arrived because of the deficiency of facts, which 

 could be obtained only by experimental observations, 

 and that this contemporary empiricism should with 

 time prepare the philosophical development of the 

 natural sciences."^- 



Hertzen subjected this collision of science with 

 speculative philosophy to detailed and deep analysis in 

 "Letters on the Study of Nature," He first of all noted the 

 fruitlessness of empirical science, which when separated 

 from philosophy is equal to the fruitlessness of idealistic 

 philosophy itself. "Philosophy without the study of nature is 

 impossible, as is the study of nature without philosophy," 

 Hertzen wrote. 92 In another place: "Without empiricism there 

 is no science, but there is no science in one-sided empiricism. 

 Experiment and speculation are two necessary, true, actual 

 stages of one and the same knowledge .... If taken in 

 opposition, they do not lead to anything, such as analysis 

 without synthesis and synthesis without analysis. "93 And 

 also: "Empiricism provided an open objection, and a loud 

 one, against idealism. What idealism did was rejected by 

 empiricism. It did not concede a step." Applicable to this 

 phrase is another statement: "Is it necessary to repeat that 

 empiricism was extremely ridiculous, that its uses in the 

 1840s was as ridiculous as the flights of idealism; one extreme 

 created a similar extreme on the opposite side. "94 



Hertzen showed that empirical investigations had accumu- 

 lated numerous assorted facts: 



So long as natural science . . . remains within the 

 limits of empiricism ... it becomes stronger, 



91. Belinskii, COLLECTED WORKS (Kiev, 1911), Vol. Ill, 

 p. 194. 



92. A. I. Hertzen, "Letters on the Study of Nature. First 

 Letter: Empiricism and Idealism" C1845) , in COLLECTED 

 WORKS in thirty volumes, Publication of Academy of 

 Science USSR, Vol. Ill (1954), p. 93. 



93. Ibid ., p. 97. 



94. Ibid., p. 120. 



202 



