ex hibition of a subject where novelty seemed almost impossible . His treatment is new in its idea , its point of view , its method , and its style . The peculiarity which thus distinguishes it from every other history is summed up in the one characteristic epithet of the title—Biographical . This indicates the new ground he takes up , and sufficiently separates him from the crowd of labourers in the same field . German scholars and thinkers had devoted themselves to the History of Philosophy for more than fifty years , and after their exhaustive labours it seemed hardly possible to impart any freshness to the subject ,. or look

    upon it from any point of view that had not already been fully occupied . The number and variety of these foreign histories is something overwhelming the mere list of titles would fill a volume : they are of all sizes and all kinds—Systematic , Methodical , Critical , Rational , Empirical , Comparative , Literary , General , Special , & c . ; Compendiums , Institutions , Elements , Outlines , Sketches , Epitomes , Abstracts , Manuels , & c . ; but amongst them all there is no Biographical History—none that possesses the title or the character it indicates . In what , then , does this special character consist ? The term Biographical is no mere fanciful addition to the title ; it expresses what is essential to the work , the conception that determines its plan and

    point of view , 7 ts method and style . What is the general p lan of the work ? It is , as explained by the author at the outset , " To write the Biography of Philosophy through the Biographies of Philosophers ; to trace the rise , ffrowth , and development of philosophy as exhibited in the philosophical schools —in a word , the Life of Philosophy . " This is expressed in the title . Philosophy is there evidently regarded as an organic , as a living whole , or the attempt to write its life would be absurd . But the whole exists and can be exhibited only through the parts ; and individual thmkerti with their special philosophies being the vital parts of the living whole , the life of philosophy must be traced through the lives of philosophers , llus indicates what is neculiar in the plan of the work . Lives of individual philosophers

    already existed in abundance , but they did not trace the biography of ^ philosophy ; and histories of philosophy were numerous , but in them all the lives of individual thinkers were neglected or distorted , according to the nature of the work , or the special views of the writer . Those who occupied themselves with the parts rarely attempted to seize the whole , and those who seized the whole were too preoccupied to truco with anything like fidelity the natural development of the parts * . Mr . Lewes secures the advantages oi both plans , by allowing the spontaneous combination of the parts to constitute the whole . He reaches-the whole through the parts , thus avoiding the easily bosetting sin of . biographers and historians respectively , that of attributing too much or too little to individual thinkers . He can allow for the full influence of personul character , temperament , and position in modifying the development of thought ; and- is under no necessity of reading into any system in order to satisfy the requirement of a logical evolution or the exigencies oi a preconceived idea . JJho advantages of this plan are manifest in every part of the work , but especially in . exhibiting the several viowa nud mutual of und

    relation of the earuerr Greek philosopher ^ whose lives opinions we have such confused and , imperfect records . Wo may instance , as examples , the accounts of Anaxugoraa and Demooritus , of ParmenidoH and % i < zno , which are tnorxs natural and consistent than any wo remember to have seen elsewherOi

    The epithet Biographical also explains Mr . Lewes ' s point of view- wlri h is certainly a peculiar one for the historian of philosop hy to take . ' Ho does he regard the subject ? Very much as a sceptic , it must bo confessed ' in relation to the present and the future . Looking on philosophy ' practically extinct , lie accepts no system , he beliovesln none . ll \ s Ay 01 may be described as a detailed illustration of the impossibility of philosonh - so far as- its highest aims are concerned—as a proof that it has accomplished all it can accomplish . It lived a vigorous life , and had an important function once . Speculation was the schoolmaster to br " m <> - the world ' t science , but , having inaugurated the era of positive philosophy its work is done and it departs in peace . This view , is , as we intimated , ' expressed in the title . We do not write a biography till the subject of it is no more till the living presence has passed away , and we can look on the finished tured stillness oi the

    history in the sculp past . By the very title he has chosen , Mr . Lewes thus indicates that in his view the time for writino- the biography of philosophy is come . It is dead , so he writes its lifiT and character . It must not , however , be supposed from this that he is really hostile to philosophy , or regards it in any sense as a delusion or imposture . Some have spoken of his work as though this were the ease , but a "lance into the volume is quite sufficient to correct such a misconception . * His evident sympathy with its difficulties and struggles , its failures und aspirations , is sufficient to show that he looks upon philosophy as bavin" - run not only a sincere , but a most noble and useful course . In his pages we trace its progress from vigorous youth , through fervent manhood , to serene ao-e and see it in the very moment of dissolution leaving a priceless legacy * the world . Though falling short of its highest aims , Mr . Lewes rewards philosophy as the guide and benefactor of mankind , well entitled to be ° held in everlasting remembrance and honour . Were it otherwise , had its .

    lifereally been vain and useless , this biography would never have been written . The title also explains the method and style of the work . As it is a biography , the writer chronicles only those leading movements which contributed to the life and progress , the growth and development of philosophy . A vast mass of the tedious and barren detail that encumbers the ordinary histories is thus thrown aside . The representative thinkers of an era , its new ideas and germinant principles are alone considered ; to the exclusion of the small sects and weak disciples , who often maintain a principle in a kind of galvanized activity , long after its real life has vanished . This , of course , adds much to the unity , concentration , and power ot" the work . The special plan of the biography , too , determines the leading characteristic of its style . As the history is the Life of Philosophy , through the Lives ef Philosophers , the writer is not only enabled but impelled to combine a rare amount of graphic detail with the highest generalizations . Throughout the volume the individual life illustrates the working of the universal law ; the

    thinkers selected being generally at once the most individual and the most representative , living a life of their own , but cherishing immense sympathy for their feliow-men , and summing up in their ef lor ts and teaching tlie ut' ^ t hopes and aspirations of the race . The personal sketches of these men are dramatic in their force and vividness , as their lives were often tragic from their fierce struggles and fatal end . More than one of these martyrs of progress are canonized in noble words in the volume before us . We need seek no further for the cause of its success . The proper study of mankind h man . If } r ou can show that philosophy really has a profoundly human interest , if you can exhibit its progress as a biography , you are sure of readers . Mr . Lewes ' s claim must be allowed . lie was the first , us he si ' ill remains the onlybiographer of philosophy .

    , . Having said so much about the general aim and character of the work , it only remains to add a word or two as to the improvements th : it render this handsome edition more worthy to retain the phice the Uiogrj ,-phieal History had already secured of a standard work . The most important feature of the library edition is the new matter , which , on a rough calculation , must extend to a hundred and fifty pages , and is pnVuably a fourth of the whole . The introduction has been rewritten , anil \< , ton great extent , new . In particular , the description of Metaphysics , which was widely objected to as narrow and exclusive , applying only to : m alinustohsolete pursuit , is removed , and replaced by another and truer one . The distinchut

    tion between Metaphysics and science is no longer confined to Lhc J / j ^ -U , extends also to the melhudx of pursuit . The chapters on the . So Uistsaiu Socrates , which anticipated Mr . ( Jrote ' s view of that dispute A Mii'ji-i : t , a « u were , perhaps , the most original and remarkable sections uf Mi . Ia- 'Wo'SS History , have received considerable additions , and are a full and valuable , though condensed account of the , epoch . The most considerable alilitiou , however , is made , under the first section of the second part , cntitloil ' Transition Period . ' The fresh matter here extends to filly psiycs , Hieluding sketches of the lives and philosophy of Abehird , Al- 'iiz / . ali , anu Giordano Bruno . The greatest deficiency of the original work , m " } " < - ' " the scholastic period was passed over in a lew pages , is thus Mipplieu , while the now livea , in interest and significance arc amount Uio lll 0 S

    striking in tho volume . . . ,. lint the most important additions to the history , in u atnotly « cioiiu >^ point of view , are those in which Mr . Lowed truces the failure ol ll ' ° , ] sational School through its confusion of thought with fouling , u " "jj gradual rise on its ruins of the Physiological Method in « le . diug w psychological questions . Under tho former head—that of llio ^' . *' " r School—two new names are introduced , Hartley and Durwin , tho . Iwcuss of Condillac ' s celebrated system being also greatly enlarged and nupnn The latter subject , that of Physiological Method , forms juj entirely !' * tion , headed < k Psychology seeking ' its basis in Physiology , ' whu : "' ¦ ' mencing with Cabunis and passing on to Gull , terminates wiili " » ' ( ' * ' . of tho historical and scientific value of hrenolo num . / UtJHlOU WJluiumu ( iiu

    position p gy , Ot II 1 O Historical |) IIUU vmuu «» ru .... » W' I ' lie tllU stance n » good examples of the now Huiuntifie discussion , thus i / iincim ? library cdiiion , tho refutation of . Comlillac ' s systo ' m oil physiologic" ! y » " , . and the acute explanation , in tho chapter devoted to ihmviu . oJ i »" mooted question , ' How with two eyos wo hoc objucts snijjlu . * uu fl is a physiological refutation of a psychological error , uud tlio psychological refutation of a physiological error .

    474 Tjg _ 3b _ L,E A D E H. ' [No. 373, ...

    474 Tjg _ _ L , E A D E H . ' [ No . 373 , jatokday ,.

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), May 16, 1857, page 18, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_16051857/page/18/