CHAPTER LX

PHILOSOPHY AND PSYCHOLOGY [Sidenote: Definitions] Philosophers, says Plato, are “those who are able to grasp the eternal and immutable”; their pursuit is wisdom. The history of philosophy is, therefore, the history of the ideas which have animated successive generations of man; so that in the wide sense the investigation includes all knowledge; the natural as well as the moral sciences; and the Greeks, to whom the western world owes the direction of its thought, so understood it. The several divisions of PHILOSOPHY (Vol. 21, p. 440), as we reckon them, were all fused by Plato in a semi-religious synthesis, with resulting confusion. Aristotle, the encyclopaedist of the ancient world, saw that the several issues should be regarded as separate disciplines, and became the founder of the sciences of logic, psychology, ethics, and aesthetics. His “first philosophy,” or, as we should say, “first principles,” which stood as introductions to his separate special inquiries, gradually acquired the name metaphysics. In more recent times the natural sciences: biology, physics, chemistry, medicine, etc., have been regarded as outside the strict boundaries of the philosophic schools; and theology, is excluded on the ground that its subject matter is so extensive that it may be looked upon as a separate science. The main divisions of philosophy are: EPISTEMOLOGY (Vol. 9, p. 701), which is concerned with the nature and origin of knowledge, i. e., the possibility of knowledge in the abstract; METAPHYSICS (Vol. 18, p. 224), the science of being, often called ONTOLOGY (Vol. 20, p. 118), dealing, that is to say, with being as being; and PSYCHOLOGY (Vol. 22, p. 547), the science of mind, an analysis of what “mind” means. [Sidenote: Some Important Articles and Their Writers] [Sidenote: Metaphysics and Logic] It will be of interest to the reader if, at this point, we enumerate some of the more important articles in the Britannica covering this field with the names of their authors. Andrew Seth Pringle-Pattison, professor of logic and metaphysics in the University of Edinburgh, wrote the general article PHILOSOPHY, which is a key to the whole subject, as well as the articles MYSTICISM (Vol. 19, p. 123), SCEPTICISM (Vol. 24, p. 306), SCHOLASTICISM (Vol. 24, p. 346), SPINOZA (Vol. 25, p. 687), and others. Of fundamental importance is the article LOGIC (Vol. 16, p. 879), which would occupy 124 pages of this Guide. It is divided into two parts: the first, by Thomas Case, president of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, formerly professor of moral and metaphysical philosophy in that university, treats of the science generally, and examines in detail the processes of inference. The second, by H. W. Blunt, of Christ Church, Oxford, and formerly fellow of All Soul’s, gives a brilliant account of the _history_ of logic, that is, the history of the ideas which have been the basis of all attempts to regulate these processes of inference. This account is unique in that it is the first critical review of the types of logical theory that has been attempted. A lucid discussion of a most difficult subject is that given under METAPHYSICS (Vol. 18, p. 224); equivalent to 100 pages in this Guide by Professor Case, to whom, as one of the most distinguished of modern Aristotelians, the article ARISTOTLE (Vol. 2, p. 501) was also assigned. The life and work of PLATO are examined in a valuable article (Vol. 21, p. 808), the equivalent in length to 54 pages of this Guide, by the late Professor Lewis Campbell, of St. Andrews, one of the best known Platonists of the time. Henry Sturt, author of _Personal Idealism_ and many other books, is responsible for brilliant discussions of UTILITARIANISM (Vol. 27, p. 820), NOMINALISM (Vol. 19, p. 735), METEMPSYCHOSIS (Vol. 18, p. 259), SPACE AND TIME (Vol. 25, p. 525), etc. And F. C. S. Schiller, of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, who, under the wider, and historically more significant title “Humanism,” has further developed the pragmatic philosophy of William James, contributed the articles on PRAGMATISM, HERBERT SPENCER, and NIETZSCHE. [Sidenote: Psychology] The very important article on PSYCHOLOGY (Vol. 22, p. 54), equal to nearly 200 pages of this Guide was contributed by James Ward, professor of mental philosophy, Cambridge, who has devoted his whole life to psychological research. In addition to PSYCHOLOGY he also contributed the articles HERBART (Vol. 13, p. 335), and NATURALISM (Vol. 19, p. 274). James Sully, the well-known psychologist, former professor of the philosophy of the mind and logic, at University College, London, contributes the article AESTHETICS (Vol. 1, p. 277). The article ETHICS (Vol. 8, p. 808), equivalent to about 100 pages of this Guide, and WILL (Vol. 28, p. 648), both of primary importance, were the work of the Rev. H. H. Williams, lecturer in philosophy, Hertford College, Oxford. Very interesting articles are ASSOCIATION OF IDEAS (Vol. 2, p. 784), DREAM (Vol. 8, p. 588), INSTINCT (Vol. 14, p. 648) and, very important, WEBER’S LAW (Vol. 28, p. 458), which expresses the relation between sensation and the stimulus which induces it. Of recent years the psychology of crowds has received a good deal of attention; in fact, the need of an understanding of the phenomena attending it is of increasing importance in this age of universal suffrage. Interesting light is thrown upon the subject in the articles SUGGESTION (Vol. 26, p. 48), by W. M. McDougall, Wilde reader in mental philosophy at Oxford; IMITATION (Vol. 14, p. 332); and RELIGION (Vol. 23, p. 66). A line of inquiry of vital importance to the social body is examined in the articles CRIMINOLOGY (Vol. 7, p. 464), by Major Griffith, for many years H. M. Inspector of Prisons, in which Lombroso’s theory of the possession by criminals of special anatomical and physiological characteristics is criticized, and the problem is shown to be one of abnormal psychology; see also CESARE LOMBROSO (Vol. 16, p. 936). For discussions of other forms of abnormal psychology, see the chapter _For Physicians and Surgeons_ in this Guide, and in particular the article INSANITY (Vol. 14, p. 597). [Sidenote: Psychical Research] Perhaps more popular, certainly more sensational, than the more legitimate branches of psychology, is that classed under PSYCHICAL RESEARCH (Vol. 22, p. 544). The title article was written by Andrew Lang, who wrote POLTERGEIST (Vol. 22, p. 14), as well as articles on SECOND SIGHT (Vol. 24, p. 570), APPARITIONS (Vol. 2, p. 209), etc. The article DIVINATION (Vol. 8, p. 332) was written by Northcote Thomas, government anthropologist to Southern Nigeria, and author of _Thought Transference_ and other books; and Mrs. Henry Sidgwick, formerly principal of Newnham College, Cambridge, and secretary to the Society for Psychical Research, was responsible for the article SPIRITUALISM (Vol. 25, p. 705). Among the biographical articles in this section, interest will be felt in the biography of Daniel Dunglas HOME, the original of Robert Browning’s poem, “Sludge the Medium.” [Sidenote: Classification] We now may classify the principal subjects belonging to the main divisions of philosophy, the sciences of epistemology, metaphysics, and psychology. The wider phases of thought roughly belonging to the division of metaphysics are, in their historical order: Platonism (see PLATO, Vol. 21, p. 808), and Aristotelianism (see ARISTOTLE, Vol. 2, p. 501), the two great Greek systems of the classical period; NEOPLATONISM (Vol. 19, p. 372), the last school of pagan philosophy, which grew up mainly among the Greeks of Alexandria from the 3rd century A.D. onwards; SCHOLASTICISM (Vol. 24, p. 346), which gave expression to the most typical products of medieval thought; IDEALISM (Vol. 14, p. 281), the philosophy of the “absolute,” which, though it has given a tinge to philosophic thought from the days of Socrates to the present time, is in its self-conscious form a modern doctrine; MATERIALISM (Vol. 17, p. 878), which regards all the facts of the universe as explainable in terms of matter and motion; REALISM (Vol. 22, p. 941), which is a sort of half-way house between Idealism and Materialism; PRAGMATISM (Vol. 22, p. 246), the philosophy of the “real,” which expresses the reaction against the intellectualistic speculation that has characterized most of modern metaphysics. LOGIC (Vol. 16, p. 879), the art of reasoning, or, as Ueberweg expresses it, “the science of the regulative laws of thought,” clearly belongs to the division of epistemology. Aspects of psychology, since they depend essentially upon perceptions of the human mind in relation to itself or its environment, are ETHICS (Vol. 9, p. 808), or moral philosophy, the investigation of theories of good and evil; and AESTHETICS (Vol. 1, p. 277), the philosophy or science of the beautiful, of taste, or of the fine arts. [Sidenote: History of Thought Personal] The articles enumerated will give the reader a clear idea of the drift of thought currents throughout the course of history, and they will introduce him to the detailed discussions of the various systems which have been propounded by the little band of men who have contributed something vital to the treasury of thought. Each has been in and out of fashion at different times. In the Britannica the contributions to philosophic thought by the great philosophers are discussed in biographical articles, to which we now turn. [Sidenote: Breaking the Ground] The father of Greek philosophy and indeed of European thought was THALES of Miletus (Vol. 26, p. 720), who founded the IONIAN SCHOOL (Vol. 14, p. 731) at the end of the 7th century B.C. He first, as far as we know, sought to go behind the infinite multiplicity of phenomena in the hope of finding an all embracing infinite unity. This unity he decided was water. HERACLITUS (Vol. 13, p. 309), the “dark philosopher,” nicknamed from his aristocratic prejudices “he who rails at the people,” later selected fire. The never ending fight between advocates of the “One” and the “Many” had therefore begun. Sophistry (see SOPHISTS, Vol. 25, p. 418) has now an unpleasant connotation, inherited from the undisciplined reasonings of the schools of which PROTAGORAS (Vol. 22, p. 464), GORGIAS (Vol. 12, p. 257), PARMENIDES of Elea (Vol. 20, p. 851), and ZENO, also of Elea (Vol. 28, p. 970), were leaders. The “science of the regulative laws of thought” had not yet been developed and fallacies were the rule rather than the exception. Protagoras, the first of the Sophists, in his celebrated essay on Truth, said that “Man is the measure of all things, of what is, that it is, and what is not, that it is not.” In other words, there is no such thing as objective truth. After nineteen-hundred years we are still seeking the answer to Pilate’s question, “What is truth?” Gorgias, in his equally famous work on Nature or on the Nonent (notbeing) maintained that “(a) nothing is, (b) that, if anything is, it cannot be known, (c) that, if anything is and can be known, it cannot be expressed in speech.” The paradoxes with which Zeno, the pupil and friend of Parmenides, adorned his arguments are proverbial. Who has not heard of Achilles and the tortoise? And it is a little curious that in quite modern times his sophisms have, after centuries of scornful neglect, been reinstated and made the basis of a mathematical renaissance by the German professor Weierstrass, who shows that we live in an unchanging world, and that the arrow, as Zeno paradoxically contended, is truly at rest at every moment of its flight (Vol. 28, p. 971). [Sidenote: The Socratic Schools] The teaching of SOCRATES (Vol. 25, p. 331) was oral, and his philosophy is handed down to us in the refined and elaborated system which PLATO (Vol. 21, p. 808) developed in his dialogues. The “One” and the “Many” were united in the philosophy of Plato. To him we owe a debt which is simply incalculable, for, as is shown in the Britannica, “to whatever system of modern thought the student is inclined he will find his account in returning to this wellspring of European thought, in which all previous movements are absorbed, and from which all subsequent lines of reflection may be said to diverge.” The germs of all ideas, even of most Christian ones, are, as Jowett remarked, to be found in Plato. The teaching of Socrates bore fruit in strangely divers forms. Plato, his legitimate successor, and the expounder of his philosophy, has been referred to, but there were other very different developments. The CYNICS (Vol. 7, p. 691), of whom DIOGENES (Vol. 8, p. 281) is the notorious prototype, uncouthly preached the asceticism which was to become so fashionable in a later era; but, their central doctrine, “let man gain wisdom—or buy a rope,” contains more than a germ of truth. The CYRENAICS (Vol. 7, p. 703), under ARISTIPPUS (Vol. 2, p. 497), starting from the two Socratic principles of virtue and happiness, differed from the Cynics in emphasizing the second. The MEGARIANS (Vol. 18, p. 77), the “friends of ideas,” as Plato called them, united the Socratic principles of virtue (as the source of knowledge) with the Eleatic doctrine (Vol. 9, p. 168) of the “One” as opposed to the “Many.” Their strength lay in the intellectual pre-eminence of their members, not so much in the doctrine, or combination of doctrines, which they inculcated. [Sidenote: Aristotle] Plato had done much, he had laid the foundation of modern thought; it remained to classify it and to systematize it. This task was reserved for ARISTOTLE (Vol. 2, p. 501), one of the greatest geniuses of any age. He invented the sciences of logic, ethics, aesthetics, and psychology, as separate sciences. He was at once a student, a reader, a lecturer, a writer, and a book collector. He was the first man whom we know to have collected books, and he was employed at one time by the kings of Egypt as consulting librarian. His system of aesthetics still remains the best foundation of the critic’s training. The fundamental difference between Aristotle and Plato is that Platonism is a philosophy of universal forms, and Aristotelianism one of individual substances. As Professor Case puts it in the Britannica: “Plato makes us think first of the supernatural and the kingdom of heaven, Aristotle of the natural and the whole world.” His inquiries, therefore, pre-eminently implied that “transvaluation of all values,” of which Nietzsche was to boast more than two thousand years later. A contemporary of Aristotle, whose philosophy occupies a somewhat independent position, is EPICURUS (Vol. 9, p. 683). His advice to a young disciple was to “steer clear of culture.” His system, in fact, led him to go back from words to realities in order to find in nature a more enduring and a wider foundation for ethical doctrine; “to give up reasonings, and get at feelings, to test conceptions and arguments by a final reference to the only touchstone of truth—the senses.” A famous Roman who subscribed to the doctrines of Epicurus was the poet-philosopher-scientist, LUCRETIUS (Vol. 17, p. 107), whose theories in his poem _De Rerum Natura_ so curiously anticipated much of modern physics and psychology. [Sidenote: The Last Greek Schools] Two schools remain to be considered before the Greek philosophy can be dismissed: the STOICS (Vol. 25, p. 942) and the Neoplatonists (see NEOPLATONISM, Vol. 19, p. 372). The Stoics caught the practical spirit of the age which had been evoked by Aristotle and provided a popular philosophy to meet individual needs. They showed kinship with the Cynics, but under the inspiration of their founder, Zeno of Citium, they avoided the excesses of that school, and formulated a system which fired the imagination of the time and finally bequeathed to Rome the guiding principles which were to raise her to greatness. Zeno is regarded as the best exponent of anarchistic philosophy in ancient Greece, and he and his philosophers opposed the conception of a free community without government to the state-Utopia of Plato; see ANARCHISM (Vol. 1, p. 915). Of Neoplatonism Adolph Harnack says in the Britannica (Vol. 19, p. 372): Judged from the standpoint of empirical science, philosophy passed its meridian in Plato and Aristotle, declined in the postAristotelian systems, and set in the darkness of Neoplatonism. But, from the religious and moral point of view, it must be admitted that the ethical “mood” which Neoplatonism endeavored to create and maintain is the highest and purest ever reached by antiquity. The most famous exponents of this system were PLOTINUS (Vol. 21, p. 849), an introspective mystic, and PORPHYRY (Vol. 22, p. 103), who edited Plotinus’s works and wrote his biography. Neoplatonism, coming as it did early in our era, formed a link between the pagan philosophy of ancient Greece and Christianity. [Sidenote: Medieval Ecclesiasticism] With the death of BOETIUS (Vol. 4, p. 116), in 524 A.D., and with the closing of the philosophical schools in Athens five years later, intellectual darkness settled over Europe and hung there for centuries. When in the Middle Ages, the speculative sciences once again attracted men’s minds, Christianity had already impressed its mark. SCHOLASTICISM (Vol. 24, p. 346) as a system began with the teaching of SCOTUS ERIGENA (Vol. 9, p. 742) at the end of the 9th century, and culminated three centuries later with ALBERTUS MAGNUS (Vol. 1, p. 504), with his greater disciple THOMAS AQUINAS (Vol. 2, p. 250), whose ideas have animated orthodox philosophic thought in the Catholic Church to this day, and with MEISTER ECKHART (Vol. 8, p. 886), the first of the great speculative mystics (see MYSTICISM, Vol. 19, p. 123). [Sidenote: Modern Ideas] With the Reformation an assertion of independence made itself heard. Man’s relation to man assumed an importance comparable to that of his relation to God; and the first steps on the path which was to lead to the rationalism of the French Encyclopaedists and of the English Utilitarians were taken by Albericus GENTILIS (Vol. 11, p. 603), and Hugo GROTIUS (Vol. 12, p. 621). In England, FRANCIS BACON (Vol. 3, p. 135) was independently working out the same problems. In philosophy his position was that of a humanist. The remarkable success of Grotius’s treatise _De Jure Belli et Pacis_ brought his views of natural right into great prominence, and suggested such questions as: “What is man’s ultimate reason for obeying laws? Wherein exactly does their agreement with his rational and social nature exist? How far and in what sense is his nature really social?” The answers which HOBBES (Vol. 13, p. 545), who was considerably influenced by Bacon, gave to these fundamental questions in his _Leviathan_ marked the starting point of independent ethical inquiry in England. [Sidenote: The Utilitarians] From this time on the drift of thought in England, though of course often profoundly affected by the speculations of continental philosophers, mainly ran in utilitarian channels; and the succession of ideas may be traced through LOCKE (Vol. 16, p. 844), whose influence on the French Encyclopaedists was far reaching, HUME (Vol. 13, p. 876), Jeremy BENTHAM (Vol. 3, p. 747) with his famous principle of the “greatest happiness for the greatest number,” J. S. MILL (Vol. 18, p. 454), and Herbert SPENCER (Vol. 24, p. 634), with his philosophy of the “unknowable.” [Sidenote: Back to Dreams] Meanwhile, on the continent of Europe, DESCARTES (Vol. 7, p. 79), in the _Discourse of Method_, had stated his famous proposition “_Cogito, ergo sum_,” and had laid down those fundamental dogmas of logic, metaphysics, and physics, from which started the subsequent inquiries of LOCKE, LEIBNITZ (Vol. 16, p. 385), and NEWTON (Vol. 19, p. 583). But CARTESIANISM (Vol. 5, p. 414), as Dr. Caird points out in the Britannica, includes not only the work of Descartes, but also that of MALEBRANCHE (Vol. 17, p. 486) and of SPINOZA (Vol. 25, p. 687), who, from very different points of view, developed the Cartesian theories, the former saturated with the study of Augustine, the latter with that of Jewish philosophy. [Sidenote: The Rights of Man] There follows a group of men whose speculations left a deep mark on the course of events in Europe and America: VOLTAIRE (Vol. 28, p. 199), MONTESQUIEU (Vol. 18, p. 775), Jean Jacques ROUSSEAU (Vol. 23, p. 775), and Denis DIDEROT (Vol. 8, p. 204). The antiecclesiastical animus which informed the writings of the first, the _Esprit des Lois_ of the second, the _Contrat Social_ of the third, and the famous encyclopaedia of the last, had political results, but their influence on metaphysical inquiry was practically nil. [Sidenote: Transcendentalism] Outstanding, of course, in the 18th century was the influence of Immanuel KANT (Vol. 15, p. 662), who summed up the teachings of Leibnitz and Hume, carried them to their logical issues, and immensely extended them. In fact, Kant and his disciple FICHTE (Vol. 10, p. 313), as Prof. Case shows in the article METAPHYSICS (Vol. 18, p. 231), “became the most potent philosophic influences on European thought in the 19th century, because their emphasis was on man.” They made man believe in himself and in his mission. They fostered liberty and reform, and even radicalism. They almost avenged man on the astronomers, who had shown that the world is not made for earth, and therefore not for man. Kant half asserted, and Fichte wholly, that Nature is man’s own construction. The _Kritik_ and the _Wissenschaftslehre_ belonged to the revolutionary epoch of the “Rights of Man,” and produced as great a revolution in thought as the French Revolution did in fact. Instead of the old belief that God made the world for man, philosophers began to fall into the pleasing dream “I am everything, and everything is I”—and even “I am God.” The term TRANSCENDENTALISM (Vol. 27, p. 172) has been specially applied to the philosophy of Kant and his successors, which is based on the view that true knowledge is intuitive, or supernatural. The famous Transcendental Club founded, 1836, by EMERSON (Vol. 9, p. 332) and others in New England, was not “transcendental” in the Kantian sense; its main theme was regeneration, a revolt from theological formalism, and a wider literary outlook; see also BROOK FARM (Vol. 4, p. 645), THOREAU (Vol. 26, p. 877), A. BRONSON ALCOTT (Vol. 1, p. 528), and MARGARET FULLER (Vol. 11, p. 295). [Sidenote: Idealism] SCHELLING’S position (Vol. 24, p. 316), like that of his disciple HEGEL (Vol. 13, p. 200), differed from the transcendentalism of Kant and Fichte in regarding all noumena, or things comprehended (Vol. 19, p. 828), as knowable products of universal reason—the Absolute Ego, and, the absolute being God, nature as a product of universal reason, “a direct manifestation not of man but of God.” This was the starting point of noumenal idealism in Germany, and showed a reversion to the wider opinions of Aristotle. Hegelianism in which this idealism is carried to its limit is professedly one of the most difficult of philosophies. Hegel said “One man has understood me and even he has not.” His obscurity lies in the manner in which, as William Wallace shows in his article on the philosopher (Vol. 13, p. 204), he “abruptly hurls us into worlds where old habits of thought fail us.” The influence of Hegel on English thought has been wide and lasting. [Sidenote: Realism] SCHOPENHAUER (Vol. 24, p. 372) was essentially a realist. He led the inevitable reaction against the absorption of everything in reason which is the keynote of the Kantian system. In the very title of his chief work, _The World as Will and Idea_, he emphasizes his position in giving “will” equal weight with “mind” or “idea” (_Vorstellung_). His “Will to Live” embodies a wholesome practical idea. Eduard von HARTMANN (Vol. 13, p. 36) in his sensational _Philosophy of the Unconscious_ established the thesis: “When the greater part of the Will in existence is so far enlightened by reason as to perceive the inevitable misery of existence, a collective effort to will non-existence will be made, and the world will relapse into nothingness, the Unconscious into quiescence.” He thus goes a step further in pessimism than did Schopenhauer, and the essence of his doctrine is the will to non-existence—_not_ to live, instead of a will to live. German realism is, however, so strongly coloured by the idealistic cast of the national thought that we have to go to France and England for the most thorough-going statement of the realist position. In France the eclecticism of V. COUSIN (Vol. 7, p. 330) marked a doctrine of comprehension and toleration, opposed to the arrogance of absolutism and to the dogmatism of sensationalism which were the tendencies of his day. In England a reversion to Baconian ideas produced the natural or intuitive realism of REID (Vol. 23, p. 51), DUGALD STEWART (Vol. 25, p. 913), SIR WILLIAM HAMILTON (Vol. 12, p. 888) and their followers, and led to the synthetic philosophy of HERBERT SPENCER (Vol. 25, p. 634). [Sidenote: Materialism] The materialists go a step further than the realists. In its modern sense materialism is the view that all we know is body (or matter), of which the mind is an attribute or function. This attitude was induced by the rapid advances of the natural sciences, and by the unifying doctrine of gradual evolution in nature. It was also heralded by a remarkable growth in commerce, manufactures, and industrialism. The leaders of the movement were BÜCHNER (Vol. 4, p. 719) whose _Kraft und Stoff_ became a text book of materialism, and HAECKEL (Vol. 12, p. 803) who in his _Riddle of the Universe_ asserts that, sensations being an inherent property of all substance, neither mind nor soul can have an origin. [Sidenote: The 19th Century and Beyond] In the inquiries of LOTZE (Vol. 17, p. 23), and FECHNER (Vol. 10, p. 231), the latter an experimental psychologist, lies the germ of much of the speculative thought of the present day. Lotze, as the well-known psychologist Henry Sturt says in his article in the Britannica (Vol. 17, p. 25), “brought philosophy out of the lecture room into the market place of life.” He saw that metaphysics must be the foundation of psychology, and that the current idealist theories of the origin of knowledge were unsound; and he concluded that the union of the regions of facts, of laws, and of standards of values, can only become intelligible through the idea of a personal deity. Like a brilliant meteor NIETZSCHE (Vol. 19, p. 672) flashed across the philosophic sky. His theories of the super-man are known to everyone. His brilliant essays are all in the nature of prolegomena to a philosophy which, embodied in a master work, the “Will to Power,” was to contain a transvaluation of all existing ethical values. Unfortunately he did not live to complete the work, which remains a fragment; but the drift of his thought is clearly indicated. One other system should be mentioned, that of POSITIVISM (Vol. 22, p. 172), which its founder, AUGUSTE COMTE (Vol. 6, p. 814) hoped would supersede every other system. Comte’s philosophy confines itself to the data of experience and declines to recognise a priori or metaphysical speculations. The system of morality which he built up on it, and in which God is replaced by Humanity, has largely failed, in spite of the brilliant ideas which animate it, because it is in many of its aspects retrograde. A most interesting review of present day tendencies in the regions of Metaphysics will be found at the end of that article, with special reference to the brilliant work of WUNDT (see also Vol. 28, p. 855), who constructing his system on the Kantian order—sense, understanding, reason, exhibits most clearly the necessary consequence from psychological to metaphysical idealism. His philosophy is the best exposition of modern idealism—that we perceive the mental and, therefore, all we know and conceive is mental. [Sidenote: The Historical Clue] This sketch of the course of events in philosophical speculation will at least enable the reader to follow the historical clue to the evolution of ideas. Every student must, in order to attain a true perspective, know the _genealogy_ of the ideas he is studying. It will therefore be best that he first read the general articles referred to in the beginning of this chapter, supplementing them by the accounts given of the separate systems under the headings of their authors. A list of the philosophical and psychological articles (more than 500 in number) in the Britannica will be found in the Index (Vol. 29, p. 939) and it is not repeated here.