94 



PHILOSOPHICAL THOUGHT. 



be called a complete anarchy, or, at best, a bewildering 

 eclecticism ? How is it that instead of stepping boldly 

 forward with finished and assertive systems as did Fichte, 

 Hegel, and Schopenliauer in Germany, Auguste Comte in 

 France, and Herbert Spencer in England, the thinkers of 

 the day require us to be content with introductions to 

 philosophy, with preliminary dis(iourses, or with disserta- 

 tions of an historical character which not infrequently do 

 little more than hint with reserve and qualification at a 

 possible solution which is promised but not given ? ^ 



^ That auarchy and inconclusive- 

 ness are characteristic of the 

 philosophic thought of the day has 

 been very generally expressed from 

 very different quarters, and is shown 

 in many important publications. 

 Among these I only mention a few. 

 Prof. Ludwig Stein, the learned 

 editor of the 'Archiv fiir Philoso- 

 phic ' (appearing in two series, 

 historical and systematic), has given 

 full expression to the state of unrest, 

 not to say bewilderment, in con- 

 temporary philosophical literature 

 in his recent publication, ' Philo- 

 sophische Stromungen der Gegen- 

 wart ' (1908), notably in the first 

 chapter, which treats of the Neo- 

 idealistic movement of thought. 

 Another not less significant indica- 

 tion is to be found in one of the 

 volumes of a compendious German 

 publication, 'Die Kulturder Gegen- 

 wart ' (ed. Paul Hinneberg). The 

 volume in question bears the title 

 of ' Systematic Philosophy,' but is 

 in reality what must appear to 

 many a very unsystematic exposi- 

 tion of recent speculation, inasmuch 

 as it is a collection of mostly lirilliaut 

 essays on various philosophical pro- 

 blems from very different and 

 frequently opposing points of view, 

 without an attempt towards re- 

 conciliation or completeness. If 



we turn to French philosophy, 

 neither the earlier ' Rapport ' by 

 Ravaisson (1867) nor the shorter 

 Review by Ribot ('Mind,' 1877, p. 

 366), nor the quite recent sympath- 

 etic Review by Boutroux (' Revue de 

 Metaphysique et de Morale,' vol. 16, 

 1908), can fail to produce upon the 

 reader a sense of bewilderment, of 

 the total absence of dominant ideas 

 in the voluminous and interesting 

 philosophical literature of the coun- 

 try. In this country, where system- 

 atic philosophy has only one pro- 

 mineiit representative, viz. , Herbert 

 Spencer, the diversity of philo- 

 sophic opinion is not felt so keenly 

 as in France and Germany, where 

 elaborate systems have in succes- 

 sion directed philosophic thought. 

 Nevertheless we meet here also 

 with the complaint of inconclusive- 

 ness. In the Introduction to a recent 

 publication with the title ' Idola 

 Theatri,' which purports to be a 

 ' ' criticism of Oxford Thought " 

 (1906), Mr Henry Sturt gives us the 

 final impression which the teaching 

 of T. H. Green and his followers left 

 on young minds : " I came to feel, 

 in common, I believe, with not a 

 few of my contemporaries, that 

 tlie teaching we got was hardly 

 strong enough in the explanation 

 of definite problems. Some such 



