MEANING AND HISTORY OF THE LOGOS OF PHILOSOPHY. 253 
which I regard as a striking type of systematised materialism. 
To him the Logos represented no over-ruling Mind; it simply 
denoted material subject to certain dynamic tendencies, ex- 
hibiting Unity, Law, and Order. It signified, not intellect, 
properly speaking, but merely the fundamental principle of 
the intelligible. Thus conceived it was termed common 
(kowde),* as being relative to common apprehension. By 
the Logos, Heracleitus appears to have meant the compre- 
hensive rationale of all things; with this word, in effect, as 
a title he published that account of itself which, as he believed, 
the universe, considered simply as an object of investigation, 
renders to the enlightened and successful philosophical 
inquirer. 
Passing on from this physical conception of the Logos 
we come to a system of philosophy in which materialism 
assumed a form still more pronounced, but in which, if 
for a moment we limit our view to the material universe, 
we shall not fail to perceive in one important respect, I 
venture to think, a further and unmistakable step in the 
direction of a truly scientific conception of the constitution 
of nature. I allude to the theory originated by Leucippus 
and elaborated by Democritus, which resolves all space- 
occupying bodies into ultimate atoms, and postulates a void 
wherein these may find room for the movements they must 
needs execute in effecting their manifold combinations. In 
the immense region of physical exploration these last-named 
theorists have distinguished themselves not a little as 
pioneers. Physics, however, are but a subject realm in the 
imperial domain of philosophy. If then, pursuing the course 
of investigation on which we have started, we look about 
for some advance in philosophic thought, our attention is 
now claimed by a doctrine which, so far as it differs as 
a philosophy from those which preceded it, will, although 
associated with a loosely speculative and utterly untenable 
physical theory, commend itself to all earnest thinkers, except 
such as prefer the materialistic to the spiritualistic ter- 
minology. 
The Pythagoreans had been inculcating the doctrine that 
the First Principle, which they appear to have conceived as a 
cause at once material, formal, and efficient, is Number. In 
its fundamental conception this was their God. But the 
fundamental conception of Number is not reached until the 
* Sextus adv. Mathemat., vii. 133. 
VOL. XXIII. ot 
