OF NATURE. 569 



human eye could resolve into the movement of par- 

 ticles of matter, as nevertheless constituted in the same 

 fashion as its cosmic and molar arrangements : they 

 were conceived to be motions of particles in space. 

 As these all came under the mechanical theory of 

 forces, so also it seemed a matter of course that what 

 were called molecular phenomena must be regarded in 

 the same manner. 



Had the new philosophy of nature contented itself 

 with clearing the way for a fruitful scientific study of 

 natural phenomena, and with combating the vague 

 notions which had been spread through the earlier 

 philosophy of nature, it would have performed a useful 

 task. Unfortunately, however, it did not content itself 

 with this important and well-defined task, but per- 

 petuated the error committed by the earlier school : it 

 attempted to find a universal principle or principles 

 by which external and internal, physical and mental 

 phenomena could be treated alike. This error brought 

 it into discredit with those who were well aware how 

 universal, but at the same time how limited in their 

 application, were the principles of the mechanical 

 sciences, and equally with those who appreciated the 

 stimulating and fructifying influence of the idealistic 

 philosophy. In consequence of this, materialism was 

 early stigmatised as a dilettante thing, and this character 

 it has not been able to shake off up to the present day. 

 It neither understood correctly the nature and scope 

 of the mathematical principles of exact science, nor 

 appreciated the fundamentally different nature of all 

 mental life. In the attempt to bring about a com- 



