SCIENTIFIC BOOKS. 
Knowledge, Belief and Certitude, an Inquiry with 
Conclusions. By FREDERICK STORRS TURNER, 
B.A. (Lond.). London, Swan, Sonnenschein 
& Co. ; New York, The Macmillan Co. 1900. 
8vo. Pp. viii+ 484. Price, $2.25. 
This is a plain, straightforward bit of work, 
possessing the good qualities that, as a rule, 
mark first-hand thinking. Here and there Mr. 
Turner may be disposed to magnify his office 
in-somewhat naive fashion ; but he is so much 
in earnest that one can forgive him readily. 
The problem by which our author has been 
oppressed may be stated succinctly thus: 
What ‘is Real Knowledge? In addressing 
himself to its solution, Mr. Turner distin- 
guishes between what he calls ‘abstract’ and 
‘real’ knowledge. He finds that the former 
is common to the many disciplines indicated 
usually by the generic names science and 
philosophy. in this connection he says a num- 
ber of sane things about science, a majority of 
them, to be sure, quite familiar already. The 
manner in which he runs amuck among the 
philosophical dignitaries and their honored 
idols does him no small credit, if he be aware 
—which I do not think he is—of the enormities 
he commits. Some of*the references to psy- 
chology look suspiciously second-hand, and the 
cavalier treatment of Wundt hardly reassures 
one regarding Mr. Turner’s insight into con. 
temporary problems and tendencies. Yet, be 
this as it may, our author suffers nothing on 
the score of tradition; and, if he contrive to 
annoy some few, he will, for similar reasons, 
amuse a great many more. 
The portion of his book on which he lays the 
greatest store on the score of originality, is en- 
titled ‘ Real Knowledge.’ It may be of interest 
to note the precise import he bestows upon this 
rather optimistic phrase. For we all remem- 
ber the proverb about the place where angels 
fear totread. ‘Real Knowledge,’ then, is the 
“science of ends, of human causality, so far as 
man is a cause by his own will and according 
to his own design (351). * * * In all its 
stages the end both is, and leads to, real knowl- 
edge. * * * It seems to me that now in this 
knowledge of ends we have a full and sufficient 
answer to those psychologists and philosophers 
SCIENCE. 
[N.S. Von. XIII. No. 324. 
who call in question the reality of the first fun- 
damental certitude, that of the Self.’’ (861-62). 
Thus, knowledge of the Self is ‘real knowl- 
edge.’ Again, ‘‘it is not too much to say that 
the knowledge of our own causal power is on a 
level with the most certain and the most impor- 
tant knowledge which we possess. This is real 
knowledge; compared with which mathemat- 
ics and metaphysics seem shadowy and unsub- 
stantial’ (886). With this the ‘nescience of 
science’ is to be sharply contrasted. ‘‘ Science 
is not a unity nor a system, but merely a gen- 
eral name for a number of separate sciences. 
All attempts to frame a tenable theory of the 
universe by means of abstract objective knowl- 
edge, or science, are necessarily doomed to 
failure’’ (439). On the other hand, positive 
conclusions are possible, to wit: ‘‘The first 
positive conclusion we have reached is that real 
knowledge is a state or mode of the conscious 
being of real living men and women. * * * The 
second positive conclusion is that this real know- 
ing is a knowing of real persons, real things, real 
events. * * * The third positive conclusion is 
that the knowing and the known are united in 
the reality ’’ (477-78). Such are Mr. Turner’s 
constructive results, so impressive to him that 
he ends, ‘‘not with a feeling of self-compla- 
cency, but with joyful confidence in the truth 
that has been revealed to me (479).”’ 
Needless to tell, all this happens to be one 
huge torepov mpérepov. Mayhap, human experi- 
ence must, by the very nature of the case, par- 
take of this character. Buta writer who would 
reveal the inwardness of ‘knowledge, belief 
and certitude’ can not be said to have solved 
his problem by the mere statement of a few 
among its obvious implications. No doubt, he 
may accomplish something along such a line— 
he may be assembling the factors involved. 
Just because this appears to be Mr. Turner’s 
situation, his interesting book would serve bet- 
ter than some pretentious manuals as an intro- 
duction to philosophy for students whose intel- 
lectual fates had been committed to a skilled 
teacher. For it is not given to every author to 
be so frank when he sees men as trees walking. 
R. M. WENLEY. 
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN. 
