VIII.-NEW BOOKS. [These Notes (by various hands) do not exclude Critical Notices later on.] Logic; or, the Morphology of Knowledge. By BERNARD BOSANQUET, formerly Fellow and Tutor of University College, Oxford. 2 Vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Pp. xvii., 398; viii., 240. The conception of logical science, which has been the author's guide in this work, is, according to the preface, "that of an unprejudiced study of the forms of knowledge in their development, their interconnexion, and their comparative value as embodiments of truth". The first volume deals with Judgment, and consists in an attempt to trace the underlying identity of the judging function through such various forms as Measurement, Enumeration, Equation, Individual and Generic Judgment, Hypothetical and Disjunctive Judgment. It is the author's opinion that the relations of these forms to one another cannot be .represented by a linear series, and he therefore represents the more abstract group of judgments (of which equation is the type) as branching off from the natural development and pursuing a parallel but independent course. The second volume deals in an analogous manner with the forms of Inference, treating of Enumerative Intuition, true Calculation, Analogy, Scientific Induction, and Concrete Systematic Inference. The concluding chapter discusses the formal and material postulates of Knowledge. Critical Notice will follow in due course. Philo Judæus; or, the Jewish Alexandrian Philosophy in its Development and 2 Vols. Dr. Drummond's scholarly work is the result of special studies extending over a long period; the introduction on "Philo and the general principles of the Jewish-Alexandrian Philosophy" (vol. i., pp. 1-26) having been "published, substantially, in 1877, in the form of a College address," and much of the author's time since then having been given to the work. "My studies," the author says, "originated in the desire to learn at first hand what Philo thought, and why he thought it; and in order to guard, as far as possible, against every bias, I have considered it best, both in my own investigations and in giving the results to the public, to avoid all side issues, and make the discussion purely historical. But while one could only gain by setting aside, for the time, the bearing of Philo's teaching upon Christian dogma, it was impossible to understand it without tracing the previous streams of thought which met and mingled in the hospitable eclecticism of his philosophy. I have, therefore, prefixed to the book on Philo a sketch of those lines of Greek speculation which had the most influence on him, and some account of that development of Hebrew thought of which he is the most distinguished representative." Book i. ("Greek Philosophy," vol. i., pp. 27-129) consists of three chapters-(1) "Heraclitus," (2) "Anaxagoras to Aristotle" (Anaxagoras, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle), (3) "The Stoics," -and an appendix "on the question whether Heraclitus recognised a conscious intelligence in the universe". Book ii. (“ Blending of Hellenism and Judaism till the time of Philo," pp. 131-255) has five chapters (1)" Preparations for the doctrine of the Logos in the Old Testament," 66 66 (2) "Ecclesiasticus," (3) "The Septuagint," (4) "Jewish-Alexandrian Literature; Sibylline Oracles," (5) "The Wisdom of Solomon,"—and two appendices, dealing with (1) the letter of Aristeas, (2) Aristobulus. The author discusses at length the question of the genuineness of the fragments of Aristobulus, and comes to the conclusion that, like the letter of the pseudo-Aristeas, they are forgeries. The exposition of the philosophy of Philo himself (bk. iii., vol. i., p. 257 to vol. ii., p. 324) falls under the following heads :-(1) "The Origin and Nature of Philosophy," (2) "The Universe and the Problems it suggests," (3) "Anthropology," (4) "The Existence and Nature of God,” (5) “The Divine Powers," (6) The Logos," (7) "The Higher Anthropology". The first three chapters are included in the first volume; the remaining four, together with three Indexes (1) Subjects and Names," (2) "References to Passages in Philo," (3) "Reference to Passages in the Old Testament cited by Philo,"-make up the second. The lines of Greek speculation which the author follows out are the Logos-doctrine started by Heraclitus, and the teleological theory started by Anaxagoras. These were "combined in the completest way" by the Stoics, who, with Plato, had most direct influence on Philo; but for the Stoics the Logos still remained, as it had been for Heraclitus, a material Logos; and again, the Stoical Pantheism was sharply distinguished from the Jewish doctrine of "the transcendent divine sovereignty". The problem of the Alexandrian philosophy-a problem already suggested by a "duality in religious experience -was "to bring the transcendent God, whose essence was incognisable by the human mind, into the requisite relations with nature and man by the mediation of certain powers". To this end it employed Greek ideas, transforming them in the process. The "divine powers," conceived as a means of bringing the infinite into relation with the finite, were identified with the Platonic ideas, and thus a new turn was given to Platonism. In the conception of the Logos as the highest of the divine powers, the Heraclitean and Stoical notion of a rational force " immanent in the universe was combined with the Platonic notion of a "most generic idea," and at the same time with the Hebrew notion of mediation between God and man. Here centre all the problems of the interpretation of Philo. With how much philosophical consistency has the reconciliation of the various elements in his "strangely - blended speculations" been carried out? According to the author, both Philo's speculative power and his consistency have usually been underrated by his expositors. When the unsystematic character of his writings, his taste for personification, and his use of the method of allegorical interpretation of Scripture are allowed for, there is seen to be no essential inconsistency or confusion, at least so far as the vital and central doctrines of his philosophy are concerned. In interpreting Philo, as in interpreting other philosophers, we ought, of course, to seek first a reconciliation of apparent inconsistencies, and “only in the last resort to admit that our author did not know his own thoughts, or was incapable of comparing them ". This method of interpretation being adopted, not only is it seen that "the doctrine of intermediate powers or ideas, instead of being an artificial resource to reconcile discordant thoughts, grows out of the very roots of Philo's theology," but also the Logos-doctrine itself, where "the uncertainty arising from Philo's eclectic method reaches its highest pitch," is found to be no mere syncretism but an organic unity. The question whether Philo conceives the Logos as personal or impersonal is thus resolved:-" Philo avoided pantheism by his belief that God was transcendent above the Logos (just as the human mind, conceived as a complex unity, is above the powers that compose it). From the depths 66 of the divine personality flowed forth the rational energy which pervaded creation, and in this its universal form it had no personality distinct from that of God; but as it passed on and took possession of finite minds, personality once more appeared" (ii. 226). The "powers" are not only not conceived as personal, but are not to be regarded as ontologically distinct beings at all. "The Logos is not a demiurge who acts for or instead of God, but is God's own rational energy acting upon matter" (ii. 192-3). On its positive side, the doctrine is thus interpreted :-"All other things are an expression of Thought, but Thought is an expression of God alone" (ii. 189). The Logos and Wisdom, in the author's view, are ultimately identical (ii. 211). The Spirit (πveûμa) also "is ontologically the same as the Logos, though in its higher sense it is used of the Logos only in connexion with mankind" (ii. 217). Philo's doctrine of the human mind is characterised by the rejection of materialism. Some of his expressions, indeed, seem inconsistent with this; but if the mind is occasionally said to be of "ethereal" or (some. times) of "fiery" nature, the inconsistency is only apparent. "Philo nowhere deliberately maintains the ethereal origin of the mind, in the strict sense of the words; and the most which can be justly alleged is that he two or three times allows himself, partly in deference to the opinion of others, partly from his figurative style of writing, to use language which might be misleading. On the other hand, his doctrine that the rational soul has for its substance the divine Spirit, which connects it inseparably with the Supreme Being, and removes it entirely from the category of matter, is asserted with a frequency and distinctness which leave nothing to be desired" (i. 335). His specially close dependence on the Greeks in his theory of matter, and of the world and its elements, is very well shown. The author concludes that Philo taught the eternity of matter, but did not regard matter as an "active principle of evil". The source of imperfection, according to Philo, is "not in the material as opposed to the spiritual, but in the phenomenal as opposed to the eternal (i. 311). It is not to matter in its essence, but to matter in its phenomenal and ever changing aspects, that Philo attributes any power of limiting the agency of God" (i. 312). An example of Dr. Drummond's method of interpretation that must at least be mentioned is his discussion of the doctrine of the divine attributes (ii. 23-8), where he shows special skill in bringing Philo's apparently discrepant statements into the unity of a general conception. Aristotle and the Christian Church: An Essay by Brother AZARIAS, of the Brothers of the Christian Schools. London: Kegan Paul, Trench & Co., 1888. Pp. vii., 141. Later on in the present No. some interesting information is given about the Aristotle of Jewish philosophy: this little book discourses of the philosopher's influence on early and medieval Christianity. The author, of undisclosed nationality, writing from London but not exactly as an Englishman would write (were it only in the matter of metaphors), took up his subject, in the first instance, for behoof of the Concord (Mass.) School of Philosophy met in last year's summer session. If he has nothing particularly new to tell, even, as he specially professes, concerning the long struggle from the beginning of the 13th century before the condemned Aristotle obtained full ecclesiastical recognition, he has yet made diligent use of all the available authorities, and does not fail to render to "the English reader" such service as he had in view. Among the factors helping on Aristotle's influence, the work of the Arabs is not overlooked; on the other hand, the mediating work of the Jews gets hardly any acknowledgment. The author's chief shortcoming is in historical perspective, as it is apt to be with writers on the long tale of centuries up to the 15th or thereby: it does not seem to be remembered that each of them included 100 years as much as those that followed, and if not (for a variety of reasons) as many possibilities in the way of human thinking, yet still a great many. When he passes, after his historic sketch, "to show the spirit in which the Schoolmen worked, and to prove that the philosophy evolved by them is as distinct from that of the Lyceum as Saint Peter's is from the Parthenon," the enthusiasm displayed continues to be more evident than the discrimination. The thesis, however, is essentially correct, as he thus goes on to express it in his preface: "Aristotle's influence is there; his terms and his formulæ are employed, but the inner spirit and the guiding principle are far different". The Cardinal-Archbishop of Westminster has read and recommends the essay; nay more, expresses himself thus on the subject of it:-"The supremacy of Aristotle in the intellectual world of nature and that of St. Thomas in the illumination of Faith, are the two great lights of natural and supernatural truth. From the time of St. Edmund, who brought the study of Aristotle from Paris to Oxford, the tradition of study at Oxford rested on Aristotle and Faith. Now it has wandered to the world of rationalism which Aristotle and St. Thomas purified." That is a deliverance standing in considerable need of explication. Solomon Maimon: An Autobiography. Translated from the German, with Additions and Notes by J. CLARK MURRAY, LL.D., F.R.S.C., Professor of Mental and Moral Philosophy, M'Gill College, Montreal. Paisley and London: Alexander Gardner, 1888. Pp. xv., 307. This is an excellent translation of the most curious self-exposure ever made by philosophical thinker. Kuno Fischer, in passing from Kant to Fichte in vol. v. of his Geschichte, first drew full attention (cc. 6, 7, pp. 172-95, in the second edition) to Maimon's strange personal story as well as his exceptional importance among the early critics of the Critical Philosophy, and J. H. Witte followed in 1876 with a special monograph on the wayward Jew and his fitful work. The translating into English of so remarkable a record of human experience as the Lebensgeschichte, not unknown of late years to some in this country for all its rarity, ought not to have been left to the chance of Prof. Clark Murray's finding a copy on the shelves of a second-hand bookseller in a Canadian town; but he has performed the task with such skill and judgment that it is well it was so left. Omission is made of the chapters on Maimonides's Guide of the Perplexed, which certainly do nothing to help forward the narrative, and are now superseded for the English student by the access that Dr. Friedländer has given to the whole of that work; there is also, here and there, some judicious condensation. On the other hand, footnotes are inserted where elucidation of the text was desirable, and a graphic concluding chapter is added, bringing down the story to Maimon's death in 1800 (he was born about 1754), his own confessions having been published in 1792. For the materials of this chapter, as also for his useful footnotes, Prof. Clark Murray draws chiefly upon the volume of Maimoniana issued by S. J. Wolff in 1813. Maimon has a special interest for English thinkers, as Mr. Shadworth Hodgson, on his own part, took occasion to declare some years ago (in the preface to The Philosophy of Reflection): he had come markedly under the influence of Locke, so powerful in Germany throughout the 18th century, before bringing his singular acumen to bear upon Kant's work of new construction in philosophy. The present volume reveals, with absolute unreserve, the extraordinary conditions of life-some of almost incredible squalor-amid which the ablest Jewish intellect since Spinoza got into play in conjunction with a character that could never let promise or purpose come to fit result. 66 T The Philosophy of Kant, as contained in Extracts from his own Writings. Selected and Translated by JOHN WATSON, LL.D., Professor of Moral Philosophy in the University of Queen's College, Kingston, Canada. Glasgow: James Maclehose & Sons, 1888. Pp. x., 356. The author of Kant and his English Critics was led some time ago, by his experience as an academic teacher, to try the method of working students up to the philosophical level with a careful selection of extracts from Kant's writings, instead of turning them loose at first into t jungle itself. It was a happy idea, as everyone with the like experie will be ready to acknowledge. Prof. Watson put his selection print, and it has been used in other American Universities besides own, but has apparently not been seen on this side of the ocean. volume which he now publishes here, and which cannot fail sc recommend itself to all concerned, is practically a new work. gone carefully over the writings of Kant again, selecting and r‹ lating all the passages that seem to be essential to the understa his philosophy". These have been taken from the Critique Reason (pp. 1-222), the Metaphysic of Morality (pp. 225-58), the Critique of Practical Reason (pp. 261-303), the Critique of Judgment (pp. 307-49). A useful Index (pp. 351-6) completes the volume. In executing the work, Prof. Watson has fortified his own scholarship and judgment with those of Prof. E. Caird, who read the whole of the MS. and made " a number of valuable suggestions". The selection seems altogether good and satisfactory, though one may a little regret that nothing is given from the "Methodenlehre" which closes the Critique of Pure Reason. The omission-e.g., in regard to so important a question as that of the function of Definition in Philosophy as compared with mathematical and with other science-is not made up by the " Appendix on Method the end of the Critique of Judgment. Nor might it have been amiss to make cross-references, at various places in the Pure Reason, to the doctrine of the Prolegomena. at ΠΛΑΤΩΝΟΣ ΤΙΜΑΙΟΣ : The Timaeus of Plato. Edited with Introduction and Notes by R. D. ARCHER-HIND, M.A., Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. London: Macmillan & Co., 1888. Pp. vii., 358. This first English edition of perhaps the most difficult of all the Platonic dialogues, and certainly among the first in scientific and philosophical significance, gives parallel with the text an English translation that is intended to relieve the business of elucidation and comment, in detail, as carried on by footnotes; the general bearings of the dialogue are discussed in an Introduction (pp. 1-52). Attention has before been called in MIND xi. 353, on the subject of the Phaedo, to Mr. Archer-Hind's Platonic work. Critical Notice will follow of his second important achievement. Introduction to the Study of Philosophy. By J. H. W. STUCKENBERG, D.D. New York: A. C. Armstrong & Son, 1888. Pp. x., 422. This work by the author of The Life of Immanuel Kant (MIND vii. 603), who here writes from Berlin though he publishes in New York, deals, |