Skip to main content

Full text of "The history of materialism and criticism of its present importance"

See other formats 


■MMHMMi 


ICtltrnru  itf 


90W 


JIt*  acntcö  Im 

0 


-^ 


: 


' 


O 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2011  with  funding  from 

Boston  Library  Consortium  Member  Libraries 


http://www.archive.org/details/historyofmateriaOOIang 


THE 

ENGLISH   AND   FOREIGN 

PHILOSOPHICAL  LIBRARY. 


VOLUME   I. 


IN  THREE    VOLUMES. 


Vol.  I. 


MATERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 
THE  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 
THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

Vol.  II. 

THE  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY. 
MODERN  PHILOSOPHY. 

Vol.  III. 

THE  NATURAL  SCIENCES. 

MAN  AND  THE  SOUL. 
MORALITY  AND  RELIGION. 


HISTORY  OF  MATERIALISM 


CRITICISM  OF  ITS  PRESENT 
IMPORTANCE. 


CORRIGENDA. 

Page  137,  ist  line  of  2d  paragraph,  for  "  logic,"  read  "  basis." 
,,     138,  line  10,  for  "  indeed,"  read  "  involved." 
,,     139,  line  2,  for  " all,"  read  "none." 
,,     261,  line  17,  for  "or,-"  read  "as." 


VOL.   I. 


BOSTON: 
JAMES    R.    OSGOOD    AND    COMPANY, 

{Late  Ticknor  <£  Fields,  and  Fields,  Osgood,  &  Go. ) 
1877. 


npz 


-3 

l 


TO   MY  FATHER 

(HJjfs  JEransIatt0Ti 
is 

AFFECTION  A  TEL  Y  DEDICA  TED. 


E.  C.   T. 


TRANSLATOR'S  PREFACE. 


The  "  History  of  Materialism  "  was  hailed,  upon  its  original 
publication  in  Germany,  as  a  work  likely  to  excite  con- 
siderable interest.  In  this  country,  Professor  Huxley 
suggested,  in  the  "  Lay  Sermons,  Lectures,  and  Addresses  " 
(published  in  1870),  that  a  translation  of  the  book  would 
be  "a  great  service  to  philosophy  in  England."  Soon 
afterwards  there  was  published  a  second — thoroughly  re- 
modelled and  re-written — edition  of  the  work.  And  then, 
in  the  autumn  of  1874,  attention  was  again  specially 
directed  to  it  by  Professor  TyndaLTs  acknowledgment  of 
his  indebtedness  "  to  the  spirit  and  to  the  letter "  of  the 
work  in  his  memorable  address  as  President  of  the  British 
Association  at  Belfast. 

It  was  shortly  after  this  that,  seeing  with  regret  that 
the  book  had  so  long  awaited  a  translator,  I  ventured  to 
apply  to  the  author  for  his  authority  to  undertake  the 
task.  The  causes  that  have  delayed  its  completion,  since 
they  are  personal  to  myself,  it  would  be  an  impertinence 
to  trouble  the  reader  with.  The  only  one  that  is  not  so, 
is  to  be  deplored  on  other  grounds  besides  that  of  mere 
delay.  The  lamented  death  of  the  author,  in  November 
1875,  deprived  me  of  the  hoped-for  opportunity  of  sub- 
mitting my  rendering  to  his  friendly  criticism. 

The  impatience  expressed  in  many  quarters  has  decided 
us  to  defer  publication  no  longer;    and  accordingly  the 


viii  TR  A  NSLA  TOR'S  PRE  FA  CE. 

reader  lias  now  before  him  the  first  instalment,  to  be 
speedily  followed  by  two  other  volumes,  which  will  com- 
plete the  work.  The  division  into  three  volumes  instead 
of  two — which  in  some  respects  might  have  been  prefer- 
able— has  been  dictated  by  practical  considerations. 

The  difficulties  attending  the  translation  of  a  philoso- 
phical German  work  into  English  are  notorious/  It  would 
be  absurd  to  suppose  that  I  have  always  succeeded  in 
meeting  or  eluding  these  difficulties;  but  I  have  endea- 
voured everywhere  to  translate  as  literally  as  was  consis- 
tent with  English  idiom. 

It  may  serve  also  to  explain  possible  obscurities  to 
remember  that  the  book  is  written  with  continual  refer- 
ence to  the  problems  and  questions  under  discussion  in 
Germany,  and  to  the  forms  of  speculation  current  there. 
It  has  been  treated,  indeed,  by  Von  Hartmann  as  a  polemic, 
'eine  durch  geschichtliche  Studien  angeschwollene  Ten- 
denzschrift.'1 And  as  an  assertion  of  the  Materialistic 
standpoint  against  the  philosophy  of  mere  'Notions' 
('  intuitionless  conceptions/  in  Coleridge's  phrase),  and  of 
the  Kantian  or  Neo-Kantian  standpoint  against  both,  no 
doubt  it  is  a  polemic ;  but  it  is,  at  the  same  time,  raised 
far  above  the  level  of  ordinary  controversial  writing  by  its 
thoroughness,  its  comprehensiveness,  and  its  impartiality. 

E.  C.  T. 

2  South  Square,  Gray's  Ink. 


1  See  Eduard  von  Hartmann  :  Neukantianismus,  Schopenhauerianismus 
und  Hegelianismus  in  ihrer  Stellung  zu  den  philosophischen  Aufgaben  der 
Gegenwart.     Berlin,  1877. 


FREDERICK  ALBERT  LANGE 
BIOGRAPHICAL  NOTES. 


Frederick  Albert  Lakge  was  born  at  Wald  near  Solingen, 
in  the  district  of  Düsseldorf,  on  the  28th  of  September 
1828.  He  was  the  son  of  the  well-known  Bible  Com- 
mentator, Dr.  J.  P.  Lange,  now  Professor  in  Bonn,  who 
has  also  shown  himself  possessed  of  special  capacities  by 
rising  from  the  position  of  a  carter  and  labourer  to  be  one 
of  the  leading  Evangelical  theologians  of  Europe. 

The  boy's  early  life  was  spent  in  Duisburg ;  but  at  the 
age  of  twelve,  his  father  having  received  a  call  as  Professor 
to  Zürich,  Switzerland  became  his  second  •  Eatherland,' 
and  until  the  last  he  retained  a  strong  love  for  the  Be- 
public  and  a  keen  interest  in  its  politics.  Already  in  his 
earlier  years  this  interest  must  have  been  excited,  for  in 
that  stirring  period  political  passions  extended  even  to  the 
boys  at  school. 

In  1848,  having  already  attended  the  University  of 
Zürich  for  two  sessions,  he  followed  the  German  custom 
of  migrating  from  university  to  university,  and  went  to 
Bonn  to  attend  lectures  on  philology.  His  journey  had  to 
be  made  through  a  country  shaken  by  the  storms  of  that 
revolutionary  period ;  and  he  wore  for  his  protection  while 
travelling  a  cockade  of  black  gold  and  red.  This  he,  with 
the  patriot  Arndt,  was  one  of  the  last  in  Bonn  to  lay  aside. 
All  the  struggles  and  activities  of  the  time  he  followed 
with  interest  and  enthusiasm.  In  a  letter  written  in  May 
1 849,  he  asks,  "  Should  it  not  be  clear  to  every  reason- 
able man  that  civilised  Europe  must  enter  into  one  great 


x  BIOGRAPHICAL  NOTES. 

political  community  ? "  Unfortunately,  twenty- eight  years 
have  done  little  to  bring  us  nearer  to  this  ideal.  Another 
of  his  aspirations,  expressed  somewhat  later,  was  destined 
to  be  realised.  Germania  was  to  wake  up,  like  the  hero- 
maiden  in  Schiller's  poem,  and  cry,  "  Give  me  my  helm ! " 

Having  taken  his  degree  of  Doctor,  he  became  an 
assistant-master  in  the  '  Gymnasium,'  or  grammar-school, 
at  Cologne ;  and  in  the  following  year  he  married. 

But  in  1855  he  returned  to  Bonn  as  '  Privat-docent '  of 
philosophy,  lecturing  on  the  History  and  Theory  of  Edu- 
cation, on  the  Schools  of  the  Sixteenth  Century,  on 
Psychology,  on  Moral  Statistics,  and  finally,  in  the  summer 
of  1857,  upon  the  History  of  Materialism.  At  the  same 
time  he  was  studying  natural  science,  attending  the  lectures 
of  Helmholtz  upon  physiology,  and  profiting  by  intimate 
intercourse  with  Frederick  Ueberweg,  the  author  of  the 
well-known  "  System  of  Logic,"  and  the  "  History  of 
Philosophy." 

In  1858,  however,  he  was  fain  to  take  a  mastership 
once  more,  this  time  at  the  Gymnasium  at  Duisburg ;  and 
there  he  continued  until  political  considerations  caused 
him  to  resign  in  1861.  He  had  now  devoted  himself  to 
social  and  economic  questions  and  to  political  agitation ; 
and,  amongst  numerous  other  offices,  filled  the  position  of 
secretary  to  the  Chamber  of  Commerce  at  Duisburg.  In 
this  post  he  gave  evidence  of  a  genius  for  finance  which 
astonished  and  delighted  the  merchants  and  manufacturers 
of  Duisburg.  He  was  still,  moreover,  steadily  working  at 
his  "  History  of  Materialism,"  and  was  at  the  time  deliver- 
ing privately  courses  of  lectures  on  the  History  of  Modern 
Philosophy.  Prom  1 862  until  1 S66  he  was  one  of  the  editors 
of  the  daily  newspaper  the  "  Rhein-  und  Buhrzeitung," 
and  maintained  the  principles  of  freedom  and  progress 
against  the  onslaught  of  reactionary  government.  His 
occupations  were  still  further  multiplied  by  his  becoming 
a  partner  in  a  publishing  and  printing  business,  in  which 
he  undertook  the  direction  of  the  printing  establishment. 


BIOGRAPHICAL  NOTES.  xi 

He  was  anxious  for  the  spread  of  information  amongst  the 
people.  Among  the  various  works  which  he  published 
at  this  period  were  his  "Arbeiterfrage"  (Labour  Ques- 
tion), 1865,  third  edition  1874;  and  "John  Stuart  Mill's 
Ansichten  über  die  Sociale  Frage  und  die  angebliche 
Umwälzung  der  Socialwissenschaft  durch  Carey,"  1866 
(Mill's  views  on  the  social  question  and  the  asserted 
revolution  worked  in  social  science  by  Carey).  He  founded 
also  a  newspaper  to  represent  the  interests  of  labour  in 
the  Ehenish  and  Westphalian  provinces,  but  the  attempt 
was  continued  for  nine  months  only. 

His  own  position  was  meanwhile  becoming  very  dim- 
cult.  His  bold  and  independent  treatment  of  the  social 
question,  which  was  then  in  the  full  tide  of  the  agitation 
led  by  Ferdinand  Lassalle,  caused  some  coldness  between 
Lange  and  his  political  friends.  At  the  same  time  he  was 
harassed  by  the  press  prosecutions  which  German  Govern- 
ments seem  unable  to  avoid,  and  which  the  German  people 
still  continue  to  endure.  Under  these  circumstances,  he 
accepted  overtures  of  partnership  made  to  him  by  an  old 
schoolfellow,  who  was  proprietor  of  the  well-known  demo- 
cratic newspaper,  the  "  Landbote  "  of  Winterthur,  then,  as 
now,  a  paper  of  great  influence.  To  Winterthur,  accord- 
ingly, he  removed  with  his  wife  and  family  in  November 
1866;  and  he  was  speedily  engaged  to  fill  as  many  muni- 
cipal and  public  offices  as  he  had  already  held  at  Duisburg. 

But  the  love  of  teaching,  which  had  always  been  strong 
within  him,  led  him  to  join  the  University  of  Zürich  as  a 
'  Privat-docent,'  although  he  continued  to  live  in  Winter- 
thur, until,  in  1870,  he  was  called  to  Zürich  as  Professor 
of  Philosophy.  For  two  years  he  worked  zealously  here, 
and  declined  a  call  to  Königsberg.  But  much  as  he  loved 
Switzerland,  yet  Germany  was  his  true  home,  and  a  feel- 
ing of  home-sickness  (as  he  says)  came  over  him  when,  in 
1872,  he  was  again  invited  by  the  Minister  Falk  to  become 
Professor  at  Marburg.  He  accepted  the  invitation,  and 
once  more  removed. 


xii  BIOGRAPHICAL  NOTES. 

His  work  at  Marburg  was  destined  to  be  of  short  dura- 
tion. The  disease  which  ultimately  proved  fatal  had  some 
time  before  declared  itself.  He  had  undergone  a  serious 
operation,  though  with  little  prospect  of  advantage,  at 
Tübingen,  from  which  place  he  wrote  to  his  wife : — 

u  Yesterday,  in  the  Botanical  Garden,  I  read  '  Die 
Künstler '  once  more.  I  could  not  help  applying  a  little 
to  myself  the  splendid  lines  which  have  always  been 
favourites  with  me — 

'  At  peace  with  Fate,  serenely  goes  his  race — 
Here  guides  the  Muse,  and  there  supports  the  Grace ; 
The  stern  Necessity,  to  others  dim 
With  Mght  and  Terror,  wears  no  frown  for  him  : 
Calm  and  serene,  he  fronts  the  threatened  dart, 
Invites  the  gentle  bow,  and  bares  the  fearless  heart.'1 

"  Can  one  express  the  Christian  idea  of  resignation  more 
beautifully  or  philosophically  ?  And  yet  with  such  true 
poetry !  " 

For  two  years,  however,  he  laboured  with  great  energy 
and  eminent  success,  lecturing  before  large  classes  upon 
various  subjects  connected  with  philosophy.  These  em- 
braced logic  and  psychology,  as  a  matter  of  course,  but 
they  were  by  no  means  limited  to  these.  In  one  session, 
for  instance,  he  lectured  on  the  History  of  Modern  Educa- 
tion, on  the  Theory  of  Voting,  and  on  Schiller's  Philoso- 
phical Poems. 

It  has  been  already  mentioned  that  the  "  History  of  Ma- 
terialism" had  originally  formed  the  subject  of  a  course  of 
lectures  at  the  University  of  Bonn.  By  the  side  of  such  a 
list,  indeed,  the  lecture-lists  of  the  professors  at  our  great 
English  universities  look  very  jejune  and  meagre.  And  it 
will  be  long,  perhaps,  before  an  Oxford  professor  lectures 

1  I  have  used  the  translation  of  Lord  Lytton,  Knebsworth  edition  of  his 
"  Translations  from  Schiller,"  p.  220.     The  original  lines  are — 
"  Mit  dem  Geschick  in  hoher  Einigkeit 
Gelassen  hingestützt  auf  Grazien  und  Musen, 
Empfängt  er  das  Geschoss,  das  ihn  bedräut, 
Mit  freundlich  dargebotenem  Busen, 
Vom  sanften  Bogen  der  Notwendigkeit." 


BIOGRAPHICAL  NOTES.  xiii 

upon  any  subject  so  real  as  the  '  Present  Significance  of 
Materialism.'  But  then,  as  we  all  know,  our  English  uni- 
versities are  the  proper  homes  of  dead  languages,  and  not 
of  living  ones;  of  extinct  systems,  and  not  of  living, 
breathing  thought.  At  Oxford,  philosophy  begins  with 
Plato  and  ends  with  Aristotle ;  unless,  perhaps,  as  some 
concession  to  two  thousand  years,  we  throw  in  a  few 
aphorisms  of  Bacon,  or  a  '  strayed  scholastic '  like  Mr.  Mill. 
Meanwhile  his  disease  continued  its  painful  progress; 
but,  undismayed  by  the  approach  of  death,  he  busied  him- 
self, in  addition  to  his  professorial  duties,  with  the  prepara- 
tion of  the  second  edition  of  the  "  History  of  Materialism." 
The  preface  to  the  first  volume  of  this  substantially  new 
work  is  dated  June  1 873 ;  to  the  second,  the  '  end  of  January 
1875/  After  February  of  this  same  year,  1875,  he  was 
unable  to  leave  the  house  again.  Until  three  weeks  before 
his  death,  and  while  his  voice  could  scarcely  rise  above  a 
whisper,  he  continued  to  work  at  his  "  Logical  Studies," 
which  have  since  been  published.  He  died  on  the  21st  of 
November. 

With  him,  in  the  words  of  one  of  his  old  colleagues  at 
Duisburg,  there  went  to  the  grave  "  a  light  of  science,  a 
standard-bearer  of  freedom  and  progress,  and  a  character 
of  spotless  purity." 

Lange's  restless  activity  and  many-sidedness  may  be 
readily  seen  from  the  facts  here  put  together.  The  distin- 
guishing features  of  his  mind  and  character  are  sufficiently 
illustrated  in  his  great  work,  now  presented  to  the  reader. 
But  two  points  that  may  be  specially  mentioned  were,  his 
intense  belief  in  the  '  reality  of  ideals ; '  and  the  way  in 
which  he  connects  the  theories  of  science  with  ethical 
ideas.  His  heart  beat  for  the  lot  of  the  masses,  and  he  felt 
that  the  question  of  labour  would  be  the  great  problem 
of  the  coming  time,  as  it  was  the  question  that  decided 
the  fall  of  the  ancient  world.  The  core  of  this  problem 
he  believed  to  be  '  the  struggle  against  the  struggle  for 
existence,'  which  is  identified  with  man's  spiritual  des- 


xiv  BIOGRAPHICAL  NOTES. 

tiny.  And  so  we  can  understand  the  anxiety  with 
which  he  looked  forward  to  the  great  revolution  which, 
in  common  with  many  thoughtful  men,  he  believed  to 
be  impending  upon  modern  society.  But  all  that  he 
could  do  to  warn  his  fellow-men  of  the  'rocks'  that 
were  '  ahead/  and  of  the  way  in  which  they  might  be 
avoided,  he  did,  not  discouraged  although  he  were  little 
heeded.  In  his  own  words  :  "  Never,  indeed,  will  our  efforts 
be  wholly  in  vain.  The  truth,  though  too  late,  yet  comes 
soon  enough  ;  for  mankind  will  not  die  just  yet.  Fortu- 
nate natures  hit  the  right  moment;  but  never  has  the 
thoughtful  observer  the  right  to  be  silent,  merely  because 
he  knows  that  for  the  present  there  are  but  few  who  listen 
to  him." 


AUTHOR'S  PREFACE  TO  THE  SECOND 
[AND  LATER]  EDITIONS. 


The  changed  form  in  which  the  "History  of  Materialism" 
appears  in  this  second  edition  is  partly  a  necessary  con- 
sequence of  the  original  plan  of  the  book,  but  partly  also 
a  result  of  the  reception  it  has  met  with. 

As  I  incidentally  explained  in  the  first  edition,  my 
intention  was  rather  to  exercise  an  immediate  influence ; 
and  I  should  have  been  quite  content  if  my  book  had,  in 
the  course  of  five  years,  been  again  forgotten.  Instead  of 
this,  however,  and  despite  a  number  of  very  friendly  re- 
views, it  required  almost  five  years  for  it  to  become 
thoroughly  known,  and  it  was  never  in  greater  demand 
than  at  the  moment  when  it  went  out  of  print,  and,  as  I 
felt,  was  already  in  many  parts  out  of  date.  This  was 
especially  so  with  regard  to  the  second  portion  of  the 
work,  which  will  receive  at  least  as  thorough  a  revision 
and  remodelling  as  this  present  volume.  The  Books,  the 
Persons,  and  the  Special  Questions  around  which  turns 
the  strife  of  opinions  are  partially  changed.  In  par- 
ticular, the  rapid  progress  of  the  natural  sciences  required 
an  entire  renewal  of  the  matter  of  some  sections,  even 
although  the  line  of  thought  and  the  results  might  remain 
essentially  unaltered. 

The  first  edition,  indeed,  was  the  fruit  of  the  labours 
of  many  years,  but  it  was  in  point  of  form  almost  extem- 
porised. Many  defects  incident  to  this  mode  of  origin 
have  been  removed ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  some  of  the 


xvi  -A  UTHOR  'S  PRE  FA  CE. 

merits  of  the  first  edition  may  have  at  the  same  time 
disappeared.  I  wished,  on  the  one  hand,  to  do  justice  to 
the  higher  standard  which  its  readers,  contrary  to  my 
original  intention,  have  applied  to  the  book;  while,  on 
the  other,  the  original  character  of  the  work  could  not  be 
wholly  destroyed.  I  am  very  far  then  from  claiming  for 
the  earlier  portion,  in  its  new  form,  the  character  of  a 
normal  historical  monograph.  I  could  not,  and  indeed  I 
did  not,  wish  to  discard  the  predominant  didactic  and 
expository  tone,  that  from  the  outset  labours  for  and  pre- 
pares the  way  for  the  final  results  of  the  Second  Book, 
and  sacrifices  to  this  effort  the  placid  evenness  of  a  purely 
objective  treatment.  But  as  I  everywhere  appealed  to  the 
sources,  and  gave  abundant  vouchers  in  the  notes,  1 1  oped 
in  this  way  to  supply  to  a  great  extent  the  want  of  a  pro- 
per monograph,  without  prejudice  to  the  essential  purpose 
of  the  book.  This  purpose  consists  now,  as  before,  in  the 
exposition  of  principles,  and  I  am  not  over-eager  to  justify 
myself  if  some  slight  objection  is  therefore  made  to  the 
appropriateness  of  my  title.  This  has  now  its  historical 
justification,  at  all  events,  and  may  remain.  ,  The  two 
parts,  however,  form  to  me  now,  as  before,  an  inseparable 
whole ;  but  my  right  expires  as  soon  as  I  lay  down  the 
pen,  and  I  must  be  content  if  all  my  readers,  even  those 
who  can  use  for  their  purposes  only  particular  portions  of 
the  whole,  will  give  due  weight  to  the  consideration  of 
the  difficulty  of  my  task. 

A.  LANGE. 
Makeükg,  June  1873. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


.first  Booft. 

HISTORY   OF    MATERIALISM    UNTIL   KANT. 

First  Section. — Materialism  in  Antiquity. 
CHAPTER  I. 

The  Early  Atomists,  especially  Demokritos         .        Pp.  1-36 

Materialism  one  of  the  earliest  attempts  at  a  philosophical  theory  of 
the  world  ;  conflict  between  philosophy  and  religion,  3.  Evidence  of 
this  conflict  in  Ancient  Greece,  5.  Intercourse  with  the  East ;  com- 
merce; rise  of  philosophy,  8.  Influence  of  mathematics  and  the 
study  of  nature,  9.  The  prevalence  of  deduction,  n.  Strict  carry- 
ing out  of  Materialism  by  Atomism,  13.  Demokritos,  his  life  and 
character,  15.  His  doctrines,  18.  Eternity  of  matter,  19.  Neces- 
sity, 20.  The  atoms  and  void  space,  22.  Formations  of  worlds,  24. 
Qualities  of  things,  and  of  the  atoms,  27.  The  soul,  28.  Ethic,  31. 
Empedokles  and  the  origin  of  adaptations,  32. 

CHAPTER  II. 

The  Sensationalism  op  the  Sophists,  and  Aristippos's  Ethical 
Materialism        .....        Pp.  37-51 

Sensationalism  and  Materialism,  37.  The  Sophists,  especially  Prota- 
goras, 38.  Aristippos,  44.  Eelation  of  theoretical  to  practical 
Materialism,  46.  Dissolution  of  Hellenic  civilisation  under  the  in- 
fluence of  Materialism  and  Sensationalism,  48. 

CHAPTER  III. 

The    Reaction    against    Materialism    and    Sensationalism  : 
Sokrates,  Plato,  Aristotle  .  .        Pp.  52-92 

Undoubted  retrogression  and  doubtful  progress  of  the  Athenian  school 
as  compared  with  Materialism,  52.     The  step  from  the  particular  to 

b 


xviii  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 

the  universal ;  preparation  for  it  by  the  Sophists,  55.  The  causes 
of  progress  by  antitheses,  and  of  the  combination  of  great  advances 
with  reactionary  elements,  57.  State  of  things  in  Athens,  58. 
Sokrates  as  a  religious  reformer,  60.  Contents  and  tendency  of  his 
philosophy,  63.  Plato,  his  intellectual  tendency  and  development, 
71.  His  conception  of  the  universal,  75.  The  'ideas'  and  the 
'  myth '  in  the  service  of  speculation,  77.  Aristotle ;  not  an  Empi- 
ricist, but  a  system-maker,  80.  His  teleology,  83.  His  doctrine  of 
substance ;  name  and  essence,  85.  Method,  88.  Criticism  of  the 
Aristotelian  philosophy,  90. 


CHAPTER  IV. 
Materialism  in  Greece  and   Rome  after  Aristotle  :    Epi- 

KUROS  .....  Pp.  93-I25 

Intermittent  influence  of  Greek  Materialism,  93.  Character  of  post- 
Aristotelian  Materialism  ;  ethical  aim  predominant,  95.  The  '  Ma- 
terialism' of  the  Stoics,  96.  Epikuros,  his  life  and  character,  98. 
His  reverence  of  the  gods,  100.  Deliverance  from  superstition  and  the 
fear  of  death,  101.  Doctrine  of  pleasure,  102.  Physics,  103.  Logic, 
and  the  theory  of  knowledge,  107.  Epikuros  as  author,  in.  Tran- 
sition from  the  reign  of  philosophy  to  the  predominance  of  the  posi- 
tive sciences ;  Alexandria,  112.  Share  of  Materialism  in  the  achieve- 
ments of  Greek  scientific  inquiry,  120. 

CHAPTER  "V. 
The  Didactic  Poem  of  Lucretius  upon  Nature  Pp.  126-158 

Home  and  Materialism,  126.  Lucretius;  his  character  and  tendency, 
129.  Contents  of  the  First  Book  ;  religion  as  source  of  all  evil,  132. 
Nothing  can  come  from  nothing,  and  nothing  can  be  annihilated, 
133-  Void  space  and  atoms,  134.  Praise  of  Empedokles  ;  the  in- 
finity of  the  universe,  136.  Idea  of  gravity,  137.  Adaptations  as 
persistent  case  among  all  possible  combinations,  138.  Contents  of 
the  Second  Book  ;  the  atoms  and  their  motion,  140.  Origin  of  sen- 
sation ;  the  infinite  number  of  originating  and  perishing  worlds,  143. 
Contents  of  the  Third  Book  ;  the  soul,  145.  The  vain  fear  of  death, 
147.  Contents  of  the  Fourth  Book ;  the  special  anthropology,  149. 
Contents  of  the  Fifth  Book ;  cosmogony,  149.  The  method  of  pos- 
sibilities in  the  explanation  of  nature,  150.  Development  of  man- 
kind ;  origin  of  speech,  of  the  arts,  of  political  communities,  152. 
Religion,  155.  Contents  of  the  Sixth  Book;  meteoric  phenomena ; 
diseases ;  Averniau  spots,  155.  Explanation  of  magnetic  attraction, 
T-S7- 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS.  xix 

Second  Section. — The  Period  of  Transition. 
CHAPTER  I. 

The  Monotheistic  Religions   in  their  Relation  to  Mater- 
ialism     ......      Pp.  161-186 

Decay  of  the  ancient  civilisation,  161.  Influence  of  slavery ;  of  the  mix- 
ture of  religions  ;  of  half -culture,  164.  Infidelity  and  superstition  ; 
Materialism  of  life  ;  luxuriance  of  vice  and  of  religions,  165.  Chris- 
tianity, 169.  Common  features  of  the  Monotheistic  religions,  172. 
The  Mosaic  doctrine  of  creation,  174.  Purely  spiritual  conception  of 
God,  175.  Strong  opposition  of  Christianity  to  Materialism,  176. 
More  favourable  attitude  of  Mohammedanism ;  Averroism  ;  services 
of  the  Arabians  to  natural  science  ;  Freethinking  and  toleration,  277. 
Influence  of  Monotheism  on  the  aesthetic  appreciation  of  nature,  184. 

CHAPTER  II. 

Scholasticism,  and  the  Predominance  op  the   Aristotelian 
Notions  oe  Matter  and  Form  .  .        Pp.  187-214 

The  Aristotelian  confusion  of  name  and  thing  as  basis  of  the  Scholastic 
philosophy,  187.  The  Platonic  conception  of  genus  and  species,  190. 
Fundamental  ideas  of  the  Aristotelian  metaphysic,  192.  Criticism 
of  Aristotle's  notion  of  Potentiality,  194.  Criticism  of  the  notion  of 
Substance,  198.  Matter,  200.  Modern  modifications  of  this  notion, 
201.  Influence  of  the  Aristotelian  notions  on  the  doctrine  of  the 
soul,  202.  The  question  of  Universals  ;  Nominalists  and  Eealists, 
207.  Influence  of  Averroism ;  of  the  Byzantine  logic,  210.  Nomi- 
nalism as  forerunner  of  Empiricism,  213. 

CHAPTER  III. 

The  Return  of  Materialistic  Theories  with  the  Regenera- 
tion op  the  Sciences  ....        Pp.  215-249 

Scholasticism  as  a  bond  of  union  in  the  civilisation  of  Europe,  215.  The 
Renascence  movement  ends  with  the  reform  of  philosophy,  216.  The 
doctrine  of  twofold  truth,  218.  Averroism  in  Padua,  219.  Petrus 
Pomponatius,  220.  Nicolaus  de  Autricuria,  225.  Laurentius  Valla, 
226.  Melanchthon  and  various  psychologists  of  the  Reformation 
period,  227.  Copernicus,  229.  Giordano  Bruno,  232.  Bacon  of 
Verulam,  236.  Descartes,  241.  The  soul  with  Bacon  and  Descartes, 
244.  Influence  of  animal  psychology,  245.  Descartes'  system,  and 
his  real  opinions,  246. 


xx  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 

Third  Section.— Seventeenth  Century  Materialism. 

CHAPTER  I. 

Gassendi      .  ■  .  .  .  .        Pp.  253-269 

Gassendi  as  restorer  of  Epikureanism,  253.  Choice  of  this  system  with 
reference  to  the  needs  of  the  time,  especially  in  respect  of  scientific 
inquiry,  254.  Compromise  with  theology,  257.  Gassendi's  youth ; 
the  '  Exercitationes  Paradoxicae,'  258.  His  character,  259.  Polemic 
against  Descartes,  260.  His  doctrines,  263.  His  death ;  his  import- 
ance for  the  reform  of  physics,  and  the  philosophy  of  nature,  269. 

CHAPTER  II. 

Thomas  Hobbes  of  Malmesbury  .  .        Pp.  270-290 

Hobbes's  development,  270.  Labours  and  experiences  during  his  stay  in 
Prance,  272.  Definition  of  philosophy,  274.  Method;  connection 
with  Descartes,  not  with  Bacon ;  his  recognition  of  great  modern  dis- 
coveries, 276.  Attack  upon  theology,  279.  Hobbes's  political  sys- 
tem, 280.  Definition  of  religion,  283.  Miracles,  284.  Physical 
principles,  285.  Relativity,  287.  Theory  of  sensation,  288.  The 
universe  and  the  corporeality  of  God,  290. 

CHAPTER  III. 

The  Later  Workings  of  Materialism  in  England  Pp.  291-330 
Connection  between  the  Materialism  of  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth 
centuries,  291.  Circumstances  in  England  favouring  the  spread  of 
Materialism,  292.  The  union  of  scientific  Materialism  with  religious 
faith ;  Boyle  and  Newton,  298.  Boyle ;  his  life  and  character,  300. 
His  predilection  for  experiment,  302.  Adheres  to  the  mechanical 
theory  of  the  universe,  303.  Newton's  life  and  character,  306.  Con- 
siderations on  the  true  nature  of  Newton's  discovery ;  he  shared  the 
general  belief  in  a  physical  cause  of  gravity,  308.  The  idea  that  this 
hypothetical  agent  determines  also  the  motion  of  the  heavenly 
bodies  lay  very  near,  and  the  way  was  already  prepared  for  it,  309. 
The  reference  of  the  combined  influence  to  the  individual  particles 
was  a  consequence  of  Atomism,  311.  The  supposition  of  an  impon- 
derable matter,  producing  gravitation  by  its  impulse,  was  already 
prepared  for,  through  Hobbes's  relative  treatment  of  the  notion  of 
atoms,  311.  Newton  declares  most  distinctly  against  the  now  pre- 
vailing notion  of  his  doctrine,  312.  But  he  separates  the  physical 
from  the  mathematical  side  of  the  question,  314.  From  the  triumph 
of  purely  mathematical  achievements  arose  a  new  physics,  315.  In- 
fluence of  the  political  activities  of  the  age  on  the  consequences  of 
the  systems,  317.  John  Locke,  his  life  and  intellectual  development, 
318.  His  "  Essay  concerning  Human  Understanding,"  320.  Other 
writings,  323.  John  Toland,  his  idea  of  a  philosophical  cultus,  324. 
The  treatise  on  "Motion  Essential  to  Matter,"  326. 


JFtrSt  38ook, 


HISTORY    OF    MATERIALISM 
UNTIL    KANT. 


VOL.  I. 


FIRST  SECTION. 

MATERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 


CHAPTEE  I. 

THE  EARLY  ATOMISTS — ESPECIALLY  DEMOKRITOS. 

Materialism  is  as  old  as  philosophy,  but  not  older.  The 
physical  conception  of  nature  which  dominates  the  earliest 
periods  of  the  history  of  thought  remains  ever  entangled 
in  the  contradictions  of  Dualism  and  the  fantasies  of  per- 
sonification. The  first  attempts  to  escape  from  these  con- 
tradictions, to  conceive  the  world  as  a  unity,  and  to  rise 
above  the  vulgar  errors  of  the  senses,  lead  directly  into 
the  sphere  of  philosophy,  and  amongst  these  first  attempts 
Materialism  has  its  place.1 

With  the  beginning,  however,  of  consecutive  thinking 
there  arises  also  a  struggle  against  the  traditional  assump- 
tions of  religion.      Eeligion  has  its  roots  in  the  earliest 

1  My  first  sentence,  which  has  been  rience,  of  sound  common  sense,  and  of 
sometimes  misunderstood,  is  directed,  the  physical  sciences.  It  might,  per- 
on  the  one  hand,  against  the  despisers  haps,  have  been  more  simply  main- 
of  Materialism,  who  find  in  this  view  tained  that  the  first  attempt  at  a 
of  the  universe  an  absolute  eontradic-  philosophy  at  all  amongst  the  Ionic 
tion  of  all  philosophical  thought,  and  physicists  was  Materialism  ;  but  the 
deny  it  the  possession  of  any  scientific  consideration  of  a  long  period  of  de- 
importance  ;  and.  on  the  other  hand,  velopment,  reaching  from  the  first 
against  those  Materialists  who,  in  hesitatingand  imperfect  systems  down 
their  turn,  despise  all  philosophy,  and  to  the  rigidly  consistent  and  calmly 
imagine  that  their  views  are  in  no  reasoned  Materialism  of  Demokritos, 
way  a  product  of  philosophical  specu-  shows  us  that  Materialism  can  only 
lation,  but  are  a  pure  result  of  expe-  be  numbered  "amongst  the  earliest 


4  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ  UITY. 

crudely-inconsistent  notions,  which  are  ever  being  created 
afresh  in  indestructible  strength  by  the  ignorant  masses. 
An  immanent  revelation,  vaguely  felt  rather  than  clearly 
realised,  lends  it  a  deep  content,  while  the  rich  embellish- 
ments of  mythology  and  the  venerable  antiquity  of  tradi- 
tion endear  it  to  the  people.  The  cosmogonies  of  the 
East  and  of  Greek  antiquity  present  us  with  "ideas  that 
are  as  little  spiritual  as  they  are  material.  They  do  not 
try  to  explain  the  world  by  means  of  a  single  principle, 
but  offer  us  anthropomorphic  divinities,  primal  beings  half 
sensuous  half  spiritual,  a  chaotic  reign  of  matter  and 
forces  in  manifold  changeful  struggle  and  activity.  In  the 
presence  of  this  tissue  of  imaginative  ideas  awakening 
thought  calls  for  order  and  unity,  and  hence  every  system 
of  philosophy  entered  upon  an  inevitable  struggle  with 
the  theology  of  its  time,  which  was  conducted,  according 
to  circumstances,  with  more  or  less  open  animosity. 

It  is  a  mistake  to  overlook  the  presence,  and  indeed  the 
momentous  influence,  of  this  struggle  in  Greek  antiquity, 
although  it  is  easy  to  see  the  origin  of  the  mistake.  If  the 
generations  of  a  distant  future  had  to  judge  of  the  whole 


attempts."    Indeed,  unless  we  iden-  between  the  soul-atoms  and  the  warm 

tify  it  with  Hylozoism  and  Panthe-  air  of  Diogenes  of  Apollonia,  despite 

ism,  Materialism  only  becomes  a  com-  all  their  superficial  similarity,  is  of 

plete  system  when  matter  is  conceived  quite  fundamental  importance.     The 

as  purely  material— that  is,  when  its  latter    is    an  absolute    Reason-stuff 

constituent  particles  are  not  a  sort  of  {Vernunftstoff);  it  is  capable  in  itself 

thinking  matter,  but  physical  bodies,  of  sensation,  and  its  movements,  such 

which   are    moved    in    obedience   to  as  they  are,  are  due  to  its  rationality, 

merely  physical  principles,  and  being  Demokritos'  soul-atoms  move,  like  all 

in  themselves  without  sensations,  pro-  other  atoms,  according  to  purely  me- 

duce  sensation  and  thought  by  parti-  chanical  principles,  and  produce  the 

cularformsof  their  combinations.  And  phenomenon  of  thinking  beings  only 

thorough  -  going    Materialism    seems  in  a  special  combination  mechanically 

always   necessarily   to   be    Atomism,  brought  about.      And  so,  again,  the 

since  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  explain  "animated  magnet"  of  Thales  har- 

whatever    happens    out    of    matter  monises  exactly  with  the  expression 

clearly  and  without  any  mixture  of  irävra  irXripv  6eQ>v,  and  yet  is  at  bot- 

eupersensuous    qualities   and  forces,  torn  clearly  to  be  distinguished  from 

unless  we  resolve  matter  into  small  the  way  in  which  the  Atomists  at- 

atoms  and  empty  space  for  them  to  tempt  to  explain  the   attraction  of 

move  in.     The  distinction,  in  fact,  iron  by  the  magnet. 


THE  EARLY  ATO MISTS.  5 

thought  of  our  own  time  solely  from  the  fragments  of  a 
Goethe  and  a  Schelling,  a  Herder  or  a  Lessing,  they  would 
scarcely  observe  the  deep  gulfs,  the  sharp  distinctions  of 
opposite  tendencies  that  mark  our  age.  It  is  character- 
istic of  the  greatest  men  of  every  epoch  that  they  have 
reconciled  within  themselves  the  antagonisms  of  their 
time.  So  is  it  with  Plato  and  Sophokles  in  antiquity ;  and 
the  greatest  man  often  exhibits  in  his  works  the  slightest 
traces  of  the  struggles  which  stirred  the  multitude  in  his 
day,  and  which  he  also,  in  some  shape  or  other,  must  have 
passed  through. 

The  mythology  which  meets  us  in  the  serene  and  easy 
dress  due  to  the  Greek  and  Roman  poets  was  neither  the 
religion  of  the  common  people  nor  that  of  the  scientifically 
educated,  but  a  neutral  territory  on  which  both  parties 
could  meet. 

The  people  had  far  less  belief  in  the  whole  poetically- 
peopled  Olympus  than  in  the  individual  town  or  country 
deities  whose  statues  were  honoured  in  the  temple  with 
special  reverence.  Not  the  lovely  creations  of  famed  artists 
enthralled  the  suppliant  crowd,  but  the  old-fashioned, 
rough-hewn,  yet  honoured  figures  consecrated  by  tradition. 
Amongst  the  Greeks,  moreover,  there  was  an  obstinate  and 
fanatical  orthodoxy,  which  rested  as  well  on  the  interests 
of  a  haughty  priesthood  as  on  the  belief  of  a  crowd  in  need 
of  help  2 

This  might  have  been  wholly  forgotten  if  Sokrates  had 
not  had  to  drink  the  cup  of  poison ;  but  Aristotle  also  fled 

2  In  view  of  the  completely  opposite  variety  of  development  than  the  con- 

account  of  Zeller  (Phil.  d.  Griechen,  stitutions  of  the  individual  cities  and 

i.  S.  44  f f.  3  Aufl. ),  it  may  be  proper  countries.     It  was   natural  that  the 

to  remark,  that  we  may  assent  to  the  thoroughly  local   character  of   their 

proposition,    "The   Greeks   had   no  cultus,  in  conjunction  with  an  increas- 

hierarchy,  and  no  infallible  system  of  ing  friendly  intercourse,  should  lead 

dogmas,"  without  needing  to  modify  to  a  toleration  and  liberality  which 

the  representation  in  the  text.    "  The  was  inconceivable  amongst  highly  cre- 

Greeks,"  we  must  remember,  had  no  dulous   and    at  the   same  time    cen- 

political  unity  in  which  these  could  tralised  peoples.     And  yet,  of  all  the 

have  been  developed.     Their  system  Greek  efforts  towards  unity,  those  of  a 

of  faiths  exhibited  an  even  greater  hierarchic  and  theocratical  tendency 


6  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

from  Athens  that  the  city  might  not  a  second  time  commit 
sacrilege  against  philosophy.  Protagoras  also  had  to  flee, 
and  his  work  upon  the  gods  was  publicly  burnt.  Anaxa- 
goras  was  arrested,  and  obliged  to  flee.     Theodoras,  "  the 


were  perhaps  the  most  important;  and 
we  may  certainly  consider,  for  ex- 
ample, the  position  of  the  priesthood 
of  Delphi  as  no  in  significant  exception 
to  the  rule  that  the  priestly  office  con- 
ferred "  incomparably  more  venera- 
tion than  power."  (Comp.  Curtius, 
Griech.  Gesch.,  i.  p.  451;  Hist,  of  Gr., 
E.  T.,  ii.  12,  in  connection  with  the 
elucidations  of  Gerhard,  Stephani, 
Welcker,  and  others  as  to  the  share 
of  the  theologians  of  Delphi  in  the 
extension  of  Bacchus-worship  and  the 
mysteries.)  If  there  was  in  Greece 
no  priestly  caste,  and  no  exclusive 
priestly  order,  there  were  at  least 
priestly  families,  whose  hereditary 
rights  were  preserved  with  the  most 
inviolable  legitimism,  and  which  be- 
longed, as  a  rule,  to  the  highest  aris- 
tocracy, and  were  able  to  maintain 
their  position  for  centuries.  How 
great  wa3  the  importance  of  the  Eleu- 
sinian  mysteries  at  Athens,  and  how 
closely  were  these  connected  with 
the  families  of  the  Eumolpidee,  the 
Kerykes,  the  Phyllidae,  and  so  on ! 
(Comp.  Hermann,  Gottesd.  Alterth., 
S.  31,  A.  21  ;  Schümann,  Griech.  Al- 
terth., ii.  S.  340,  u.  f.  2  Aufl.)  As  to 
the  political  influence  of  these  fami- 
lies, the  fall  of  Alkibiades  affords  the 
clearest  elucidation,  although  in  trials 
which  bring  into  play  high-church 
and  aristocratic  influences  in  connec- 
tion with  the  religious  fervour  of  the 
masses,  the  individual  threads  of  the 
network  are  apt  to  escape  observation. 
As  to  orthodoxy,  this  must  indeed  not 
be  taken  to  imply  a  scholastic  and 
organised  system  of  doctrines.  Such 
a  system  might  perhaps  have  arisen 
if  the  Theocrasy  of  the  Delphic  theo- 
logians and  of  the  mysteries  had  not 
come  too  late  to  prevent  the  spread 
of  philosophic  rationalism   amongst 


the  aristocratic  and  educated  classes. 
And  so  men  remained  content  with 
the  mystery-worships,  which  allowed 
every  man  on  all  other  points  to  think 
as  he  pleased.  But  all  the  more  in- 
violable remained  the  general  belief 
in  the  sanctity  and  importance  of 
these  particular  gods,  these  forms  of 
worship,  these  particular  sacred  words 
and  usages,  so  that  here  nothing  was 
left  to  the  individual,  and  all  doubt, 
all  attempts  at  unauthorised  changes, 
all  casual  discussion,  remained  forbid- 
den. There  was,  however,  without 
doubt,  even  with  regard  to  the  mythi- 
cal traditions,  a  great  difference  be- 
tween the  freedom  of  the  poets  and 
the  strictness  of  the  local  priestly 
tradition,  which  was  closely  con- 
nected with  the  cultus.  A  people 
which  met  with  different  gods  in 
every  city,  possessed  of  different  at- 
tributes, as  well  as  a  different  genea- 
logy and  mythology,  without  having 
its  belief  in  its  own  sacred  tradi- 
tions shaken  thereby,  must  with 
proportionate  ease  have  permitted 
its  poets  to  deal  at  their  own  pleasure 
with  the  common  mythical  material 
of  the  national  literature  ;  and  yet,  if 
liberties  thus  taken  appeared  in  the 
least  to  contain  a  direct  or  indirect 
attack  upon  the  traditions  of  the  local 
divinities,  the  poet,  no  less  than  the 
philosopher,  ran  into  danger.  The 
series  of  philosophersnamedin  the  text 
as  having  been  persecuted  in  Athens 
alone  might  easily  be  enlarged ;  for 
example,  by  Stilpo  and  Theophrastos 
(Meier  u.  Schümann,  Att.  Prozess,  S. 
303,  u.  f.).  There  might  be  added 
poets  like  Diagorasof  Melos,  on  whose 
head  a  price  was  set ;  Aeschylos,  who 
incurred  the  risk  of  his  life  for  an 
alleged  violation  of  the  mysteries,  and 
was  only  acquitted  by  the  Areopagus 


THE  EARL  Y  A  TO  MISTS, 


atheist,"  and  probably  also  Diogenes  of  Apollonia,  were 
prosecuted  as  deniers  of  the  gods.  And  all  this  happened 
in  humane  and  enlightened  Athens. 

From  the  standpoint  of  the  multitude,  every  philosopher, 
even  the  most  ideal,  might  be  prosecuted  as  a  denier  of 
the  gods ;  for  no  one  of  them  pictured  the  gods  to  himself 
as  the  priestly  tradition  prescribed. 


If  we  cast  a  glance  to  the 

in  consideration  of  his  great  services ; 
Euripides,  who  was  threatened  with 
an  indictment  for  atheism,  and  others. 
How  closely  tolerance  and  intolerance 
bordered  upon  each  other  in  the 
minds  of  the  Athenians  is  best  seen 
in  a  passage  from  the  speech  against 
Andokides  (which,  according  to  Blass, 
Att.  Beredsamkeit,  S.  566  ff.,  is  not 
really  by  Lysias,  although  it  is  a 
genuine  speech  in  those  proceedings). 
There  it  is  urged  that  Diagoras  of 
Melos  had  only  outraged  (as  a  foreign- 
er) the  religion  of  strangers,  but  An- 
dokides had  insulted  that  of  his  own 
city ;  and  we  must,  of  course,  be  more 
angry  with  our  fellow-countrymen 
than  with  strangers,  because  the  lat- 
ter have  not  transgressed  against  their 
own  gods.  This  subjective  excuse 
must  have  issued  in  an  objective  ac- 
quittal, unless  the  sacrilege  was  espe- 
cially directed  against  the  Athenian, 
and  not  against  a  foreign  religion. 
From  the  same  speech  we  see  further, 
that  the  family  of  the  Eumolpidse  was 
authorised,  under  certain  circum- 
stances, to  pass  judgment  against  re- 
ligious offenders  according  to  a  secret 
code  whose  author  was  entirely  un- 
known. (That  this  happened  under 
the  presidency  of  the  King  Archon — 
comp.  Meier  u.  Schömann,  S.  117,  u. 
f. — is  for  our  purpose  unimportant.) 
That  the  thoroughly  conservative 
Aristophanes  could  make  a  jest  of  the 
gods,  and  even  direct  the  bitterest 
mockery  against  the  growing  super- 
stition, rests  upon  entirely  different 
grounds ;  and  that  Epikuros  was  never 
persecuted  is  of  course  explained  sim- 


shores  of  Asia  Minor  in  the 

ply  by  his  decided  participation  in  all 
the  external  religious  ceremonies. 
The  political  tendency  of  many  of 
these  accusations  establishes  rather 
than  disproves  their  foundation  in 
religious  fanaticism.  If  the  reproach 
of  äaißei.a  was  one  of  the  most  effec- 
tual means  of  overthrowing  even 
popular  statesmen,  not  the  letter  of 
the  law  only,  but  the  passionate  reli- 
gious zeal  of  the  masses  must  obvi- 
ously have  existed  ;  and  accordingly 
we  must  regard  as  inadequate  the 
view  of  the  relation  of  church  and 
state  in  Schömann,  Griech.  Alterth., 
i.  S.  117,  3  Aufl.,  as  well  as  many  of 
the  points  in  Zeller's  treatment  of  the 
question  above  referred  to.  And  that 
the  persecutions  were  not  always  in 
connection  with  ceremonies,  but  often 
had  direct  reference  to  doctrine  and 
belief,  appears  to  be  quite  clearly 
proved  by  the  majority  of  the  accusa- 
tions against  the  philosophers.  But 
if  we  reflect  upon  the  by  no  means 
small  number  of  cases  of  which  we 
hear  in  a  single  city  and  in  a  compa- 
ratively short  space  of  time,  and  upon 
the  extreme  peril  which  they  in- 
volved, it  will  scarcely  appear  right  to 
say  that  philosophy  was  attacked  "in 
a  few  only  of  its  representatives."  We 
have  still  rather  seriously  to  inquire, 
as  again  in  the  modern  philosophy 
of  the  seventeenth,  eighteenth  (and 
nineteenth  ?)  centuries,  How  far  the 
influence  of  conscious  or  unconscious 
accommodation  to  popular  beliefs  be- 
neath the  pressure  of  threatening- 
persecution  has  left  its  mark  xxpon  the 
svstems  themselves  ? 


8  MA  TER1ALISM  IN  ANTIQ  UITY. 

centuries  that  immediately  precede  the  brilliant  period 
of  Hellenic  intellectual  life,  the  colonies  of  the  Ionians, 
with  their  numerous  important  cities,  are  distinguished  for 
wealth  and  material  prosperity,  as  well  as  for  artistic  sensi- 
bility and  refinement  of  life.  Trade  and  political  alliances, 
and  the  increasing  eagerness  for  knowledge,  led  the  inhabi- 
tants of  Miletos  and  Ephesos  to  take  long  journeys,  brought 
them  into  manifold  intercourse  with  foreign  feelings  and 
opinions,  and  furthered  the  elevation  of  a  free-thinking 
aristocracy  above  the  standpoint  of  the  narrower  masses. 
A  similar  early  prosperity  was  enjoyed  by  the  Doric  col- 
onies of  Sicily  and  Magna  Graecia.  Under  these  circum- 
stances, we  may  safely  assume  that,  long  before  the  appear- 
ance of  the  philosophers,  a  freer  and  more  enlightened 
conception  of  the  universe  had  spread  amongst  the  higher 
ranks  of  society. 

It  was  in  these  circles  of  men,  wealthy,  distinguished, 
with  a  wide  experience  gained  from  travel,  that  philosophy 
arose.  Thales,  Anaximander,  Herakleitos,  Empedokles  took 
a  prominent  position  amongst  their  fellow-citizens,  and  it 
is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  no  one  thought  of  bringing 
them  to  account  for  their  opinions.  This  ordeal,  it  is  true, 
they  had  to  undergo,  though  much  later ;  for  in  the  last 
century  the  question  of  the  atheism  of  Thales  was  eagerly 
handled  in  special  monographs.3     If  we  compare,  in  this 

3  Comp.  Zeller,  i.  S.  176,  Anm.  2,  reason,"  especially  in  the  Stoical 
3  Aufl.,  and  the  works  quoted  in  sense,  refers  merely  to  an  immanent, 
Marbach,  Gesch.  d.  Phil.,  S.  53,  not  anthropomorphic,  and  therefore 
which,  and  that  by  no  mere  coinci-  also  not  a  personal  God.  Even 
dence,  appeared  at  the  period  of  the  though  the  Stoic  tradition  may  rest 
Materialist  controversy  of  the  last  upon  a  mere  interpretation  of  an  older 
century.  With  regard  to  the  state-  tradition  in  the  sense  of  their  own 
ment  of  Zeller,  who  seems  to  me  to  system,  yet  it  does  not  follow  from 
rate  Thales  too  low,  I  may  observe,  this  that  this  interpretation  (apart 
that  the  passage  in  Cicero,  De  Nat.  from  the  genuineness  of  the  words)  is 
Deorum,  i.  x.  23,  formerly  employed  also  false.  Judging  from  the  con- 
to  prove  the  theism  of  Thales,  with  nection,  the  probably  genuine  expres- 
Cicero's  characteristic  shallowness,  sion  that  all  things  are  full  of  gods 
by  the  expression  "fmgere  ex,"  in-  may  very  likely  be  the  origin  of  the 
dicates  a  Demiurgus  standing  outside  notion — an  expression  which  even 
the  world-stuff,  while  God,  as  "world-  Aristotle  (De  An.,  i.  5,  17)  obviously 


THE  EARLY  A  TO  MIS  TS.  9 

respect,  the  Ionic  philosophers  of  the  sixth  century  with 
the  Athenians  of  the  fifth  and  fourth,  we  shall  at  once  be 
reminded  of  the  contrast  between  the  English  sceptical 
movement  of  the  seventeenth  and  the  French  of  the 
eighteenth  century.  In  the  one  case,  nobody  thought  of 
drawing  the  people  into  the  war  of  opinions  ; 4  in  the  other, 
the  movement  was  a  weapon  with  which  fanaticism  was 
to  be  assaulted. 

Hand  in  hand  with  this  intellectual  movement  proceeded 
among  the  Ionians  the  study  of  mathematics  and  natural 
science.  Thales,  Anaximander,  and  Anaximenes  busied 
themselves  with  special  problems  of  astronomy,  as  well 
as  with  the  explanation  of  the  universe ;  and  Pythagoras 
transplanted  the  taste  for  mathematical  and  physical 
inquiry  to  the  westward  colonies  of  the  Doric  stock.  The 
fact  that,  in  the  eastern  portion  of  the  Greek  world,  where 
the  intercourse  with  Egypt,  Phoenicia,  Persia,  was  most 
active,  the  scientific  movement  began,  speaks  more  de- 
cidedly for  the  influence  of  the  East  upon  Greek  culture 
than  the  fabulous  traditions  of  the  travels  and  studies  of 
Greek  philosophers.5     The  idea  of  an  absolute  originality 

interprets  symbolically ;   so  that  the  consistent    position    of    Anaxagoras. 

doubt  indicated  by  tcrws  refers  (and  So  the  way  in  -which  he  speaks  of  his 

rightly)  to    his    own    interpretation  doubtful  merit,   as   also  the  severe 

only,  which  is,  in  fact,   much  more  censure  of    his  inconsistency,  are  in 

perverse  and  improbable  than  that  of  Aristotle  only  the  continuation  of  the 

the  Stoics.     To  refute  (Zeller,  i.  173)  fanatical  zeal  with  which  the  Platonic 

the  view  of  the  latter  by  Aristotle  Sokrates,  in  the  Phaedo,  c.  46,  handles 

(Met. ,  i.  3)  is  unsafe,  because  Aris-  the  same  point. 

totle  is  undoubtedly  there  bringing         4  Comp.  Buckle,  History  of  Civili- 

out  the  element  in  Anaxagoras  which  zation,  i.  497  sqq. 
was  related  to  his  own  philosophy,         5  Compare  the   lengthy  refutation 

that  is,  the  separation  of  the  world-  of  the  views  as  to  the  rise  of  Greek 

forming  Keason,  as  of  the  cause    of  philosophy  from  Oriental  speculation 

Becoming,    from    the    matter    upon  in  Zeller,  i.  S.  20  ff.,  3  Aufl.,  and  the 

which  it  works.     That  he  is  not  con-  concise  but  very  careful  discussion  of 

tent  with  this  very  element  in  Anax-  the  same  question  in  Ueberweg,  i., 

agoras,  as  is  shown  by  the  very  next  4  Aufl.,  S.  32,  E.  T.  31.    The  criticism 

chapter,  because  the  transcendental  of  Zeller  and  others  has  for  ever  dis- 

principle   appears  only  occasionally,  placed  the  cruder  views  that  the  East 

and  is  not  consistently  carried  out,  taught  philosophy  to  the  Greeks  ;  on 

is  a  necessary   consequence    of    the  the  other  hand,  the  remarks  of  Zeller 

transitional  and  by  no  means  wholly  (S.  23  ff.)  as  to  the  influence  of  the 


io  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ  U1TY. 

of  Hellenic  culture  may  be  justified  if  by  this  we  mean 
originality  of  form,  and  argue  the  hidden  character  of  its 
roots  from  the  perfection  of  the  flower.  It  becomes,  how- 
ever, delusive  if  we  insist  upon  the.  negative  results  of  the 
criticism  of  special  traditions,  and  reject  those  connections 
and  influences  which,  although  the  usual  sources  of  history 
fail  us,  are  obviously  suggested  by  a  view  of  the  circum- 
stances. Political  relations,  and,  above  all,  commerce, 
must  necessarily  have  caused  knowledge,  sentiments,  and 
ideas  to  flow  in  many  ways  from  people  to  people ;  and  if 
Schiller's  saying,  "  Euch  ihr  Götter  gehöret  der  Kaufmann" 
("  To  you,  0  gods,  belongs  the  merchant"),  is  genuinely 
human,  and  therefore  valid  for  all  time,  many  an  intercom- 
munication will  have  been  later  connected  by  mythology 
with  some  famous  names,  whose  true  bearers  have  for  ever 
been  lost  to  memory. 

Certain  it  is  that  the  East,  in  the  sphere  of  astronomy 
and  the  measurement  of  time,  was  ahead  of  the  Greeks. 
The  people  of  the  East,  too,  possessed  mathematical  know- 


common  Indo-Germanic  descent,  and  with  a  great  religious  movement  in 

the  continual  influence  of  neighbour-  the  East."      Conversely,  also,  it    is 

hood,  may  well  gain  an  increased  sig-  quite  possible  that  particular  philo- 

nificance  with  the  progress  of  Oriental  sophical  ideas  may  have  come  from 

studies.     Especially  with  regard  to  the  East  to  Greece,  and  there  have 

philosophy,    we    may    observe    that  been  developed  just  because  suitable 

Zeller — as  a  result  of  his  Hegelian  intellectual  circumstances  had  been 

standpoint  —  obviously  undervalues  prepared  by  the  Greeks'  own  develop- 

its  connection  with  the  general  his-  ment.     The  historians  will  also  have 

tory  of    thought,    and    isolates    too  to    adopt    scientific  theories.       The 

much  the   "speculative"   ideas.     If  crude  opposition  of  originality  and 

our  view  of  the  very  intimate  con-  tradition  can  no  longer  be  employed, 

nection  of  speculation  with  religious  Ideas,  like  organic  germs,  fly  far  and 

rationalism,  and  with  the  beginning  wide,   but  the    right    ground    alone 

of  scientific  thought,  is  at  all  correct,  brings  them  to  perfection,  and  often 

then   the   stimulus  to  this  changed  gives  them  higher  forms.      And  in 

mode  of  thought  may  have  come  from  this  case,  of  course,  the  possibility  of 

the  East,  but  may  in  Gi-eece,  thanks  the  origin  of  Greek  philosophy  with- 

to  the    more  favourable    soil,   have  out  such  stimulus  is  not  excluded, 

matured  more   noble  fruits.      Com-  although,  of  course,  the  question  of 

pare  the  observation  of  Lewes,  Hist,  originality  bears  quite  a  new  aspect, 

of  Phil. ,  i.  p.  3:  "  It  is  a  suggestive  The  true  independence  of  Hellenic 

fact  that  the  dawn  of  scientific  specu-  culture  rests  in  its  perfection,  not  in 

lation  in  Greece  should  be  coincident  its  beginnings. 


THE  EARL  Y  A  TO  MISTS.  1 1 

ledge  and  skill  at  a  time  when  no  one  thought  of  such 
things  as  yet  in  Greece ;  although  it  was  in  this  very  sphere 
of  mathematics  that  the  Greeks  were  destined  to  outrun 
all  the  nations  of  antiquity. 

With  the  freedom  and  boldness  of  the  Hellenic  mind  was 
united  an  innate  ability  to  draw  inferences,  to  enunciate 
clearly  and  sharply  general  propositions,  to  hold  firmly 
and  surely  to  the  premisses  of  an  inquiry,  and  to  arrange 
the  results  clearly  and  luminously ;  in  a  word,  the  gift  of 
scientific  deduction. 

It  has  in  our  days  become  the  fashion,  especially  amongst 
the  English  since  Bacon,  to  depreciate  the  value  of  de- 
duction. Whewell,  in  his  well-known  "History  of  the 
Inductive  Sciences,"  is  constantly  unjust  to  the  Greek 
philosophers,  and  notably  to  the  Aristotelian  school.  He 
discusses  in  a  special  chapter  the  causes  of  what  he  regards 
as  their  failure,  continually  applying  to  them  the  standard 
of  our  own  time  and  of  our  modern  scientific  position. 
We  must,  however,  insist  that  a  great  work  had  to  be  done 
before  the  uncritical  accumulation  of  observations  and 
traditions  could  be  transformed  into  our  fruitful  method 
of  experiment.  A  school  of  vigorous  thinking  was  first  to 
arise,  in  which  men  were  content  to  dispense  with  pre- 
misses for  the  attainment  of  their  proximate  object.  This 
school  was  founded  by  the  Greeks,  and  it  was  they  who 
gave  us,  at  length,  the  most  essential  basis  of  deductive 
processes,  the  elements  of  mathematics  and  the  principles 
of  formal  logic.6     The  apparent  inversion  of  the  natural 

6  Although    the    modern    Aristo-  Notion,  and  frequently,  indeed,  con- 

telians  are  so  far  right  that  the  essen-  tradict  it.     Much,  however,  as  it  may 

tial  feature  of  the  Aristotelian  Logic,  now  be  the  fashion  to  despise  Formal 

from  its  author's  standpoint,  is  not  Logic,  and  to  over-estimate  the  meta- 

the  Formal  Logic,  hut  the  logico-meta-  physical  doctrine  of  the  Notion,  yet 

physical  Theory  of  Knowledge.     At  a  calm  consideration  establishes  be- 

the  same  time  he  has  also  left  us  cer-  yond  question  that  the  fundamental 

tain   elements   of  Formal    Logic,  of  principles  of  Formal  Logic  are  alone 

course  only  collected  and  developed  demonstrated   strictly   as  >the    prin- 

by  him,  which,  as  I  hope  to  show  in  ciples  of  Mathematics,  and  these  only 

a  later  work,  have  a  merely  external  so  far  as  they  are  not  (as  is  the  doctrine 

connection  with  the  principle  of  his  of  the  conclusions  from  modal  judg- 


12  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

order,  in  the  fact  that  mankind  learnt  to  deduce  correctly 
before  they  learnt  to  find  correct  starting-points  from  which 
to  reason,  can  be  seen  to  be  really  natural  only  from  a 
psychological  survey  of  the  whole  history  of  thought. 

Of  course,  speculation  upon  the  universe  and  its  in- 
ter-relations was  not,  like  mathematical  inquiry,  able  to 
reach  results  of  permanent  value :  innumerable  vain  at- 
tempts must  first  shake  the  confidence  with  which  men 
ventured  upon  this  ocean  before  philosophic  criticism 
could  succeed  in  showing  how  what  was  apparently  the 
same  method,  brought  about  in  the  one  case  sure  progress, 
and  in  the  other  mere  blind  beating  about  the  bush.?  And 
yet,  even  in  the  last  few  centuries,  nothing  so  much  con- 
tributed to  lead  philosophy,  which  had  just  broken  off  the 
Scholastic  yoke,  into  new  metaphysical  adventures,  as  the 
intoxication  caused  by  the  astonishing  advances  of  mathe- 
matics in  the  seventeenth  century.  Here  also,  of  course, 
the  error  furthered  again  the  progress  of  culture ;  for  the 
systems  of  Descartes,  Spinoza,  and  Leibniz,  not  only 
brought  with  them  numerous  incitements  to  thought  and 
inquiry,  but  it  was  these  systems  that  first  really  displaced 
the  Scholasticism  already  doomed  by  the  sentence  of  criti- 
cism, and  thereby  made  way  for  a  sounder  conception  of 
the  world. 

In  Greece,  however,  men  succeeded  for  once  in  freeing 
the  vision  from  the  mist  of  wonder,  and  in  transferrins;  their 
study  of  the  world  from  the  dazzling  fable-land  of  religious 
and  poetical  ideas  to  the  sphere  of  reason  and  of  sober 
theory.  This,  however,  could,  in  the  first  place,  only  be 
accomplished  by  means  of  Materialism ;  for  external  things 
lie  nearer  to  the  natural  consciousness  than  the  "Ego," 
and  even  the  Ego,  in  the  ideas  of  primitive  peoples,  is 
connected  rather  with  the  body  than  with  the  shadowy 


merits)  adulterated  and  corrupted  by  Vera.  Einl.,  especially  the  passage  iii. 

the  Aristotelian  Metaphysic.  S.  38,  Hartenstein.     A  full  discussion 

7  Compare  the  formulation  of  the  of  the  questions  of  method  will  be 

same  problem  in  Kant,  Kritik  d.  rein,  found  in  the  Second  Book. 


THE  EARLY  A  TO  MISTS.  13 

Soul,  the  product  of  sleeping  and  of  waking  dreams,  that 
they  supposed  to  inhabit  the  body.8 

The  proposition  admitted  by  Voltaire,  bitter  opponent 
as  he  otherwise  was  of  Materialism,  "  I  am  a  body,  and  I 
think,"  would  have  met  with  the  assent  also  of  the  earlier 
Greek  philosophers.  When  men  began  to  admire  the  de- 
sign in  the  universe  and  its  component  parts,  especially  in 
the  organic  sphere,  it  was  a  late  representative  of  the  Ionic 
natural  philosophy,  Diogenes  of  Apollonia,  who  identified 
the  reason  that  regulated  the  world  with  the  original  sub- 
stance, Air. 

If  this  substance  had  been  conceived  as  sentient,  and 
its  sensations  supposed  to  become  thoughts  by  means  ot 
the  growing  complexity  and  motion  of  the  substance,  a 
vigorous  Materialism  might  have  been  developed  in  this 
direction ;  perhaps  a  more  durable  one  than  that  of  the 
Atomists.  But  the  reason-matter  of  Diogenes  is  omni- 
scient ;  and  so  the  last  puzzle  of  the  world  of  appearances 
is  again  at  the  outset  hopelessly  confused.9 

The  Atomists  broke  through  the  circle  of  this  petitio 
principii  in  fixing  the  essence  of  matter.  Amongst  all  the 
properties  of  things,  they  assigned  to  matter  only  the 
simplest,  and  those  indispensable  for  the  presentation  of 
something  in  time  and  space,  and  endeavoured  from  these 
alone  to  develop  the  whole  aggregate  of  phenomena.     In 

8  Comp,  the  article  "  Seelenlehre "  tellectual  life  of  man  from  a  series 
in  the  Encyc.  des  Ges.  Erziehungs-  of  sentient  conditions  in  his  corpo- 
und  Unterrichtswesens,  Bd.  viii.  real  atoms,  we  strike  upon  the  same 
S.  594.  rock  as  the  Atomism  of  Demokritos, 

9  Comp.  Note  1.  Details  as  to  when  he  builds  tip,  e.g.,  a  sound  or  a 
Diogenes  of  Apollonia  in  Zeller,  i.  colour  from  the  mere  grouping  of 
218  ff.  The  possibility  here  sug-  atoms  in  themselves  neither  lumin- 
gested  of  an  equally  consequent  Ma-  ous  nor  sounding  ;  while,  if  we  trans- 
terialism  without  Atomism  will  be  fer  again  the  whole  contents  of  human 
considered  in  the  Second  Book,  when  consciousness,  as  an  internal  condi- 
we  discuss  the  views  of  Ueberweg.  tion,  to  a  single  atom — a  theory  which 
Now  we  will  only  observe  that  a  recurs  in  modern  philosophy  in  the 
third  possibility,  which  also  was  most  various  modifications,  though  it 
never  developed  in  antiquity,  lies  in  was  so  far  from  the  mind  of  the  an- 
the  theory  of  sentient  atoms ;  but  cients— then  Materialism  is  trans- 
here,  as  soon  as  we  build  up  the  in-  formed  into  a  mechanical  Idealism. 


14  MA  TERIAL1SM  IN  ANTIQ  UITY. 

this  respect  the  Eleatics,  it  may  be,  had  prepared  the  way 
for  them,  that  they  distinguished  the  persistent  matter 
that  is  known  in  thought  alone  as  the  only  real  existence 
from  the  deceitful  change  of  sense-appearances ;  and  the 
referring  of  all  sense  qualities  to  the  manner  of  combina- 
tion of  the  atoms  may  have  been  prepared  for  by  the 
Pythagoreans,  who  recognised  the  essence  of  things  in 
number,  that  is,  originally  in  the  numerically  fixed  rela- 
tions of  form  in  bodies.  At  all  events,  the  Atomists  sup- 
plied the  first  perfectly  clear  conception  of  what  is  to  be 
understood  by  matter,  or  the  substratum  of  all  phenomena. 
"With  the  introduction  of  this  notion,  Materialism  stood 
complete  as  the  first  perfectly  clear  and  consequent  theory 
of  all  phenomena. 

This  step  was  as  bold  and  courageous  as  it  was  metho- 
dically correct ;  for  so  long  as  men  started  at  all  from  the 
external  objects  of  the  phenomenal  world,  this  was  the 
only  way  of  explaining  the  enigmatical  from  the  plain, 
the  complex  from  the  simple,  and  the  unknown  from  the 
known;  and  even  the  insufficiency  of  every  mechanical 
theory  of  the  world  could  appear  only  in  this  way,  because 
this  was  the  only  way  in  which  a  thorough  explanation 
could  be  reached  afc  all. 

With  few  great  men  of  antiquity  can  history  have  dealt 
so  despitefully  as  with  Demokritos.  In  the  distorted 
picture  of  unscientific  tradition,  almost  nothing  appears  of 
him  except  the  name  of  the  "  laughing  philosopher,"  while 
figures  of  incomparably  less  importance  extend  themselves 
at  full  length.  So  much  the  more  must  we  admire  the 
tact  with  which  Bacon,  ordinarily  no  great  hero  in  his- 
torical learning,  chose  exactly  Demokritos  out  of  all  the 
philosophers  of  antiquity,  and  awarded  him  the  premium 
for  true  investigation,  whilst  he  considers  Aristotle,  the 
philosophical  idol  of  the  Middle  Ages,  only  as  the  originator 
of  an  injurious  appearance  of  knowledge,  falsely  so  called, 
and  of  an  empty  philosophy  of  words.  Bacon  may  have 
been  unfair  to  Aristotle,  because  he  was  lacking  in  that 


THE  EARLY  A  TO  MISTS.  1 3 

historical  sense  which,  even  amidst  gross  errors,  recognises 
the  inevitable  transition  to  a  deeper  comprehension  of  the 
truth.  In  Demokritos  he  found  a  kindred  spirit,  and  judged 
him,  across  the  chasm  of  two  thousand  years,  much  as  a 
man  of  his  own  age.  In  fact,  shortly  after  Bacon,  and  in 
the  very  shape  which  Epikuros  had  given  it,  Atomism 
became  the  foundation  of  modern  natural  science. 

Demokritos  was  a  citizen  of  the  Ionian  colony  of  Ab- 
dera  on  the  Thracian  coast.  The  "  Abderites  "  had  not  as 
yet  earned  the  reputation  of  "  Gothamites,"  which  they 
enjoyed  in  the  later  classical  times.  The  prosperous 
commercial  city  was  wealthy  and  cultivated :  Demokritos' 
father  was  a  man  of  unusual  wealth ;  there  is  scarcely  room 
to  doubt  that  the  highly-gifted  son  enjoyed  an  excellent 
education,  even  if  there  is  no  historical  foundation  for  the 
story  that  he  was  brought  up  by  Persian  Magi.10 


10  It  must  not  be  supposed  from 
this  that  I  concur  entirely  in  a  kind 
of  criticism  employed  with  regard  to 
this  tradition  by  Mullach,  Zeller,  and 
others.  It  is  not  right  to  reject  im- 
mediately the  whole  story  of  the  stay 
of  Xerxes  in  Abdera,  merely  because 
of  the  ridiculous  exaggeration  of 
Valerius  Maximus.  and  the  inac- 
curacy of  a  passage  in  Diogenes.  We 
know  from  Herodotus  that  Xerxes 
made  a  halt  in  Abdera,  and  was  very 
much  pleased  with  his  stay  there 
(viii."  120 ;  probably  the  passage  which 
Diogenes  had  in  his  mind).  That  upon 
this  occasion  the  king  and  his  court 
would  quarter  themselves  upon  the 
richest  citizens  of  the  place  is  a 
matter  of  course ;  and  that  Xerxes 
had  his  most  learned  Magi  in  his 
train  is  again  historical.  But  we  are 
so  far  from  being  justified,  therefore, 
in  supposing  even  an  early  stimulat- 
ing influence  to  have  been  exercised 
by  these  Persians  upon  the  mind  of 
an  inquisitive  boy,  that  we  might 
rather  argue  the  contrary,  since  the 
great  internal  probability  might  only 
the  more  easily  enable  the  germ  of 


these  stories  to  develop  itself,  from 
mere  conjectures  and  combinations, 
into  a  factitious  tradition,  while  the 
late  appearance  of  the  story,  in  un- 
trustworthy authors,  makes  its  exter- 
nal evidence  very  slight.  As  to  the 
associated  question  of  the  age  of 
Demokritos,  in  spite  of  all  the  acute- 
ness  spent  in  its  treatment  (comp. 
Frei,  Qusestiones  Protagoreae,  Bonnse, 
1845,  Zeller,  i.  S.  684  sqq.,  Anm.  2, 
and  783  sqq.,  Anm.  2),  a  successful 
answer  in  defence  of  the  view  of  K.  P. 
Hermann,  which  we  followed  in  the 
ist  edition,  is  by  no  means  rendered 
impossible.  Internal  evidence  (comp. 
Lewes,  Hist.  Phil.,  i.  97)  declares, 
however,  rather  for  placing  Demo- 
kritos later.  The  view,  indeed,  of 
Aristotle,  who  makes  Demokritos  the 
originator  of  the  Definitions,  con- 
tinued by  Sokrates  and  his  contem- 
poraries (comp.  Zeller,  i.  S.  686 
Anm. ),  must  not  be  too  hastily  ad- 
opted, since  Demokritos,  at  all  events, 
only  began  to  develop  his  doctrines 
when  he  had  reached  mature  age. 
If,  then,  we  place  this  work  of  So- 
krates at  the  height  of  his  intercourse 


i6  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ  UITY. 

Demokritos  appears  to  have  spent  his  whole  patrimony 
in  the  "  grand  tour"  which  his  zeal  for  knowledge  induced 
him  to  make.  Eeturning  in  poverty,  he  was  supported  by 
his  brother,  but  soon,  by  his  successful  predictions  in  the 
sphere  of  natural  philosophy,  he  gained  the  reputation  of 
being  a  wise  and  heaven-inspired  man.  Finally,  he  wrote 
his  great  work,  the  "  Diakosmos," — the  public  reading  of 
which  was  rewarded  by  his  native  city  with  a  gift  of  one 
hundred,  according  to  others,  five  hundred  talents,  and  with 
the  erection  of  commemorative  columns. 

The  year  of  Demokritos'  death  is  uncertain,  but  there  is 
a  general  admission  that  he  reached  a  very  advanced  age, 
and  died  cheerfully  and  painlessly. 

A  great  number  of  sayings  and  anecdotes  are  connected 
with  his  name,  though  the  greater  portion  of  them  have  no 
particular  import  for  the  character  of  the  man  to  whom 
they  relate.  Especially  is  this  so  of  those  which  sharply 
contrast  him  as  the  "  laughing  "  with  Herakleitos  as  the 
"  weeping  "  philosopher,  since  they  see  nothing  in  him  but 
the  merry  jester  over  the  follies  of  the  world,  and  the  holder 
of  a  philosophy  which,  without  losing  itself  in  profundities, 
regards  everything  from  the  good  side.  As  little  pertinent 
are  the  stories  that  represent  him  merely  as  a  Polyhistor,  or 
even  as  the  possessor  of  mystic  and  secret  doctrines.  "What 
in  the  crowd  of  contradictory  reports  as  to  his  person  is 
most  certain  is,  that  his  whole  life  was  devoted  to  scien- 
tific investigations,  which  were  as  serious  and  logical  as 
they  were  extensive.  The  collector  of  the  scattered  frag- 
ments which  are  all  that  remain  to  us  of  his  numerous 
works,  regards  him  as  occupying  the  first  place  for  genius 
and  knowledge  amongst  all  the  philosophers  before  his 
birth,  and  goes  so  far  as  to  conjecture  that  the  Stagirite 
has  largely  to  thank  a  study  of  the  works  of  Demokritos 
for  the  fulness  of  knowledge  which  we  admire  in  him.11 

with  the  Sophists,  about  425,  Demo-  n  Mullach,  Fragm.  Phil.  Graec,  Par. 

kritos  could,  at  all  events,  be  as  old  1869,  p.  338:  "Fuit  il'le  quarnquam 

as  Sokrates,  but,  of  course,  not  have  in  caeteris  dissimilis,  in  hoc  sequabili 

been  born  aa  late  as  460.  omnium    artium    studio    simillinius 


THE  EARL  Y  A  TO  MIS  TS.  1 7 

It  is  significant  that  a  man  of  such  extensive  attain- 
ments has  said  that  "  we  should  strive  not  after  fulness  of 
knowledge,  but  fulness  of  understanding ;"  12  and  where  he 
speaks,  with  pardonable  complacence,  of  his  achievements, 
he  dwells  not  upon  the  number  and  variety  of  his  writings, 
but  he  boasts  of  his  personal  observation,  of  his  inter- 
course with  other  learned  men,  and  of  his  mathematical 
method.  "Among  all  my  contemporaries,"  he  says,  "I 
have  travelled  over  the  largest  portion  of  the  earth  in  search 
of  things  the  most  remote,  and  have  seen  the  most  climates 
and  countries,  heard  the  largest  number  of  thinkers,  and 
no  one  has  excelled  me  in  geometric  construction  and 
demonstration — not  even  the  geometers  of  the  Egyptians, 
with  whom  I  spent  in  all  five  years  as  a  guest."  13 

Amongst  the  circumstances  which  have  caused  Demo- 
kritos  to  fall  into  oblivion,  ought  not  to  be  left  unmen- 
tioned  his  want  of  ambition  and  distaste  for  dialectic 
discussion.  He  is  said  to  have  been  in  Athens  without 
making  himself  known  to  one  of  its  philosophers.  Amongst 
his  moral  aphorisms  we  find  the  following :  "  He  who  is 
fond  of  contradiction  and  makes  many  words  is  incapable 
of  learning  anything  that  is  right." 

Such  a  disposition  suited  little  with  the  city  of  the 
Sophists,  and  certainly  not  with  the  acquaintance  of  a 
Sokrates  or  a  Plato,  whose  whole  philosophy  was  developed 
in  dialectic  word-play.     Demokritos  founded  no  school. 

His  words  were,  it  appears,  more  eagerly  copied  from 
than  copied  out;  and  his  whole  philosophy  was  finally 
absorbed  by  Epikuros.    Aristotle  mentions  him  frequently 

Aristotelis.     Atque  haud  scio  an  Sta-  mark  that  it  shows    "that  Demo- 

girites  illam  qua  reliquos  philosophos  kritos  in  this  respect  had  little  to 

superat  eruditionem  aliqua  ex  parte  learn  from  foreigners, "goes  much  too 

Democriti    librorum    lectioni    debu-  far.     It  is  not  even  certain  from  De- 

erit."  mokritos's  observation  that  he  was 

12  Zeller,  i.  S.  746,  Mullach,  Fr.  superior  to  the  "  Harpedonaptae  " 
Phil.,  p.  349,  Fr.  140-142.  on  his  arrivalin  Egypt;  but  even  if 

13  Fragm.  Varii  Arg.  6,  in  Mullach,  he  were,  he  might,  it  is  obvious,  still 
Fragm.  Phil.,  pp.  370  sqq.  ;   comp,  learn  much  from  them. 

Zeller,  i.  688,  Anm.,  where  the  re- 

VOL.  I.  B 


i8  MA TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

with  respect ;  but  lie  cites  him,  for  the  most  part,  only  when 
he  attacks  him,  and  this  he  by  no  means  always  does  with 
a  fitting  objectivity  and  fairness.14  How  often  he  has  bor- 
rowed from  him  without  naming  him  we  do  not  know. 
Plato  speaks  of  him  nowhere,  though  it  is  a  matter  of  dis- 
pute whether,  in  some  places,  he  has  not  controverted  his 
opinions  without  mention  of  his  name.  Hence  arose,  it 
may  be,  the  story  that  Plato  in  fanatical  zeal  would  have 
liked  to  buy  up  and  burn  all  the  works  of  Demokritos.1^ 

In  modern  times  Eitter,  in  his  "  History  of  Philosophy," 
emptied  much  anti-materialistic  rancour  upon  Demo- 
kritos's  memory;  and  we  may  therefore  rejoice  the  more 
at  the  quiet  recognition  of  Brandis  and  the  brilliant  and 
convincing  defence  of  Zeller;  for  Demokritos  must,  in 
truth,  amongst  the  great  thinkers  of  antiquity,  be  num- 
bered with  the  very  greatest. 

As  to  the  doctrines  of  Demokritos,  we  are,  indeed,  better 
informed  than  we  are  as  to  the  views  of  many  a  philoso- 
pher whose  writings  have  come  to  us  in  greater  fulness. 
This  may  be  ascribed  to  the  clearness  and  cons  cutiveness 
of  his  theory  of  the  world,  which  permits  us  to  add  with  the 
greatest  ease  the  smallest  fragment  to  the  whole.  Its  core 
is  Atomism,  which,  though  not  of  course  invented  by  him, 
through  him  certainly  first  reached  its  full  development. 
We  shall  prove  in  the  course  of  our  history  of  Materialism 
that  the  modern  atomic  theory  has  been  gradually  devel- 
oped from  the  Atomism  of  Demokritos.  We  may  consider 
the  following  propositions  as  the  essential  foundations  of 
Demokritos's  metaphysic. 

14  Comp.,  e.g.,  the  way  in  which  nomenon   as    such.      See   Zeller,   i. 

Aristotle,  De  Aninia,  i.  3,  attempts  to  742  u.  f . 

render  ridiculous  the  doctrine  of  De-  15  However  incredible  such  fanati- 
mokritos  as  to  the  movement  of  the  cism  may  appear  to  us,  it  is  quite  con- 
body  by  the  soul ;  further,  the  inter-  sonant  with  the  character  of  Plato  ; 
polation  of  chance  as  a  cause  of  move-  and  as  Diogenes'  authority  for  this 
ment,  which  is  gently  censured  by  statement  is  no  less  a  person  than 
Zeller,  i.  710,  711,  with  Anm.  1,  and  Aristoxenos,  it  may  be  that  we  have 
the  statement  that  Demokritos  had  here  something  more  than  a  "  story." 
attributed  truth  to  the  sensible  phe-  Cf.Ueberweg,  i. 4  Aufl.,  S.  73, E.  T.  68. 


THE  EARL  Y  A  TO  MISTS.  19 

I.  Out  of  nothing  arises  nothing ;  nothing  that  is  can  he 
destroyed.  All  change  is  only  combination  and  separa- 
tion of  atoms.1® 

This  proposition,  which  contains  in  principle  the  two 
great  doctrines  of  modern  physics — the  theory  of  the 
indestructibility  of  matter,  and  that  of  the  persistence  of 
force  (the  conservation  of  energy) — appears  essentially  in 
Kant  as  the  first  "  analogy  of  experience  : "  "  In  all 
changes  of  phenomena  matter  is  permanent,  and  the  quan- 
tity thereof  in  nature  is  neither  increased  nor  diminished." 
Kant  finds  that  in  all  times,  not  merely  the  philosopher, 
but  even  common  sense,  has  presupposed  the  permanence 
of  matter.  The  doctrine  claims  an  axiomatic  validity  as 
a  necessary  presupposition  of  any  regulated  experience  at 
all,  and  yet  it  has  its  history !  In  reality,  to  the  natural 
man,  in  whom  fancy  still  overrides  logical  thought,  nothing 
is  more  familiar  than  the  idea  of  origin  and  disappearance, 
and  the  creation  "  out  of  nothing  "  in  the  Christian  dogma 
is  scarcely  ever  the  first  stumbling-block  for  awakening 
scepticism. 

With  philosophy  the  axiom  of  the  indestructibility  of 
matter  comes,  of  course,  to  the  front,  although  at  first  it 
may  be  a  little  veiled.  The  "boundless"  (aireipov)  01 
Anaximander,  from  which  everything  proceeds,  the  divine 
primitive  fire  of  Herakleitos,  into  which  the  changing 
world  returns,  to  proceed  from  it  anew,  are  incarnations 
of  persistent  matter.  Parmenides  of  Elea  was  the  first 
to  deny  all  becoming  and  perishing.  The  really  existent 
is  to  the  Eleatics  the  only  "All,"  a  perfectly  rounded 
sphere,  in  which  there  is  no  change  nor  motion ;  all  altera- 
tion is  only  phenomenal.  But  here  arose  a  contradiction 
between  appearance  and  being,  in  face  of  which  philosophy 
could  not  be  maintained.  The  one-sided  maintenance  of 
the  one  axiom  injured  another:  "Nothing  is  without 
cause."  How,  then,  from  such  unchanging  existence 
could  the  phenomenal   arise  ?     To  this  was   added  the 

16  See  the  proofs  in  Zeller,  i.  691,  Anm.  2. 


so  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ  UITY. 

absurd  denial  of  motion,  which,  of  course,  led  to  innumer- 
able logomachies,  and  so  furthered  the  development  of 
Dialectic.  Empedokles  and  Anaxagoras  drop  this  absur- 
dity, inasmuch  as  they  refer  all  becoming  and  perishing 
to  combination  and  separation.  Only  first  by  means  of 
Atomism  was  this  thought  fully  represented,  and  made 
the  corner-stone  of  a  strictly  mechanical  theory  of  the 
universe ;  and  it  was  further  necessary  to  bring  into  con- 
nection the  axiom  of  the  necessity  of  everything  that 
happens. 

II.  "  Nothing  happens  by  chance,  but  everything  through  a 
cause  and  of  necessity "17 

This  proposition,  already,  according  to  a  doubtful  tradi- 
tion, held  by  Leukippos,  must  be  regarded  as  a  decided 
negation  of  all  teleology,  for  the  "cause"  (X070?)  is 
nothing  but  the  mathematico-mechanical  law  followed 
by  the  atoms  in  their  motion  through  an  unconditional 
necessity.  Hence  Aristotle  complains  repeatedly  that 
Demokritos,  leaving  aside  teleological  causes,  had  ex- 
plained everything  by  a  necessity  of  nature.  This  is 
exactly  what  Bacon  praises  most  strongly  in  his  book  on 
the  "Advancement  of  Learning,"  in  which,  in  other  re- 
spects, he  prudently  manages  to  restrain  his  dislike  of  the 
Aristotelian  system  (lib.  iii.  c.  4). 

This  genuinely  materialistic  denial  of  final  causes  had 
thus,  we  see,  led,  in  the  case  of  Demokritos,  to  the  same 
misunderstandings  that,  in  our  own  day,  Materialism  finds 
almost  everywhere  predominant — to  the  reproach  that  he 
believed  in  a  blind  chance.  Although  no  confusion  is  more 
common,  nothing  can  be  more  completely  opposite  than 
chance  and  necessity  ;  and  the  explanation  lies  in  this,  that 
the  notion  of  necessity  is  entirely  definite  and  absolute, 
while  that  of  chance  is  relative  and  fluctuating. 

When  a  tile  falls  upon  a  man's  head  while  he  is  walking 

17  Fragm.  Phys.,  41,  Mullach,  p.  aXXd  irdvTa  £k  \6yov  re  /cat  vir  dv- 
365 :    <!  ovdev    XPVP-a    fxdrt]v    ylvcrai     dytcqs.'' 


THE  EARLY  ATO MISTS.  21 

down  the  street,  this  is  regarded  as  an  accident ;  and  yet 
no  one  doubts  that  the  direction  of  the  wind,  the  law  of 
gravitation,  and  other  natural  circumstances,  fully  deter- 
mined the  event,  so  that  it  followed  from  a  physical  neces- 
sity, and  also  from  a  physical  necessity  must,  in  fact,  strike 
any  head  that  at  the  particular  moment  happened  to  be  on 
the  particular  spot. 

This  example  clearly  shows  that  the  assumption  of 
chance  is  only  a  partial  denial  of  final  cause.  The  falling 
of  the  stone,  in  our  view,  could  have  had  no  reasonable 
cause  if  we  call  it  an  accident. 

If,  however,  we  assume,  with  the  philosophy  of  the  Chris- 
tian religion,  an  absolute  predestination,  we  have  as  com- 
pletely excluded  chance  as  by  the  assumption  of  absolute 
causality.  In  this  point  the  two  most  consequent  theories 
entirely  coincide,  and  both  leave  to  the  notion  of  chance 
only  an  arbitrary  use,  practically  no  use  whatever.  We 
call  accidental  anything  the  cause  or  object  of  which  we 
do  not  know,  merely  for  the  sake  of  brevity,  and  therefore 
quite  unphilosophically ;  or  we  start  from  a  one-sided 
standpoint,  and  maintain,  in  the  face  of  the  teleologist,  the 
accidental  theory  of  events,  in  order  to  get  rid  of  final 
causes,  while  we  again  have  recourse  to  this  same  theory 
of  chance  so  soon  as  we  have  to  deal  with  the  principle  of 
sufficient  reason. 

And  rightly,  so  far  as  physical  investigation  or  any  strict 
science  is  concerned ;  for  it  is  only  from  the  side  of  efficient 
causes  that  the  phenomenal  world  is  accessible  to  inquiry, 
and  all  infusion  of  final  causes,  which  are  by  way  of  sup- 
plement placed  above  or  beside  the  nature  forces  subject 
to  necessity — that  is,  those  operating  with  the  utmost 
regularity  of  ascertained  laws — has  no  significance  what- 
ever, except  as  a  partial  negation  of  science,  an  arbitrary 
exclusion  of  a  sphere  not  yet  subjected  to  thorough  inves- 
tigation. 18 

18  Of  course,  this  is  also  true  of  the     to  set  aside  the  fundamental  principle 
most  recent  and  the  boldest  attempt     of  all  scientific  thought— the  'Plnlo- 


22  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ  UITY. 

An  absolute  teleology,  however,  Bacon  was  willing  to 
admit,  although,  his  conception  of  it  was  not  sufficiently 
clear.  This  notion  of  a  design  in  the  totality  of  nature, 
which  in  detail  only  gradually  becomes  intelligible  to  us 
by  means  of  efficient  causes,  does  not  refer,  of  course,  to  any 
absolutely  human  design,  and  therefore  not  to  a  design  in- 
telligible to  man  in  its  details.  And  yet  religions  need  an 
absolutely  anthropomorphic  design.  This  is,  however,  as 
great  an  antithesis  to  natural  science  as  poetry  is  to  his- 
torical truth,  and  can,  therefore,  like  poetry,  only  maintain 
its  position  in  an  ideal  view  of  things. 

Hence  the  necessity  of  a  rigorous  elimination  of  final 
causes  before  any  science  at  all  can  develop  itself.  If 
we  ask,  however,  whether  this  was  the  impelling  motive 
for  Demokritos  when  he  made  an  absolute  necessity  the 
foundation  of  all  study  of  nature,  we  cannot  here  enter 
upon  all  the  questions  thus  suggested :  only  of  this  there 
can  be  no  doubt,  that  the  chief  point  was  this,  viz.,  a  clear 
recognition  of  the  postulate  of  the  necessity  of  all  things 
as  a  condition  of  any  rational  knowledge  of  nature.  The 
origin  of  this  view  is,  however,  to  be  sought  only  in  the 
study  of  mathematics,  the  influence  of  which  in  this  direc- 
tion has  in  later  times  also  been  very  decided.19 

III.  Nothing  exists  hut  atoms  and  empty  space  :  all  else 
is  only  opinion. 

Here  we  have  in  the  same  proposition  at  once  the 
strong  and  the  weak  side  of  all  Atomism.  The  founda- 
tion of  every  rational  explanation  of  nature,  of  every  great 
discovery  of  modern  times,  has  been  the  reduction  of 
phenomena  into  the  motion  of  the  smallest  particles ;  and 
undoubtedly  even  in  classical  ages  the  most  important 
results  might  have  been  attained  in  this  direction,  if  the 
reaction  that  took  its  rise  in  Athens  against  the  devo- 
tion of  philosophers  to  physical  science  had  not  so  dis- 

sopliy  of  the  Unconscious!'  We  shall     Book  of  returning  to  this  late  fruit 
have  an  opportunity  in  the  Second     of  our  speculative  Romanticism. 
19  Fragm.  Phys.,  i,  Mullach,  p.  357. 


THE  EARLY  ATO MISTS.  23 

tinctly  gained  the  upper  hand.  On  the  Atomic  theory  we 
explain  to-day  the  laws  of  sound,  of  light,  of  heat,  of 
chemical  and  physical  changes  in  things  in  the  widest 
sense,  and  yet  Atomism  is  as  little  able  to-day  as  in  the 
time  of  Demokritos  to  explain  even  the  simplest  sensa- 
tion of  sound,  light,  heat,  taste,  and  so  on.  In  all  the 
advances  of  science,  in  all  the  presentations  of  the  notion 
of  atoms,  this  chasm  has  remained  unnarrowed,  and  it 
will  be  none  the  less  when  we  are  able  to  lay  down  a 
complete  theory  of  the  functions  of  the  brain,  and  to 
show  clearly  the  mechanical  motions,  with  their  origin  and 
then  results,  which  correspond  to  sensation,  or,  in  other 
words,  which  effect  sensation.  Science  does  not  despair,  by 
the  means  of  this  powerful  weapon,  of  success  in  deriving 
even  the  most  complicated  processes  and  most  significant 
motives  of  a  living  man,  according  to  the  laws  of  the  per- 
sistence of  force,  from  the  impulses  that  are  set  free  in 
his  brain  under  the  influence  of  the  nervous  stimuli ;  but 
she  is  for  ever  precluded  from  finding  a  bridge  between 
what  the  simplest  sound  is  as  the  sensation  of  a  subject — 
mine,  for  instance — and  the  processes  of  disintegration  in 
the  brain  which  science  must  assume  in  order  to  explain 
this  particular  sensation  of  sound  as  a  fact  in  the  objective 
world. 

In  the  manner  in  which  Demokritos  cut  this  Gordian 
knot  we  may  perhaps  trace  the  influence  of  the  Eleatic 
School.  They  explained  motion  and  change  in  general  as 
mere  phenomena,  and,  in  fact,  non-existent  phenomena. 
Demokritos  limited  this  destructive  criticism  to  sense 
qualities.  "  Only  in  opinion  consists  sweetness,  bitterness, 
warmth,  cold,  colour ;  in  truth,  there  is  nothing  but  the 
atoms  and  empty  space."  20 

Since  to  him,  therefore,  the  Immediately  Given — sensa- 
tion— had  something  deceptive  about  it,  it  is  easily  intelli- 
gible that  he  complained  that  the  truth  lies  deep  hidden, 

20  Mullach,  357  :  "  vo/Aip  y\vKu  Kal  pbv,  vofjup  XP01V'  ^T£V  ^  &TOfxa  Kai 
pößcp  iriKpbv,  vbp.<£  Sepfxbv,  vop.cp  ipvx-     Kevov." 


MATERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 


and  that  lie  can  yield  more  weight  to  reflection  with  regard 
to  knowledge  than  to  immediate  perception.  His  reflection 
dealt  with  notions  that  kept  close  to  the  perceptions  of 
sense,  and  were  for  that  very  reason  suited  to  explain 
nature.  From  the  one-sidedness  of  those  whose  hypo- 
theses are  mere  deductions  from  notions  Demokritos  was 
saved  by  this,  that  he  constantly  tested  his  theory  of  the 
atomic  movements  by  picturing  it  to  himself  in  the  forms 
of  sense. 

IV.  The  atoms  are  infinite  in  number,  and  of  endless  variety 
of  form.  In  the  eternal  fall  through  infinite  space, 
the  greater,  which  fall  more  quickly,  strike  against 
the  lesser,  and  lateral  movements  and  vortices  that 
thus  arise  are  the  commencement  of  the  formation  of 
worlds.  Innumerable  worlds  are  formed  and  perish 
successively  and  simultaneously .21 

The  magnitude  of  this  conception  has  often  in  antiquity 


21  The  main  features  of  Atomism 
we  must,  in  defect  of  authentic  frag- 
ments, take  in  the  main  from  Aristotle 
and  Lucretius ;  and  we  may  remark, 
that  even  in  these  accounts,  far  re- 
moved as  they  are  from  the  ridiculous 
disfigurements  and  misunderstandings 
of  a  Cicero,  yet  the  mathematical 
clearness  of  the  premisses  and  the 
connection  of  the  individual  parts  has 
probahly  suffered.  We  are,  there- 
fore, justified  in  completing  the  defec- 
tive tradition,  though  always  in  the 
sense  of  that  mathematico-physical 
theory  on  which  Bemokritos's  whole 
system  hangs.  So  the  procedure  of 
Zeller,  e.g.,  is  undoubtedly  quite 
right  when  treating  the  relation  of 
size  and  weight  of  the  atoms  (i.  698- 
702) ;  on  the  other  hand,  there  is  even 
here,  in  the  doctrine  of  motion,  still 
a  remnant  left  of  the  want  of  clear- 
ness so  persistent  in  all  later  accounts. 
Zeller  observes  (p.  714),  that  the  idea 
that  in  infinite  space  there  is  no  above 
and  below,  appears  not  to  have  forced 
itself  upon  the  Atomists ;  that  what 


Epikuros,  in  Diogenes,  x.  60,  says  on 
this  point  is  too  superficial  and  un- 
scientific to  be  credited  to  Demokri- 
tos.  But  this  judgment  is  too  decided ; 
for  Epikuros  by  no  means  opposes, 
as  Zeller  (iii.  i.  377,  &c.)  supposes,  to 
the  objection  of  there  being  no  above 
and  below  in  infinite  space  ocular  evi- 
dence only ;  but  he  makes  the  quite 
correct,  and  therefore,  it  may  be,  quite 
Demokritean  remark,  that  in  spite  of 
this  relativity  of  "  above"  and  "be- 
low" in  infinite  space,  yet  that  the 
direction  from  head  to  foot  is  a  defi- 
nitely given  notion,  and  that  from 
foot  to  head  may  be  regarded  as  the 
opposed  notion,  however  much  we 
may  suppose  the  line  on  which  these 
dimensions  are  measured  to  be  pro- 
longed. In  this  direction  follow  the 
general  movement  of  the  free  atoms, 
and  clearly  only  in  the  sense  of  the 
movement  from  the  head  to  the  foot 
of  a  man  standing  in  the  line,  and  this 
direction  is  that  from  above  to  below 
— the  directly  opposite  one  that  from 
below  upwards. 


THE  EARLY  A  TO  MISTS.  25 

been  considered  as  something  quite  monstrous,  and  yet  it 
stands  much  nearer  to  our  modern  ideas  than  that  of  Aris- 
totle, who  proved  a  priori  that  besides  his  self-contained 
world  there  could  be  no  second.  When  we  come  to  Epiku- 
ros  and  Lucretius,  where  we  have  fuller  information,  we  shall 
discuss  more  thoroughly  their  cosmical  theory.  Here  we 
will  only  mention  that  we  have  every  reason  to  suppose 
that  many  features  of  the  Epikurean  Atomism,  in  cases 
where  we  are  not  told  the  contrary,  are  due  to  Demokritos. 
Epikuros  made  the  atoms  infinite  in  number,  but  not  infi- 
nitely various  in  form.  More  important  is  his  innovation 
in  reference  to  the  origin  of  the  lateral  motion. 

Here  Demokritos  gives  us  a  thoroughly  logical  view, 
although  one  which  cannot  be  maintained  in  face  of  our 
modern  physics ;  but  yet  it  shows  that  the  Greek  thinker 
carried  out  his  speculations  as  far  as  was  then  possible  in 
subjection  to  strictly  physical  principles.  Starting  from 
the  erroneous  view  that  greater  bodies — the  same  density 
being  assumed — fall  quicker  than  smaller  ones,  he  made 
greater  atoms  in  their  descent  overtake  and  strike  the 
smaller.  But  as  the  atoms  are  of  various  shapes,  and  the 
collision  will  not  take  place  in  the  centre  of  the  atoms, 
then,  even  according  to  the  principles  of  modern  mechani- 
cal science,  revolutions  of  the  atoms  on  their  axes  and 
lateral  motions  will  be  set  up.  When  once  set  up,  these 
lateral  motions  must  ever  become  more  and  more  com- 
plicated, and  as  the  collision  of  constant  new  atoms  with  a 
layer  of  atoms  already  in  lateral  motion  constantly  imparts 
new  forces,  so  we  may  suppose  that  the  motion  will  con- 
tinually increase. 

From  the  lateral  motions  in  connection  with  the  rotation 
of  the  atoms  are  then  easily  produced  cases  of  retrogressive 
movement.  If  now,  in  a  layer  of  atoms  so  involved,  the 
heavier  —  i.e.,  the  larger — atoms  continually  receive  a 
stronger  impetus  downwards,  they  will  finally  be  collected 
below,  while  the  light  ones  will  form  the  upper  stratum. 
The  basis  of  this  whole  theory,  the  doctrine  of  the  quicker 


26  MA  TER1ALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

descent  of  the  greater  atoms,22  was  attacked  by  Aristotle,  and 
it  appears  that  Epikuros  was  thus  induced,  whilst  retaining 
the  rest  of  the  system,  to  introduce  his  fortuitous  devia- 
tions of  the  atoms  from  the  straight  line.  Aristotle,  that 
is,  taught  that  if  there  could  be  void  space,  which  he 
thought  impossible,  then  all  bodies  must  necessarily  fall 
with  equal  speed,  since  the  difference  in  the  rapidity  of 
the  descent  is  determined  by  the  various  densities  of  the 
medium — as,  for  example,  water  and  air.  IsTow  void  space 
not  being  a  medium,  there  is  no  difference  therefore  in  the 
descent  of  different  bodies.  Aristotle  in  this  case  was  at 
one  with  our  modern  science,  as  also  in  his  doctrine  of 
gravitation  towards  the  centre  of  the  universe.  His  de- 
duction, however,  is  only  in  places  rational,  and  is  mixed 
with  subtleties  of  the  same  kind  as  those  by  which  he 
seeks  to  demonstrate  the  impossibility  of  motion  in  empty 
space.  Epikuros  cut  the  matter  short,  and  comes  to  this 
simple  conclusion:  because  in  empty  space  there  is  no 
resistance,  all  bodies  must  fall  equally  fast — apparently  in 
entire  agreement  with  modern  physics;  but  only  appa- 
rently, since  the  true  theory  of  gravitation  of  descent  was 
wholly  wanting  to  the  ancients. 

22  Comp.  Fragm.  Phys.,  2,  Mullach,  impact  of  the  atoms  rushing  in  from 

P-  3585  an<i  the  admirable  remark  of  without    attain    a   rotatory  motion. 

Zeller,  i.  717,  Anm.  t,  on  the  purely  The  stars,  according  to  Demokritos, 

mechanical  nature  of  this  aggregation  are  moved  by  the  rotating  covering 

of  the  homogeneous  atoms.     But  it  of  the  world.     Epikuros,  of  course, 

is  less  certain  whether    the  vortical  who  was,   however,  it  is  certain,  a 

movement  (the  "  Kreis-  oder  Wirbel-  very  weak  mathematician  as  compared 

bewegung,"  Zeller,  p.  715,  and  Anm.  with  Demokritos,  in  spite  of  his  being 

2)  really  played  the  part  in  Demo-  later,  thought  it   also  possible  that 

kritos's  system  attributed  to  it  by  the  sun  may  maintain  its  continual 

later  reporters.     It  seems  much  more  revolution  round  the  earth  in  conse- 

likely  that  he  made  the  vortical  move-  quence  of  the  impulse  once  received 

ment  of  the  mass  of  atoms  of  which  in  the  general  movement  of  the  uni- 

the    world  was  composed   only  de-  verse ;  and  if  we  consider  how  vague 

velop  itself  after  the  atoms,  and  espe-  were  the  pre-Galilean  ideas  as  to  the 

cially  those  of  the  outer  covering  of  nature  of  motion,  we  need  not  be  sur- 

the  universe,  had  formed  a  compact  prised  that  even  Demokritos  should 

body  held  together  by  the  hooks  of  have  made  a  vortical  motion  be  devel- 

che  atoms.     Such  a  body  might  then  oped  out  of  the  rectilinear  impact ; 

very  easily,   partly  by  the  original  but  convincing  proofs  of  this  view  are 

motion  of  its  particles,  partly  by  the  entirely  wanting. 


THE  EARL  Y  A  TO  MISTS.  27 

It  is  not  uninteresting  to  compare  how  Galilei,  as  soon 
as,  after  many  painful  efforts,  he  had  reached  the  true  law 
of  fall,  directly  ventured  a  priori  to  the  conclusion  that  in 
empty  space  all  bodies  will  fall  equally  fast,  a  consider- 
able period  before  this,  by  means  of  the  air-pump,  could 
be  proved  to  be  the  fact.  It  is  a  question  to  be  considered 
how  far  reminiscences  of  Aristotle  or  Lucretius  may  not 
have  assisted  Galilei  to  this  conclusion.2 3 

V.  The  variety  of  all  things  is  a  consequence  of  the  variety  of 
their  atoms  in  number,  size,  figure,  and  arrangement ; 
there  is  no  qualitative  difference  of  atoms.  They  have 
no  "  internal  conditions ; "  and  act  on  each  other  only 
hy  pressure  or  collision.^ 

We  have  already  seen,  in  connection  with  the  third  pro- 
position, that  Demokritos  regarded  the  sense  qualities,  such 
as  colour,  sound,  heat,  and  so  on,  as  mere  deceptive  appear- 
ances, which  is  only  to  say  that  he  entirely  sacrificed  ther 
subjective  side  of  phenomena,  which  is,  nevertheless,  all 
that  is  immediately  given,  in  order  to  be  able  to  carry  out 
a  more  consequent  objective  explanation ;  and  accordingly 
Demokritos  engaged,  in  fact,  in  the  most  exhaustive  inves- 
tigations as  to  what  must  be,  in  the  object,  the  substratum 
of  the  sensible  qualities. 

According,  then,  to  the  difference  in  the  relations  of 
the  atoms  in  a"  schema" — which  may  remind  us  of  the 
"  schemata  "  or  atoms  of  our  chemists — are  determined  our 
subjective  impressions.25 

Aristotle  complains  that  Demokritos  had  reduced  all 

23  Comp.  Whewell,  Hist,  of  the  In-  Noteworthy  is  the  general  principle 
duct.  Sei.,  ii.  34  (ed.  1837).  in  Fr.  24:  "The  schema  is  in  itself 

24  Here  again  the  authentic  proofs  (/ca0  avro),  the  sweetness,  however, 
are  lacking ;  we  have  chiefly  to  rely  and  the  sensible  quality  is  only  in 
upon  reports  of  Aristotle,  which  are  relation  to  another  and  in  another." 
here,  however,  very  full,  and  raise  Here  we  have,  too,  the  source  of  the 
no  suspicion  of  misunderstanding.  Aristotelian  opposition  of  substance 
Fuller  details  in  Zeller,  i.  704  ff.  and  accident,  just  as  Aristotle  found 

25  Here  we  have  tolerably  full  ex-  the  original  of  his  apposition  of 
tracts  in  Theophrastos  ;  comp.  Fragm.  dvva/Ms  and  ivepyeia  in  Demokritos. 
Phys.,   24-39,  Mullach,  p.  362  sqq.  (Fragm.  Phys.,  7,  Mullach,  p.  358). 


28  MA TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

kinds  of  sensation  into  the  one  sensation  of  touch — a 
reproach  which,  in  our  eyes,  will  rather  be  counted  to  his 
praise.  The  gist  of  the  problem  will  lie,  then,  just  in  this 
sense  of  touch. 

We  can,  indeed,  easily  enough  rise  to  the  standpoint 
of  regarding  all  sensations  as  modifications  of  touch, 
although  there  will  still  remain  unsolved  enigmas  enough. 
But  we  cannot  so  naively  dispose  of  the  question  how  the 
simplest  and  most  elementary  of  all  sensations  is  related 
to  the  pressure  or  collision  which  occasions  it.  The  sen- 
sation is  not  in  the  individual  atom,  and  still  less  is  it  an 
aggregate  of  them;  for  how  could  it  be  brought  into  a 
focus  through  void  space  ?  It  is  produced  and  determined 
by  means  of  a  Form  in  which  the  atoms  act  in  mutual 
co-operation.  Materialism  here  borders  closely  on  For- 
malism, as  Aristotle  has  not  forgotten  to  point  out.2<5 
Whilst  he,  however,  made  the  forms  transcendentally 
causes  of  motion,  and  thereby  struck  at  the  root  of 
all  natural  science,  Demokritos  was  careful  not  to 
follow  up  the  formalistic  side  of  his  own  theory,  which 
would  only  lead  him  into  the  depths  of  metaphysic. 
Here  we  first  find  the  need  of  the  Kantian  "Critick  of 
Eeason  "  to  throw  the  first  weak  ray  of  light  into  the  depths 
of  a  mystery  which,  after  all  the  progress  of  our  knowledge 
of  nature,  is  yet  to-day  as  great  as  it  was  in  the  time  of 
Demokritos. 

VI.  The  soul  consists  of  fine,  smooth,  round  atoms,  like 
those  of  fire.  These  atoms  are  the  most  mooile,  and 
by  their  motion,  which  permeates  the  whole  body, 
the  phenomena  of  life  are  produced.^ 

Here  then,  also,  is  the  soul,  as  with  Diogenes  of  Apol- 
lonia,  a  particular  kind  of  matter ;  and  Demokritos  be- 

26  Arist.Phys.  Ausc,  ii.  2,  where  it  [wcpbv  yap  n  /xipos  'EßTredokXTJs  ical 

is  explained  that  nature  is  twofold,  Arj/xoKptTOS  rod  ddovs  ml    tov  tL  fy 

consisting  of  form  and  matter :  the  eivai  ^xhaVTOm 

earlier  philosoi->her  had  regarded  mat-  27  Qf  #  teller  i.  728  ff. 
ter  only,  with  the  limitation  —  iirl 


THE  EARL  Y  A  TO  MISTS.  29 

lieves,  also,  that  this  matter  is  distributed  throughout  the 
universe,  and  everywhere  produces  the  phenomena  of 
heat  and  of  life.  Demokritos  therefore  recognises  a  dis- 
tinction between  soul  and  body,  which  our  modern  Mate- 
rialists would  scarcely  relish ;  and  he  knows  how  to  utilise 
this  distinctionr-,for  his  ethical  system,  just  as  the  Dual- 
ists had  done.  The  soul  is  the  really  essential  part  of 
man ;  the  body  is  only  the  vessel  of  the  soul,  and  this  must 
be  our  principal  care.  The  soul  is  the  seat  of  happiness ; 
bodily  beauty  without  reason  is  in  its  nature  merely  ani- 
mal. To  Demokritos,  indeed,  has  been  ascribed  the  doc- 
trine of  a  divine  world-soul,  only  that  he  means  by  this 
merely  the  universal  diffusion  of  that  mobile  matter  which 
he  could  very  well  describe  figuratively  as  the  divine 
element  in  the  world,  without  attributing  to  it  other  than 
material  properties  and  mechanical  movements. 

Aristotle  ridicules  the  view  of  Demokritos  as  to  the 
manner  in  which  the  soul  influences  the  body  by  making 
a  comparison.  Daedalos  is  said  to  have  made  a  moving 
statue  of  Aphrodite :  this  the  actor  Philippos  explained  had 
been  done  probably  by  pouring  quicksilver  into  the  interior 
of  the  wooden  figure.  In  the  same  way  Aristotle  thinks 
would  Demokritos  have  man  moved  by  the  mobile  atoms 
within  him.  The  comparison  is  clearly  inadequate,28  but 
it  may  nevertheless  serve  to  explain  two  fundamentally 
different  principles  of  regarding  nature.  Aristotle  thinks 
that  not  this,  but  through  choice  and  reflection  the  soul 
moves  man — as  if  this  were  not  clear  to  the  savage  long 
before  the  very  slenderest  beginnings  of  science.  Our 
whole  "  comprehension  "  is  a  referring  of  the  particular  in 
phenomena  to  the  general  laws  of  the  phenomenal  world. 
The  last  step  of  this  endeavour  is  the  including  of  the 

28  See  note  14  above.  To  do  justice  own  words  are — "Nam  quos  hie  no- 
to  Demokritos's  idea  we  need  only  mino  Spiritus  nil  nisi  corpora  sunt,  et 
to  compare  how  Descartes  (De  Pass.,  aliam  nullam  proprietatem  habent 
art.  x.,  xi.)  represents  the  action  of  nisi  quod  sint  corpora  tenuissima  et 
the  material  "  animal  spirits"  in  the  quae  moventur  celerime,  instar  par- 
moving  of   the    body.      [Descartes'  tiumflammaeexfaceexeuntis."— Tß.] 


3o  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ  UITY. 

processes  of  reason  in  this  chain.  Demokritos  took  this 
step :  Aristotle  misconceived  its  meaning. 

The  doctrine  of  mind,  says  Zeller  (i.  735),  has  not  in 
the  case  of  Demokritos  proceeded  from  the  general  neces- 
sity of  a  "  deeper  principle  "  for  the  explanation  of  nature. 
Demokritos  regarded  mind  not  as  "the  world-building 
force,"  but  only  as  one  form  of  matter  amongst  others. 
Even  Empedokles  had  regarded  rationality  as  an  internal 
property  of  the  elements;  Demokritos,  on  the  contrary, 
only  as  a  "  phenomenon  taking  its  origin  from  the  mathe- 
matical constitution  of  certain  atoms  in  their  relation  to 
the  others."  And  this  is  just  Demokritos's  superiority;  for 
every  philosophy  which  seriously  attempts  to  understand 
the  phenomenal  world  must  come  back  to  this  point. 
The  special  case  of  those  processes  we  call  "  intellectual " 
must  be  explained  from  the  universal  laws  of  all  motion, 
or  we  have  no  explanation  at  all.  The  weak  point  of  all 
Materialism  lies  just  in  this,  that  with  this  explanation  it 
stops  short  at  the  very  point  where  the  highest  problems 
of  philosophy  begin.  But  he  who  devises  some  bungling 
explanation  of  nature,  including  the  rational  actions  of 
mankind,  starting  from  mere  conjectural  a  priori  notions 
which  it  is  impossible  for  the  mind  to  picture  intelligibly 
to  itself,  destroys  the  whole  basis  of  science,  no  matter 
whether  he  be  called  Aristotle  or  Hegel. 

Good  old  Kant  would  here  undoubtedly  in  principle 
declare  himself  on  the  side  of  Demokritos  and  against 
Aristotle  and  Zeller.  He  declares  empiricism  as  thor- 
oughly justified,  so  far  as  it  does  not  become  dogmatic, 
but  only  opposes  "  temerity,  and  the  presumption  of  reason 
mistaking  its  true  destiny,"  which  "  talks  largely  of  insight 
and  knowledge  where  insight  and  knowledge  can  really 
do  nothing,"  which  confounds  the  practical  and  theoreti- 
cal interests,  "  in  order,  where  its  convenience  is  interfered 
with,  to  tear  away  the  thread  of  physical  investigations."  29 

29  Kritik  der  Vernunft,  Elementarl.,     further  the   remarkable  note  on  p. 
ii.    2,   2,    2,   Haupst.,    3  Abschnitt,     335. 
Hartenstein,     iii.     334    ff.      Comp. 


THE  EARL  Y  A  TO  MISTS.  3 1 

This  intellectual  presumption  in  the  face  of  experience, 
this  unjustifiable  tearing  of  the  thread  of  physical  inquiries, 
plays  to-day  also  its  part,  as  well  as  in  Hellenic  antiquity. 
We  shall  have  much  to  say  about  it  before  we  have  done. 
It  is  ever  the  point  at  which  a  healthy  philosophy  cannot 
too  sharply  and  energetically  take  Materialism  into  its 
protection. 

With  all  its  elevation  of  the  mind  above  the  body,  the 
ethic  of  Demokritos  is  nevertheless  at  bottom  a  theory  of 
Hedonism,  standing  quite  in  harmony  with  the  material- 
istic cosmology.  Amongst  his  moral  utterances,  which 
have  been  preserved  in  much  greater  number  than  the 
fragments  of  his  physical  philosophy,  we  find,  it  is  true, 
many  of  those  primitive  doctrines  of  wisdom  which 
might  find  their  place  in  the  most  diverse  systems,  which 
Demokritos — together  with  counsels  of  prudence  drawn 
from  his  own  personal  experiences — taught  in  a  too  prac- 
tical and  popular  shape  for  them  to  be  considered  as 
having  formed  distinctive  marks  of  his  system;  but  we 
can,  nevertheless,  unite  the  whole  into  a  consecutive 
series  of  thoughts  resting  upon  a  few  simple  principles. 

Happiness  consists  in  the  cheerful  calmness  of  spirit 
which  man  can  attain  only  by  securing  the  mastery  over 
his  desires.  Temperance  and  purity  of  heart,  united  with 
culture  of  the  emotions  and  development  of  the  intelli- 
gence, supply  every  man  with  the  means,  in  spite  of  all  the 
vicissitudes  of  life,  of  reaching  this  goal.  Sensual  pleasure 
affords  only  a  brief  satisfaction ;  and  he  only  who  does 
good  for  the  sake  of  its  intrinsic  merit,  without  being 
swayed  by  fear  or  hope,  is  sure  of  this  inward  reward. 

Such  an  ethical  system  is  indeed  very  far  removed  from, 
the  Hedonism  of  Epikuros,  or  from  the  system  of  a  refined 
egotism  which  we  find  associated  with  the  Materialism  of 
the  eighteenth  century  •  but  it  is  nevertheless  lacking  in 
the  distinctive  mark  of  all  idealistic  morality,  a  principle 
of  conduct  taken  directly  from  the  consciousness,  and 
asserted  independently  of  experience.     The   distinctions 


32  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

of  good  and  evil,  right  and  wrong,  Demokritos  appears  to 
suppose  to  be  known  without  further  inquiry;  cheerful 
serenity  of  soul  is  the  most  lasting  good,  and  that  it  can 
only  be  attained  by  right  thinking  and  acting  are  results 
of  experience ;  and  the  reason  for  striving  after  this  har- 
monious inward  condition  lies  exclusively  in  the  happi- 
ness of  the  individual. 

Of  all  the  great  principles  underlying  the  Materialism 
of  our  time,  one  only  is  wanting  in  Demokritos ;  and  that 
is  the  abolition  of  all  teleology  by  the  principle  of  the 
development  of  the  purposeful  from  the  unpurposeful. 
We  cannot,  in  fact,  dispense  with  such  a  principle  as  soon 
as  we  seriously  undertake  to  carry  out  one  kind  of  caus- 
ality, that  of  the  mechanical  impact  of  atoms.  It  is  not 
sufficient  to  show  that  it  is  the  finest,  most  mobile,  and 
smoothest  atoms  which  produce  the  phenomena  of  the 
organic  world ;  we  must  also  show  why,  with  the  help  of 
these  atoms,  instead  of  arbitrary,  aimless  objects,  there  are 
produced  the  exquisitely  articulated  bodies  of  plants  and 
animals,  with  all  their  organs  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
individual  and  the  species.  Only  when  we  have  demon- 
strated the  possibility  of  this,  then,  in  the  full  sense  of  the 
word,  can  the  rational  movements  be  understood  as  a 
special  form  of  the  universal  movement. 

Demokritos  extolled  the  adaptation  of  organic  bodies, 
and  especially  of  the  human  frame,  with  the  admiration 
of  a  reflective  observer  of  nature.  We  find  in  him  no 
trace  of  that  false  teleology,  which  may  be  described  as  the 
hereditary  foe  of  all  science ;  but  we  discover  nowhere  an 
attempt  to  explain  the  origin  of  these  adaptations  from 
the  blind  sway  of  natural  necessity.  Whether  this  means 
that  there  was  a  gap  in  his  system,  or  only  that  there  has 
been  a  gap  in  the  tradition,  we  do  not  know ;  but  we  do 
know  that  this  last  basis  of  all  Materialism,  crudely,  it  is 
true,  but  yet  in  fully  intelligible  clearness,  sprung  from 
the  philosophical  thought  of  the  Greeks.  What  Darwin, 
relying  upon  a  wide   extent  of  positive  knowledge,  has 


THE  EARL  Y  A  TOMISTS.  33 

achieved  for  our  generation,  Empedokles  offered  to  the 
thinkers  of  antiquity — the  simple  and  penetrating  thought, 
that  adaptations  preponderate  in  nature  just  because  it  is 
their  nature  to  perpetuate  themselves,  while  what  fails  of 
adaptation  has  long  since  perished. 

Hellenic  intellectual  life  attained  to  an  active  develop- 
ment in  Sicily  and  Lower  Italy  not  much  later  than  on 
the  coasts  of  Asia  Minor.  Indeed,  c  Masma  Graecia,'  with 
its  proud  and  wealthy  cities,  far  outstripped  the  mother- 
country,  until  at  last  the  rays  of  philosophy  were  again 
concentrated,  as  in  a  focus,  at  Athens.  The  rapid  develop- 
ment of  these  colonies  must  have  been  influenced  by  an 
element  like  that  which  caused  Goethe's  ejaculation — 

"  Amerika  !  du  hast  es  besser, 
Als  unser  Continent,  das  alte, 
Hast  keine  verfallenen  Schlösser 
Und  keine  Basalte." 

The  greater  freedom  from  tradition,  removal  from  antique 
religious  observances,  and  from  the  contact  of  the  priestly 
families  and  their  despotic,  deeply-rooted  authority,  seem 
to  have  especially  favoured  the  transition  from  the  pre- 
judices of  religious  faith  to  scientific  inquiry  and  philo- 
sophical speculation.  The  Pythagorean  brotherhood  was, 
with  all  its  austerity,  still  at  the  same  time  a  religious 
revolution  of  a  tolerably  radical  nature ;  and  amongst  the 
intellectual  chiefs  of  this  confederation  there  arose  the 
most  fruitful  study  of  mathematics  and  natural  science 
which  Greece  had  known  before  the  Alexandrian  epoch. 
Xenophanes,  who  migrated  from  Asia  Minor  to  Lower 
Italy,  and  there  founded  the  school  of  Elea,  is  an  eager 
Eationalist.  He  attacks  the  mythological  representation 
of  the  gods,  and  substitutes  a  philosophical  conception. 

Empedokles  of  Agrigentum  cannot  be  described  as  a 
Materialist,  because  with  him  force  and  matter  are  still  fun- 
damentally separated.  He  was  probably  the  first  Greek 
who  divided  matter  into  the  four  elements,  which,  by  means 
of  Aristotle,  secured  so  long  a  tenure  of  life,  that  even 

vol.  1.  g 


34  MA  TER1ALISM  IN  ANTIQ  UITY. 

in  the  science  of  to-day  we  constantly  come  upon  their 
traces.  Besides  these  elements,  Empedokles  supposed  that 
there  were  two  ultimate  forces — Love  aud  Hate — which, 
in  the  formation  and  dissolution  of  the  world,  performed 
the  functions  of  attraction  and  repulsion.  Had  Empedokles 
made  these  forces  properties  of  the  elements,  we  might 
quietly  rank  him  as  a  Materialist ;  for  not  only  did  the  pic- 
turesque language  of  his  poems  draw  its  illustrations  from 
the  feelings  of  the  human  heart,  but  he  set  the  whole 
Olympos  and  the  lower  world  in  motion  in  order  to  give 
life  to  his  conceptions,  and  to  find  occupation  for  the 
imagination  as  well  as  for  the  reason.  But  his  forces  are 
independent  of  matter.  Tor  immeasurable  periods  now 
the  one  preponderates,  now  the  other.  If  love  has  attained 
a  complete  predominance,  then  all  matter,  collected  into  a 
great  sphere,  enjoys  a  blessed  peace.  If  hate  has  reached 
the  height  of  power,  everything  is  thrown  into  confusion 
and  dislocation.  In  each  case  no  individual  tilings  exist. 
All  terrestrial  life  is  in  connection  with  the  circumstances 
of  transition,  which  lead  from  the  unity  of  the  world- 
sphere,  through  the  growing  power  of  hatred,  to  absolute 
dissolution,  or  the  contrary  way,  through  the  increasing 
power  of  love.  This  latter  way  is  that  of  our  world-epoch, 
in  which  we  gather  from  the  fundamental  principles  of  the 
system  we  must  clearly  have  an  enormous  extent  of  time 
behind  us.  The  special  features  of  his  cosmogony  interests 
us  here  only  so  far  as  it  deals  with  the  development  of 
organisms,  since  here  we  are  met  by  that  principle  which, 
in  the  hands  of  Epikuros  and  Lucretius,  has  subsequently 
exercised  so  great  an  influence. 

The  principles  of  fhate'  and  'love'  do  not  operate 
according  to  a  plan,  or,  at  least,  have  no  other  plan  than 
that  of  universal  separation  and  reunion.  Organisms  arise 
through  the  fortuitous  play  of  the  elements  and  elementary 
forces.  First  were  formed  plants,  und  then  animals.  The 
animal  organs  were  first  developed  by  nature  individually ; 
eyes  without  faces,  arms  without  bodies,  and  so  on.    Then 


THE  EARL  Y  A  TO  MISTS.  35 

there  resulted,  in  the  progress  of  the  combining  tendency, 
a  confused  play  of  "bodies,  now  united  in  one  way,  and 
now  in  another.  Nature  tried  all  possible  combinations 
simultaneously,  until  there  resulted  a  creature  capable  of 
life,  and  finally  of  propagation.  As  soon  as  this  is  pro- 
duced it  perpetuates  itself,  whilst  the  previous  products 
had  perished  as  they  were  produced. 

Ueberweg  remarks  as  to  this  doctrine  (Hist,  of  Phil.,  E.  T. 
i.  62,  n.),  that  it  may  be  compared  with  the  physical  philo- 
sophy of  Schelling  and  Oken,  and  the  theory  of  descent 
proposed  by  Lamarck  and  Darwin ;  yet  that  these  find 
the  explanation  of  progress  rather  in  the  successive  differ- 
entiation of  simpler  forms,  while  the  Empedoklean  doc- 
trine seeks  it  rather  in  the  union  of  heterogeneous  forms. 
The  observation  is  very  just ;  and  we  might  add,  that  the 
later  theory  of  descent  is  supported  by  the  facts,  while 
the  doctrine  of  Empedokles,  considered  from  our  present 
scientific  standpoint,  is  absurd  and  fantastic.  It  is  worth 
while,  however,  to  point  out  what  links  the  two  doctrines 
in  the  most  distinct  and  united  opposition  to  the  views  of 
Schelling  and  Oken,  and  that  is  the  purely  mechanical 
attainment  of  adaptations  through  the  infinitely  repeated 
play  of  production  and  annihilation,  in  which  finally  that 
alone  survives  which  bears  the  guarantee  of  persistence  in 
its  relatively  fortuitous  constitution.  And  if,  in  regard  to 
Empedokles,  criticism  must  still  doubt  whether  he  really 
so  understood  the  matter,  yet  this  much  is  quite  certain, 
that  Epikuros  so  construes  the  Empedoklean  theory,  and 
has  accordingly  fused  it  with  his  Atomism,  and  with  his 
doctrine  of  the  realisation  of  all  possibilities. 

About  the  name  of  Empedokles,  as  about  that  of 
Demokritos,  there  has  gathered  a  mass  of  myth  and  legend, 
much  of  which  is  dne  to  a  mastery  of  natural  forces,  which 
seemed  very  wonderful  to  his  contemporaries.  But  while 
Demokritos  must  have  earned  this  renown,  in  spite  of  the 
most  sober  simplicity  and  openness  in  his  life  and  teach- 
ing, by  merely  practical  achievements,  Empedokles  appears 


36  MA  TER  TALIS M  IN  ANTIQ  UITY. 

to  have  loved  the  nimbus  of  the  wonder-worker,  and  to  have 
utilised  it  for  his  reforming  purposes.  He  also  sought  to 
spread  purer  ideas  of  the  gods,  though  he  did  not  reach 
the  rationalism  of  Xenophanes,  who  discarded  all  anthro- 
pomorphism. Empedokles  believed  in  the  transmigration 
of  souls,  and  forbade  the  offering  of  sacrifices  as  well  as 
the  eating  of  flesh.  His  earnest  demeanour,  his  fiery 
eloquence,  the  fame  of  his  works,  imposed  upon  the 
people,  who  revered  him  as  a  god.  Politically,  he  was  a 
zealous  partisan  of  democracy,  and  contributed  to  its 
victory  in  his  native  city.  Yet  he,  too,  must  have  expe- 
rienced the  fickleness  of  popular  favour :  he  died  in  the 
Peloponnese,  probably  in  exile.  How  his  religious  views 
were  to  be  reconciled  with  his  scientific  theories  we  do 
not  know.  "  How  many  theological  doctrines,"  remarks 
Zeller,  "  have  there  not  been  believed  by  Christian  philo- 
sophers, whose  philosophical  conclusions  would  be  in  com- 
plete antagonism  with  those  doctrines ! " 


(    37    ) 


CHAPTEE  II. 

THE   SENSATIONALISM   OF  THE   SOPHISTS  AND   APJSTIPPOS'S 
ETHICAL  MATERIALISM. 

What  stuff  or  matter  is  in  tlie  outer  world  of  nature, 
sensation  is  in  the  inner  life  of  man.  If  we  believe  that 
consciousness  can  exist  without  sensation,  this  is  due  to  a 
subtle  confusion.  It  is  possible  to  have  a  very  lively  con- 
sciousness, which  busies  itself  with  the  highest  and  most 
important  things,  and  yet  at  the  same  time  to  have  sensa- 
tions of  an  evanescent  sensuous  strength.  But  sensations 
there  always  are ;  and  from  their  relations,  their  harmony 
or  want  of  harmony,  are  formed  the  contents  and  meaning 
of  consciousness;  just  as  the  cathedral  is  built  of  the 
rough  stone,  or  the  significant  drawing  is  composed  of  fine 
material  lines,  or  the  flower  of  organised  matter.  As,  then, 
the  Materialist,  looking  into  external  nature,  follows  out 
the  forms  of  things  from  the  materials  of  which  they  are 
composed,  and  with  them  lays  the  foundations  of  his 
philosophy,  so  the  Sensationalist  refers  the  whole  of  con- 
sciousness back  to  sensations.  Sensationalism  and  Mate- 
rialism, therefore,  agree  at  bottom  in  laying  stress  on 
matter  in  opposition  to  form:  the  question  then  arises, 
how  are  their  mutual  relations  to  be  explained  ? 

Obviously  not  by  a  mere  convention,  which  at  once  sets 
a  man  down  as  a  Sensationalist  in  regard  to  the  internal, 
and  a  Materialist  in  regard  to  the  external  world.  Although 
this  standpoint  is  the  commonest  in  our  inconsequent 
practice,  it  is  anything  but  a  philosophical  one. 

Much  rather  will  the  consequent  Materialist  deny  that 
sensation  exists  independently  of  matter,  and  will  accord- 


33  MATERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

ingly,  even  in  the  facts  of  consciousness,  find  only  effects 
of  ordinary  material  changes,  and  regard  these  in  the  same 
light  as  the  other  material  facts  of  the  external  world : 
the  Sensationalist  will,  on  the  other  hand,  be  obliged  to 
deny  that  we  know  anything  whatever  of  matter,  or  of 
the  things  of  the  external  world  in  general,  since  we  have 
only  our  own  perception  of  the  things,  and  cannot  know 
how  this  stands  related  to  the  things  in  themselves.  Sen- 
sation is  to  him  not  only  the  material  (Stoff)  of  all  the 
facts  of  consciousness,  but  also  the  only  immediately  given 
material,  since  we  have  and  know  the  things  of  the  exter- 
nal world  only  in  our  sensations.  As  a  result  of  the  unde- 
niable correctness  of  this  proposition,  which  is  at  once  an 
advance  upon  the  ordinary  consciousness,  and  already  pre- 
supposes a  conception  of  the  world  as  a  unity,  Sensa- 
tionalism must  appear  a  natural  development  of  Mate- 
rialism.30 This  development  was  brought  about  among 
the  Greeks  through  that  very  school  which  in  general 
struck  deepest  into  ancient  life,  alike  in  its  constructive 
and  destructive  influences, — by  means  of  the  Sophists. 

It  was  said  in  later  antiquity  that  the  sage  Demokritos 
once  saw  a  porter  in  his  native  town  packing  together  in 
a  very  ingenious  manner  the  wood  blocks  he  had  to  carry. 
Demokritos  talked  to  him,  and  was  so  surprised  by  his 
quickness  that  he  took  him  as  a  pupil.  This  porter  was 
the  man  who  furnished  the  occasion  for  a  great  revolution 
in  the  position  of  philosophy:  he  became  a  teacher  of 


30  Compare,  in  the  modern  history  case  of  Hoboes  and  Demokritos.  F'ir- 

of  philosophy,  the  relation  of  Locke  ther,  we  see  easily  that  Sensationalism 

to  Hobbes,   or  of  Condillac  tc  La-  is  at    bottom  only  a    transition   to 

mettrie.      This   does  not,  of  course,  Idealism  —  as,   for    example,    Locke 

mean  that  we  must  always  expect  a  stands  on  untenable  ground  between 

chronological  series  of  this  kind,  and  Hobbes  and  Berkeley ;  for  so  soon  as 

yet  it  is  the  most  natural,  and  there-  the  sense-perception    is  the  strictly 

fore  the  most  frequent.     We  must,  given,  nob  only  will  the  quality  of 

however,  observe  how  the  sensation-  the    object   be    uncertain,    but    its 

alistic  elements  are,  as  a  rule,  already  very  existence  must  appear  doubtful, 

present  in  the  deeper  Materialists  ;  And  yet  this  step  was  not  taken  by 

and  very  expressly,  in  especial,  in  the  antiquity. 


THE  SOPHISTS  AND  ARISTIPPOS. 


39 


wisdom  for  gold.  He  was  Protagoras,  the  first  of  the 
Sophists.31 

Hippias,  Prodikos,  Gorgias,  and  a  long  series  of  less 
famous  men,  chiefly  known  through  Plato's  writings,  were 
soon  travelling  through  the  cities  of  Greece,  teaching  and 
disputing,  and  in  some  cases  they  made  great  fortunes. 
Everywhere  the  cleverest  youths  flocked  to  them ;  to  par- 
take of  their  instructions  soon  became  the  mark  of  fashion  ; 
their  doctrines  and  speeches  became  the  daily  topics  of 
the  upper  classes,  and  their  fame  spread  with  incredible 
rapidity. 

This  was  a  new  thing  in  Greece,  and  the  old  Maratho- 


31  The  porter  story  must  probably 
be  considered  fabulous,  although  this 
is  a  case  -where  the  traces  of  some 
such  tale  reach  very  far  back.  Comp. 
Brandis, Gesch.  d.  griech,  röm.  Philos. , 
i.  523  ff.,  and,  on  the  other  side, 
Zeller,  i.  866,  Anm.  1,  where  cer- 
tainly too  much  stress  is  laid  upon 
the  "scurrility"  of  Epikuros.  The 
question  whether  Protagoras  was  a 
pupil  of  Demokritos  hangs  together 
with  the  difficult  question  of  age  dis- 
cussed in  note  10.  We  prefer  here 
also  to  leave  it  undecided.  But  even 
in  case  the  predominant  view,  which 
makes  Protagoras  some  twenty  years 
older  than  Demokritos,  should  ever 
be  sufficiently  proved,  the  influence 
of  Demokritos  upon  the  Protagorean 
theory  of  knowledge  remains  ex- 
tremely probable,  and  we  must  then 
assume  that  Protagoras,  originally 
a  mere  rhetorician  and  teacher  of 
politics,  developed  his  own  system 
later,  indeed  during  his  second  stay 
at  Athens,  in  intellectual  intercourse 
with  his  opponent  Sokrates,  at  a  time 
when  the  writings  of  Demokritos 
might  already  have  had  their  influ- 
ence. Zeller's  attempt,  following  Frei 
(Quaestiones  Protagoreae,  Bonnae, 
1845),  to  deduce  the  philosophy  of 
Protagoras  wholly  from  Herakleitos, 
disregarding  Demoki'itos,  splits  on 
the  want  of  a  sufficient  point  of  sup- 


port for  the  subjective  direction  of 
Protagoras  in  the  theory  of  know- 
ledge. If  it  is  proposed  to  regard  as 
Herakleitic  the  origin  of  sensation 
from  a  mutual  motion  of  sense  and 
object  (comp.  Zeller,  i.  585),  the  reso- 
lution of  sense  qualities  into  subjec- 
tive impressions  is  wholly  wanting  in 
Herakleitos.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
vöfjLcp  y\vKu  /ecu  vo/xtp  irLKpov^  and  so 
on  (Fragm.  Phys.,  1),  of  Demokritos 
forms  the  natural  transition  from  the 
purely  objective  view  of  the  world  of 
the  older  physicists  to  the  subjective 
one  of  the  Sophists.  Protagoras 
must  indeed  reverse  the  standpoint 
of  Demokritos  in  order  to  reach  his 
own  ;  but  this  is  also  his  position  to- 
wards Herakleitos,  who  finds  all  truth 
in  the  universal,  while  Protagoras 
seeks  it  in  the  particular.  The  cir- 
cumstance that  the  Platonic  Sokrates 
(comp.  Frei,  Quaest.  Prot.,  p.  79) 
makes  the  principle  of  Protagoras, 
that  all  is  motion,  to  be  the  original 
of  all  things,  is  historically  not  deci- 
sive. Generally  it  may  be  said  that 
the  influence  of  Herakleitos  on  the 
doctrine  of  Protagoras  is  unmistak- 
able, and  it  is  at  the  same  time  pro- 
bable that  the  elements  due  to  this  are 
the  original  elements  to  which  Demo- 
kritos's  reference  of  the  sense  quali- 
ties to  subjective  impressions  was 
added  later  as  a  fermenting  element. 


4o  MA TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

nian  warriors,  trie  veterans  of  the  liberation  struggle,  were 
not  the  only  conservatives  who  shook  their  heads.  The 
supporters  of  the  Sophists  themselves  held  towards  them, 
with  all  their  admiration,  much  the  same  position  as,  in 
our  own  day,  the  patrons  of  an  opera-singer:  the  majority 
would,  in  the  midst  of  their  admiration,  have  disdained  to 
follow  in  their  steps.  Sokrates  used  to  embarrass  the  pupils 
of  the  Sophists  by  blunt  questions  as  to  the  object  of  their 
teacher's  profession.  From  Pheidias  we  learn  sculpture, 
from  Hippokrates  medicine — what,  then,  from  Protagoras  ? 

The  pride  and  love  of  display  of  the  Sophists  were  no 
substitute  for  the  respectable  and  reserved  attitude  of 
the  old  philosophers.  Aristocratic  dilletanteism  in  philo- 
sophy was  thought  more  respectable  than  their  professional 
business.  - 

We  are  not  yet  far  removed  from  the  time  when  only 
the  darker  side  of  the  Sophistic  system  was  known  to  us. 
The  ridicule  of  Aristophanes  and  the  moral  earnestness  of 
Plato  have  joined  with  the  innumerable  anecdotes  of  later 
times  to  concentrate  upon  the  name  of  the  Sophists  all 
that  was  to  be  found  of  frivolous  pedantry,  of  venal  dia- 
lectic, and  systematic  immorality.  Sophist  became  the 
designation  of  all  pseudo-philosophy ;  and  long  after  the 
vindication  of  Epikuros  and  the  Epikureans  was,  to  the 
general  profit  of  men  of  culture,  an  accomplished  fact, 
that  reproach  still  clung  to  the  name  of  the  Sophists, 
and  it  remained  an  insoluble  puzzle  how  Aristophanes 
could  have  represented  Sokrates  as  the  head  of  the 
Sophists. 

Through  Hegel  and  his  school,  in  connection  with  the 
unprejudiced  inquiries  of  modern  philology,  the  way  was 
cleared  in  Germany  for  a  more  accurate  view.  A  still  more 
decided  position  was  taken  by  Grote  in  his  "  History  of 
Greece,"  and  before  him  Lewes  had  entered  the  lists  for  the 
honour  of  the  Sophists.  He  maintains  Plato's  Euthyde- 
mus  to  be  just  as  much  an  exaggeration  as  the  Clouds  of 
Aristophanes.      "  The  caricature  of  Sokrates   by  Aristo- 


THE  SOPHISTS  AND  ARISTIPPOS.  41 

phanes  is  quite  as  near  the  truth  as  the  caricature  of  the 
Sophists  by  Plato;  with  this  difference,  that  in  the  one 
case  it  was  inspired  by  political,  in  the  other  by  specula- 
tive, antipathy."32  Grote  shows  us  that  this  fanatical 
hatred  was  thoroughly  Platonic.  Xenophon's  Sokrates 
occupies  a  much  less  hostile  position  towards  the  Sophists. 

Protagoras  marks  a  great  and  decisive  turning-point  in 
the  history  of  Greek  philosophy.  He  is  the  first  who 
started,  not  from  the  object — from  external  nature,  but 
from  the  subject — from  the  spiritual  nature  of  man.33  He 
is  in  this  respect  an  undoubted  predecessor  of  Sokrates ; 
he  stands,  indeed,  in  a  certain  sense,  at  the  head  of  the 
whole  antimaterialistic  development,  which  is  equally 
made  to  begin  with  Sokrates.  At  the  same  time,  how- 
ever, Protagoras  has,  in  addition,  the  most  intimate  rela- 
tions to  Materialism,  through  his  starting  from  sensation 
as  Demokritos  started  from  matter ;  whilst  he  was  very 
decidedly  opposed  to  Plato  and  Aristotle  in  this,  that  to 
him— and  this  trait  also  is  related  to  Materialism — the 
particular  and  the  individual  is  the  essential,  not  the 
universal,  as  with  them.  With  the  Sensationalism  of  Pro- 
tagoras is  combined  a  relativity  which  may  remind  us  of 
Büchner  and  Moleschott.  The  expression  that  something 
is,  always  needs  a  further  determination  in  relation  to  what 
it  is  or  is  becoming;  otherwise  our  predication  has* no 
meaning. 3* 

In  precisely  the  same  way  Büchner  says,  in  order  to 
combat  the  '  thing  in  itself/  that  all  things  exist  only  for 
each  other,  and  have  no  significance  apart  from  mutual 
relations ; 35  and  still  more  decidedly  Moleschott :  "  Except  in 

32  Hist,  of  Phil.,  i.  106,  107.  basis  of  the  philosophy  of  Protagoras 

33  Comp.  Frei,  Quaest.  Prot.,  p.  no.     — in  its  completion — and  not  the 
"  Mnlto   plus   vero  ad  philosophiam     Heraklitean  iravra  pet. 

promo ven dam  eo  contulit  Protagoras  34  Frei,  Quaest.  Prot.,  p.  84  foil, 

quod  hominem  dixit  omnium  rerum  35  Comp.  Büchner,  Die  Stellung  des 

mensuram.      Eo    enim    mentem  sui  Menschen  in  der  Natur,  Leipz.,  1870, 

consciam  reddidit,  rebusque  superi-  p.  cxvii.      The  expression   of  Mole- 

orem  praeposuit."    But  for  this  rea-  schott  will  be  more  fully  discussed  in 

son  this  must  be  regarded  as  the  true  the  Second  Book. 


42  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

relation  to  the  eye,  into  which  it  sends  its  rays,  the  tree 
has  no  existence"  All  such  expressions  are  still  in  our 
own  day  regarded  as  Materialism.  To  Demokritos,  how- 
ever, the  atom  was  a  '  thing  in  itself.'  Protagoras  dropped 
the  Atomism.  He  regarded  matter  as  something  in  itself 
completely  undetermined,  involved  in  eternal  flow  and 
change.     It  is  what  it  appears  to  the  individual. 

The  most  distinctive  features  of  the  philosophy  of  Pro- 
tagoras are  the  following  propositions  underlying  his  Sen- 
sationalism : — 

i.  Man  is  the  measure  of  all  things :  of  those  that  are 
that  they  are ;  of  those  that  are  not  that  they  are  not. 

2.  Contradictory  assertions  are  equally  true. 

Of  these  propositions,  the  second  is  the  most  striking^ 
and  is  also  the  one  that  most  forcibly  reminds  us  of  the 
unscrupulous  pedantry  which  is  only  too  often  considered 
as  the  essence  of  the  Sophistic  system.  It  gains,  however, 
a  deeper  sense  so  soon  as  it  is  explained  from  the  first 
principle  which  contains  the  core  of  the  Protagorean 
doctrines.  Man  is  the  measure  of  things,  that  is,  it  de- 
pends upon  our  sensations  how  things  appear  to  us,  and 
this  appearance  is  all  that  is  given  us ;  and  so  it  is  not 
man  in  his  universal  and  necessary  qualities,  but  each 
individual  in  each  single  moment,  that  is  the  measure  of 
things.  If  it  is  a  question  of  the  universal  and  necessary 
qualities,  than  Protagoras  must  be  regarded  wholly  as  a 
predecessor  of  the  theoretical  philosophy  of  Kant.  Yet 
Protagoras  as  to  the  influence  of  the  subject,  as  well  as  to 
the  judgment  of  the  object,  kept  close  to  the  individual  per- 
ception, and  so  far  from  viewing  the  '  man  as  such,'  he 
cannot  even,  strictly  speaking,  make  the  individual  the 
measure  of  things,  for  the  individual  is  mutable ;  and  if 
the  same  temperature  appear  to  the  same  man  at  one  time 
cool,  at  another  warm,  both  impressions  are  in  their  own 
moment  equally  true,  and  there  is  no  truth  outside  this. 

We  may  now  easily  explain  the  second  principle  with- 
out contradiction,  so  soon  as  we  proceed  to  the  closer 


THE  SOPHISTS  AND  ARISTIPPOS,  43 

determination  as  demanded  by  the  system  of  Protagoras — 
in  the  sense  of  two  different  individuals. 

It  was  not  the  object  of  Protagoras  to  maintain  the 
simultaneous  truth  and  falsity  of  the  same  assertion  in  the 
mouth  of  the  same  individual ;  although,  indeed,  he  teaches 
that,  of  every  proposition  maintained  by  any  one,  the  oppo- 
site may  be  maintained  with  equal  right,  in  so  far  as  there 
may  be  any  one  to  whom  it  so  appears. 

That  in  this  way  of  regarding  things  there  is  contained 
a  great  element  of  truth  cannot  but  be  recognised  ;  for  the 
real  fact,  the  immediately  given,  is  in  reality  the  pheno- 
menon. But  our  mind  demands  something  persistent  in 
the  flood  of  phenomena.  Sokrates  sought  the  path  to  this 
persistent  element;  Plato,  in  complete  contrast  to  the 
Sophists,  believed  he  had  found  it  in  the  universal,  in  face 
of  which  the  particular  sank  back  into  unreal  seeming. 
In  this  controversy,  if  we  view  it  quite  theoretically,  the 
Sophists  are  right,  and  Plato's  theoretical  philosophy  can 
find  its  higher  significance  only  in  the  deep-lying  suspicion 
of  a  hidden  truth,  and  in  its  relations  to  the  ideal  elements 
of  life. 

In  Ethic  the  fatal  consequences  of  the  standpoint  of  Pro- 
tagoras are  most  obvious.  Protagoras,  indeed,  did  not  draw 
these  consequences.  He  explained  desire  to  be  the  prin- 
ciple of  action,  but  he  drew  a  sharp  distinction  between 
the  good  citizens  and  noble  men  who  have  desires  only  for 
what  is  good  and  noble,  and  the  bad  and  vulgar  who  feel 
attracted  towards  evil.36  At  the  same  time,  the  conse- 
quence must  have  followed  from  the  theoretical  conception 
of  this  unconditioned  relativity,  that  that  is  right  and 
good  for  the  man  which  in  each  case  seems  to  him  right 
and  good. 

As  practical  men,  and,  in  fact,  teachers  of  virtue,  the 
Sophists  helped  themselves  by  simply  adopting  the  tradi- 
tional Hellenic  morality  as  a  whole  for  their  own.  There 
could  be  no  question  of  deducing  it  from  a  principle  :  even 

36  Frei,  Quaest.  Prot.,  p.  99  ;  Zeller,  i.  916  foil. 


44  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ UITY. 

the  doctrine  that  those  sentiments  are  to  be  favoured  which 
further  the  prosperity  of  the  state  was  not  raised  to  an 
ethical  principle,  however  nearly  it  may  approach  it. 

So  it  is  intelligible  that  the  most  important  consequences 
from  this  principle  of  arbitrariness  were  drawn  not  only 
by  fanatical  opponents  like  Plato,  but  occasionally  even 
by  venturesome  pupils  of  the  Sophists.  The  famous  art  of 
making  the  worse  appear  the  better  cause  is  defended  by 
Lewes  as  an  art  of  disputation  for  practical  people,  as  the 
art  of  being  one's  own  advocate  :  the  reverse  of  the  picture 
is  only  too  obvious.37  The  defence  is  sufficient  to  show 
that,  on  the  general  ground  of  average  Greek  morality,  the 
Sophists  might  boldly  assert  their  blamelessness ;  it  is  not 
sufficient  to  refute  the  view  that  Sophistic  was  a  dissolving 
element  in  Hellenic  civilisation. 

But  if  we  look  closely  at  the  position  that  desire  is  the 
moving  principle  of  action,  we  easily  see  that  the  ground 
was  already  prepared  by  the  Sensationalism  of  Protagoras 
for  the  Cyrenaic  doctrine  of  pleasure.  The  develop- 
ment of  this  germ  was  carried  out  by  the  '  Sokratic '  Aris- 
tippos. 

On  the  hot  coasts  of  Northern  Africa  lay  the  Greek 
commercial  colony  of  Cyrene ;  here  Oriental  luxury  was 
combined  with  the  refinement  of  Hellenic  civilisation. 
Sprung  from  a  wealthy  mercantile  family  of  this  city, 
brought  up  with  the  sentiments  and  education  of  a  man  of 
the  world,  the  young  Aristippos  went  to  Athens,  attracted 
by  the  fame  of  Sokrates.  Of  handsome  form,  and  gifted 
with  the  charm  of  the  most  refined  demeanour  and  the  most 
intellectual  conversation,  Aristippos  found  his  way  to  every 
heart.  He  attached  himself  to  Sokrates,  and  was  regarded 
as  a  Sokratic,  different  as  the  direction  taken  by  his  doc- 
trine was  from  the  essence  of  the  Sokratic  theory.  His 
personal  inclination  to  a  life  of  pleasure  and  display,  and 
the  powerful  influence  of  the  Sophists,  brought  about  the 
development  of  his  doctrine  that  pleasure  is  the  object  of 

37  Lewes,  Hist  of  PliiL,  i.  114. 


THE  SOPHISTS  AND  ARISTIPPOS.  45 

existence.  Aristotle  calls  him  a  Sophist ;  yet  we  may  also 
recognise  in  him  the  influence  of  Sokratic  views.  Sokrates 
found  the  highest  happiness  in  virtue,  and  taught  that 
virtue  is  identical  with  true  knowledge.  Aristippos  taught 
that  self-control  and  temperance — that  is,  the  genuine  So- 
kratic virtues — alone  render  us  capable  of  enjoyment,  and 
keep  us  so ;  only  the  wise  man  can  be  really  happy.  Hap- 
piness, however,  is  with  him,  of  course,  only  pleasure. 

He  distinguished  two  forms  of  sensation:  one  which 
results  from  gentle  motion,  the  other  from  violent  rapid 
motion ;  the  former  is  pleasure,  the  latter  pain  or  absence 
of  pleasure. 

Now  since  sensual  pleasure  obviously  produces  a  livelier 
sensation  than  intellectual  pleasure,  it  was  merely  a  con- 
sequence of  the  inexorable  logic  of  Hellenic  speculation 
when  Aristippos  inferred  from  this  that  physical  pleasure 
is  better  than  intellectual  pleasure,  physical  pain  worse 
than  mental.     Epikuros  tried  to  escape  this  by  a  sophism. 

Finally,  Aristippos  taught  expressly  that  the  true  aim  is 
not  happiness,  which  is  the  permanent  result  of  many 
single  sensations  of  pleasure,  but  the  individual  sensual 
concrete  pleasure  itself.  Happiness  is  of  course  good,  but 
it  must  come  spontaneously,  and  is  therefore  not  the  aim. 

No  Sensationalistic  moralist  of  ancient  or  modern  times 
has  been  more  logically  consistent  than  Aristippos,  and  his 
life,  constitutes  the  best  commentary  on  his  doctrine. 

With  Sokrates  and  his  school,  Athens  had  become  the 
centre  of  philosophic  tendencies.  Though  from  this  point, 
too,  proceeded  the  great  reaction  against  Materialism, 
which  in  Plato  and  Aristotle  secured  the  most  decided 
victory,  yet  even  here  the  intellectual  influences  of  Mate- 
rialism were  sufficiently  powerful  to  challenge  such  a 
reaction. 

Demokritos,  it  is  true,  felt  no  attraction  towards  Athens. 
"  I  came  to  Athens,"  he  is  reported  to  have  said,  "  and  no 
man  knew  me."  As  a  man  of  reputation  then,  he  had 
hastened  to  the  then  newly  flourishing  centre  of  science  to 


46  MA  TERIALISM  IN  A  NTIQ  UITY. 

view  closely  the  course  of  speculation  there,  and  quietly 
again  departed  without  revealing  himself ;  and  it  may  well 
be  that  the  great  and  earnest  system  of  Demokritos  worked 
much  less  powerfully  on  the  seething  tendencies  of  the  time 
than  the  less  logical  but  more  intelligible  features  of  that 
Materialism,  in  the  wider  sense  of  the  word,  which  domi- 
nates the  whole  pre-Sokratic  period  of  philosophy.  Above 
all  things,  however,  had  Sophistic,  in  the  good  and  the  bad 
sense  of  the  word,  found  a  favourable  soil  in  Athens. 
Since  the  Persian  war  a  change  had  taken  place,  under  the 
influence  of  the  new  modes  of  thought,  which  extended 
through  all  grades  of  society.  Under  Perikles's  powerful 
direction,  the  state  had  reached  the  consciousness  of  its 
destiny.  Commerce  and  the  sovereignty  of  the  sea  had 
favoured  the  development  of  material  interests.  A  magni- 
ficent spirit  of  enterprise  appeared  amongst  the  Athenians. 
The  time  at  which  Protagoras  taught  almost  coincided  with 
the  period  which  saw  the  elevation  of  the  mighty  build- 
ings of  the  Acropolis. 

The  stiffness  of  antiquity  disappeared,  and  art,  in  its 
passage  to  the  beautiful,  reached  that  elevation  of  style 
which  we  find  in  the  works  of  Pheidias.  In  gold  and  ivory 
arose  the  wonderful  statues  of  Pallas  Parthenos,  and  of  the 
Olympian  Zeus ;  and  while  beliefs  in  all  classes  are  begin- 
ning to  totter,  the  festival  processions  of  the  gods  reached 
the  highest  pitch  of  splendour  and  magnificence.  More 
material  and  luxurious  in  every  respect  than  Athens  was 
Korinth ;  but  Korinth  was  not  the  city  of  philosophers. 
There  intellectual  apathy  and  degradation  passed  into 
sensuality,  to  which  the  traditional  forms  of  worship  not 
merely  adapted  themselves,  but  even  gave  encouragement, 
and  thus,  even  in  antiquity,  the  interdependence  of  theo- 
retical and  practical  Materialism,  as  well  as  the  opposition 
of  the  two,  is  unmistakably  obvious.  If  by  practical  Ma- 
terialism we  understand  a  dominant  inclination  to  material 
acquisition  and  enjoyment,  then  theoretical  Materialism  is 
opposed  to  it,  as  is  every  effort  of  the  spirit  towards  know- 


THE  SOPHISTS  AND  AR1STIPP0S.  47 

ledge.  Nay,  we  may  say  that  the  sober  earnest  which 
marks  the  great  Materialistic  systems  of  antiquity  is  per- 
haps more  suited  than  an  enthusiastic  Idealism,  which 
only  too  easily  results  in  its  own  bewilderment,  to  keep 
the  soul  clear  of  all  that  is  low  and  vulgar,  and  to  lend  it 
a  lasting  effort  after  worthy  objects. 

Eeligious  traditions,  whose  origin  may  be  traced  to  high 
ideal  elevation,  are  sometimes  easily  polluted  in  the  course 
of  centuries  with  the  material  and  low  sentiments  of  the 
masses,  quite  apart  from  the  '  Materialism  of  dogma,' 
which  may  be  found  in  every  firmly-rooted  orthodox  sys- 
tem, so  soon  as  the  bare  substance  of  religious  doctrines  is 
more  highly  valued  than  the  spirit  which  has  produced 
them.  The  mere  decomposition,  however,  of  tradition 
does  not  better  this  fault ;  since  a  religion  will  rarely  have 
so  petrified  that  no  spark  of  ideal  life  will,  from  its  higher 
forms,  fall  upon  the  soul ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  the  pro- 
gress of  enlightenment  does  not  make  the  masses  into 
philosophers. 

But  the  true  notion  of  ethical  Materialism  is,  of  course, 
quite  different :  we  must  understand  by  it  a  moral  doctrine 
which  makes  the  moral  action  of  man  rise  from  the  parti- 
cular emotions  of  his  spirit,  and  which  determines  the  object 
of  action,  not  by  an  unconditionally  ruling  idea,  but  by  the 
effort  after  a  desired  condition.  Such  an  ethical  system  may 
be  named  Materialistic,  because,  like  theoretical  Material- 
ism, it  starts  from  matter  as  opposed  to  form ;  only,  that  here 
is  meant,  not  the  matter  of  external  bodies,  not  even  the 
quality  of  sensation  as  matter  of  theoretical  consciousness, 
but  the  elementary  matter  of  practical  conduct,  the  im- 
pulses  and  the  feelings  of  pleasure  and  its  opposite.  We 
may  say  that  this  is  only  an  analogy,  that  there  is  no 
obvious  unity  of  tendency,  but  history  shows  us  almost 
universally  that  this  analogy  is  powerful  enough  to  deter- 
mine the  connection  of  the  systems. 

A  fully-developed  ethical  Materialism  of  this  sort  is  not 
only  not  ignoble,  but  it  seems  by  a  sort  of  internal  neces- 


48  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

sity  to  lead  to  noble  and  elevated  forms  of  life,  and  to  a 
love  of  those  forms  which  rise  far  above  the  commonplace 
demand  for  happiness;  just  as,  on  the  other  hand,  an 
idealistic  ethical  system  in  its  full  development  cannot 
help  being  anxious  for  the  happiness  of  individuals  and  the 
harmony  of  their  impulses. 

But  we  are  concerned,  in  the  historical  development  of 
nations,  not  with  a  purely  ideal  ethic,  but  with  thoroughly 
fixed  traditional  forms  of  morality,  the  stability  of  which 
is  disturbed  and  shaken  by  any  new  principle,  because 
they  do  not  rest  upon  the  abstract  reflection  of  the  man 
himself,  but  on  a  taught  and  inherited  product  of  the  col- 
lective life  of  many  generations.  And  thus  our  experience 
hitherto  seems  to  teach  us  that  all  Materialistic  morality, 
pure  as  it  may  otherwise  be,  operates  especially  in  periods 
of  transformation  and  transition,  as  a  powerful  solvent, 
while  all  great  and  decisive  revolutions  and  reforms  first 
break  out  in  the  shape  of  new  ethical  ideas. 

Such  new  ideas  were  introduced  in  antiquity  by  Plato 
and  Aristotle,  but  they  could  neither  penetrate  to  the 
masses,  nor  gain  over  to  their  objects  the  old  forms  of  the 
national  religion.  All  the  deeper  on  this  account  was  the 
influence  of  these  products  of  Hellenic  philosophy  upon 
the  later  development  of  mediaeval  Christianity. 

When  Protagoras  was  driven  from  Athens  for  having 
begun  his  book  on  the  gods  with  the  words,  "As  to  the 
gods,  I  do  not  know  whether  they  exist  or  not,"  it  was 
already  too  late  for  the  salvation  of  the  conservatism  for 
which  Aristophanes  vainly  set  to  work  all  the  forces  of  the 
stage,  and  even  the  sacrifice  of  Sokrates  could  no  longer 
stay  the  progress  of  the  Spirit  of  the  Times. 

As  early  as  the  Peioponnesian  war,  soon  after  the  death 
of  Perikles,  the  great  revolution  in  the  whole  life  of  the 
Athenians  was  decided ;  and  of  this  revolution  the  espe- 
cial promoters  were  the  Sophists. 

This  rapid  process  of  dissolution  is  unique  in  history : 
no  people  has  ever  lived  so  fast  as  the  Athenians.     And 


THE  SOPHISTS  AND  ARISTIPPOS.  49 

instructive  as  may  be  this  turning-point  of  their  history, 
the  danger  is  proportionately  great  of  our  drawing  false 
conclusions  from  it. 

So  long  as  a  state,  as  in  the  case  of  Athens  before 
Perikles,  steadily  develops,  and  holds  fast  to  old  traditions, 
all  its  citizens  feel  themselves  held  together  by  a  common 
interest  as  against  other  states.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
philosophy  of  the  Sophists  and  that  of  the  Cyrenaics  had 
a  cosmopolitan  colouring. 

The  thinker  embraces  in  a  short  series  of  conclusions 
events  which  history  requires  thousands  of  years  to  realise  ; 
and  so  the  cosmopolitan  idea  may  be  in  general  quite 
right,  and  yet  in  the  particular  case  prejudicial,  because  it 
destroys  the  interest  of  the  citizens  in  their  country,  and 
in  consequence  cripples  the  country's  vital  force. 

So  long  as  men  adhere  to  their  traditions,  there  are  cer- 
tain ultimate  limits  set  to  the  ambition  and  the  talents  of 
the  individual.  All  these  limits  are  removed  by  the  prin- 
ciple that  each  individual  man  has  in  himself  the  mea- 
sure of  all  things.  The  only  security  against  this  is  the 
merely  conventional ;  but  the  conventional  is  the  unrea- 
sonable, because  thought  always  impels  us  to  new  develop- 
ments. 

This  was  soon  understood  by  the  Athenians,  and  not 
the  philosophers  only,  but  even  their  most  zealous  oppo- 
nents, learnt  to  argue,  to  criticise,  to  dispute,  and  to  make 
projects.  The  Sophists  created  even  an  art  of  demagogy ; 
for  they  taught  rhetoric  with  the  express  object  of  under- 
standing how  one  may  turn  the  masses  in  the  direction 
suitable  to  one's  own  interest. 

Since  contradictory  assertions  are  equally  true,  many 
an  imitator  of  Protagoras  cared  only  to  establish  his  own 
personal  view,  and  so  a  kind  of  right  of  moral  force  was 
introduced.  At  all  events,  the  Sophists  must  have  pos- 
sessed, in  the  art  of  influencing  men's  minds,  great  skill 
and  deep  psychological  insight,  or  they  could  not  have 
received  an  income  which,  compared  with  the  fees  of  our 

VOL.  I.  D 


50  MA TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

own  days,  stands  at  least  in  the  relation  of  principal  to' 
interest.  And,  moreover,  trie  underlying  idea  was  not 
that  of  a  reward  for  trouble,  but  that  of  the  purchase  of 
an  art  which  was  the  making  of  its  possessor. 

Aristippos,  who  flourished  in  the  fourth  century,  was  a 
true  cosmopolitan.  The  courts  of  the  tyrants  were  his 
favourite  resort,  and  at  that  of  Dionysius  of  Syracuse  he 
not  unfrequently  met  with  his  intellectual  opposite,  Plato. 
Dionysius  valued  him  beyond  all  other  philosophers,  be- 
cause he  knew  how  to  make  something  out  of  every 
moment;  also,  of  course,  because  he  humoured  all  the 
tyrant's  caprices.  In  the  principle  that  nothing  natural 
is  blamable,  Aristippos  agreed  with  the  '  dog '  Diogenes ; 
and  hence  he  also  was  named  by  the  popular  wit  the 
'  royal  dog/  This  is  not  a  casual  coincidence,  but  a  simi- 
larity of  principles,  which  exists  in  spite  of  the  difference 
of  the  consequences  drawn  from  them.  Aristippos,  too, 
had  no  necessities ;  for  he  had  always  what  he  needed, 
and  felt  just  as  secure  and  happy  when  wandering  in  rags 
as  when  living  in  regal  splendour. 

But  the  example  of  the  philosophers,  who  were  fond  of 
foreign  courts,  and  found  it  absurd  to  serve  consistently 
the  narrow  interests  of  a  single  state,  was  soon  followed 
by  the  political  envoys  of  Athens  and  other  republics,  and 
no  Demosthenes  could  avail  to  save  the  freedom  of  Greece. 

As  to  religious  beliefs,  it  deserves  notice  that  simul- 
taneously with  the  weakening  of  beliefs,  which  spread 
from  the  theatre  through  the  influence  of  Euripides  among 
the  people,  there  appeared  a  number  of  new  mysteries. 

History  has  but  too  frequently  shown  that  if  the  edu- 
cated men  begin  to  laugh  at  the  gods,  or  to  resolve  their 
existence  into  philosophical  abstractions,  immediately 
the  half-educated  masses,  becoming  unsteady  and  un- 
quiet, seize  upon  every  folly  in  order  to  exalt  it  into  a 
religion. 

Asiatic  cults,  with  fantastic,  even  immoral  practices, 
found  most  favour.     Kybele  and  Kotytto,  Adonis-worship 


THE  SOPHISTS  AND  ARISTIPPOS.  51 

and  Orphic  prophecies,  based  upon  impudently  fabricated 
sacred  books,  became  popular  in  Athens  as  well  as  in  the 
rest  of  Greece.  And  so  was  prepared  that  great  com- 
mingling of  religions  which  connected  the  East  and  West 
after  the  campaign  of  Alexander,  and  which  was  so  im- 
portant in  preparing  the  way  for  the  later  propagation 
of  Christianity. 

Upon  art  and  science  also  the  Sensationalistic  doctrines 
exercised  a  great  transforming  influence.  The  materials  of 
the  empirical  sciences  were  popularised  by  the  Sophists. 
They  were  for  the  most  part  men  of  great  learning,  who 
were  fully  masters  of  their  stores  of  solid  knowledge,  and 
had  them  always  ready  for  practical  use ;  but  they  were 
in  the  natural  sciences  not  inquirers,  but  only  popularisers. 
On  the  other  hand,  we  owe  to  their  efforts  the  foundation 
of  grammar  and  the  development  of  an  admirable  prose, 
such  as  was  demanded  by  the  progress  of  the  times, 
instead  of  the  narrow  forms  of  poetry,  and  above  all  the 
great  development  of  rhetoric.  Poetry  under  their  in- 
fluence sank  gradually  from  its  ideal  height,  and  in  tone 
and  contents  approached  the  character  of  the  modern. 
Plot,  effort,  wealth  of  wit  and  emotion,  became  more  and 
more  important. 

No  history  shows  more  plainly  than  that  of  Hellas  that, 
by  a  natural  law  of  human  development,  there  is  no  un- 
broken persistence  of  the  good  and  the  beautiful.  It  is 
the  transitional  points  in  the  ordered  movements  from  one 
principle  to  another  that  conceal  within  them  the  greatest 
sublimity  and  beauty.  And  therefore  we  have  no  right  to 
complain  of  a  worm-eaten  blossom  :  the  very  law  of  blos- 
soming it  is  that  leads  to  decay ;  and  in  this  respect  Aris- 
tippos  was  at  the  highest  point  of  his  time  when  he  taught 
that  it  is  the  present  moment  only  that  can  alone  bring 
happiness. 


(      52      ) 


CHAPTEE  III. 

THE  REACTION  AGAINST  MATERIALISM  AND  SENSATIONALISM  : 
SOKRATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE. 

"When  we  regard  from  trie  standpoint  of  a  reaction  against 
Materialism  and  Sensationalism  those  products  of  Hellenic 
speculation  which  are  usually  considered  the  highest  and 
most  perfect,  we  are  in  danger  of  undervaluing  these  pro- 
ducts, and  of  criticising  them  with  the  bitterness  ordinarily- 
directed  against  Materialism.  The  temptation  is  indeed 
strong,  for  we  have  here,  as  soon  as  we  disregard  the  other 
aspects  of  the  great  crisis,  a  reaction  in  the  worst  sense  of 
the  term.  It  is  a  reaction  in  which  the  lower  standpoint 
is  elevated  above  the  higher,  after  the  former  had  been 
surmounted  consciously  and  by  a  genuine  intellectual  effort 
— a  suppression  of  the  beginnings  of  a  better  view  by 
ideas  in  which  the  old  errors  of  unphilosophical  thought 
return  in  a  new  shape,  with  new  prestige  and  power,  but 
not  without  their  old  pernicious  character.  Materialism 
explained  natural  phenomena  by  immutable  necessary 
laws :  the  reaction  introduced  a  reason  fashioned  after 
human  models  haggling  with  necessity,  and  so  demolished 
the  basis  of  all  natural  science  by  the  convenient  instru- 
ment of  arbitrary  caprice.38 

Materialism  conceived  adaptations  to  be  the  highest 

38  This  doctrine  is  set  forth  repeat-  cause  :  and  no  suggestion  whatever  is 

edly  and  at  length  in  the  Tiinaeus  of  made  as  to  their  coincidence.    Reason 

Plato ;  comp. ,  e.g. ,  the  passages  p.  48  A,  is  higher  than  necessity,  but  does  not 

56  C,  and  68  E.    Everywhere  here  two  rule  unconditionally,  but  only  to   a 

kinds  of  cause  are  expressly  spoken  certain  extent,  and  even  so  far  only 

of — the  Divine  and  rational,  that  is,  by  persuasion, 
the   teleological ;    and    the  Natural 


REACTION:  SOKRATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE.    53 

products  of  nature,  but  without,  therefore,  sacrificing  the 
unity  of  its  principle :  the  reaction  struggled  fanatically 
to  retain  a  teleology  which  even  in  its  most  brilliant  forms 
conceals  flat  anthropomorphism,  and  whose  radical  exter- 
mination is  the  indispensable  condition  of  all  scientific 
progress.39 

Materialism  gave  the  preference  to  mathematical  and 
physical  investigations  —  that  is,  those  departments  in 
which  the  human  mind  is  first  able  to  secure  results  of 
permanent  value :  the  reaction,  to  begin  with,  wholly 
threw  over  physical  inquiries  in  favour  of  ethic,  and 
when,  under  Aristotle,  it  again  took  up  the  neglected 
study,  it  thoroughly  corrupted  it  by  the  reckless  intro- 
duction of  ethical  ideas.40 

While  we  have  in  these  points  undoubted  retrogression, 
the  progress — at  least  that  in  which  utterance  was  given 
to  the  determined  opposition  of  the  great  philosophical 
school  of  Athens  against  Materialism  and  Sensationalism — 
is  of  a  very  doubtful  nature.  We  have  Sokrates  to  thank 
for  the  phantom  of  definitions  which  presuppose  an  alto- 

59  The  anthropomorphic  character  human  purposes.  Plato  recognises 
of  this  teleology,  as  well  as  the  anti-  that  things  have  an  end  of  their  own, 
materialistic  zeal  with  which  it  was  and  so  their  adaptation  is  more  inter- 
inculcated  and  defended,  is  seen  most  nal ;  while  in  Aristotle  the  end  com- 
clearly  from  the  passage  of  the  Phaedo  pletely  coincides  with  the  notional 
mentioned  further  on  in  the  text  (pp.  essence  of  the  thing.  But  even  so 
97  C-99  D  Steph.),  in  which  Sokrate3  we  have  imported  a  power  of  realising 
complains  so  bitterly  of  Anaxagoras,  themselves  into  all  natural  things, 
who  had  made  no  use  whatever  in  which  is  absolutely  inconceivable  as 
his  cosmology  of  the  so  promising  a  natural  phenomenon,  and  has  its 
'reason,'  but  had  explained  every-  only  original  in  the  practical  con- 
thing  by  purely  material  causes.  sciousness  of  the  forming  and  f ashion- 

40  Of  ethical  origin  is  teleology  in  ing  human  being.  There  are,  how- 
particular.  It  is  indeed  true  that  ever,  many  other  ethical  ideas  which 
even  the  Platonic  teleology  is  less  Aristotle  has  carried  into  the  study 
crudely  anthropomorphic  than  the  of  nature,  with  the  utmost  injury  to 
Sokratic,  and  in  the  teleology  of  the  progress  of  inquiry :  thus,  above 
Aristotle,  again,  we  find  a  decided  ad-  all,  the  order  of  merit  of  all  things 
vance ;  but  the  ethical  character,  and  in  nature,  and,  in  fact,  the  abstract 
the  inconsistency  with  genuine  phy-  relations  of  'above'  and  'below,' 
sical  inquiry,  are  common  to  all  the  'right'  and  'left,'  besides  'nat- 
three  stages.  In  Sokrates  everything  ural'  and  'violent'  motion,  and 
just  as   it    is  has  been  created    for  so  on. 


54  MA  TERIALISM  IN  A  NTIQ  UITY. 

gether  imaginary  agreement  of  name  and  thing,  and  Plato 
for  the  delusive  method  which  rests  one  hypothesis  upon 
another  still  more  general,  until  at  last  the  fullest  know- 
ledge is  found  in  what  is  most  abstract.  Aristotle  we  have 
to  thank  for  the  juggle  between  the  potential  and  the 
actual,  and  the  fancy  of  a  complete  and  all-comprehensive 
system  of  knowledge.  That  all  these  acquisitions  of  the 
Athenian  school  are,  even  to  our  own  time,  continually 
operative,  especially  in  Germany,  admits  of  no  doubt; 
and  therefore  over  the  historical  importance  of  this  school 
we  need  waste  no  further  word,  but  may  rather  ask,  Was 
this  historical  importance  a  fortunate  or  an  unfortunate 
thing  ? 

So  long  as  we  regard  these  points  in  themselves  and 
in  their  purely  theoretical  opposition  to  Materialism,  our 
judgment  must  be  necessarily  an  unfavourable  one,  and 
we  may,  indeed,  go  a  long  way  further  than  this.  It  is 
usually  said  that  with  Protagoras  the  earlier  Greek  philo- 
sophy reached  its  dissolution,  and  that  an  entirely  new 
foundation  was  required,  which  was  afforded  by  Sokrates 
and  his  return  to  self-knowledge.  We  shall  soon  see  how 
far  the  history  of  thought  justifies  this  view.  Such  a  view, 
moreover,  can  be  supported  only  by  the  consideration  of 
the  whole  extent  of  Greek  intellectual  life.  Philosophy, 
and  especially  theoretical  philosophy  in  the  strict  sense, 
can  scarcely  be  abolished  through  the  attainment  of  truth, 
only  to  begin  again  from  the  beginning  with  the  old 
errors.  This  might,  indeed,  appear  to  be  possible  if  we 
consider,  for  example,  the  transition  from  Kant  to  Pichte ; 
but  all  such  phenomena  must  be  explained  from  the  whole 
history  of  thought,  since  philosophy  never  holds  an  isolated 
position  in  the  intellectual  life  of  any  given  people.  Quite 
theoretically  considered,  the  relativity  of  the  Sophists  was 
a  thoroughly  sound  advance  in  the  theory  of  knowledge, 
and  not  at  all  the  end  of  philosophy,  but  much  rather  its 
true  beginning.  We  see  this  most  clearly  in  ethic ;  for  it 
was  just  the  Sophists,  who  apparently  undermined  every 


REACTION:  SOKRATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE.    55 

possible  basis  of  morality,  who  made  it  their  favourite 
occupation  to  teach  virtue  and  statesmanship.  They  sub- 
stituted in  the  place  of  what  is  good  in  itself  that  which 
is  useful  to  the  state.  How  very  close  this  comes  to 
Kant's  ethical  axiom:  So  act  that  the  maxims  of  your 
conduct  might  be  the  principles  of  universal  legislation. 

It  is,  in  fact,  the  step  from  the  particular  to  the  uni- 
versal which  should  here  in  due  course  have  followed, 
and,  abstractly  speaking,  might  have  followed,  without 
giving  up  the  acquisitions  of  relativity  and  individualism 
made  by  the  Sophists.  In  ethic  this  step  has  in  effect 
been  taken  as  soon  as  virtue,  after  the  falling  away  of  all 
externally-given  objective  rules,  is  not  simply  laid  aside, 
but  proceeds  to  identify  itself  with  the  principle  of  the 
conservation  and  progress  of  a  community.  This  was  the 
course  the  Sophists  took,  without,  however,  being  con- 
scious of  its  fundamental  significance ;  but  might  not  this 
consciousness  in  time  have  developed  itself  out  of  their 
doctrine?  In  that  case,  although,  of  course,  the  highest 
point  would  not  have  been  at  once  attained,  yet  hence- 
forward the  ground  would  have  been  thoroughly  firm  and 
secure  beneath  their  feet. 

Sokrates  resolved  virtue  into  knowledge :  is  this  prin- 
ciple, when  quite  theoretically  tested,  really  higher  than 
the  standpoint  of  the  Sophists  ?  What,  indeed,  the  objec- 
tive notion  of  the  good  is,  we  can  as  little  discover  from 
the  whole  body  of  the  Platonic  dialogues  as  the  nature  of 
the  philosopher's  stone  from  the  alchemistic  writings.  If 
we  make  the  knowledge  of  virtue  a  consciousness  of  the 
right  principles  of  conduct,  then  it  is  easily  reconcilable 
with  the  foundation  upon  the  common  weal  in  the  state. 
If  we  take  the  Sokratic  illustration  of  the  intemperate 
man,  who  only  sins  because  he  is  not  fully  conscious  of 
the  painful  consequences  of  his  present  desire,  no  Sophist 
would  deny  that  the  man  who  is  so  constituted  that  this 
consciousness  is  never  lacking  is  the  better  constituted,  but 
for  him  in  consequence,  quite  subjectively  and  individually 


56  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY, 

considered,  the  good  is  the  better.  He  chooses  the  better 
not  through  a  knowledge  of  the  notion  of  the  good,  but 
through  a  psychological  condition,  differing  at  the  moment 
of  choice  from  that  of  the  intemperate  man.  It  is  true, 
indeed,  that  from  the  consideration  of  such  instances  the 
necessity  for  the  individual  also  of  a  general  notion  of  the 
good  embracing  the  different  moments  of  time  may  be 
seen.  Such  a  notion  was  possessed  even  by  Demokritos. 
A  pupil  of  Demokritos  and  Protagoras,  who  had  continued, 
if  I  may  use  the  expression,  a  tangential  movement  from 
their  philosophy,  instead  of  sweeping  round  again  with 
Sokrates,  might  easily  have  reached  the  position  that  man 
is  the  measure  of  things :  the  individual  man  in  his 
momentary  condition  of  the  individual  phenomenon,  the 
average  man  of  a  sum  of  phenomena. 

Protagoras  and  Prodikos  busied  themselves  also  with 
the  rudiments  of  grammatical  and  etymological  studies, 
and  we  do  not  know  how  much  is  really  due  to  them  of 
what  we  are  now  accustomed  to  assign  to  Plato  and  Aris- 
totle. It  is  sufficient,  however,  for  our  purpose,  to  know 
that  the  Sophists  had  already  turned  their  attention  to 
words  and  the  meaning  of  words.  Now  the  word,  as  a 
rule,  stands  as  a  sign  for  a  group  of  sensations.  Might 
they  not  in  this  way  have  very  soon  reached  a  theory  of 
universals  in  the  sense  of  the  medieval  Nominalism  ?  In 
such  a  theory,  of  course,  the  universal  would  not  have 
been  more  real  and  certain  than  the  particular,  but,  on 
the  contrary,  would  have  been  further  removed  from  the 
object,  and  more  uncertain — in  fact,  in  direct  opposition  to 
Plato,  the  more  uncertain  as  it  became  more  universal. 

If,  finally,  the  Sophists,  among  human  actions,  which,  if 
regarded  from  a  strictly  individual  standpoint,  are  all 
equally  good,  discriminate  between  the  praiseworthy  and 
the  blameworthy,  and  that  according  to  a  rule  which  is 
gathered  from  the  universal  life  in  a  state,  might  they  not 
also  have  reached  the  idea  of  discriminating  amongst 
perceptions  which  in  themselves  are  all  equally  true,  the 


REACTION:  SOKRATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE.     57 

normal  and  the  abnormal  from  the  historical  standpoint 
of  universal  thought?  The  position  would  then  have 
remained  quite  unassailed,  that  '  true/  in  the  strictest 
sense,  that  is  '  certain/  is  merely  the  individual  feeling  of 
the  particular  person;  but,  besides,  a  fixed  standard  of  values 
might  have  been  attained  for  the  different  perceptions  in 
accordance  with  their  current  acceptation  in  human  inter- 
course. 

If  one  would  apply  such  a  scale  of  current  value  to  the 
just  developed  universals  in  the  JSTominalistic  sense,  the 
idea  of  probability  would  have  almost  irresistibly  presented 
itself.  So  near,  apparently,  in  this  case,  did  the  Sophistic 
standpoint  lie  to  the  ripest  fruit  of  modern  speculation. 
The  path  of  progress  was  to  all  appearance  open.  Why 
must  the  great  reaction  intervene  which  was  to  lead  the 
world  for  thousands  of  years  in  the  errors  of  Platonic 
Idealism  ? 

The  answer  to  this  question  has  been  already  indicated. 
The  fact  is,  that  we  have  to  deal  not  with  a  philosophy 
that  develops  itself  continuously,  whether  by  antago- 
nisms or  in  a  direct  line,  but  only  with  philosophising 
men,  who,  like  their  doctrines,  are  children  of  their  time. 
The  misleading  appearance  of  an  advance  through  anta- 
gonisms, as  Hegel  supposes,  rests  upon  this  very  fact,  that 
the  thoughts  which  dominate  an  era,  or  which  appear  as 
philosophical  ideas,  form  only  one  portion  of  the  intellec- 
tual life  of  a  nation,  and  that  very  different  influences, 
often  the  more  powerful  because  so  little  apparent,  are  at 
the  same  time  in  activity,  until  they  suddenly  become  in 
turn  the  dominant  ones,  while  the  others  retire  into  the 
background. 

Ideas  that  hasten  onwards  too  rapidly  for  their  age  live 
themselves  out,  and  must  invigorate  themselves  once  more 
by  a  struggle  with  reaction  before  they  painfully,  and  yet 
more  surely,  again  struggle  to  the  front.  But  how  is  it  that 
this  is  brought  about  ?  The  more  rapidly  the  bearers  of 
new  ideas  and  new  theories  snatch  at  the  control  of  public 


58  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

opinion,  the  more  violent  will  be  the  opposition  of  tradi- 
tional ideas  in  the  minds  of  their  contemporaries.  After 
being  long  blinded  and  stunned,  as  it  were,  prejudice  gathers 
itself  together,  either  by  external  persecution  and  sup- 
pression, or  by  new  intellectual  creations  to  battle  with 
and  overcome  the  inconvenient  opinions.  If  such  new 
intellectual  creations  are  in  themselves  poor  and  empty, 
and  endured  only  from  hatred  of  progress,  they  can,  as  in 
the  case  of  Jesuitism  against  the  Eeformation,  only  prose- 
cute their  purpose  in  alliance  with  cunning  and  force  and 
a  policy  of  universal  suppression.  But  if  they  have,  in 
addition  to  their  reactionary  importance,  a  germ  of  life 
within  themselves,  a  content  which  in  other  respects  leads 
to  progress,  they  may  often  produce  more  brilliant  and 
satisfactory  results  than  the  activity  of  a  faction  which 
has  become  arrogant  from  the  possession  of  new  truths, 
and  which,  as  happens  only  too  frequently  after  a  conspi- 
cuous success,  becomes  enfeebled  and  inadequate  to  the 
proper  following  up  of  what  has  been  attained. 

Of  this  latter  kind  was  the  situation  in  Athens  when 
Sokrates  faced  the  Sophists.  We  have  shown  above  how, 
abstractly  considered,  the  standpoint  of  the  Sophists  might 
have  been  further  developed ;  but  if  we  had  to  point  out 
the  forces  which,  but  for  the  intervention  of  the  Sokratic 
reaction,  might  have  effected  this  development,  we  should 
have  some  difficulty.  The  great  Sophists  were  content,  of 
course,  with  their  practical  successes.  The  very  boundless- 
ness of  their  relativity,  their  vague  acceptance  of  the 
middle-class  morality  without  the  establishment  of  any 
principle,  the  pliant  individualism  which  everywhere 
assumes  to  itself  the  right  to  throw  down  or  let  stand  as 
suits  the  purpose  of  the  moment — these  were,  it  is  obvious, 
admirable  foundations  for  the  education  of  'practical  states- 
men '  of  the  well-known  stamp,  which,  from  the  dim  be- 
ginning of  time  until  our  own  days,  has  everywhere  secured 
the  greatest  external  success.  No  wonder  that  the  Sophists 
more  and  more  went  over  from  Philosophy  to  Politic,  from 


REACTION:  SOKRATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE.     59 

Dialectic  to  Khetoric !  And  we  find,  indeed,  even  in  Gorgias, 
a  clear  consciousness  that  philosophy  had  been  degraded 
to  the  level  of  a  mere  preparation  for  practical  life. 

Under  such  circumstances,  it  is  no  cause  for  surprise 
that  the  younger  generation  of  Sophists  betrayed  not  the 
least  inclination  to  carry  on  the  development  of  philosophy 
on  the  basis  of  the  view  reached  by  Protagoras,  with  the 
omission  of  the  transcendental  and  mythical  universal 
introduced  by  Plato,  and  so  to  press  on  to  the  standpoint 
of  modern  Nominalism  and  Empiricism.  On  the  contrary, 
the  later  Sophists  distinguished  themselves  merely  by  a 
confident  insistance  upon  the  principle  of  subjectivity  or 
individual  will,  and  by  outbidding  their  masters  in  framing 
a  convenient  theory  for  the  holders  of  power  in  the  Greek 
states.  There  was,  therefore,  retrogression  as  regards  the 
strictly  philosophical  germ  in  this  philosophy — a  sign  that 
the  more  earnest  and  deeper  natures  no  longer  felt  them- 
selves drawn  in  this  direction. 

All  this  is,  of  course,  not  in  the  same  degree  applicable 
to  the  severe  and  earnest  Materialism  of  Demokritos ;  yet 
we  have  seen  that  Demokritos  founded  no  school.  This 
was  due,  indeed,  partly  to  his  own  tendency  and  inclina- 
tion, but  partly  also  to  the  character  of  the  time.  For  once 
Materialism,  with  its  belief  in  eternally  existing  atoms, 
was  outbid  by  Sensationalism,  which  denied  the  exist- 
ence of  any  thing-in-itself  behind  phenomena.  It  would 
have  needed  a  great  advance,  however — a  much  greater 
than  the  just-mentioned  continuations  of  the  Sensationalist 
philosophy — to  reintroduce  the  atom  as  a  necessary  mode 
of  presentation  of  an  unknown  relation,  and  so  to  main- 
tain the  basis  of  physical  science.  Consequently,  at  this 
period,  the  interest  in  objective  investigations  generally 
disappeared.  In  this  respect,  Aristotle  may  almost  be 
regarded  as  the  true  successor  of  Demokritos  ;  of  course,  a 
successor  who  uses  the  results  and  the  principles  by  which 
they  have  been  attained  for  completely  opposite  purposes. 
In  the  summertide  of  the  new  Athenian  philosophy,  how- 


6o  MA  TER I ALIS M  IN  ANTIQ  UITY. 

ever,  ethical  and  logical  questions  came  so  much  to  the 
front  that  they  caused  everything  else  to  be  forgotten. 

Whence  came  this  one-sided  prominence  of  ethical  and 
logical  problems  ?  The  answer  to  this  question  must  at 
once  show  us  what  was  the  inmost  principle  of  life  through 
which  the  new  tendency  arose,  and  whose  force  gives  it  a 
higher  and  more  independent  value  than  that  of  a  mere 
reaction  against  Materialism  and  Sensationalism.  Here, 
however,  it  is  impossible  to  separate  the  men  from  the 
doctrines,  the  purely  philosophical  elements  from  the  whole 
intellectual  movement,  if  we  wish  to  understand  why  cer- 
tain philosophical  innovations  could  attain  such  an  impor- 
tant significance.  It  was  Sokrates  who  called  the  new 
tendency  into  life.  Plato  gave  it  its  idealistic  stamp,  and 
Aristotle,  by  connecting  it  with  empirical  elements,  created 
out  of  it  that  ultimate  system  which  thenceforth  dominated 
the  thought  of  so  many  centuries.  Opposition  to  Material- 
ism culminates  in  Plato  ;  the  Aristotelian  system  made  the 
most  obstinate  stand  against  Materialistic  theories ;  but  the 
attack  was  begun  by  one  of  the  most  remarkable  men  of 
whom  history  tells,  a  character  of  rare  greatness  and  reso- 
lution— the  Athenian  Sokrates. 

All  the  portraitures  of  Sokrates  show  him  to  us  as  a  man 
of  great  physical  and  intellectual  force,  a  stout,  stubborn 
nature,  of  stern  self-command  and  few  necessities,  brave  in 
fight,  enduring  not  only  of  fatigues,  but  also,  if  need  be,  of 
the  drinking-bout,  moderately  as  he  otherwise  lived.  His 
self-control  was  not  the  tranquillity  of  a  nature  which  has 
nothing  to  control,  but  the  preponderance  of  a  great  mind 
over  strong  sensual  traits  and  a  naturally  passionate  tem- 
perament.41    His  thoughts  and  endeavours  were  concen- 

41  We  do  not  refer  to  the  insuffi-  ditionally  rejected),  but  we  hold  to 

ciently  authenticated  stories  of  Zopy-  his  character  as  it  is  presented  to  us 

ros  and  the  like,  according  to  which  in  Xenophon  and  Plato,  and  espe- 

Sokrates,  at  all  events  in  his  youth,  cially  to  the  well-known  description 

was   choleric  and  licentious   (comp,  in  the  Symposion.     We  do  notthere- 

Zeller,  ii.  2  Aufl.  54,  where,  indeed,  the  fore  assert  that  Sokrates  at  any  pe- 

stories  of  Aristoxenos  are  too  uncon-  riod  of  his  life  did  not  control  his 


REACTION:  SOKRATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE.    61 

trated  upon  a  few  important  points,  and  the  whole  latent 
energy  of  his  nature  entered  into  the  service  of  these 
thoughts  and  endeavours.  The  earnestness  that  worked 
within  him,  the  fire  that  glowed  in  him,  lent  to  his  address 
a  marvellous  influence.  In  his  presence  alone  of  all  men 
could  Alkibiades  feel  ashamed;  the  power  of  his  un- 
adorned address  drew  tears  from  impressionable  souls.4^ 
His  was  an  apostle  nature,  burning  with  the  desire  to 
communicate  to  his  fellow-citizens,  and  especially  the 
young,  the  fire  that  lived  within  him.  His  work  he  him 
self  felt  was  holy,  and  behind  the  playful  irony  that  marked 
his  dialectic  lurked  the  eager  energy  of  a  spirit  that  knew 
and  prized  nothing  but  the  ideas  by  which  it  was  pos- 
sessed. 

Athens  was  a  pious  city,  and  Sokrates  was  a  genuine 
Athenian.  Enlightened  as  he  was,  his  theory  of  the  world 
stall  remained  a  distinctly  religious  theory.  The  teleolo- 
gical  conception  of  nature,  to  which  he  adhered  with  zeal, 
not  to  say  fanaticism,  was  to  him  only  a  proof  of  the  exist- 
ence and  activity  of  the  gods,  as  in  truth  the  need  of  re- 
garding the  gods  as  creating  and  working  in  human  fashion 
may  be  called  the  mainspring  of  all  teleology.43 

That  a  man  like  this  should  be  the  very  man  to  be 
arraigned  for  Atheism,  need  not,  however,  cause  us  over- 
much surprise.  At  all  times  it  has  been  the  faithful 
reformers,  and  not  the  worldly  freethinkers,  who  have 
been  crucified  and  burnt;  and  the  work  of  Sokrates, 
even  in  the  sphere  of  religion,  was  that  of  a  reformer. 
The  whole  tendency  of  the  time  set  just  then  to  the 
purification  of  religious  ideas ;  not  among  the  philosophers 
only,  but  even  among  the  most  influential  Greek  priest- 
passionate  disposition,  but  merely  in  the  Platonic  Symposion,  especially 
that  this  fierce  natural  foundation,     215  D,  E. 

whi);h  was  converted  into  the  enthu-  43  This  is  most  clearly  shown,  as 
siasm  of  the  apostle  of  morality,  must  far  as  Sokrates  is  concerned,  in  his 
h:ve  assigned  to  it  its  due  impor-  discussion  with  Aristodemos  (Xen. 
t-ance.  Memor.,  i.  4),  detailed  at  length  in 

42  Comp,  the  eulogy  of  Alkibiades     Lewes,  Hist.  Phil.,  i.  168-173. 


62  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ  U1TY. 

hoods,  there  appears  to  have  been  a  strong  inclination, 
while  retaining  myth  for  the  credulous  masses,  to  frame 
a  more  spiritual  idea  of  the  gods,  to  arrange  and  unify 
the  variety  of  local  cults  according  to  the  inner  relations 
of  the  theological  idea,  and  to  secure  for  the  great  national 
deities,  such  as  the  Olympian  Zeus,  and  especially  the 
Delphian  Apollo,  as  wide  a  recognition  as  possible.44 
To  these  endeavours  Sokrates's  manner  of  dealing  with 
religion  was  to  a  certain  point  agreeable  enough ;  and 
there  is  still  some  question  whether  we  ought  not  to 
regard  the  remarkable  answer  of  the  oracle  of  Delphi, 
which  declared  Sokrates  to  be  the  wisest  of  the  Hellenes, 
as  a  covert  approval  of  his  believing  rationalism.  Yet 
this  very  man  could  be  more  easily  denounced  to  the 
people  as  a  foe  of  religion,  the  more  often  he  was  ac- 
customed openly,  and  with  an  avowed  object  of  influencing 
his  fellow-citizens,  to  discuss  the  most  dangerous  questions. 
This  religious  earnestness  of  the  great  man  determined, 
then,  his  whole  conduct  in  life  and  death,  in  a  degree 
which  lends  to  the  man  a  still  higher  importance  than 
to  the  doctrine,  and  which  was  quite  calculated  to  make 
his  pupils  into  disciples  zealous  to  spread  wider  the  flame 
of  this  lofty  inspiration.  The  way  in  which  Sokrates, 
following  his  sense  of  duty,  opposed,  as  Prytanis,  the 
passionate  excitement  of  the  populace,  the  way  in  which 
he  refused  to  obey  the  Thirty  Tyrants,45  and  after  his  con- 

44  Mention  has  already  been  made  late  for  a  regeneration  of  Paganism, 
of  the  '  Theokrasy '  (the  mingling  and  it  burst  into  full  activity,  we  may 
fusion  into  one  of  different  gods  and  learn,  in  particular,  from  the  half 
worships)  of  the  Delphic  priesthood  philosophical,  half  mystical  cult  of 
in  Note  2  above.  The  place  of  '  King  Helios,'  which  the  Emperor 
Apollo  in  the  Sokratic  spiritual  Julian  would  have  opposed  to  Chris- 
movement  has  been  recently  pointed  tianity.  Comp.  Baur,  Gesch.  d. 
out  very  curiously  and  markedly  by  Christi.  Kirche,  ii.  (2  Ausg.)  S. 
Nietzsche,  Die  Geburt  der  Tragödie  23  ff.  ;  Teuffei,  Studien  und  Charak- 
aus  dem  Geiste  der  Musik :  Leipzig,  teristiken  :  Leipzig,  1871,  S.  190. 
1872.  How  this  tendency,  in  conneo-  45  Sokrates  was  Epistates  of  the 
tion  with  the  Platonic  theories,  for  Prytanes,  and  had  in  that  capacity 
centuries  continued  an  exuberant  to  put  the  question  to  the  vote,  on 
growth,  until,  at  last,  although  too  the  day  when  the  excited  populace 


REACTION :  SOKRATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE.    63 

demnation  declined  to  flee,  but,  obedient  to  the  law,  with 
peaceful  soul  faced  death,  is  a  convincing  proof  that  with 
him  the  doctrine  and  the  life  were  completely  fused. 

It  has  been  recently  supposed  that  we  must  explain  the 
philosophical  significance  of  Sokrates  by  showing  that  he 
was  anything  but  a  mere  teacher  of  morality,  but  that  he 
has,  on  the  contrary,  left  a  very  distinct  mark  upon  the 
history  of  philosophy  by  certain  definite  innovations.  To 
this  there  is  no  objection ;  only  we  wish  to  show  how  all 
these  new  views,  with  their  bright  and  dark  sides,  have 
their  roots  directly  in  the  theological  and  ethical  principle 
by  which  Sokrates  was  guided  in  his  whole  conduct. 

If  we  next  ask  how  it  was  that  Sokrates  came  to  re- 
nounce speculation  as  to  the  essence  of  things,  and  instead 
to  make  the  moral  nature  of  man  the  supreme  object  of 
his  philosophy,  we  have  from  himself  and  his  pupils  the 
explanation  that  he  had  in  his  younger  days  busied  him- 
self with  physical  science,  but  that  everything  in  this 
province  appeared  to  him  so  uncertain  that  he  had  aban- 
doned this  kind  of  inquiry  as  unprofitable.  Much  more 
important  was  it  for  him,  according  to  the  Delphic  oracle, 
to  know  himself:  the  object,  however,  of  this  effort  after 
self-knowledge  is  to  become  as  good  as  possible. 

We  need  not  now  concern  ourselves  with  the  question 
whether  Sokrates  had  really  at  one  time  zealously  pursued 
physical  investigation,  as  would  seem  to  follow  from  the 
satirical  picture  drawn  by  Aristophanes.  In  the  period  of 
his  life  which  we  know  from  Plato  and  Xenophon  it  was 
no  longer  so ;  on  the  contrary,  we  know  from  Plato  that 
Sokrates  had  read  many  of  the  writings  of  the  earlier 
philosophers  without  finding    any  satisfaction  in   them. 

wished  to  condemn  the  generals  who  put    it    to    the   vote.      The    Thirty 

had  neglected  to  pick  up  the  dead  Tyrants  ordered  him  and  four  others 

after  the  battle    of  Arginusae.     The  to  bring  Leon  back  to  Athens  from 

proposal    was    not    only    unjust    in  Salamis ;  the  other  four  obeyed,  but 

itself,  but  it  had  a  defect  of  form,  Sokrates   quietly  went    back   home, 

and  therefore  Sokrates,  at  the  risk  although  he  knew  that  it  was  at  the 

of  his  own  life,  steadily  refused  to  peril  of  his  life. 


64  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ  UITY. 

He  read,  for  instance,  Anaxagoras,  and  when  he  found 
that  Anaxagoras  explained  the  creation  by  referring  it  to 
reason,  he  was  uncommonly  delighted,  for  he  supposed 
that  Anaxagoras  would  find  in  reason  some  explanation 
of  all  the  arrangements  of  the  universe,  and  show,  for 
example,  if  the  earth  is  flat,  why  it  is  best  thus ;  or,  if 
it  is  in  the  centre  of  the  universe,  why  this  must  be  so, 
and  so  on.  Instead  of  this,  he  was  rudely  disenchanted 
when  Anaxagoras  spoke  of  physical  causes  only.  That 
is  as  if  some  one  should  propose  to  explain  why  Sokrates 
is  sitting  in  this  particular  place,  and  then  when  he  began 
should  explain  the  '  sitting '  according  to  the  principles  of 
anatomy  and  physiology,  instead  of  mentioning  that  the 
Athenians  had  thought  good  to  condemn  him,  and  how 
he  had  thought  good  in  disdain  of  flight  to  sit  here  and 
await  his  fate.46 

We  see  from  this  illustration  how  Sokrates  came  to  the 
study  of  such  treatises  with  a  ready-made  view.  His 
entire  conviction  is  that  the  reason  which  has  created 
the  world-structure  proceeds  after  the  manner  of  human 
reason;  that  we  can  follow  its  thoughts  everywhere,  al- 
though we  must  at  the  same  time  admit  its  infinite 
superiority.  The  world  is  explained  from  man,  not  man 
from  the  universal  laws  of  nature.  In  the  order  of 
natural  events,  then,  there  is  presupposed  throughout 
that  antithesis  of  thoughts  and  acts,  of  plan  and  material 
execution,  which  we  find  in  our  own  consciousness.  Every- 
where we  have  an  anthropomorphic  activity.  A  plan,  a 
purpose  must  first  be  provided,  and  then  the  matter  and 
the  force  to  set  it  going.  We  see  here  how  much  of  a 
Sokratic  Aristotle  still  was  at  bottom  with  his  antithesis 
of  form  and  matter,  and  the  government  of  efficient  causes 
by  the  final  purpose.  Without  having  dealt  himself 
with  physical  science,  Sokrates  had  yet  already  marked  out 

46  Lewes,  Hist,  of  Phil.,  i.  81  foil.,  thinks  it  to  be  genuinely  Sokratic, 
gives  this  passage  of  the  Phaedo  and  shows  how  Anaxagoras  was  mis- 
(comp.  Note  39)  at  length.    He  rightly     understood  by  Sokrates. 


REACTION:  SOKRATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE.    65 

for  it  the  path  in  which  it  was  afterwards  to  travel  with 
such  steady  persistence.  But  the  peculiar  principle  of 
this  theory  of  the  universe  is  the  theological.  The  archi- 
tect of  the  worlds  must  be  a  Person  who  can  be  con- 
ceived and  imagined  by  man,  though  he  may  not  be 
understood  in  all  his  actions.  Even  the  apparently  im- 
personal expression  that  'reason'  has  done  all  this 
receives  a  religious  stamp  through  the  unconditional 
anthropomorphism  with  which  the  work  of  this  'reason' 
is  regarded.  And  therefore  we  find,  even  in  the  Platonic 
Sokrates — and  this  trait  must  be  genuine — the  expressions 
'  Eeason '  and  '  God '  often  employed  as  quite  convertible 
terms. 

That  Sokrates  in  his  conception  of  these  things  rests 
upon  essentially  monotheistic  views  need  not  surprise  us, 
for  it  lay  entirely  in  the  time.  It  is  true  this  monotheism 
was  nowhere  dogmatic ;  on  the  contrary,  the  plurality  of 
the  gods  is  expressly  maintained,  but  the  preponderance 
of  the  God  who  is  regarded  as  creator  and  preserver  of 
the  world  makes  the  others  beings  of  a  lower  rank,  who 
may,  for  many  speculative  purposes,  be  left  entirely  out 
of  sight. 

So  that  we  may  perhaps  assume  that  the  uncertainty  of 
physical  speculations,  of  which  Sokrates  complains,  was 
nothing  but  the  too  obvious  impossibility  of  constructing 
a  complete  and  rational  explanation  of  the  whole  structure 
of  the  universe,  such  as  he  had  vainly  sought  from  Anaxa- 
goras.  For  efficient  causes  are  regarded  by  Sokrates, 
wherever  he  deals  with  them,  as  something  entirely  in- 
different and  unimportant ;  which  is  quite  intelligible  if 
they  are  conceived  not  as  universal  laws  of  nature,  but 
merely  as  the  implements  of  a  reason  which  personally 
thinks  or  creates.  The  more  exalted  or  majestic  this  is 
conceived  to  be,  so  much  the  more  indifferent  and  insig- 
nificant will  the  implement  be  considered ;  and  so  Sokrates 
can  scarcely  speak  with  sufficient  contempt  of  '  the  search 
after  external  causes.' 

VOL.  I.  ,E 


66  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

One  sees  from  this  how  at  bottom  the  doctrine  of  the 
identity  of  thought  and  existence  has  a  theological  root, 
since  it  supposes  that  the  reason  of  a  world-soul,  or  a  God, 
and  a  reason,  moreover,  differing  from  the  human  reason 
only  in  degree,  has  so  contrived  and  disposed  everything 
that  we  can  think  it  again,  and,  if  we  use  our  reason  quite 
rightly,  must  think  it  again. 

The  religious  tendency  inaugurated  by  Sokrates  may 
be  compared  with  the  Kationalism  of  modern  times. 
Sokrates  is  perfectly  ready  to  retain  the  ordinary  forms 
of  religious  cultus,  only  he  imparts  to  them  everywhere 
a  deeper  meaning ;  thus,  for  example,  when  he  demands 
that  we  shall  not  pray  for  particular  blessings,  but  much 
rather  require  '  good '  from  the  gods,  since  they  know  best 
what  is  good  for  us.  This  doctrine  seems  as  harmless  as 
it  is  reasonable,  until  we  reflect  how  deeply  in  Hellenic 
faith  prayer  for  particular  blessings  was  bound  up  with 
the  very  existence  of  particular  deities.  The  gods  of  the 
popular  belief  were  thus  made  by  Sokrates  only  the  repre- 
sentatives of  a  purer  creed.  Unity  of  worship  between 
the  people  and  the  educated  was  preserved,  but  by  the 
aid  of  an  interpretation  of  traditional  creeds  which  we  may 
well  call  rationalistic.  That  Sokrates  praises  the  oracles 
is  quite  in  harmony  with  this  tendency,  for  why  should, 
not  the  deity,  who  has  taken  thought  in  the  smallest  details 
for  the  good  of  man,  also  hold  intercourse  with  him  and 
afford  him  counsel?  And  even  in  "our  modern  civilisa- 
tion, and  in  England  also,  although  more  especially  in 
Germany,  a  very  powerful  tendency  has  arisen,  which 
thought  it  its  duty  to  spread  purer,  forms  of  faith,  exactly 
out  of  zeal  for  the  restoration  of  religion  and  its  influence r 
and  the  main  impulse  of  which,  with  all  its  rationalism, 
was  a  positive  one.  Zeal  against  Materialism,  and  the 
anxious  assertion  of  the  ideal  benefits  of  faith  in  God, 
freedom,  and  immortality,  was  nowhere  greater  than 
amongst  men  of  this  tendency.  So  Sokrates  also,  who  is 
under  the  double  sway  of  destructive  culture  and  love  for 


REACTION:  SOKRATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE.    67 

the  ideal  content  of  faith,  will,  above  all  things,  preserve 
the  latter.  The  conservative  element,  which  pervades  his 
whole  being,  by  no  means  prevents  him  from  putting  his 
hands  to  very  radical  changes,  even  in  the  sphere  of  poli- 
tics, in  order  that  the  most  essential  and  noble  element  of 
political  existence,  the  living  sense  of  community,  may  be 
permanently  secured  against  the  torrent  of  the  predomi- 
nant individualism. 

Lewes,  who  gives  us  what  is  in  many  respects  an  admi- 
rable picture  of  Sokrates,  would  like  to  prove  from  his 
doctrine  that  virtue  is  knowledge,  that  philosophy,  and  not 
morality,  was  the  special  occupation  of  his  life.  This 
distinction  leads  to  misconceptions.  A  mere  'moralist' 
Sokrates  certainly  was  not,  if  by  that  we  mean  a  man  who, 
without  regard  to  the  deeper  establishing  of  his  doctrines, 
only  attempts  to  make  himself  and  others  more  moral. 
But  yet  his  philosophy  in  its  inmost  essence  was  moral 
philosophy,  and  moral  philosophy  based  upon  a '  religious 
foundation.  In  this  is  the  mainspring  of  all  his  activities, 
and  the  presupposition  of  the  intelligibility  and  teachable- 
ness of  morality  is  from  the  beginning  implied  in  his  pecu- 
liar religious  standpoint.  That  he  went  further,  and 
not  only  asserted  the  intelligibility  of  morality,  but  identi- 
fied practical  virtue  with  the  theoretical  comprehension  of 
morality,  is  his  personal  conception  of  the  relationship ; 
and  here  also  we  may  venture  to  trace  religious  influences. 

The  Delphic  god,  who  was  especially  a  god  of  moral  ele- 
vation, called  upon  man,  by  the  inscription  on  his  temple, 
to  '  Know  himself.'  This  utterance  became  to  Sokrates  in 
a  twofold  respect  the  guide  of  his  philosophical  career: 
first,  in  the  establishment  of  moral  science  instead  of  the 
apparently  fruitless  natural  science;  but,  secondly,  in  the 
principle  of  striving  after  moral  elevation  by  means  of 
knowledge. 

The  relativity  of  the  Sophists  must  to  a  man  of  this 
intellectual  tendency  have  been  thoroughly  hateful.  The 
religious  sense  calls  for  its  sure  points,  especially  in  ail 


68  MA TERIAL1SM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

that  concerns  God,  the  soul,  and  the  rule  of  life.  For 
Sokrates,  therefore,  it  is  an  axiomatic  principle  that  there 
must  be  an  ethical  knowledge.  Relativity,  which  scouts 
it,  rests  upon  the  right  of  individual  impressions.  As 
against  this,  then,  the  universal  and  the  universally  true 
must  be  established. 

We  have  seen  above  how  the  step  to  the  universal 
might  have  been  taken  from  the  standpoint  of  relativity 
without  any  change  of  principle.  But  in  that  case  the  uni- 
versal would  have  been  conceived  in  a  strict  Nominalistic 
sense.  Knowledge  might  have  extended  itself  to  infinity 
on  this  field  without  ever  getting  beyond  empiricism  and 
probability.  It  is  interesting  to  observe  how  the  Platonic 
Sokrates,  in  arguing  against  the  relativity  of  Protagoras, 
often  begins  exactly  as  a  genuine  disciple  of  the  Sophists 
must  have  begun,  if  he  would  venture  on  the  step  to 
the  consideration  of  the  universal.  But  the  controversy 
never  stops  there;  it  always  aims  beyond  the  imme- 
diate goal,  in  order  to  embrace  the  universal  in  that  tran- 
scendental sense  in  which  Plato  had  introduced  it  into 
science.  And  the  ground  had,  without  doubt,  been  already 
prepared  for  this  by  Sokrates.  If  the  Platonic  Sokrates 
proves,  for  example  (in  the  Kratylus),  that  names  are  not 
arbitrarily  assigned  to  things,  but  that  they  correspond  to 
the  innermost  nature  of  the  object,  there  is  already  con- 
tained in  this  nature  of  things,  in  a  germinal  shape,  that 
essence  which  Plato  later  exalted  so  high  above  the  indi- 
vidual things,  that  they  were  reduced  and  degraded  to 
mere  appearances. 

Aristotle  attributes  to  Sokrates  two  essential  innovations 
in  method — the  use  of  definitions  and  induction.  Both,  as 
methods  of  dialectic,  turn  upon  universals ;  and  the  art 
of  discussion,  in  which  Sokrates  was  a  master,  consisted 
chiefly  in  the  sure  and  skilful  reference  of  the  single  case 
to  a  universal,  and  employment  of  the  universal  to  con- 
clude back  to  the  particular.  And  it  is  just  here,  of 
course,  that  we  find  in  the  Platonic  dialogues  quantities 


REACTION:  SOKRATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE.    69 

of  logical  tricks,  ambuscades,  and  sophisms  of  all  kinds  on 
the  side  of  the  always  victorious  Sokrates.  He  plays  often 
with  his  opponents,  as  a  cat  with  a  mouse,  entraps  them 
into  far-reaching  admissions,  only  to  show  them  himself 
immediately  that  the  reasoning  contained  an  error ;  but 
scarcely  is  this  repaired,  than  the  opponent  is  again  caught 
in  a  snare,  which  is,  in  fact,  no  more  real  than  the  first. 

There  is  no  doubt  that  here  the  general  treatment  is 
genuinely  Sokratic,  although  the  particular  arguments  are 
for  the  most  part  Plato's.  It  will  also  be  admitted  that 
this  sophistical  manner  of  opposing  the  Sophists  is  much 
more  profitable  in  speech,  in  the  direct  conflict  of  argu- 
ment, where  one  man  tries  his  intellectual  strength  against 
another,  than  in  the  calm  literary  discussion  which,  at 
least  according  to  our  ideas,  must  be  measured  by  a  far 
severer  standard  of  soundness  in  its  proofs. 

Sokrates  scarcely  ever  consciously  confused  his  oppo- 
nents, and  merely  overmatched  them  instead  of  thoroughly 
refuting  them.  It  is  his  firm  belief  in  his  own  principles  that 
blinds  him  to  the  errors  of  his  own  reasoning,  while  he  in- 
stantly discovers  those  of  his  opponents,  and  employs  them 
with  all  the  force  of  a  practised  athlete.  Although,  how- 
ever, we  cannot  charge  Sokrates  with  any  dishonesty  in 
debate,  yet  the  confusion  of  the  defeat  of  an  opponent  with 
the  refutation  of  his  opinion  belongs  to  him  also,  as  it  had 
already  belonged  to  his  predecessors  and  to  Greek  dialectic 
from  its  first  beginnings.  The  picture  of  the  intellectual 
wrestling-match,  or,  as  we  find  in  Aristotle  in  particular, 
of  the  contest  of  two  parties  before  a  tribunal,  is  every- 
where present,  the  thought  appears  linked  with  the  person, 
and  the  vivid  picturesqueness  of  debate  replaces  a  calm  and 
complete  analysis. 

The  Sokratic  '  irony,'  moreover,  with  which  he  professes 
ignorance  and  asks  instruction  from  his  opponent,  is  often 
only  the  thin  veil  of  a  dogmatism  which  is  ever  ready,  in 
the  least  embarrassment,  innocently,  and  to  all  appearance 
only  tentatively,  to  foist  in  a  ready-made  opinion,  and, 


70  MA  TERIAL1SM  IN  ANTIQ UITY. 

unobserved,  to  gain  it  acceptance.  Yet  this  is  a  dogmatism 
which  consisted  in  the  constant  repetition  of  few  and 
simple  dogmas  :  virtue  is  knowledge ;  the  just  man  alone 
is  really  happy  ;  self-knowledge  is  the  first  duty  of  man ; 
to  improve  himself  is  of  more  consequence  than  any  care 
for  external  things,  and  so  on. 

With  regard  to  the  special  meaning  of  self-knowledge  ana 
the  doctrine  of  virtue,  Sokrates  remains  always  a  seeker 
only.  He  seeks  with  all  the  energy  of  a  believing  nature, 
but  he  does  not  venture  to  assert  definite  conclusions. 
His  method  of  definitions  leads  much  more  frequently 
to  the  mere  postulation  of  a  definition,  to  the  statement 
of  the  idea  of  the  thing  that  is  to  be  known,  than  to  the 
actual  establishing  of  a  definition.  When  we  reach  the 
point  where  something  more  should  be  given  us,  we  find 
either  a  mere  attempt  or  the  everlasting  Sokratic  ignorance. 
He  is  apparently  content  with  the  negation  of  negation, 
and  reminds  us  of  the  oracle  which  declared  him  to  be  the 
wisest  of  the  Greeks  because  he  knew  his  own  ignorance, 
whilst  other  men  do  not  so  much  as  know  that  they  know 
nothing.  This  result,  however,  purely  negative  as  it  ap- 
pears, is  far  as  the  heavens  removed  from  scepticism ;  for 
whilst  the  sceptic  denies  the  very  possibility  of  certain 
knowledge,  to  Sokrates  the  idea  that  such  a  knowledge 
there  must  be  is  the  very  guiding  star  of  all  his  activity. 
He  contents  himself,  however,  with  making  room  for 
genuine  knowledge  by  destroying  mere  sham  knowledge, 
and  by  the  constitution  and  employment  of  a  method 
which  shall  be  capable  of  discerning  true  from  seeming 
knowledge.  Criticism  therefore,  as  opposed  to  scepticism, 
is  the  function  of  this  method  ;  and  in  the  vindication  of 
criticism  as  the  instrument  of  science  we  have  at  least  one 
achievement  of  his  activity  that  possesses  a  permanent 
value.  And  yet  his  chief  significance  in  the  history  of 
philosophy  does  not  lie  here,  but  in  his  belief  in  know- 
ledge and  its  object ;  the  universal  essence  of  things,  the 
stationary  pole  in  the  flight  of  phenomena.     Although  this 


REACTION:  SOKRATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE.    71 

belief  may  have  overshot  the  mark,  yet  thus  was  taken  the 
indispensable  step  that  the  flagging  energies  of  Eelativism 
and  Materialism  were  incapable  of  taking — the  treatment 
of  the  universal  in  its  relation  to  the  individual,  of  concep- 
tions in  contrast  to  mere  perception.  The  tares  of  Platonic 
Idealism  grew  up  together  with  the  wheat ;  but  the  ground 
was  yet  again  prepared :  when  a  strong  hand  took  the 
plough,  the  field  of  philosophy  again  bore  fruit  a  hundred- 
fold, just  when  it  seemed  destined  to  be  unproductive. 

Of  all  the  disciples  of  Sokrates,  Plato  was  the  one  most 
deeply  affected  by  that  religious  glow  which  proceeded 
from  him,  and  it  was  Plato  also  who  carried  out  most 
purely,  though  also  most  one-sidedly,  the  thoughts  of  the 
master.  And  it  is  especially  the  errors  which  lie  at  the 
foundation  of  the  Sokratic  philosophy  which,  in  the  hands 
of  Plato,  attain  a  mighty  development,  to  endure  for  thou- 
sands of  years.  These  Platonic  errors,  however,  because  of 
their  deep  opposition  to  the  philosophy  which  springs  from 
experience,  are  for  us  of  especial  importance.  They  are 
also  errors  of  universal  significance,  like  those  of  Material- 
ism; for-  although  they  may  not  be  connected  with  the 
nature  of  our  thinking  faculties  by  such  immediate  points 
of  connection  as  is  Materialism,  yet  they  rest  only  the 
more  surely  on  the  broad  basis  of  our  whole  psychical 
organisation.  Both  theories  are  necessary  stages  of  human 
thought,  and  although  Materialism  may,  as  compared  with 
Platonism,  upon  special  points  always  maintain  its  posi- 
tion ;  yet  it  may  be  that  the  whole  picture  of  the  world 
which  this  latter  affords  stands  nearer  to  the  unknown 
truth :  in  any  case  it  has  deeper  relations  to  the  life  of  the 
emotions,  to  art,  to  the  moral  functions  of  mankind. 
Noble,  however,  as  these  relations  may  be,  and  beneficently 
as  Platonism  at  various  epochs  may  have  acted  through 
them  on  the  whole  development  of  humanity,  the  indispen- 
sable duty  nevertheless  remains  of  laying  thoroughly  bare 
the  errors  of  Platonism  without  regard  to  their  nobler 
aspects. 


72  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY, 

But  first  a  word  as  to  Plato's  general  tendency.  We 
called  him  the  purest  of  the  Sokratics,  and  we  found  in 
Sokrates  a  Eationalist.  This  is  far  from  agreeing  with  the 
widely  current  view  which  regards  Plato  as  a  mystic  and  a 
poetical  enthusiast;  but  this  view  is  thoroughly  false. 
Lewes,  who  has  opposed  this  notion  with  special  energy, 
thus  characterises  him :  "  He  wrote  poetry  in  his  youth ; 
in  mature  age  he  wrote  vehemently  against  it.  In  his 
dialogues  he  appears  anything  but  '  dreamy ; '  anything 
but  '  an  Idealist/  as  that  phrase  is  popularly  understood. 
He  is  a  dialectician,  a  severe  and  abstract  thinker,  and  a 
great  Sophist.  His  metaphysics  are  of  a  nature  so  abstract 
and  so  subtle  that  they  frighten  away  all  but  the  most  de- 
termined students.  His  views  on  morals  and  politics,  so 
far  from  having  any  romantic  tinge,  are  the  neplus  ultra  of 
logical  severity ;  hard,  uncompromising,  and  above  human- 
ity. He  had  learned  to  look  upon  human  passion  as  a 
disease,  and  human  pleasure  as  a  frivolity.  The  only 
thing  worth  living  for  was  truth.  Dialectics  was  the 
noblest  exercise  of  humanity."  47 

47  Lewes,   Hist,   of  Phil.,   i.    197.  scriptions  are  just,  and  not  irreconcil- 

Compare,  on  the  other  hand,  the  ap-  able  ;  for  the  plastic  beauty,  clear  as 

proving  words  of  Zeller,  ii.  (2te  Aufl. ),  the  god  of  light,  of  the  form  in  Plato, 

p.  355,  as  to  the  poetical  character  of  is  indeed  '  poetical,'  in  the  wider  sense 

the  Platonic  philosophy  :   "As  an  ar-  of  the  word,  but  is  not  mystical  or 

tistic  nature  was  necessary  to  the  pro-  romantic.     At  the  same  time,  how- 

duction  of  such  a  philosophy,  so  in  ever,   the  stubborn  and  pretentious 

turn  this  philosophy  would  necessarily  dialectic,  to  which  Lewes  holds,  is 

require  to  be   embodied  in  artistic  carried  to  an  extent  which  is  in  fact 

shape.  The  phenomenon  brought  into  not  only  extravagant,  but  is  even  dis- 

such  near  contact  with  the  idea  as  we  turbing  to  the  artistic  form  ;  but  it 

find  with  Plato  becomes  a  beautiful  stands,   moreover,  with  its  dogmat- 

phenomenon,  the  intuition  of  the  idea  ism  and  its  special  pretentions  to  a 

in  the  phenomenon  an  aesthetic  intui-  '  knowledge '  which  is  only  gained  by 

tion.    Where  science  and  life  so  inter-  a  systematic  struggle,  also  in  contra- 

penetrate  each  other  as  with  him,  diction    with    the    genuine    poetical 

there  science  will  only  be  communi-  principle  of  true  speculation,  which 

cated  in  lively  description ;  and  since  relies  more  upon  intellectual  vision 

what  is  to  be  communicated  is  an  ideal,  than     upon      mediate      knowledge, 

this  description  will  necessarily  be  a  Plato's  philosophy   might  indeed,  if 

poetical  description."  No  doubt  Lewes  this  artistic  element  had  been  carried 

lias  under-estimated  the  artistic  ele-  out,  bave  become  the  best  model  for 

ment  in  Plato's  dialogues.     Both  de-  the  speculation  of  all  time ;  but  the- 


REACTION:  SO K RATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE,     jt, 

In  all  this,  it  cannot  be  denied  that,  historically,  Platon- 
ism  frequently  appears  in  connection  with  enthusiasm,  and 
that  even  the  widely-digressing  Neoplatonic  systems  find 
some  support  in  Plato's  doctrine ;  nay,  amongst  the  imme- 
diate followers  of  the  great  master  there  were  those  who 
may  be  described  as  mystics ;  and  the  Pythagorean  ele- 
ments which  they  combined  with  the  teachings  of  Plato 
find  in  these  very  teachings  support  and  authority.  We 
have  besides  these,  of  course,  the  extremely  sober  '  middle 
academy,'  which  also  connected  itself  with  Plato,  and  the 
beginnings  of  whose  theory  of  probability  may  in  fact  be 
traced  in  Plato. 

The  truth  is,  that  in  Plato  the  Sokratic  Eationalism  out- 
runs itself,  and  in  the  effort  to  elevate  the  sphere  of  reason 
high  above  the  sensations,  went  so  far  that  a  relapse  into 
mythical  forms  became  inevitable.  Plato  ascended  into  a 
sphere  for  which  man  has  been  granted  neither  language 
nor  powers  of  conception.  He  saw  himself  thus  compelled 
to  fall  back  upon  figurative  expression;  but  his  system 
is  a  speaking  proof  that  figurative  expression  for  what  is 
entirely  supersensual  is  a  chimera,  and  that  the  attempt  to 
climb  by  this  ladder  to  impossible  heights  of  abstraction 
revenges  itself  in  the  predominance  exercised  by  the  figure 
over  the  thought,  and  by  rushing  to  consequences  in  which 
all  logical  consistency  perishes  beneath  the  glamour  of 
associations  of  sensuous  ideas.48 

combination  of  this  element  -with  the  tific  form.     It  is  wrong,  however,  to 

abstract  dialectic,  and  logical  severity,  regard  thiä  as  a  weakness  in  the  phi- 

so  sharply  emphasised  by  Lewes,  pro-  losopher,  who  is  here  merely  too  much 

duces  a   heterogeneous   whole,    and  of  a  poet  still,  and  too  little  of  a  philo- 

especially  by  its   total  confusion  of  sopher.    It  lies  rather  in  the  nature  of 

science  and  poetry  created  great  con-  the  problems  on  which  Plato  has  here 

fusion  in  later  philosophy.  ventured  that  they  cannot  be  treated 

48  Zeller,   ii.    2   Aufl.,    p.    361   ff.  in  any  but  a  figurative  method.     An 

[E.    T.    160  foil.],    recognises,    quite  adequate  scientific  knowledge  of  the 

rightly,  that  the  Platonic  myths  are  not  absolutely   transcendental   is  impos- 

the  mere  garments  of  thoughts  which  sible,    and    modern    systems    which 

the  philosopher  possessed  in  another  calls  up  the  phantom  of  an  intellectual 

shape,   but  that  they   are   employed  knowledge  of  transcendental  things, 

in  those  cases  where  Plato  wishes  to  are  in  truth   no  whit  higher  in  this 

express   something  which  he  has  no  respect  than  the  Platonic, 
means  of  conveying  in  rigorous  seien- 


74  -  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

Plato,  before  attaching  himself  to  Sokrates,  had  been 
introduced  to  the  philosophy  of  Herakleitos,  and  had  so 
learnt  that  there  is  no  quiet  persistent  being,  that  every- 
thing is  in  constant  flux.  When,  then,  he  thought  he 
had  discovered  something  permanent  in  the  Sokratic 
definitions,  and  in  the  universal  essence  of  things  which  is 
expressed  in  these  definitions,  he  combined  this  doctrine 
with  a  Herakleitean  element,  in  such  fashion  that  he  attri- 
buted true  being,  and  the  undisturbed  permanence  in- 
separable from  it,  to  the  universal  alone ;  the  individual 
things,  on  the  other  hand,  are  strictly  not  at  all,  but  merely 
become.  The  phenomena  flow  away  without  reality :  being 
is  eternal. 

We  now  know  that  the  only  ideas  capable  of  defini- 
tion are  abstract,  self-constituted  ideas,  such  as  those 
employed  by  the  mathematician  in  order  to  approach 
infinitesimally  near  to  the  quantitative  constitution  of 
things,  without,  however,  exhausting  it  by  his  formulas. 
Every  attempt  to  define  things  breaks  down :  the  conven- 
tional employment  of  a  word  may  be  arbitrarily  fixed, 
but  when  this  word  is  used  to  indicate  a  class  of  objects 
according  to  their  common  nature,  it  becomes  evident, 
sooner  or  later,  that  the  things  have  other  relations  and 
other  distinguishing  qualities  than  was  originally  supposed. 
The  old  definition  becomes  useless,  and  must  be  replaced  by 
a  new,  which  has  in  its  turn  no  more  pretensions  to  eternal 
validity  than  the  first.  No  definition  of  a  fixed  star  can 
prevent  it  from  moving ;  no  definition  can  draw  a  perma- 
nent boundary  between  meteors  and  other  heavenly  bodies. 
As  often  as  research  makes  a  great  step  forward,  the 
definitions  must  give  way,  and  individual  things  do  not 
regulate  themselves  in  accordance  with  our  general  notions, 
but  these  must,  on  the  contrary,  be  determined  by  the 
particular  objects  which  we  perceive. 

Plato  carried  further  the  elements  of  logic  he  had 
received  from  Sokrates.  In  him  we  find,  for  the  first  time, 
a  clear  idea  of  genera  and  sjoecics,  of  the  co-ordination  and 


REACTION:  SOKRA  TES,  PLA TO,  ARISTOTLE.    75 

subordination  of  concepts;  and  he  is  fond  of  using  the 
new  achievement  that  he  may,  by  the  aid  of  division,  bring 
light  and  order  into  the  objects  of  discussion.  This  was, 
indeed,  a  great  and  important  step  forward,  and  yet  even 
this  immediately  enlisted  itself  in  the  service  of  as  great 
an  error.  There  arose  that  hierarchy  of  ideas  in  which 
that  which  is  most  void  of  content  was  placed  highest. 
Abstraction  was  the  Jacob's  ladder  by  which  the  philo- 
sopher ascended  to  certainty.  The  further  he  was  from 
facts,  the  nearer  he  thought  himself  to  truth. 

Whilst  Plato,  however,  exhibited  universal  ideas  as  the 
permanent  in  the  fleeting  phenomenal  world,  he  saw  him- 
self further  compelled  to  the  pregnant  step  of  separating 
the  universal  from  the  particular,  and  attributing  to  it  a 
separate  existence.  Beauty  is  not  only  in  beautiful  objects, 
goodness  not  only  in  good  men,  but  the  beautiful,  the  good, 
quite  abstractly  regarded,  are  self-existent  realities.  It 
would  lead  us  too  far  to  discuss  fully  here  the  Platonic 
ideal  theory :  it  is  enough  for  our  purpose  to  examine  its 
foundations,  and  to  see  how  from  these  foundations  sprang 
that  intellectual  tendency  which  raised  itself  so  high,  as  it 
supposed,  above  the  vulgar  empiricism,  and  which  must, 
nevertheless,  at  all  points,  yield  again  to  empiricism 
wherever  it  is  a  question  of  the  positive  progress  of 
science. 

So  much  is  clear,  that  we  need  the  universal  and  the  pro- 
cess of  abstraction  in  order  to  attain  to  knowledge.  Even 
the  particular  fact,  in  order  to  become  an  object  of  know- 
ledge, must  be  exalted  above  the  Individualism  of  Prota- 
goras by  the  supposition  and  demonstration  of  a  perception 
of  something  implying  regular  recurrence  •  that  is,  of  the 
universal  as  against  the  individual — of  the  average  as 
against  fluctuations.  But  knowledge  thus  begins  at  once 
to  rise  above  mere  opinion  before  it  has  directed  itself  to 
any  special  class  of  similar  objects.  We  require,  however, 
in  addition,  even  before  we  can  accurately  know  whole 
classes,  general  terms  in  order  to  fix  our  knowledge,  and 


76  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ UITY. 

to  be  able  to  communicate  it ;  for  the  simple  reason  that 
no  language  could  suffice  to  express  all  particulars,  and 
because,  with,  a  language  that  did  this,  no  understanding,  no 
general  knowledge  would  be  possible,  and  the  retention  of 
such  an  infinity  of  meanings  would  be  impossible.  On 
this  point  Locke  was  the  first  to  throw  a  clear  light ;  but 
we  must  never  forget  that  Locke,  long  as  he  lived  after 
Plato,  nevertheless  stands  in  the  midst  of  the  great  pro- 
cess by  which  the  modern  world  freed  itself  from  the 
Platonic  and  Aristotelian  theory  of  things.  Sokrates,  Plato, 
and  Aristotle,  like  their  whole  age,  allowed  themselves  to 
be  deceived  by  words.  We  have  seen  how  Sokrates  be- 
lieved that  every  word  must  originally  express  the  essence 
of  the  thing ;  the  general  name,  therefore,  would  express 
the  nature  of  the  class  of  objects  in  question.  Where 
there  was  a  name,  there  a  real  existence  was  presupposed. 
Justice,  Truth,  Beauty,  must  mean  l  something ; '  and  there 
must  accordingly  be  realities  corresponding  to  these  expres- 
sions. 

Aristotle  points  out  that  Plato  first  distinguished  the 
universal  essence  of  things  from  the  individuals,  which 
Sokrates  had  not  yet  done.  But  Sokrates  had,  moreover, 
not  held  that  peculiar  doctrine  of  Aristotle  as  to  the  rela- 
tion of  the  universal  to  the  particular  which  we  shall  soon 
have  to  consider.  Yet  Sokrates  had  got  as  far  as  the 
theory  that  our  knowledge  has  reference  to  the  universal, 
and  that  is  something  quite  different  from  the  indispen- 
sableness  of  general  notions  for  knowledge  explained 
above.  The  virtuous  man  is,  according  to  Sokrates,  the 
man  who  knows  what  is  pious  or  impious,  what  is  noble 
or  disgraceful,  what  is  just  or  unjust ;  but  in  saying  this, 
he  had  always  in  his  eye  the  definition  which  he  was  cease- 
lessly in  search  of.  The  universal  nature  of  the  just,  of  the 
noble,  not  what  is  in  the  particular  case  just  and  noble,  is 
sought.  From  the  universal  we  must  obtain  the  parti- 
cular, but  not  conversely;  for  induction  serves  him  in 
reaching  the  universal,  only  to  make  it  clear  to  the  mind, 


RE  A  CT  ION :  SOKRA  TES,  PL  A  TO,  ARISTO  TIE.    7  7 

not  to  found  the  universal  upon  the  sum  of  particular 
instances.  From  this  standpoint  it  was  only  consistent 
to  allow  the  universal  to  exist  by  itself,  because  only 
thereby  did  it  seem  to  attain  to  complete  independence. 
Only  later  could  the  attempt  be  made  to  establish  for  the 
universal  an  immanent  and  yet  fundamentally  indepen- 
dent relation  to  the  particular  objects.  It  must  not  be 
left  out  of  sight,  however,  that  the  Herakleitean  founda- 
tion of  Plato's  education  very  materially  contributed  to 
bring  about  this  separation  between  the  universal  and  the 
particular. 

But  we  must  not  fail  to  understand  that  from  this  para- 
doxical method  of  working  of  course  only  paradoxical  re- 
sults could  follow.  The  name  is  made  a  thing,  but  a  thing 
having  no  similarity  with  any  other  thing,  and  to  which, 
in  the  nature  of  human  thought,  only  negative  predicates 
can  be  attached.  But  since  there  is  an  absolute  necessity 
for  some  positive  assertion,  we  find  ourselves  from  the  out- 
set in  the  region  of  myth  and  symbol. 

The  very  word  eZSo?  or  ISea,  from  which  our  word  idea 
has  come,  bears  this  stamp  of  the  symbolical.  There  is  a 
similar  notion  of  the  species  as  distinguished  from  the  in- 
dividual. "We  may  very  easily  represent  to  ourselves  in 
imagination  a  pattern  of  any  species  which  is  free  from 
all  the  accidents  of  the  individual,  and  will  therefore 
stand  for  the  type  or  pattern  of  all  individuals,  and  be 
moreover  an  absolutely  perfect  individual.  We  cannot 
imagine  a  lion  as  such,  a  rose  as  such ;  but  we  may  repre- 
sent in  imagination  a  definitely-outlined  picture  of  a  lion  or 
a  rose,  wholly  free  from  all  those  accidents  of  individual 
formation  which  may  collectively  be  regarded  as  devia- 
tions from  this  norm,  as  imperfections.  This  is,  how- 
ever, not  the  Platonic  idea  of  the  lion  or  the  rose,  but  an 
ideal  that  is  a  creation  of  the  senses,  intended  to  express 
the  abstract  idea  as  perfectly  as  possible.  The  idea  itself 
is  invisible,  for  everything  that  is  invisible  belongs  to  the 
fleeting  world  of  mere  phenomena:  it  has  no  forms  in 


78  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

space,  for  the  supersensuous  cannot  be  linked  with  space. 
Similarly  nothing  whatever  positive  can  be  expressed  of  the 
ideas  without  conceiving  them  in  some  sensuous  fashion. 
They  cannot  be  called  pure,  sovereign,  perfect,  eternal,  with- 
out our  connecting  with  them  by  these  very  words  ideas 
of  sense.  So  Plato,  in  his  ideal  theory,  is  obliged  to  have 
recourse  to  mythus,  and  so,  at  a  single  step  we  pass  from 
the  highest  abstraction  to  the  true  life-element  of  all 
mysticism — the  sensuous  supersensuous.  The  mythus  is, 
however,  to  have  only  a  figurative  or  metaphorical  force. 
By  its  means,  what  is  in  itself  only  an  object  of  the  pure 
reason  is  to  be  represented  in  the  forms  of  the  phenomenal 
world ;  but  what  kind  of  figure  can  that  be  of  which  the 
original  cannot  be  supplied  ? 

The  idea  itself  is  said  to  be  perceived  by  the  reason, 
though  but  imperfectly  in  this  earthly  life,  and  the  reason 
stands  related  to  this  supersensuous  existence  as  the 
senses  are  related  to  sensible  objects.  And  this  is  the 
origin  of  that  sharp  separation  of  reason  and  sensation 
which  has  ever  since  dominated  all  philosophy,  and  has 
excited  endless  misunderstandings.  The  senses  are  said 
to  have  no  share  in  knowledge;  they  can  only  feel  or 
perceive,  and  reach  only  to  phenomena.  The  reason,  on  the 
other  hand,  is  capable  of  comprehending  the  supersensual. 
It  is  completely  separated  from  the  rest  of  the  human 
organisation,  especially  by  Aristotle,  who  has  developed 
this  doctrine  further.  Certain  special  objects  are  sup- 
posed to  be  known  by  the  pure  reason — the  '  Noumena ' 
which,  in  opposition  to  '  Phenomena '  or  appearances, 
form  the  object  of  the  highest  kind  of  knowledge.  But, 
in  fact,  not  only  are  these  noumena  cobwebs  of  the  brain, 
but  even  the  'pure  reason,'  which  is  to  apprehend  them, 
is  equally  fabulous.  Man  has  no  such  reason,  and  no 
idea  of  such  a  reason,  which  can  perceive  the  universal, 
the  abstract,  the  supersensuous,  the  ideas  without  the 
mediation  of  sensation  and  perception.  Even  where  our 
thought  carries  us  beyond  the  limits  of  our  sensible  ex- 


REACTION:  SOKRATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE.    79 

perience,  where  we  are  led  to  the  conjecture  that  our  space, 
with  its  three  dimensions,  our  time,  with  its  present 
springing  out  of  nothing  and  vanishing  into  nothing,  are 
only  human  forms  of  the  conception  of  an  infinitely  more 
comprehensive  being, — even  here  we  must  avail  ourselves 
of  the  ordinary  understanding,  whose  categories,  one  and 
all,  are  indissolubly  connected  with  sensation.  We  cannot 
imagine  either  the  one  and  the  many,  or  substance  as 
opposed  to  its  qualities,  or  even  a  predicate  of  any  kind, 
without  an  infusion  of  the  sensible. 

"We  are  here,  therefore,  everywhere  in  the  presence  of 
mythus,  and  of  mythus  whose  inner  core  and  significance 
consists  of  the  utterly  unknown,  not  to  say  an  absolute 
nonentity.  All  these  Platonic  conceptions,  therefore,  have 
been,  down  to  our  own  days,  only  hindrances  and  ignesfatui 
for  thought  and  inquiry,  for  the  mastery  of  phenomena  by 
the  understanding  and  by  sure  methodical  science.  But  just 
as  the  human  spirit  will  never  be  content  with  the  world 
of  understanding,  which  an  exact  empiricism  might  afford 
us,  so  the  Platonic  philosophy  will  ever  remain  the  first 
and  most  elevated  type  of  a  poetical  exaltation  of  the 
spirit  above  the  unsatisfying  patchwork  of  knowledge,  and 
we  are  as  much  justified  in  this  exaltation  on  the  wings 
of  imaginative  speculation  as  in  the  exercise  of  any  func- 
tion of  our  mental  and  physical  faculties.  Nay,  we  shall 
attach  to  it  a  high  importance  when  we  see  how  the  free 
play  of  spirit  which  is  involved  in  the  search  after  the  One 
and  the  Eternal  in  the  change  of  earthly  things,  reacts 
with  a  vitalising  and  freshening  influence  upon  whole  gene- 
rations, and  often  indirectly  affords  a  new  impulse  even  to 
scientific  research.  Only  the  world  must,  once  for  all,  clearly 
comprehend  that  we  have  here  not  knowledge,  but  poesy, 
even  though  this  poesy  may  perhaps  symbolically  repre- 
sent to  us  a  real  and  true  aspect  of  the  true  nature  of  all 
things,  of  which  the  immediate  apprehension  is  denied 
to  our  reason.  Sokrates  wished  to  make  an  end  of  the 
rampant  individualism,  and  to  pave  the  way  to  objective 


8o  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

knowledge.  The  result  was  a  method  which  completely 
confused  subjective  and  objective,  rendered  impossible  the 
direct  advance  of  positive  knowledge,  and  appeared  to  open 
to  individual  thought  and  speculation  a  sphere  of  the  most 
unlimited  license.  But  this  license  was,  nevertheless,  not 
really  so  unlimited.  The  religious  and  moral  principle 
from  which  Plato  and  Sokrates  started  guided  the  great 
speculative  movement  to  a  determined  goal,  and  made  it 
capable  of  affording  a  deep  content  and  a  noble  character 
of  completeness  to  the  moral  efforts  and  struggle  of  thou- 
sands of  years,  while  it  became  completely  fused  with 
foreign  and  anything  but  Hellenic  conceptions  and  doctrines. 
And  even  to-day  the  ideal  theory,  which  we  are  obliged 
to  banish  from  the  realm  of  science,  may  by  its  ethical  and 
aesthetic  content  become  a  source  of  plentiful  blessings. 
The  'form'  (Gestalt),  as  Schiller  has  so  beautifully  and 
vigorously  rendered  the  faded  expression  '  idea,'  still  lives 
and  moves  divinely  amongst  gods  in  the  abodes  of  light, 
and  still  to-day,  as  in  old  Hellas,  has  the  power  of  lifting 
us  upon  its  wings  above  the  anxieties  of  earth  that  we 
may  flee  into  the  realm  of  the  ideal. 

As  to  Aristotle,  we  shall  here  speak  very  briefly,  since 
we  must  discuss  the  influence  of  his  system  when  we 
come  to  medieval  times.  Then  we  will  enter  more  fully 
into  the  most  important  notions  which  the  middle  ages 
and  modern  times  have,  with  various  modifications,  bor- 
rowed from  his  system.  Here  we  are  rather  concerned 
with  its  general  nature  and  its  relation  to  Idealism  and 
Materialism. 

Aristotle  and  Plato  being  by  far  the  most  influential 
and  important  of  the  Greek  philosophers  whose  works  we 
possess,  we  are  easily  led  to  suppose  a  sharp  antithesis 
between  them,  as  though  they  represented  two  main  philo- 
sophical tendencies  —  a  priori  speculation  and  rational 
empiricism.  The  truth  is,  however,  that  Aristotle  devised 
a  system  in  close  dependence  upon  Plato,  which,  though 
not  without  internal  inconsistencies,  combines  an  apparent 


REACTION:  SO K RATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE.     81 

empiricism  with  all  those  errors  which  in  the  Sokratico- 
Platonic  theories  radically  corrupt  empirical  inquiry.49 

It  is  still  a  very  widely  prevalent  opinion  that  Aristotle 
was  a  great  physical  inquirer.  But  since  we  have  known 
how  much  had  been  previously  accomplished  in  this 
sphere,50  and  how  unhesitatingly  Aristotle  appropriated 
the  observations  of  others,  and  all  kinds  of  information, 
without  mentioning  his  authority;  moreover,  how  many 
of  his  statements  bear  an  impression  of  being  his  own 
observations  which  cannot  have  been  observed,  because 
they  are   wholly   false; '51    criticism   of  this  opinion   has 


49  The  proofs  of  this  we  -will  take 
from  a  book  recently  published, 
although  not  written  with  this  ob- 
ject :  Eucken,  Die  Methode  der  aris- 
totelischen Forschung  in  ihrem  Zu- 
sammenhang mit  den  philosophischen 
Grundprincipien  des  Aristoteles : 
Berlin,  1872.  In  this  very  careful 
and  learned  little  book  is  a  striking 
support  of  the  view,  which  we  have 
long  held,  that  the  neo-Aristotelian 
school,  which  was  founded  by  Tren- 
delenburg, must  in  the  end  chiefly 
contribute  to  our  definitive  emanci- 
pation from  Aristotle.  In  Eucken 
philosophy  resolves  itself  into  the 
Aristotelian  philology ;  but  then  this 
philology  is  thorough  and  objective. 
We  nowhere  find  the  deficiencies  of 
the  Aristotelian  method  so  clearly 
and  comprehensively  stated  as  here  ; 
and  although  the  author,  nevertheless, 
holds  that  there  is  a  balance  of  advan- 
tages, yet  no  careful  reader  can  help 
seeing  how  weak  the  proofs  of  this 
are.  The  small  success  of  Aristotle 
in  scientific  discoveries  is  attributed 
by  the  writer  almost  exclusively  to 
the  want  of  instruments  necessary  to 
perfect  the  powers  of  observation, 
although  it  is  historically  established 
that  modern  progress  in  all  the  de- 
partments of  natural  inquiry  began 
with  almost  the  same  means  which 
were  at  the  service  of  the  ancients, 
and  that  it  has  for  the  most  part 
VOL.  I. 


created  for  itself  the  magnificent  tools 
which  are  to-day  at  its  disposal. 
Copernicus  had  no  telescope,  but  he 
dared  to  shake  off  the  authority  of 
Aristotle.  That  was  the  decisive 
step,  and  it  was  the  same  in  all  other 
departments. 

50  This  point  has,  of  course,  escaped 
Eucken,  who  (Meth.  d.  arist.  For- 
schung, S.  153),  on  the  contrary, 
makes  it  appear  how  little  had  been 
done  before  him.  Yes,  if  the  extant 
literature  were  all !  Comp,  on  the 
other  side  the  Note  n  above  on  the 
use  made  of  Demokritos,  and  the 
manner  in  which  Aristotle,  as  de- 
scribed by  Eucken,  S.  7  foil.,  made 
use  of  his  predecessors  without  quot- 
ing them — unless  they  were  to  be 
introduced  for  the  purpose  of  being 
refuted. 

51  Examples  in  Eucken,  S.  154  ff.  : 
that  men  only  have  palpitation  of 
the  heart ;  that  male  creatures  have 
more  teeth  than  females;  that  the 
skull  in  woman  has,  unlike  that  of 
man,  a  circular  suture ;  that  there  is 
an  empty  space  in  the  back  part  of 
the  human  skull  ;  and  that  men  have 
eight  ribs.  Again,  S.  164  foil.,  what 
are  said  to  be  experiments  :  that  eggs 
float  in  strong  brine ;  that  it  is  pos- 
sible to  collect  in  a  close  vessel  01 
wax  drinkable  water  from  the  sea; 
that  the  yolk  of  several  eggs  shaken 
together  collects  into  the  middle. 


82  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

been  excited,  although  it  has  scarcely  as  yet  thoroughly 
gone  to  work.  But  what  must  in  any  case  remain  to 
Aristotle  is  the  praise,  bestowed  on  him  by  Hegel,  of  having 
subordinated  the  wealth  and  the  detail  of  the  actual  uni- 
verse to  the  Notion.  However  great  or  however  small  may 
have  been  his  independent  work  in  the  special  sciences,  the 
most  important  element  of  his  whole  activity  will  still  be 
the  collection  of  the  matter  of  all  existing  sciences  around 
speculative  points  of  view,  and  therefore  an  activity  which 
in  principle  coincides  with  that  of  the  modern  systema- 
tisers,  and  above  all  of  Hegel. 

Demokritos  also  mastered  the  whole  extent  of  the 
science  of  his  time,  and  that  probably  with  greater  inde- 
pendence and  thoroughness  than  was  the  case  with  Aris- 
totle ;  but  we  have  no  trace  whatever  of  his  having  brought 
all  these  sciences  under  the  yoke  of  his  system.  With 
Aristotle  the  carrying  out  of  the  speculative  basis  is  the 
chief  aim.  The  one  and  the  permanent,  which  Plato 
sought  outside  things,  Aristotle  wants  to  find  in  the 
manifoldness  of  the  things  themselves.  As  he  makes 
the  external  universe  an  enclosed  sphere,  with  the  earth 
resting  in  the  centre,  so  the  world  of  science  is  pervaded 
by  the  same  method,  the  same  manner  of  conception  and 
representation,  and  everything  gathers  round  the  knowing 
subject,  whose  ideas,  with  a  naive  forgetfulness  of  all  the 
limitations  of  knowledge,  are  viewed  as  the  true  and  ulti- 
mate objects  of  apprehension. 

Bacon  advanced  the  assertion  that  the  co-ordination  of 
knowledge  into  a  system  was  a  hindrance  to  further  pro- 
gress. This  view  Aristotle  could  scarcely  have  opposed, 
for  he  held  the  task  of  science  as  a  whole  to  be  exhausted, 
and  never  for  a  moment  doubted  that  he  was  in  a  position 
to  supply  a  satisfactory  answer  to  all  really  essential 
questions.  As  in  the  sphere  of  ethic  and  politic  he  con- 
fined himself  to  the  types  exhibited  in  the  Hellenic  world, 
and  had  little  sense  of  the  great  changes  which  were  going 
on  beneath  his  eyes,  so  he  troubled  himself  little  with  the 


REACTION:  SOKRATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE.    83 

crowd  of  new  facts  and  observations  which  were  made  acces- 
sible to  the  man  of  science  by  the  campaigns  of  Alexander. 
That  he  accompanied  Alexander  in  order  to  satisfy  his 
desire  of  knowledge,  or  that  plants  and  animals  were  sent 
to  him  for  examination  from  distant  climates,  is  mere 
fable.  Aristotle  confined  himself  in  his  system  to  the 
knowledge  of  his  own  day,  and  was  convinced  that  this 
was  all  that  was  of  real  importance,  and  sufficed  to  solve 
all  the  principal  problems.52  It  was  this  very  limitation 
of  his  views,  and  the  certainty  with  which  he  moved  in 
the  narrow  circle  of  his  universe,  that  recommended  Aris- 
totle so  eminently  to  the  philosophical  teachers  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  while  modern  times,  with  their  inclination 
to  progress  and  revolution,  had  no  task  more  important 
than  to  burst  asunder  the  fetters  of  this  system. 

More  conservative  than  Plato  and  Sokrates,  Aristotle 
everywhere  attaches  himself  to  tradition,  to  popular  opinion, 
to  the  conceptions  contained  in  language;  and  his  ethical 
advances  keep  as  near  as  possible  to  the  ordinary  customs 
and  laws  of  Hellenic  communities.  He  has  therefore  always 
been  the  favourite  philosopher  of  conservative  schools  and 
tendencies. 

The  unity  of  his  theory  of  things  Aristotle  secures  by 
the  most  reckless  anthropomorphism.  The  corrupt  tele- 
ology which  argues  from  man  and  his  aims  is  one  of  the 
most  essential  elements  of  his  system.  As  in  human 
production  and  activity,  for  example  in  the  building  of  a 
house  or  ship,  the  idea  of  the  whole  is  always  the  first 
thing  present  as  the  end  of  activity,  and  as  this  idea  then, 
by  the  carrying  out  of  the  parts,  realises  itself  in  matter, 
nature  must  be  supposed  to  proceed  in  the  same  way, 

52  Cuvier  observed  that  Aristotle  cal  writings  of  Aristotle  exhibit  no 

describes  the  Egyptian  fauna  not  from  trace  of  any  addition  to  knowledge 

his   personal  observation,    but  from  made  by  the  campaigns  of  Alexander. 

the  details  furnished  by  Herodotus,  (Eucken,  loc.  cit.  p.  16  and  p.  160;  as 

although  the  description  reads  as  if  to  his  view  of  the  completion  of  seien» 

he   had  himself    seen    the    animals,  tific  knowledge,  p.  5  foil.) 
Humboldt  remarks  that  the  zoologi- 


84  MATERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

because  in  his  view  this  sequence  of  end  and  thing,  of 
form  and  matter,  is  typical  of  all  that  exists.  After  man 
with  his  aims,  the  world  of  organisms  is  established. 
These  serve  him  not  only  to  show  the  real  potentiality  of 
the  tree  in  the  seed-corn,  not  only  as  types  for  the  classi- 
fication by  species  and  genus,  as  model  examples  of  the 
teleological  principle,  and  so  on,  but  especially,  by  the 
comparison  of  lower  and  higher  organisms,  to  establish  the 
view  that  everything  in  the  universe  is  capable  of  being 
arranged  in  degrees  of  rank,  and  according  to  notions  of 
value — a  principle  which  Aristotle  does  not  fail  to  go  on 
to  apply  to  the  most  abstract  relations,  such  as  above  and 
below,  right  and  left,  and  so  on.  And  he  obviously  be- 
lieves that  all  these  relations  of  rank  do  not  merely  exist 
in  the  human  method  of  comprehension,  but  are  grounded 
upon  the  nature  of  things.  So  everywhere  the  universal 
is  explained  by  means  of  the  special,  the  easy  by  means 
of  the  difficult,  the  simple  by  the  compound,  the  low  by 
the  higher.  And  this  it  is  which  in  great  measure  has 
secured  the  popularity  of  the  Aristotelian  system  ;  for  man, 
to  whom  nothing  is  of  course  more  familiar  than  the  sub- 
jective circumstances  of  his  thought  and  action,  is  always 
inclined  to  regard  as  clear  and  simple  their  causal  relations 
to  the  world  of  objects,  since  he  confounds  the  obvious 
succession  in  time  of  the  internal  and  external  with  the 
mysterious  motive  power  of  efficient  causes.  Thus,  for 
example,  Sokrates  could  regard  as  a  very  simple  matter 
the  '  thinking  and  electing'  by  which  human  actions  come 
about  according  to  the  notion  of  the  end ;  the  result  of  a 
determination  seemed  no  less  simple,  and  the  precedent 
circumstances  in  muscles  and  nerves  become  merely 
indifferent  accidents.  Things  in  nature  seem  to  betray  a 
certain  clesignedness,  and  therefore  they  also  must  arise 
by  this  so  natural  process  of  thought  and  election.  A 
Creator  constituted  like  man  is  therefore  assumed ;  and  as 
he  is  infinitely  wise,  the  whole  way  of  looking  at  things 
is  rested  upon  a  firm  basis  of  optimism. 


REACTION:  SOKRATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE.     8$ 

Aristotle  had,  of  course,  made  a  great  advance  in  the 
method  in  which  he  conceives  the  end  as  operative  in 
things.  (Comp,  note  40.)  When  man  came  to  reflect 
more  closely  on  the  way  and  manner  in  which  the  end 
was  realised,  that  most  naive  anthropomorphism  which 
made  the  Creator  work  with  human  hands  was  no  longer 
to  be  entertained.  A  rationalistic  view  of  things,  which 
regarded  the  popular  religious  ideas  as  the  figurative  pre- 
sentation of  supernatural  facts,  could,  of  course,  make  no 
exception  in  the  case  of  teleology;  and  as  here  also,  as 
everywhere,  Aristotle  endeavoured,  after  his  manner,  to 
attain  to  complete  clearness,  he  was  necessarily  led  by 
teleology  itself,  and  by  the  consideration  of  the  organic 
world,  to  a  pantheistic  theory,  which  makes  the  divine 
thought  everywhere  permeate  matter,  and  realise  itself 
and  become  immanent  in  the  growth  and  becoming  of  all 
things.  By  the  side  of  this  view,  which  was  capable,  with 
very  slight  modification,  of  being  developed  into  a  com- 
plete Naturalism,  there  is  in  Aristotle  a  transcendental 
idea  of  God,  which  theoretically  rests  upon  the  truly 
Aristotelian  thought  that  all  motion  must  ultimately  pro- 
ceed from  a  something  itself  unmoved.53 

The  traces  of  empiricism  in  Aristotle  are  to  be  found 
partly  in  isolated  expressions,  of  which  the  most  impor- 
tant are  those  which  require  us  to  respect  facts,  but  partly 
also  in  his  doctrine  of  substance  (pvala),  which,  of  course, 

C3  The  principle  of  the  Aristotelian  foundation ;  but  the  ontological  sup- 
theology  is  very  well  and  very  sue-  port  of  the  transcendentality  of  God 
cinctly  expressed  in  Ueberweg,  Grund-  lies  in  the  proposition  that  all  mo- 
riss,  i.  4  Aufl.  p.  175  foil.,  1  E.  T.  tion,  including  the  development  from 
162,  163:  "The  world  has  its  prin-  potentiality  to  reality,  has  a  moving 
ciple  in  God,  and  this  principle  exists  cause  which  is  itself  unmoved, 
not  merely  as  a  form  immanent  in  "Every  particular  object  which  is 
the  world,  like  the  order  in  an  army,  the  result  of  development  implies  an 
but  also  as  an  absolute  self-existent  actual  moving  cause ;  so  the  world, 
substance,  like  the  general  in  an  as  a  whole,  demands  an  absolutely 
army."  The  conclusion  of  the  theo-  first  mover  to  give  form  to  the  natu- 
logy  with  the  words  of  Homer,  ovk  rally  passive  matter  which  constitutes 
äyaöbv  iroXvKOLpavir),  ets  Koipavos  icrrca,  it  "  (loc.  cit.  162). 
betrays   the   ethical  tendency  at  its 


86  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ  UITY, 

offends  us  by  an  irreconcilable  contradiction.  Aristotle, 
in  this  point  differing  essentially  from  Plato,  calls,  in  the 
strict  and  proper  sense,  the  individual  existences  and 
things  substances.  In  them  the  form,  the  essential  part,  is 
united  with  matter ;  the  whole  is  a  concrete  and  thoroughly 
real  existence.  Nay,  Aristotle  sometimes  speaks  as 
though  complete  reality  belonged  properly  to  the  concrete 
thing  alone.  This  is  the  standpoint  of  the  medieval 
Nominalists,  who,  however,  have  not,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
the  opinion  of  Aristotle  thoroughly  on  their  side;  for 
Aristotle  spoils  everything  again  by  admitting  a  second 
kind  of  substance,  especially  in  the  notions  of  species,  but 
also  in  universals  generally.  Not  only  is  this  apple-tree 
here  before  my  window  a  reality,  but  the  notion  of  kind 
also  indicates  a  similar  reality ;  only  that  the  universal 
essence  of  the  apple-tree  does  not  dwell  in  the  vague 
cloud-land  of  ideas,  from  which  it  radiates  an  influence 
into  the  things  of  the  phenomenal  world,  but  the  universal 
essence  of  the  apple-tree  has  its  existence  in  the  individual 
apple-trees. 

There  is  here,  in  fact,  so  long  as  we  confine  ourselves  to 
organisms,  and  compare  only  species  and  individual,  a 
deceptive  appearance  which  has  already  dazzled  many 
moderns.  Let  us  endeavour  to  indicate  precisely  the 
point  where  truth  and  error  separate. 

Let  us  begin  by  placing  ourselves  at  the  Nominalistic 
standpoint,  which  is  perfectly  clear.  There  are  only  indi- 
vidual apple-trees,  individual  lions,  individual  maybugs, 
and  so  on  ;  and  besides  these  names,  by  which  we  colligate 
the  sum  of  existing  objects,  where  similarity  or  likeness 
connects  them  together.  The  '  universal '  is  nothing  but 
the  name.  It  is  not  difficult,  however,  to  give  this  way  of 
looking  at  things  an  appearance  of  superficiality,  by  point- 
ing out  that  we  are  here  treating  not  of  casual  similarities, 
depending  on  the  casual  perception  of  the  subject,  but 
that  objective  nature  offers  certain  obviously  distinctive 
groups  which,  by  their  real  similitude,  compel  us  to  this 


REACTION:  SO K RATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE.     S7 

common  conception  of  them.  The  most  unlike  individuals 
amongst  lions  or  maybugs  are  yet  much  nearer  to  each 
other  than  the  lion  is  to  the  tiger,  or  the  maybugs  to  the 
stag-beetle.  This  observation  is  doubtless  true.  Yet  a 
very  brief  examination  of  its  force  will  show  us  that  the 
real  connecting  link,  which  we  will  for  brevity's  sake  admit 
without  discussion,  is  in  any  case  something  quite  different 
from  the  universal  type  of  the  genus  which  we  in  our 
fancy  associate  with  the  name  apple-tree. 

We  might,  then,  from  this  point  carry  much  further  the 
metaphysical  discussion  of  the  relation  of  the  individual  to 
the  universal,  of  the  one  to  the  many.  Supposing  that  we 
knew  a  formula  of  the  combination  of  matter,  or  of'  the 
state  of  things  in  a  germ-cell,  by  which  it  could  be  deter- 
mined whether  the  germ  will  develop  itself  into  the  form 
of  an  apple  or  of  a  pear  tree ;  then  it  may  be  conjectured 
that  every  individual  germ-cell,  besides  the  conditions  of 
this  formula,  has  also  its  individual  variations  and  pecu- 
liarities, and  really  is  at  bottom  in  all  cases,  at  first,  the 
result  of  the  universal  and  particular,  or  rather  the  concrete 
fact,  in  which  there  is  no  distinction  whatever  of  the  uni- 
versal and  the  particular.  The  formula  lies  purely  in  our 
mind. 

"We  easily  see  that  here  again  realistic  objections  might 
be  made  ;  but  it  is  not  necessary  to  follow  this  chain  fur- 
ther in  order  to  understand  the  error  of  the  Aristotelian 
doctrine  of  the  universal.  This  error  lies  much  further 
back ;  for  Aristotle  keeps  close  by  the  word.  He  seeks 
nothing  unknown  behind  the  universal  essence  of  the 
apple-tree.  This  is  much  rather  fully  known.  The  word 
directly  indicates  a  reality,  and  this  goes  so  far  that  Aris- 
totle, in  the  transference  of  that  which  was  found  in  the 
organism  to  other  objects,  in  the  case  of  a  hatchet  distin- 
guishes the  individuality  of  this  particular  hatchet  from  its 
*  hatchetness.'  The  '  hatchetness '  and  the  material,  the 
metal,  taken  together,  compose  the  hatchet,  and  no  bit  of 
metal  can  become  a  hatchet  until  it  is  seized  and  possessed 


83  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ  UITY. 

by  the  form  corresponding  to  the  universal.  This  tendency 
to  infer  the  existence  immediately  from  the  name  is  the 
fundamental  error  of  the  Aristotelian  theory  of  notions, 
and  leads,  in  its  logical  consequences,  little  as  Aristotle 
cares  to  trouble  himself  with  these,  to  the  same  exaltation 
of  the  universal  over  the  particular  which  we  find  in 
Plato.  Tor  if  it  is  once  conceded  that  the  essence  of  the 
individual  lies  in  the  species,  the  most  essential  part  of 
the  species  must  again  lie  on  a  still  higher  plane,  or,  in  other 
words,  the  ground  of  the  species  must  lie  in  the  genus,  and 
so  on. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  then,  this  thoroughgoing  influence 
of  the  Platonic  modes  of  thought  is  clearly  shown  in  the 
method  of  inquiry  usually  employed  by  Aristotle.  For  we 
speedily  discover  that  his  proceeding  from  facts,  and  his 
inductive  mounting  from  facts  to  principles,  has  remained 
a  mere  theory,  scarcely  anywhere  put  in  practice  by  Aris- 
totle himself.  At  the  most,  what  he  does  is  to  adduce  a 
few  isolated  facts,  and  immediately  spring  from  these  to 
the  most  universal  principles,  to  which  he  thenceforward 
dogmatically  adheres  in  purely  deductive  treatment.^  So 
Aristotle  demonstrates  from  universal  principles  that  out- 
side our  enclosed  world-sphere  nothing  can  exist ;  and  in 
the  same  manner  he  reaches  his  destructive  doctrine  of  the 
'  natural '  motion  of  bodies  in  opposition  to  the  '  enforced ' 
motion,  to  the  assertion  that  the  left  side  of  the  body  is 


54  Eucken,  loc.  cit.,  S.  167  sqq.,  in  den  verschiedenen  Gebieten  der 
shows  that  even  the  strict  notion  Naturwissenschaft  im  Allgemeinen 
of  induction  in  Aristotle  is  not  easy  wie  im  Besondern  manchmal  mit 
to  fix,  because  he  often  uses  the  grosser  Zuversicht  von  einigen  weni- 
expression  for  mere  analogy,  which  gen  Erscheinungen  aus  auf  das  Allge- 
must,  however,  differ  from  indue-  meine  geschlossen  und  daher  oft  Be- 
tion ;  and  even  for  the  mere  ex-  hauptungen  aufgestellt,  die  weit  über 
planation  of  abstract  ideas  by  in-  den  Umfang  des  von  ihm  thatsächlich 
stances.  Where  the  term  is  used  Beobachteten  hinausgehen."  Exam- 
more  strictly  (for  the  reaching  of  the  pies  of  this,  S.  171  ff.,  as  to  a  priori 
universal  out  of  the  particular),  Aris-  conclusions,  where  induction  should 
totle  was  still  inclined  [loc.  cit. ,  S.  rather  have  been  employed,  comp. 
171)  to  pass  hastily  from  the  particu-  Eucken,  SS.  54  ff.,  91  ff.,  113  ff.,  117 
lar  to  the  universal.    "  So  hat  er  denn  ff.,  &c. 


REACTION:  SOKRATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE.     89 

colder  than  the  right,  to  the  doctrine  of  the  transformation 
of  one  kind  of  matter  into  another,  of  the  impossibility  of 
motion  in  empty  space,  to  the  absolute  distinction  of  cold 
and  -warm,  light  and  heavy,  and  so  on.  So  again  he  proves 
a  'priori  how  many  species  of  animals  there  can  be,  de- 
monstrates from  universal  principles  why  animals  must 
be  endowed  with  this  member  or  that,  and  numerous  other 
propositions,  which  are  then  employed  in  their  turn,  with  the 
most  logical  consistency,  and  which  in  their  totality  render 
successful  inquiry  completely  impossible.  The  science  to 
which  the  Platonic  and  Aristotelian  philosophy  best  adapts 
itself  is  naturally  mathematics,  in  which  the  deductive 
principle  has  attained  such  brilliant  results.  Aristotle, 
therefore,  views  mathematics  as  the  type  of  all  sciences, 
only  he  prevents  its  employment  in  natural  researches  by 
everywhere  referring  the  quantitative  back  to  the  qualita- 
tive; and  so  adopts  a  precisely  opposite  course  to  that 
taken  by  modern  physical  science. 

Closely  connected  with  deduction  is  the  dialectical  treat- 
ment of  controverted  points.  Aristotle  is  fond  of  a  his- 
torico-critical  exposition  of  the  views  of  his  predecessors. 
They  are  to  him  the  representatives  of  all  possible  opinions, 
to  which  he  finally  opposes  his  own  particular  view.  Uni- 
versal agreement  is  a  complete  proof;  the  refutation  of  all 
other  views  gives  an  appearance  of  necessity  to  what 
appears  to  be  the  one  remaining  view.  Plato  had  already 
distinguished  knowledge  from  correct  opinion  by  the 
capacity  of  him  who  has  a  ready  answer  to  all  possible 
objections,  and  can  maintain  his  own  view  successfully  in 
the  struggle  of  opinions.  Aristotle  himself  introduces  the 
opponents,  makes  them  expound  their  opinions — often 
inaccurately  enough — disputes  with  them  on  paper,  and 
then  sits  as  judge  in  his  own  cause.  So  victory  in  discus- 
sion takes  the  place  of  proof,  the  contest  of  opinions  the 
place  of  analysis,  and  the  whole  remains  a  purely  sub- 
jective treatment,  out  of  which  no  true  science  can  be 
developed. 


9o  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ UITY. 

If  we  now  ask  how  it  was  possible  that  such  a  system 
could  prove  a  barrier  for  hundreds  of  years,  not  only  to 
Materialism,  but  to  every  empirical  tendency,  and  how  it 
is  possible  that  the  '  organic- world  theory  of  Aristotle '  is 
still  to-day  maintained  by  an  influential  school  of  philo- 
sophy to  be  the  axiomatic  impregnable  basis  of  all  true 
philosophy,  we  must,  in  the  first  place,  not  forget  that 
speculation  is  in  general  fond  of  starting  from  the  naive 
notions  of  the  child  and  the  charcoal-burner,  and  so  of  con- 
necting together  in  the  sphere  of  human  thought  the  highest 
and  the  lowest,  in  the  face  of  the  relativistic  mean.  "We 
have  already  seen  how  consistent  Materialism  is  able,  as  no 
other  system  can,  to  bring  order  and  relation  into  the  sen- 
sible world,  and  how  it  is  entitled,  from  this  starting-point, 
to  regard  even  man,  with  all  his  various  activities,  as  a 
special  case  of  the  universal  laws  of  nature ;  and  yet,  how 
between  man  as  an  object  of  empirical  research,  and  man  as 
he  is  in  the  immediate  self-knowledge  of  the  subject,  there 
is  fixed  an  eternal  gulf.  And  hence  the  attempt  is  ever 
repeated  to  see  whether,  by  starting  from  self-conscious- 
ness, we  may  attain  a  more  satisfying  philosophy ;  and  so 
strong  is  the  secret  tendency  of  man  in  this  direction, 
that  this  attempt  will  a  hundred  times  be  regarded  as  suc- 
cessful, in  spite  of  the  recognised  failure  of  all  previous 
efforts. 

It  will  indeed  be  a  most  important  step  in  philosophical 
progress  if  these  efforts  are  finally  abandoned ;  but  that 
will  never  be  the  case  unless  the  longing  of  the  human 
reason  for  unity  receive  satisfaction  in  some  other  way. 
We  are  constituted  not  merely  to  know,  but  also  to  imagine 
and  construct ;  and  though  with  more  or  less  mistrust  of 
the  definite  validity  of  what  the  understanding  and  the 
senses  have  to  offer  us,  yet  mankind  will  ever  hail  with  joy 
the  man  who  understands  how,  by  the  force  of  genius,  and  by 
employing  all  the  constructive  impulses  of  his  era,  to  create 
that  unity  in  the  world  and  in  our  intellectual  life  which 
is  denied  to  our  knowledge.    This  creation  will,  indeed,  be 


REACTION;  SOKRATES,  PLATO,  ARISTOTLE.    91 

only  the  expression  of  the  yearning  of  the  age  after  unity 
and  perfection;  yet  even  this  is  no  small  thing,  for  the 
maintenance  and  nourishment  of  our  intellectual  life  is 
as  important  as  science  itself,  although  not  so  lasting  as 
this  is  :  since  the  investigation  of  the  details  of  positive 
knowledge,  and  of  the  relations  which  are  the  exclusive 
objects  of  our  knowledge,  is  absolute,  owing  to  its  method, 
while  the  speculative  apprehension  of  the  absolute  can 
only  claim  a  relative  importance  as  the  expression  of  the 
views  of  an  epoch. 

Although,  then,  we  must  ever  regard  the  Aristotelian 
system  as  an  opposing  hostile  force  in  relation  to  the  clear 
distinction  of  these  spheres — although  it  is  the  standing 
type  of  a  perverted  method,  the  great  example  of  all  that  is 
to  be  avoided,  in  its  mingling  and  confusion  of  speculation 
and  inquiry,  and  in  its  pretensions  not  merely  to  comprehend 
but  to  dominate  positive  knowledge — yet  we  must,  on  the 
other  hand,  recognise  that  this  system  is  the  most  perfect 
example  as  yet  afforded  in  history  of  the  actual  establish- 
ment of  a  theory  of  the  universe  which  forms  a  united  and 
self-included  whole.  If,  therefore,  it  is  my  duty  to  lessen 
the  reputation  of  Aristotle  as  an  investigator,  yet,  neverthe- 
less, the  manner  in  which  he  united  in  himself,  and  collected 
into  a  harmonious  system,  the  whole  sum  of  the  learning 
of  his  time,  still  remains  a  gigantic  intellectual  achieve- 
ment, and,  by  the  side  of  the  perverseness  which  we  have 
been  obliged  to  point  out,  we  find  in  every  department 
plentiful  work  of  penetrating  acuteness.  In  addition  to 
this,  as  the  founder  of  logic,  Aristotle  deserves  a  place  of 
high  honour  in  philosophy,  and  if  the  complete  fusion  of 
his  logic  with  his  metaphysic,  taken  abstractly,  lessens  the 
value  of  this  science,  yet  this  very  combination  lends  force 
and  charm  to  the  system.  In  an  edifice  so  firmly  built, 
the  spirit  could  take  rest,  and  find  its  support  in  the  seeth- 
ing and  impetuous  time  when  the  ruins  of  the  ancient 
culture,  with  the  enthralling  ideas  of  a  new  religion,  excited 
in  the  Western  mind  so  great  and  troubled  an  excitement, 


92  MA TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

and  a  stormy  endeavour  after  new  forms.  How  content 
were  our  forefathers  on  their  earth,  resting  in  the  bounded 
sphere  of  the  eternally-revolving  vault  of  heaven,  and 
what  agitation  was  excited  by  the  keen  current  of  air  that 
burst  in  from  infinity  when  Copernicus  rent  this  curtain 
asunder ! 

But  we  are  forgetting  that  we  have  not  yet  to  set  forth  the 
importance  of  the  Aristotelian  system  in  medieval  times. 
In  Greece  it  was  only  very  gradually  that  it  acquired  the 
predominance  over  all  other  systems,  when,  after  the  close 
of  the  classical  period  which  precedes  Aristotle,  the  rich 
blossoming  of  scientific  activity  which  began  after  him, 
also  declined,  and  the  vacillating  spirit  grasped  here  also  at 
the  strongest  prop  that  seemed  to  be  offered.  For  a  time 
the  star  of  the  Peripatetic  School  blazed  brightly  enough 
beside  other  stars,  but  the  influence  of  Aristotle  and  his 
doctrine  could  not  prevent  the  invasion  of  Materialistic 
views  with  exalted  force  soon  after  him,  nor  indeed  prevent 
these  from  seeking  to  find  points  of  connection  even  in  his 
own  peculiar  system. 


(    93    ) 


CHAPTER  IV. 

MATERIALISM  IN  GREECE  AND  ROME  AFTER  ARISTOTLE: 
EPIKÜROS. 

We  have  seen  in  the  previous  chapter  how  that  progress 
by  antitheses,  which  Hegel  has  made  so  important  for  the 
philosophical  treatment  of  history,  must  always  be  based 
upon  a  general  view  of  all  the  facts  in  the  history  of  cul- 
ture. A  tendency,  after  spreading  vigorously  and  com- 
pletely permeating  its  whole  epoch,  begins  to  die  out,  and 
loses  its  hold  upon  new  generations.  Meanwhile  fresh 
forces  arise  from  other  and  hitherto  invisibly-working 
currents  of  thought,  and  adapting  themselves  to  the 
changed  character  of  the  nations  and  states,  issue  a  new 
watchword.  A  generation  exhausts  itself  in  the  produc- 
tion of  ideas,  like  the  soil  which  produces  the  same  crop 
too  long ;  and  the  richest  harvest  always  springs  from  the 
fallow  field. 

Such  an  alternation  of  vigour  and  exhaustion  meets  us 
in  the  history  of  Greek  Materialism.  Materialistic  modes 
of  thought  dominated  the  philosophy  of  the  fifth  century 
B.c.,  the  age  of  Demokritos  and  Hippokrates.  It  was 
toward  the  end  of  this  century  that  a  spiritual  movement 
was  inaugurated  by  Sokrates,  which,  after  undergoing 
various  modifications  in  the  systems  of  Plato  and  Aristotle, 
dominates  the  succeeding  century. 

But  again  from  the  school  of  Aristotle  himself  there 
proceeded  men  like  Dikaearchos  and  Aristoxenos,  who 
denied  the  substantiality  of  the  soul.  And  finally  there 
appeared  the  famous  physicist  Strato  of  Lampsakos,  whose 
doctrine,  so  far  as  it  can  be  made  out  from  the  scanty 


94  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

traditions,  is  scarcely  distinguishable  from  purely  Mate- 
rialistic views. 

The  z/ov?  of  Aristotle  Strato  regarded  as  consciousness 
based  upon  sensation.5^  He  supposed  the  activity  of  the 
soul  to  consist  in  actual  motion.  All  existence  and  life  he 
referred  to  the  natural  forces  inherent  in  matter. 

And  although  we  find  that  the  whole  of  the  third  cen- 
tury is  marked  by  a  revival  of  Materialistic  modes  of 
thought,  yet  Strato's  reform  of  the  Peripatetic  School  does 
not  on  this  head  make  good  more  than  a  position  of  com- 
promise. The  decisive  impulse  is  given  by  the  system 
and  school  of  Epikuros ;  and  even  his  great  opponents,  the 
Stoics,  in  the  sphere  of  physics  incline  distinctly  to  Mate- 
rialistic conceptions. 

The  historical  circumstances  which  prepared  the  way  for 
the  new  influence  were  the  destruction  of  Greek  freedom 
and  the  collapse  of  Hellenic  life — that  brief  but  unique 
flowering  -  time,  at  the  conclusion  of  which  arises  the 
Athenian  philosophy.  Sokrates  and  Plato  were  Athe- 
nians, and  men  ©f  that  genuine  Hellenic  spirit  which  was 

s5  A3,  generally  speaking,  the  most  the   divine  essence  which  influences 

familiar  form  of  Materialism  among  and  develops  the  natural  and  inse- 

the  Greeks  was  ike  anthropological,  parable  human  soul,  and  by  which,  in 

so  we  observe  that  Aristotle's  doe-  consequence,  the  process  of  thinking 

trine  of  the  separable,  divine,  and  yet  takes  place.     (Comp.  Zeller,  iii.  1,  2 

individual,  soul  in  man  met  with  the  Aufl.  S.  712).     Amongst  the  Arabian 

strongest  opposition  amongst  his  sue-  interpreters,    Averroes  in  particular 

cessors  in  antiquity.      Aristoxenos,  conceived  the  doctrine  of  the  penetra- 

the  musician,  compared  the  relation  tion  of  the  divine  soul  into  man  quite 

of  the  soul  to  the  body  to  that  of  pantheistically;  while  contrariwise  the 

harmony  to  the  strings  by  which  it  Christian  philosophers  of  the  Middle 

is  produced.     Dikaearchos,  in  place  Ages  carried  further  than  Aristotle 

of  the  individual  soul-substance,  put  the  individuality  and  separability  of 

a  universal  principle  of  life  and  sen-  the    reason,    from  which    they  got 

sation,  which  becomes  only  tempora-  their     immortal     anima    rational  is 

rily  individualised  in  corporeal  ob-  (apart,  that  is,  from  the  strictly  or- 

jeets.     (Ueberweg,  Grund.,  i.  4  Aufl.  thodox  doctrine  of  the  Church,  which 

S.  198,  E.  T.,  Hist,  of  Phil.,  i.  p.  183).  requires    that     the    immortal    soul 

One  of  Aristotle's  most  important  in-  should  include  not  the  reason  alone, 

terpreters  under  the  empire,  Alex-  but  the  lower  faculties),  so  that  in 

ander  of  Aphrodisias,  conceived  the  this  particular  too  the  exact  view  of 

separable  soul  (the  vovs  ttoltjtiicos)  to  Aristotle  was  scarcely  anywhere  ac- 

be  no  portion  of  the  man,  but  only  as  cepted. 


THE  STOICS  AND  EPIKUROS.  95 

beginning  to  disappear  before  their  eyes.  Aristotle,  in 
point  of  time  and  character,  stands  on  the  threshold  of 
the  transition,  but  by  his  resting  upon  Plato  and  Sokrates 
he  was  closely  connected  with  the  preceding  period.  How 
intimate  are  the  relations  in  Plato  and  Aristotle  of  ethic 
to  the  idea  of  the  state !  Yet  the  radical  reforms  of  the 
Platonic  state  are,  like  the  conservative  discussions  of  the 
Aristotelian  politic,  devoted  to  an  ideal  which  was  to  offer 
strong  opposition  to  the  rising  flood  of  Individualism. 
But  Individualism  was  of  the  essence  of  the  time,  and  an 
entirely  different  stamp  of  men  arises  to  take  control  of 
the  thought  of  the  age.  Again,  it  is  the  outlying  districts 
of  the  Greek  world  which  produce  most  of  the  principal 
philosophers  of  the  next  epoch ;  but  this  time,  it  is  true, 
not  the  old  Hellenic  colonies  in  Ionia  and  Magna  Graecia, 
but  chiefly  districts  where  the  Greek  element  had  come 
in  contact  with  the  influences  of  foreign,  and  especially 
Oriental  culture.56  The  love  of  positive  scientific  research 
became  more  pronounced  again  in  this  era,  but  the  various 
departments  of  inquiry  began  to  diverge.  Although  we 
never  find  in  antiquity  that  keen  enmity  between  natural 
science  and  philosophy  which  is  so  common  at  present, 
yet  the  great  names  in  the  two  spheres  cease  to  be  the 
same.  The  connection  of  men  of  science  with  a  school  of 
philosophers  became  much  freer ;  while  the  chiefs  of  the 
schools  were  no  longer  inquirers,  but  were  above  all  things 
advocates  and  teachers  of  their  system. 

The  practical  standpoint  which  Sokrates  had  asserted  in 
philosophy  allied  itself  now  with  Individualism,  only  to 
become  the  more  one-sided  in  consequence.  Por  the  sup- 
ports which  religion  and  public  life  had  previously  offered 
to  the  consciousness  of  the  individual  now  completely  gave 
way,  and  the  isolated  soul  sought  its  only  support  in  philo- 
sophy. So  it  came  about  that  even  the  Materialism  of 
this  epoch,  closely  as  it  also,  in  the  contemplation  of  nature, 
leaned   upon   Demokritos,   issued    chiefly  in   an   ethical 

56  Comp.  Zeller,  iii.  1,  2  Aufl.,  p.  26,  E.  T.  (Eeicliel,  Stoics,  &c),  p.  36. 


96  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

aim — in.  the  liberation  of  the  spirit  from  doubt  and  anxiety, 
and  the  attaining  of  a  calm  and  cheerful  peacefulness  of 
soul.  Yet  before  we  speak  of  Materialism  in  the  narrower 
sense  of  the  term  (see  Note  i),  let  us  here  interpose  some 
observations  on  the  '  Materialism  of  the  Stoics.' 

At  the  first  glance  we  might  suppose  that  there  is  no 
more  consistent  Materialism  than  that  of  the  Stoics,  who 
explain  all  reality  to  consist  in  bodies.  God  and  the 
human  soul,  virtues  and  emotions,  are  bodies.  There 
can  be  no  flatter  contradiction  than  that  between  Plato 
and  the  Stoics.  He  teaches  that  that  man  is  just  who 
participates  in  the  idea  of  justice ;  while,  according  to  the 
Stoics,  he  must  have  the  substance  of  justice  in  his  body. 

This  sounds  Materialistic  enough ;  and  yet,  at  the  same 
time,  the  distinctive  feature  of  Materialism  is  here  wanting 
— the  purely  material  nature  of  matter ;  the  origination  of 
all  phenomena,  including  those  of  adaptation  and  spirit, 
through  movements  of  matter  according  to  universal  laws 
of  motion. 

The  matter  of  the  Stoics  possesses  the  most  various 
forces,  and  it  is  at  bottom  force  that  makes  it  what  it  is  in 
each  particular  case.  The  force  of  all  forces,  however,  is  the 
deity  which  permeates  and  moves  the  whole  universe  with 
its  influence.  Thus  deity  and  undetermined  matter  stand 
opposed  to  each  other,  as  in  the  Aristotelian  system  the 
highest  form,  the  highest  energy,  and  the  mere  poten- 
tiality of  becoming  everything  that  form  produces  from  it 
— that  is,  God  and  matter.  The  Stoics,  indeed,  have  no 
transcendental  God,  and  no  soul  absolutely  independent  of 
body;  yet  their  matter  is  thoroughly  pervaded,  and  not 
merely  influenced  by  soul;  their  God  is  identical  with  the 
world,  and  yet  he  is  more  than  mere  self- moving  matter ; 
he  is  the  '  fiery  reason  of  the  world,'  and  this  reason  works 
that  which  is  reasonable  and  purposeful,  like  the  '  reason- 
stuff'  of  Diogenes  of  Apollonia,  according  to  laws  which 
man  gathers  from  his  consciousness,  and  not  from  his 
observation  of  sensible  objects.    Anthropomorphism,  there- 


THE  STOICS  AND  EPIKUROS.  97 

fore,  teleology,  and  optimism  profoundly  dominate  the 
Stoic  system,  and  its  true  character  must  be  described  as 
'  Pantheistic' 

The  Stoics  had  a  strikingly  pure  and  correct  doctrine  of 
the  freedom  of  the  will.  Moral  accountability  is  involved 
in  the  fact  that  conduct  flows  from  the  will,  and  so  from 
the  innermost  and  most  essential  nature  of  man ;  but  the 
manner  in  which  each  man's  will  shapes  itself  is  only  a 
result  of  the  mighty  necessity  and  divine  predestination 
which  govern  all  the  machinery  of  the  universe  down  to 
the  smallest  detail.  For  his  thought  also  man  is  respon- 
sible, because  even  our  judgments  are  shaped  by  the  influ- 
ence of  our  moral  character. 

The  soul,  which  is  bodily  in  its  nature,  subsists  for  a 
certain  time  after  death :  wicked  and  foolish  souls,  whose 
matter  is  less  pure  and  durable,  perish  quicker ;  the  good 
mount  to  an  abode  of  the  blessed,  where  they  remain  till 
they  are  resolved  in  the  great  conflagration  of  the  universe, 
with  everything  that  exists,  into  the  unity  of  the  divine 
being. 

But  how  was  it  that  the  Stoics,  from  their  lofty  theory 
of  morals,  proceeded  to  a  theory  of  the  universe  standing 
in  many  points  so  near  to  Materialism  ?  Zeller  thinks 
that,  in  consequence  of  their  practical  tendency,  they  had 
conceived  their  metaphysic  in  the  simplest  form  in  which 
it  is  supplied  by  the  immediate  experience  of  practical 
life.57     There  is  a  good  deal  to  be  said  for  this  view  of  the 

57  Zeller,  iii.  i,  S.  113  ff.,  E.  T.  jects.  The  objects  then  presented  to 
(Reichel,  Stoics,  &c),  p.  129:  "  Ori-  the  senses  are  regarded  by  them  as 
ginally  devoting  themselves  with  all  real  things,  nor  is  an  opportunity 
their  energies  to  practical  inquiries,  afforded  for  doubting  their  real  being, 
in  their  theory  of  nature  the  Stoics  Their  reality  is  practically  taken  for 
occupied  the  ground  of  ordinary  com-  granted,  because  of  the  influence  they 
mon  sense,  which  knows  of  no  real  exercise  on  man,  and  because  they 
object  except  what  is  grossly  sensible  serve  as  objects  for  the  exercise  of 
and  corporeal.  In  all  their  specula-  man's  powers.  In  every  such  exer- 
tions their  primary  aim  was  to  dis-  eise  of  power  both  subject  and  object 
cover  a  firm  basis  for  human  actions,  are  material.  Even  when  an  impres- 
In  actions,  however,  men  are  brought  sion  is  conveyed  to  the  soul  of  man, 
into  direct  contact  with  external  ob-  the  direct  instrument  is  something 
VOL.  I.  G 


gS  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ UITY. 

question ;  "but  there  is  in  the  system  of  Epikuros  a  still 
deeper  link  between  ethical  and  physical  science.  And  is 
such  a  link  wanting  in  the  case  of  the  Stoics  ?  May  it 
not  be,  perhaps,  that  Zeno  found  a  support  for  his  theory  of 
virtue  just  in  this  thought  of  the  absolute  unity  of  the 
universe  ?  Aristotle  leaves  us  stranded  in  the  dualism  of  a 
transcendental  God  and  the  world  he  governs,  of  the  body 
with  an  animal  soul  and  the  separable  immortal  spirit : 
an  excellent  foundation  for  the  consciousness  of  medieval 
Christianity,  broken  and  yearning  from  the  dust  towards 
eternity,  but  not  for  the  haughty  self-sufficiency  of  the 
Stoic. 

The  step  from  absolute  Monism  to  the  physic  of  the 
Stoics  is  now  easy,  for  either  all  bodies  must  be  reduced 
to  pure  idea,  or  all  spirits,  including  that  which  moves  in 
them,  must  become  bodies ;  and  even  if,  with  the  Stoics, 
we  simply  define  body  as  that  which  is  extended  in  space, 
the  difference  between  these  two  views,  utterly  opposed 
as  they  seem  to  one  another,  is  not  really  great. — Yet  here 
we  must  break  off,  since  whatever  may  have  been  the 
connection  between  the  ethic  and  the  physic  of  the  Stoics, 
the  speculations  as  to  space,  in  its  relation  to  the  world  of 
ideas  and  of  bodies,  belong  to  modern  times. — We  turn 
now  to  the  revival  by  Epikuros  of  a  consequent  Mate- 
rialistic theory,  resting  upon  a  purely  mechanical  theory 
of  the  world. 

The  father  of  Epikuros  is  said  to  have  been  a  poor 
schoolmaster  of  Athens,  who  became  a  Jclerüchos,  or  colo- 
nist, at  Samos.     There  Epikuros  was  born  towards  the 

material — the  voice  or  the  gesture,  merely  from  the   predominance    of 

In  the  region  of  experience  there  are  practical    interests.      But,    in  fact, 

no  such  things  as  non-material  im-  Materialism,    in     the    wider    sense 

pressions."  Comp,  ibid.,  S.  325  ff., E.  (pantheistic  or  mechanical),  was  for 

T.  362,  where  an  admirable  parallel  the  ancients    an    almost    inevitable 

is  drawn  between  the  Stoical  ethic  consequence    of     rigorous     Monism 

and  their   theoretical  views  of  the  and    Determinism  ;    for   they   were 

absolute  sway  of  the  divine  will  in  still  far  removed  from  the  modern 

the  world,  while,  on  the  other  hand,  Idealism  of  a  Descartes,  Leibniz,  or 

Materialism    there    too  is    deduced  Kant. 


THE  STOICS  AND  EPIKUROS.  99 

end  of  the  year  342,  or  at  the  beginning  of  341.  In  his 
fourteenth  year,  it  is  said,  he  studied  Hesiod's  Cosmogony 
at  school,  and  finding  that  everything  was  explained  to 
arise  from  chaos,  he  cried  out  and  asked,  Whence,  then, 
came  chaos  ?  To  this  his  teacher  had  no  reply  that  would 
content  him,  and  from  that  hour  the  young  Epikuros  began 
to  philosophise  for  himself. 

Epikuros  must,  in  fact,  be  regarded  as  self-taught, 
although  the  most  important  ideas  which  he  incorporated 
in  his  system  were  individually  already  commonly  known. 
His  general  education  is  said  to  have  been  deficient.  He 
joined  himself  to  none  of  the  then  prevailing  schools,  but 
studied  the  more  industriously  the  writings  of  Demokritos, 
which  supplied  him  with  the  corner-stone  of  his  cosmology, 
the  doctrine  of  atoms.  Nausiphanes,  a  somewhat  scepti- 
cal follower  of  Demokritos,  is  said  to  have  first  introduced 
this  doctrine  to  him  at  Samos. 

Nevertheless,  we  cannot  assume  that  it  was  through 
ignorance  of  other  systems  that  Epikuros  took  his  own 
course ;  for  already  as  a  youth  of  eighteen  he  had  been  to 
Athens,  and  heard  probably  Xenokrates,  the  pupil  of 
Plato,  whilst  Aristotle,  accused  of  atheism,  was  at  Chalcis, 
looking  towards  his  end. 

How  different  then  the  state  of  Greece  from  what  it  had 
been  a  hundred  years  before,  whilst  Protagoras  was  still 
teaching !  Then  Athens,  the  home  of  free  culture,  had 
reached  its  highest  point  of  external  power.  Art  and 
literature  were  in  their  fullest  bloom.  Philosophy  was  ani- 
mated by  all  the  vigour  and  arrogance  of  youth.  Epikuros 
studied  at  Athens  at  the  time  of  the  downfall  of  liberty. 

Thebes  had  perished,  and  Demosthenes  lived  in  exile. 
Erom  Asia  were  heard  the  news  of  Alexander's  victories. 
The  East  disclosed  its  marvels ;  and  as  the  circle  of  vision 
was  widened,  the  Hellenic  fatherland,  with  its  glorious 
past,  appeared  more  and  more  as  a  step  that  had  been 
taken  on  the  way  to  new  developments,  whose  whence 
and  whither  no  man  vet  knew. 


ioo  MA TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

Alexander  died  suddenly  at  Babylon ;  the  last  convul- 
sive struggle  of  freedom  followed,  only  to  be  cruelly  re- 
pressed by  Antipater.  Amidst  this  confusion  Epikuros 
again  left  Athens,  in  order  to  return  to  his  parents'  Ionian 
home.  Afterwards  he  is  supposed  to  have  taught  at  Kolo- 
phon,  Mitylene,  and  Lampsakos ;  and  at  the  last-named 
place  he  gained  his  first  disciples.  He  only  returned  to 
Athens  in  the  maturity  of  years,  and  there  bought  a 
garden,  where  he  dwelt  with  his  disciples.  It  is  said 
to  have  borne  as  an  inscription,  "  Stranger,  here  will  it 
be  well  with  thee :  here  pleasure  is  the  highest  good." 
Here  lived  Epikuros  with  his  followers,  temperately  and 
simply,  in  harmonious  effort,  in  heartfelt  friendship,  as  in 
a  united  family.  By  his  will  he  bequeathed  the  garden  to 
his  school,  which  for  a  long  time  still  had  its  centre  there. 
The  whole  of  antiquity  furnishes  no  brighter  and  purer 
example  of  fellowship  than  that  of  Epikuros  and  his 
school. 

Epikuros  never  filled  any  public  office ;  and  yet  he  is 
said  to  have  loved  his  country.  He  never  came  into  con- 
flict with  religion,  for  he  sedulously  honoured  the  gods 
with  all  conventional  observance,  without  pretending  to  a 
belief  concerning  them  which  he  did  not  really  feel. 

The  existence  of  the  gods  he  based  upon  the  pure  sub- 
jective knowledge  which  we  have  of  them :  and  yet  that 
man  is  not  an  atheist,  he  taught,  who  denies  the  gods  of 
the  multitude,  but  much  rather  he  who  subscribes  to  the 
opinions  of  the  multitude  concerning  the  gods.  We  are 
to  regard  them  as  eternal  and  immortal  beings,  whose  holi- 
ness excludes  every  thought  of  care  or  occupation;  and 
therefore  all  the  events  of  nature  proceed  according  to 
eternal  laws,  and  without  any  interference  from  the  gods, 
whose  majesty  is  insulted  if  we  suppose  that  they  trouble 
themselves  about  us  :  we  must  worship  them,  nevertheless, 
for  the  sake  of  their  perfection. 

If,  now,  we  put  together  these  partly  contradictory 
expressions,  there   can  be  no  doubt  that  Epikuros   did 


THE  STOICS  AND  EPIKUROS.  101 

really  respect  the  idea  of  the  gods  as  an  element  of  noble 
human  nature,  and  not  the  gods  themselves  as  actual 
objective  existences.  Only  from  this  point  of  view,  of  a 
subjective  and  soul-harmonising  reverence  for  the  gods, 
can  we  explain  the  contradictions  in  which  otherwise  the 
Epikurean  system  would  necessarily  leave  us  involved. 

For  if  the  gods  exist  indeed,  but  do  nothing,  that  would 
be  reason  enough  for  the  credulous  frivolity  of  the  masses 
to  helieve  in  them  but  not  to  worship  them,  while  Epi- 
kuros  did  in  fact  just  the  reverse  of  this.  He  reverences 
the  gods  for  their  perfection :  this  he  might  equally  do 
whether  this  perfection  is  exhibited  in  their  outward 
actions,  or  whether  it  is  only  developed  as  an  ideal  in  our 
thoughts ;  and  this  latter  seems  to  have  been  his  view. 

In  this  sense,  however,  we  must  not  suppose  that  his 
reverence  for  the  gods  was  mere  hypocrisy  in  order  to 
keep  on  good  terms  with  the  mass  of  the  people  and  the 
dangerous  priesthood :  it  came  really  from  his  heart ;  for 
these  careless  and  painless  gods  did  in  fact  represent,  as  it 
were,  an  incarnated  ideal  of  his  philosophy. 

It  was  at  the  utmost  a  concession  to  existing  circum- 
stances, and  certainly,  at  the  same  time,  a  habit  endeared 
by  the  associations  of  youth,  when  he  attached  himself  to 
the  forms  which  must  of  course,  from  his  standpoint,  seem 
at  least  arbitrary  and  indifferent. 

Thus  Epikuros  could  at  once  impart  a  flavour  of  piety  to 
his  life,  and  still  make  the  central  point  of  his  philosophy 
the  effort  to  win  that  calmness  of  the  soul  which  finds  its 
only  immovable  foundation  in  deliverance  from  foolish 
superstitions. 

Epikuros,  then,  taught  expressly  that  even  the  motion  of 
the  heavenly  bodies  is  not  dependent  upon  the  wish  or 
impulse  of  a  divine  being;  nor  are  the  heavenly  bodies 
themselves  divine  beings,  but  everything  is  governed  by 
an  eternal  order  which  regulates  the  interchange  of  ori- 
gination and  destruction. 

To  investigate  the  reason  of  this  eternal  order  is  the 


102  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ  UITY. 

business  of  the  physical  inquirer,  and  in  this  knowledge 
perishable  beings  find  their  happiness. 

The  mere  historical  knowledge  of  natural  events,  with- 
out a  knowledge  of  causes,  is  valueless;  for  it  does  not 
free  us  from  fear  nor  lift  us  above  superstition.  The 
more  causes  of  change  we  have  discovered,  the  more 
we  shall  attain  the  calmness  of  contemplation;  and  it 
cannot  be  supposed  that  this  inquiry  can  be  without 
result  upon  our  happiness.  For  the  deepest  anxieties  of  the 
human  heart  arise  from  this,  that  we  regard  these  earthly 
things  as  abiding  and  satisfying,  and  so  we  must  tremble 
at  all  the  changes  which  nevertheless  occur.  But  he  who 
regards  change  in  things  as  necessarily  inherent  in  their 
very  existence  is  obviously  free  from  this  terror. 

Others,  believing  the  old  myths,  are  in  fear  of  eternal 
torments  to  come ;  or,  if  they  are  too  sensible  to  believe  in 
these,  yet  apprehend  at  least  the  loss  of  all  feeling  which 
death  brings  with  it  as  an  evil,  just  as  if  the  soul  could 
still  feel  this  deprivation. 

But  death  is  really  quite  indifferent  to  us,  just  because 
it  deprives  us  of  feeling.  So  long  as  we  are,  there  is  as 
yet  no  death ;  but  as  soon  as  death  comes,  then  we  exist 
no  more.  And  yet  we  cannot  but  dread  even  the  approach 
of  a  thing  which  in  itself  has  nothing  terrible  about  it. 
Still  more  foolish  is  it,  of  course,  to  sing  the  praises  of .  an 
early  death,  which  we  can  always  secure  for  ourselves  at 
a  moment's  notice.  There  is  no  more  misfortune  in  life 
to  the  man  who  has  really  convinced  himself  that  not  to 
live  is  no  misfortune. 

Every  pleasure  is  a  good,  every  pain  is  an  evil ;  but  we 
are  not  on  that  account  to  pursue  after  every  pleasure  and 
to  flee  from  every  pain.  Peace  of  soul  and  freedom  from 
pain  are  the  only  lasting  pleasures,  and  these  are  therefore 
the  true  aim  of  existence. 

On  this  point  Epikuros  diverges  sharply  from  Aristippos, 
who  placed  pleasure  in  motion,  and  declared  the  indivi- 
dual pleasure  to  be  the  true  object.     The  tempestuous  life 


THE  STOICS  AND  EPIKUROS.  103 

of  Aristippos,  as  compared  with  the  quiet  garden-life  of 
Epikuros,  shows  how  their  opposite  theories  were  carried 
out  in  practice.  Unquiet  youth  and  retired  age,  as  well  of 
the  nation  as  of  philosophy,  seem  at  once  reflected  in  these 
contrasts. 

None  the  less  was  Epikuros  opposed  to  Aristippos,  from 
whom  he  had  learnt  so  much,  in  teaching  that  intellectual 
pleasure  was  higher,  and  to  be  preferred  to  physical  plea- 
sure ;  for  the  mind  is  stimulated  not  only  by  the  present, 
but  also  by  the  past  and  the  future. 

Yet  Epikuros  also  was  so  far  consistent  that  he  explained 
that  the  virtues  must  be  chosen  for  pleasure's  sake  alone, 
just  as  we  resort  to  medicine  for  the  sake  of  health ;  but 
he  added,  that  virtue  is  the  only  permanent  element  of 
pleasure ;  all  besides  may  be  separated  from  it  as  being 
perishable.  So  near,  logically,  stood  Epikuros  to  his  oppo- 
nents Zeno  and  Chrysippus,  who  declared  that  virtue  is 
the  only  good ;  and  yet,  in  consequence  of  the  difference 
in  the  points  of  departure,  we  find  the  utmost  difference  in 
the  systems. 

All  the  virtues  are  derived  by  Epikuros  from  wisdom, 
which  teaches  us  that  man  cannot  be  happy  unless  he  is 
wise,  noble,  and  just ;  and,  conversely,  that  man  cannot  be 
wise,  noble,  and  just,  without  being  really  happy.  Physics, 
in  the  Epikurean  system,  were  in  the  service  of  ethic,  and 
this  subordinate  position  could  not  but  react  upon  his 
explanation  of  nature.  Eor  as  the  whole  object  of  the 
explanation  of  nature  is  to  free  us  from  fear  and  anxiety, 
the  stimulus  to  inquiry  ceases  when  once  the  object  is 
attained;  and  it  is  attained  so  soon  as  it  is  shown  how 
events  can  be  explained  from  universal  laws.  The  possi- 
bility is  enough  here ;  for  if  an  effect  can  be  ascribed  to 
natural  causes,  I  need  not  any  longer  seek  after  super- 
natural ones.  Here  we  recognise  a  principle  which  the 
German  Eationalism  of  the  last  century  frequently  applied 
to  the  explanation  of  miracles. 

But  we  are  forgetting  to  ask  whether  and  how  we  can 


104  MA  TER1ALISM  IN  ANTIQ  UITY. 

prove  what  is  the  real  cause  of  the  events,  and  this  want 
of  a  certain  distinction  has  its  revenge ;  for  only  those  ex- 
planations will  give  us  lasting  satisfaction  in  which  we 
find  a  coherence  and  a  principle  of  unity.  Epikuros,  as 
we  shall  see  further  on,  possessed  such  a  principle  in  the 
bold  thought  that,  given  the  infinity  Of  worlds,  then  every- 
thing that  is  at  all  possible  is  somewhere  at  some  time 
realised  in  the  universe;  but  this  general  idea  has  very 
little  to  do  with  the  ethical  aim  of  physics,  which  must 
have  reference  to  our  world. 

Thus,  with  regard  to  the  moon,  Epikuros  supposed  that 
it  might  have  its  own  light,  but  its  light  might  also  come 
from  the  sun.  If  it  is  suddenly  eclipsed,  it  may  be  that 
there  is  a  temporary  extinction  of  the  light ;  it  may  also 
be  that  the  earth  has  interposed  between  the  sun  and 
moon,  and  so  by  its  shadow  causes  the  eclipse. 

The  latter  opinion  seems  indeed  to  have  been  specially 
held  by  the  Epikureans  ;  only  it  is  so  combined  with  the 
other  that  we  see  how  unimportant  it  was  considered  to 
decide  between  them.  You  may  choose  which  view  you 
prefer — only  let  your  explanation  remain  a  natural  one. 
This  natural  explanation  must  rest  upon  analogy  with 
other  known  cases;  for  Epikuros  declares  that  the  right 
study  of  nature  must  not  arbitrarily  propose  new  laws, 
but  must  everywhere  base  itself  upon  actually  observed 
facts.  So  soon  as  we  abandon  the  way  of  observation,  we 
have  lost  the  traces  of  nature,  and  are  straying  into  the 
region  of  idle  fantasies. 

In  other  respects  Epikuros's  theory  of  nature  is  almost 
entirely  that  of  Demokritos,  only  fuller  accounts  of  it  have 
been  preserved  to  us.  The  following  propositions  contain 
what  is  most  important  in  it : — 

Out  of  nothing  nothing  comes,  for  otherwise  anything 
could  come  out  of  anything.  Everything  that  is  is  body ; 
the  only  thing  that  is  not  body  is  empty  space. 

Amongst  bodies  some  are  formed  by  combination ;  the 


THE  STOICS  AND  EPIKUROS.  105 

others  are  those  out  of  which  all  combinations  are  formed. 
These  are  indivisible  and  absolutely  immutable. 

The  universe  is  unbounded,  and  therefore  the  number 
of  bodies  must  also  be  endless. 

The  atoms  are  in  constant  motion,  in  part  widely 
removed  from  each  other,  while  in  part  they  approach 
each  other  and  combine.  But  of  this  there  was  never 
a  beginning.  The  atoms  have  no  qualities  except  size, 
figure,  and  weight. 

This  proposition,  which  formally  denies  the  existence  of 
intrinsic  qualities  as  opposed  to  external  motions  and  com- 
binations, forms  one  of  the  characteristic  features  of  all 
Materialism.  With  the  assumption  of  intrinsic  qualities 
the  atom  has  already  become  a  monad,  and  we  pass  on 
into  Idealism  or  into  pantheistic  Naturalism. 

The  atoms  are  smaller  than  any  measurable  size.  They 
have  a  size,  but  not  this  or  that  particular  size,  for  none 
that  can  be  mentioned  will  apply  to  them. 

Similarly  the  time  in  which  the  atoms  move  in  the 
void  is  quite  inexpressibly  short ;  their  movement  is  abso- 
lutely without  hindrance.  The  figures  of  the  atoms  are 
of  inexpressible  variety,  and  yet  the  number  of  actually 
occurring  forms  is  not  absolutely  infinite,  because  in  that 
case  the  formations  possible  in  the  universe  could  not  be 
confined  within  definite,  even  though  extremely  wide, 
limits.58 

In  a  finite  body  the  number  as  well  as  the  variety  of 
the  atoms  is  limited,  and  therefore  there  is  no  such  thing 
as  infinite  divisibility. 

In  void  space  there  is  no  above  or  below ;  and  yet  even 
here  one  direction  of  motion  must  be  opposed  to  another. 
Such  directions  are  innumerable,  and  with  regard  to  them 
we  can  in  thought  imagine  above  and  below. 

53  For  the  divergences  of  Epiknros  Lucretius's  Be  Natura,  which  will  be 

from  Demokritos  we  must  refer  partly  found  further  on,  and  the  special  dis- 

to  the  section  on  Demokritos  (p.  25  cussions  in  connection  with  it. 
foil.),   partly  to  the  extracts  from 


io6  MA TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

The  soul  is  a  fine  substance  distributed  through  the 
whole  mass  of  body,  and  most  resembles  the  air  with  an 
infusion  of  warmth. — Here  we  must  again  interrupt  the 
ideas  of  Epikuros  to  make  a  brief  remark. 

To  our  present  Materialists,  this  very  theory  of  a  soul 
like  this,  consisting  of  fine  matter,  would,  of  all  others,  be 
most  repugnant.  But  whilst  we  now  find  such  theories, 
for  the  most  part,  only  amongst  fanciful  Dualists,  the  case 
was  quite  different  when  nothing  was  known  as  to  the 
nature  of  nerve-force  or  the  functions  of  the  brain.  The 
material  soul  of  Epikuros  is  a  genuine  constituent  of  the 
bodily  life,  an  organ,  and  not  a  heterogeneous  substance 
existing  independently,  and  continuing  to  exist  after  the 
dissolution  of  the  body.  This  is  quite  clear  from  the  fol- 
lowing developments : — 

The  body  encloses  the  soul,  and  conducts  sensations  to 
it :  it  shares  in  sensation  by  means  of  the  soul,  and  yei 
imperfectly,  and  it  loses  this  power  of  sensation  at  the 
dissolution  of  the  soul.  If  the  body  is  destroyed  the  soul 
must  also  be  dissolved. 

The  origin  of  mental  images  is  due  to  a  constant  stream- 
ing of  fine  particles  from  the  surface  of  bodies.  In  this 
manner  actual  material  copies  of  things  enter  into  us. 

Hearing,  too,  takes  place  through  a  current  proceeding 
from  sounding  bodies.  As  soon  as  the  sound  arises,  the 
report  is  formed  by  certain  billows,  which  produce,,  as  it 
were,  a  current  of  air. 

More  interesting  than  these  hypotheses,  which,  in  the 
absence  of  all  true  scientific  inquiry,  could  only  be 
childishly  inadequate,  are  those  explanations  which  are 
more  independent  of  clear,  positive  knowledge.  Thus 
Epikuros  attempted  to  explain  by  natural  laws  the  de- 
velopment of  speech  and  of  knowledge.  The  names  of 
things  did  not  originate  as  a  formal  system,  but  through 
men's  uttering  peculiar  sounds  varying  according  to  the 
nature  of  things.  The  use  of  those  sounds  was  confirmed 
by  convention,  and  so  the  various  languages  were   de- 


THE  STOICS  AND  EPIKUROS.  107 

veloped.  New  objects  occasioned  new  sounds,  which 
then  spread  through  employment,  and  became  generally 
intelligible. 

Nature  has  taught  man  many  things,  and  so  placed 
him  that  he  must  act.  When  he  is  brought  into  contact 
with  objects,  reflection  and  inquiry  arise,  in  some  cases 
quicker,  in  others  more  slowly ;  and  so  the  development 
of  ideas  progresses  ceaselessly  through  certain  stages. 

Epikuros  did  least  for  the  extension  of  logic,  and  that 
deliberately,  and  from  reasons  which  do  all  honour  to 
his  intelligence  as  well  as  his  character.  If  one  reflects 
how  the  great  mass  of  the  Greek  philosophers  sought  to 
shine  by  paradoxical  assertions  and  dialectic  tricks,  and 
for  the  most  part  confounded  things  instead  of  explaining 
them,  we  can  only  praise  the  sound  sense  of  Epikuros, 
which  led  him  to  reject  dialectic,  as  not  only  useless  but 
pernicious.  For  the  same  reasons  he  employed  no  strange- 
sounding  technical  terminology,  but  explained  everything 
in  mere  household  words.  Erom  the  orator  he  desired 
nothing  but  clearness ;  nevertheless  he  sought  to  establish 
a  canon  of  truth. 

And  here  again  we  come  upon  a  point  on  which  Epikuros 
is  almost  universally  misunderstood  and  undervalued.  That 
his  logic  is  very  simple  is  generally  admitted,  but  with 
a  contemptuous  sneer  that  is  not  justified  by  the  true 
state  of  the  case.  The  logic  of  Epikuros  is  distinctly  sen- 
sationalistic  and  empirical ;  from  this  standpoint,  then,  it 
is  to  be  judged,  and  it  can  be  shown  that  its  essential 
principles,  so  far  as  we  can  gather  them  from  the  mutilated 
and  in  many  ways  obscure  accounts  which  have  come  to 
us,  are  not  only  clear  and  consistent,  but  are  also  irresis- 
tible up  to  the  point  where  the  one-sidedness  of  all  empiri- 
cism finds  its  limits. 

The  ultimate  basis  of  all  knowledge  is  sensible  percep- 
tion. And  this  is  in  itself  always  true :  only  through  its 
relation  to  an  object  does  error  arise.  If  a  madman 
sees  a  dragon,  this  perception,  as  such,  is  not  deceptive ; 


io8  MA TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

he  does  perceive  the  picture  of  a  dragon,  and  no  reason 
and  no  law  of  thought  can  alter  the  fact.  But  if  he 
believes  that  this  dragon  will  devour  him,  there  he  is 
wrong.  The  error  lies  in  the  referring  of  the  perception 
to  an  objective  fact.  It  is  an  error  of  the  same  kind  as 
when  a  scientific  man,  after  the  most  sober  inquiry,  in- 
correctly explains  some  celestial  phenomenon.  The  per- 
ception is  true,  the  reference  to  an  assumed  cause  is  false. 

Aristotle  of  course  teaches  that  true  and  false  are  shown 
only  in  the  synthesis  of  subject  and  predicate  in  the  judg- 
ment. A  chimera  is  neither  false  nor  true,  but  if  any  one 
asserts  that  the  chimera  exists  or  does  not  exist,  then 
these  propositions  are  either  true  or  false. 

Ueberweg  maintains*  that  Epikuros  has  confounded 
truth  and  psychical  reality.  But  in  order  to  maintain 
this  he  must  define  truth  as  the  "  agreement  of  the  psy- 
chical image  with  a  really  existing  object,"  and  this  defini- 
tion agrees  indeed  with  Ueberweg's  logic,  only  it  is  neither 
commonly  accepted  nor  necessary. 

Let  us  dismiss  the  logomachy.  If  Epikuros's  madman 
forms  to  himself  the  judgment,  '  This  phenomenon  is  the 
image  of  a  dragon/  Aristotle  can  no  longer  object  to  the 
truth  of  this  judgment.  That  the  judgment  of  the  madman 
in  reality  (though  not  always)  is  quite  a  different  one  is 
here  irrelevant. 

This  remark  should  also  be  a  sufficient  reply  to  Ueber- 
weg; for  there  is  certainly  nothing  which  has,  in  the 
strongest  sense  of  the  term,  so  c  independent '  an  existence 
of  our  ideas,  from  which  everything  else  is  first  derived. 
But  Ueberweg  understands  the  matter  differently,  and 
therefore  here  too  a  different  reply  shall  be  made  to  the 
mere  verbal  misapprehension.  In  his  phraseology  Epi- 
kuros's perception  can  no  longer  be  called  '  true,'  but  yet 
it  may  be  called  '  certain,'  because  it  is  simple,  incontro- 
vertible, immediately  given. 

And  now  it  may  be  asked,  Is  this  immediate  certainty 

[*  Hist.  Phil.,  i.  4th  ed.  p.  220,  E.  T.  204.— Tr.] 


THE  STOICS  AND  EPIKUROS.  109 

of  the  particular  individual  concrete  perceptions  the 
foundation  of  all  'truth/  even  if  we  understand  it  in 
Ueberweg's  sense  or  not  ?  The  Empiricist  will  say  Yes ; 
the  Idealist  (that  is,  the  Platonic,  not  perhaps  the  Ber- 
keleian)  will  say  No.  Further  on  we  will  go  more  deeply 
into  this  contradiction.  Here  it  is  sufficient  to  make 
Epikuros's  train  of  thought  perfectly  clear,  and  so  to 
secure  his  justification. 

So  far  the  standpoint  of  Epikuros  is  that  of  Protagoras, 
and  it  is  therefore  a  complete  misapprehension  to  suppose 
that  he '  can  be  refuted  by  drawing  the  inference :  So 
then  contradictory  propositions  according  to  Epikuros,  as 
according  to  Protagoras,  may  be  equally  true.  Epikuros 
answers :  Yes,  they  are  true — each  for  its  object.  The 
contradictory  assertions  as  to  the  same  object  have,  how- 
ever, only  nominally  the  same  object.  The  objects  are 
different :  for  they  are  not  the  '  things  in  themselves/  but 
the  mental  images  of  them.  These  are  the  only  real  start- 
ing-point. The  '  things  in  themselves '  do  not  even  form 
the  second,  but  only  the  third  step  in  the  process  of 
knowledge.59 

59  Zeller  iii.  1,  2  Aufl.,  p.  365  foil.,  tive  thing,  is  broken,  and  will  there- 
treats  this  point  as  a  "difficulty,"  as  fore  appear  so  out  of  the  water  also, 
to  the  solution  of  which  Epikuros  is  indeed  false ;  but  it  can  be  easily 
appears  to  have  troubled  himself  but  corrected  by  a  second  perception, 
little.  But  the  expression  is  remark-  If  now  the  perceptions  taken  in 
able  that,  on  the  view  of  Pythagoras,  themselves  were  not  collectively 
errors  of  the  senses  become  impossible ;  quite  trustworthy,  and  the  basis  of 
while  shortly  afterwards  follows  the  all  further  knowledge,  one  might  pro- 
correct  remark  that  the  error  lies  not  pose  to  annul  one  of  them  entirely, 
in  the  perception  but  in  the  judgment,  as  we  simply  and  absolutely  abandon 
The  eye,  for  example,  looking  upon  an  incorrect  judgment.  But  it  is 
a  stick  plunged  into  the  water,  sees  it  obvious  that  that  is  quite  impossible, 
broken.  This  perception,  however,  Even  such  errors  of  the  senses  (errors 
of  a  broken  stick,  is  not  only  thor-  unknown  to  the  ancients),  in  which 
oughly  true  and  trustworthy  (com-  an  incorrect  judgment  (false  induc- 
pare  what  is  said  in  the  text  against  tion)  immediately  and  unconsciously 
Ueberweg),  but  it  is,  moreover,  a  interferes  with  and  affects  the  function 
very  important  basis  of  the  theory  of  perception,  as,  for  instance,  the  phe- 
of  the  refraction  of  light,  which,  nomena  of  dark  spots  on  the  retina, 
without  such  perceptions,  could  never  are  as  perceptions  trustworthy.  When 
have  been  attained.  The  judgment  Zeller  believes  that  the  difficulty 
that  the  stick,  conceived  as  an  objec-  would  be  only  carried  a  step  further 


I  io  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ  UITY. 

Epikuros  goes  beyond  Protagoras  in  the  safe  path  of 
Empiricism,  since  he  recognises  the  formation  of  memory- 
pictures,  which  arise  from  repeated  perception,  and  which, 
therefore,  as  compared  with  the  individual  perception, 
have  already  the  character  of  a  universal.  This  universal, 
or  what  is  equivalent  to  a  universal,  idea  (for  example,  the 
idea  of  a  horse  after  one  has  seen  different  animals  of  this 
kind),  is  less  certain  than  the  original  individual  idea,  but 
can  at  the  same  time,  just  because  of  its  universal  nature, 
play  a  much  greater  part  in  thought. 

It  forms  the  middle  term  in  the  passage  to  the  causes, 
that  is,  in  the  inquiry  after  the  'thing  in  itself/  This 
inquiry  it  is  that  first  results  in  science,  for  what  is  all 
Atomism  but  a  theory  as  to  the  '  thing  in  itself,'  which  lies 
at  the  bottom  of  phenomena  ?  Similarly  the  criterion  of 
the  truth  of  all  universals  is  always  their  ratification  by 
perception,  the  basis  of  all  knowledge.  The  universals  are 
not,  therefore,  by  any  means  especially  certain  or  true. 
They  are,  primarily,  only  '  opinions '  which  are  spontane- 
ously developed  out  of  the  contact  of  man  with  things. 

These  opinions  are  true  if  they  are  ratified  by  percep- 


back  by  the  distinction  between  tbe  stance,  the  way  in  which  Kousseau 
perception  of  a  picture  and  perception  makes  his  Emile  develop  the  notion 
of  an  object,  that  seems  to  rest  upon  0f  the  refraction  of  light  out  of  the 
a  misunderstanding.  The  question,  picture  of  the  broken  stick.  And 
"  How  may  the  true  be  distinguished  although  Epikuros  may  not  have 
from  the  untrue  pictures  ?  "  is  thus  treated  the  question  with  this  keen- 
to  be  answered,  that  every  picture  is  ness,  yet  obviously  his  remark  (if 
"true;"  that  is,  the  object  is  given  Cicero  reports  correctly),  that  it  is 
with  complete  certainty  in  that  modi-  the  task  of  the  wise  man  to  distin- 
fication  which  necessarily  follows  guish  mere  opinion  {opinio)  from  eer- 
f  rom  the  constitution  of  the  media  tainty  (perspicuitas),  is  not  the  whole 
and  of  our  organs.  Our  proper  task  answer  that  Epikuros's  system  affords 
is  never,  therefore,  to  reject  a  pic-  0n  the  matter.  Nay,  it  is  perfectly 
ture  absolutely  as  "  untrue,"  and  to  dear  that  this  very  distinction  must 
substitute  another  for  it,  but  to  re-  be  produced  in  the  same  way  as  all 
cognise  as  such  a  modification  of  the  other  knowledge ;  by  the  formation 
original  picture.  This  takes  place  quite  0f  a  notion,  and,  in  connection  with 
simply,  like  all  other  recognition,  it,  a  belief  naturally  developed  frsm 
through  the  formation  of  a  Trp6\r)\j/is  the  perception  itself  as  to  the  causes 
and  then  of  a  56£<x  out  of  repeated  of  the  modified  phenomenon, 
perceptions.     Let  us  compare,  for  in- 


THE  STOICS  AND  EPIK  URO  S.  in 

tions.  The  Empiricists  of  our  own  day  demand  that  they 
shall  be  ratified  by  '  facts.'  But  as  to  the  existence  of  a 
fact,  we  can  again  only  appeal  to  perception.  If  the  logi- 
cian objects  that  it  is  not  perception  but  methodical  proof 
that  determines  the  existence  of  a  fact,  we  must  remind 
him  in  turn  that  this  methodical  proof,  in  the  last  result, 
can  only  be  referred  to  perceptions  and  their  interpreta- 
tion. The  elementary  fact,  therefore,  is  always  the  percep- 
tion, and  the  difference  of  the  standpoints  shows  itself 
only  in  this — whether  the  method  of  verification  is  purely 
empirical,  or  whether  it  rests  eventually  upon  propositions 
which  are  viewed  as  necessarily  prior  to  all  experience. 
This  controversy  we  need  not  here  decide.  It  is  enough 
that  we  have  shown  that,  even  in  the  matter  of  logic,  we 
have  been  led  by  hostile  traditions  into  unfairly  re- 
proaching Epikuros  with  superficiality  and  inconsistency, 
whilst  from  his  own  standpoint  he  goes  to  work  at  least 
as  rationally  as  Descartes,  for  example,  who  also  rejects 
the  whole  traditional  logic,  and  substitutes  a  few  simpler 
rules  of  investigation. 

Epikuros  was  the  most  fertile  writer  amongst  the 
ancients,  with  the  exception  of  the  Stoic  Chrysippos,  who 
wished  to  surpass  him  in  this  respect,  and  succeeded ;  but 
whilst  the  books  of  Chrysippos  abounded  in  borrowed  pas- 
sages and  quotations,  Epikuros  never  made  a  quotation, 
but  carved  everything  out  of  his  own  materials. 

In  this  disdain  of  all  quotations,  we  cannot  but  recog- 
nise that  radicalism  which  is  not  unfrequently  united 
with  Materialistic  views — a  disdain  of  the  historical,  as 
compared  with  the  scientific,  element.  Let  us  take  these 
three  points  together :  that  Epikuros  was  self-taught,  and 
attached  himself  to  none  of  the  dominant  schools ;  that  he 
hated  dialectic,  and  employed  a  universally  intelligible 
mode  of  speech ;  finally,  that  he  never  quoted,  and,  as  a 
rule,  simply  ignored  those  who  thought  differently  from 
himself;  and  we  have  here  an  adequate  explanation  of 
the  hatred  that  so  many  narrow  philosophers  have  poured 


1 12  MA TER1ALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

upon  him.  The  charge  of  want  of  thoroughness  flows 
from  the  same  source,  for  still  in  our  own  days  nothing  is 
so  common  as  the  tendency  to  seek  the  thoroughness  of  a 
system  in  an  elaborate  scheme  of  unintelligible  phrases. 
If  our  contemporary  Materialists  in  their  opposition  to 
philosophical  terminology  go  too  far,  and  often  condemn 
for  want  of  clearness  terms  which  have  a  quite  fixed 
meaning,  although  one  not  to  be  guessed  at  once  by  a 
beginner,  this  is  chiefly  to  be  ascribed  to  a  neglect  of  the 
historical  and  exact  meaning  of  the  expressions.  Without 
having  grounds  for  making  definitely  a  similar  reproach 
against  Epikuros,  we  must  not  overlook  this  common 
feature  of  the  neglect  of  history.  In  this,  as  in  so  many 
other  respects,  the  keenest  contrast  to  Materialism  is  to  be 
found  in  Aristotle. 

It  is  worth  noticing  that  Greek  philosophy,  so  far  as  it 
is  expressed  in  sound  systems,  having  a  character  of  unity, 
and  based  upon  purely  ethical  and  intellectual  ideas,  ter- 
minates with  Epikuros  and  his  school,  as  it  begins  with 
the  Ionian  natural  philosophers.  The  further  develop- 
ments belong  to  the  positive  sciences,  while  specula- 
tive philosophy,  in  Neo-Platonism,  becomes  thoroughly 
degenerate. 

As  the  aged  Epikuros  cheerfully  closed  his  life  in 
the  midst  of  his  circle  of  disciples  at  Athens,  a  new 
theatre  of  Greek  intellectual  life  was  already  opened  at 
Alexandria. 

Within  very  recent  times  it  was  the  fashion  to  use 
the  '  Alexandrian  spirit '  as  the  synonyme  for  superficial 
sciolism  and  peddling  pedantry;  and  even  yet,  while  we 
recognise  the  claims  of  Alexandrian  research,  we  usually 
couple  with  this  recognition  the  thought  that  only  the 
complete  shipwreck  of  a  vigorous  national  life  had  been 
able  to  supply  such  room  for  the  purely  theoretical  need 
of  knowledge. 

In  the  face  of  these  notions,  it  is  important  for  our 
object  to  point  out  the  creative  energy,  the  living  spark  of 


THE  STOICS  AND  EPIKUROS.  113 

noble  effort — an  effort  as  bold  and  comprehensive  in  its 
aims  as  it  was  bold  and  honest  in  its  means — which  the 
learned  world  of  Alexandria  presents  to  us  on  a  nearer 
view. 

For  if  the  Greek  philosophy,  springing  from  a  Material- 
istic origin,  after  a  short  and  brilliant  passage  through  all 
conceivable  standpoints,  found  its  termination  in  Mate- 
rialistic systems  and  Materialistic  modifications  of  other 
systems,  we  are  entitled  to  ask  what  was  the  final  result 
of  all  these  transformations  ? 

But  the  'final  result'  may  be  variously  understood. 
Philosophers  have  sometimes  approved  of  a  construction 
which  compares  the  career  of  philosophy  to  the  course  of  a 
day  from  night  through  morning,  noon,  and  evening  again 
to  night.  The  natural  philosophers  of  Ionia  on  the  one  hand, 
and  Epikureanism  on  the  other,  fall  on  this  theory  in  the 
region  of  night. 

We  must  not  forget,  however,  that  the  conclusion  of 
Greek  philosophy  in  the  return  of  Epikuros  to  the  sim- 
plest principles  did  not  lead  the  nation  back  to  the  con- 
dition of  poetical  childhood,  but  much  rather  formed  the 
natural  transition  to  a  period  of  the  most  fruitful  inquiries 
in  the  sphere  of  the  positive  sciences. 

Historians  are  very  fond  of  maintaining  that  in  Greece 
the  rapid  development  of  philosophy  produced  a  hopeless 
separation  between  the  thought  of  the  intellectual  aristo- 
cracy and  the  imaginations  and  aspirations  of  the  people, 
and  that  this  separation  brought  about  the  national  catas- 
trophe. We  may,  indeed,  grant  all  this,  and  yet  hold 
that  the  fall  of  individual  nations  does  not  hinder  the  pro- 
gress of  humanity ;  nay,  that  in  the  very  fall  of  the  nation 
the  result  of  its  efforts,  like  the  seeds  of  the  dying 
plant,  reaches  its  utmost  ripeness  and  perfection.  If  we 
see,  then,  how  such  results  became  really  in  later  times  the 
life-germs  of  new  and  unlooked-for  progress,  we  shall 
regard  the  career  of  philosophy  and  of  scientific  inquiry 
from  a  higher   and  freer   standpoint.      And  it   may  be 

VOL.  I.  h 


1 14  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

actually  proved  that  the  brilliant  scientific  outburst  of 
our  own  times,  at  the  era  of  its  development,  at  every 
point  connects  itself  with  Alexandrian  traditions. 

All  the  world  has  heard  of  the  libraries  and  schools  of 
Alexandria,  of  the  munificence  of  her  kings,  the  zeal  of 
her  teachers  and  scholars.  But  it  is  not  all  this  that  con- 
stitutes the  historical  importance  of  Alexandria:  it  is 
much  more  the  very  marrow  of  all  science,  the  method 
which  here  appeared  first  after  a  sort  that  determined  the 
course  of  all  after-time ;  and  this  progress  in  methodology 
is  not  confined  to  this  or  that  science,  nor  to  Alexandria 
itself,  but  is  much  rather  the  common  note  of  Hellenic 
research  after  the  decadence  of  speculative  philosophy. 

Grammar,  the  first  foundations  of  which  had  been  laid 
by  the  Sophists,  found  in  this  period  an  Aristarchos  of 
Samothrace,  the  pattern  of  critics,  a  man  from  whom  the 
philology  of  our  own  day  has  still  found  something  to 
learn. 

In  history,  Polybios  began  to  set  causes  and  effects  in 
organic  connection.  In  Manetho's  chronological  inquiries 
the  great  Scaliger  sought  in  modern  times  a  point  of 
departure. 

Euklid  created  the  method  of  geometry,  and  provided 
the  elements  which  yet  constitute  the  basis  of  this 
science. 

Archimedes  found  in  the  theory  of  the  lever  the  founda- 
tion of  all  statics :  from  him  until  Galilei  the  mechanical 
sciences  made  no  more  progress. 

But  amongst  the  sciences  of  this  epoch,  astronomy 
shines  with  special  brilliancy,  after  having  rested  from 
the  time  of  Thales  and  Anaximander.  With  great  em- 
phasis speaks  Whewell  of  the  'inductive  age  of  Hip- 
parchos,'  for  it  was  in  fact  the  inductive  method  in  all  its 
thoroughness  and  fertility  that  was  for  the  first  time 
handled  by  Hipparchos.  The  cogency  of  the  inductive 
method  rests,  however,  upon  the  presupposition  of  that 
uniformity  and  necessity  in  the  course  of  nature  which 


THE  STOICS  AND  EPIKUROS.  115 

Demokritos  had  first  brought  distinctly  into  view.  Hence 
is  to  be  explained,  moreover,  the  far-reaching  influence  of 
astronomy  in  the  days  of  Copernicus  and  Keppler,  the 
true  restorers  of  that  method  which  Bacon  formulated. 

The  necessary  complement  of  the  inductive  method,  the 
second  corner-stone  of  our  modern  science,  is,  of  course, 
experiment.  This,  too,  had  its  birth  in  Alexandria,  and  in 
its  schools  of  medicine. 

Anatomy  was  made  the  basis  of  medical  knowledge  by 
Herophilos  and  Erasistratos,  and  even  vivisection  appears 
to  have  been  employed.  A  school  of  great  influence  grew 
up,  which  made  experience,  in  the  best  sense  of  the  word, 
its  grand  principle,  and  great  progress  was  the  reward  of 
their  efforts.  If  we  include  all  these  brilliant  phenomena 
in  one  view,  the  intellectual  activity  of  Alexandria  must 
inspire  in  us  a  high  regard.  It  was  not  the  want  of  internal 
vitality,  but  the  course  of  history,  which  speedily  put  an 
end  to  this  activity ;  and  we  may  say  that  the  renascence 
of  the  sciences  was  chiefly  a  revival  of  Alexandrian 
principles. 

Nor  must  we  undervalue  the  results  of  positive  research 
in  antiquity.  "We  here  leave  out  of  sight  grammar  and 
logic,  history  and  philology,  whose  great  and  permanent 
achievements  none  will  controvert.  We  will  rather  point 
out  that  in  those  very  sciences,  in  which  the  last  few  cen- 
turies have  attained  such  an  unequalled  development,  the 
preparatory  achievements  of  Greek  inquiry  were  of  high 
importance. 

Whoever  contemplates  the  Homeric  world,  with  its 
ceaseless  miracles,  the  narrow  space  of  its  earth-surface, 
and  its  naive  conceptions  of  the  heavens  and  the  stars, 
must  confess  that  the  capable  among  the  Greeks  had 
entirely  to  remodel  their  notions  of  the  world.  Of  the 
wisdom  of  the  Indians  and  the  Egyptians  only  fragments 
reached  them,  which,  without  answering  efforts  of  their 
own,  could  never  have  attained  to  any  serious  develop- 
ment.    The  distorted  representation  of  the  few  countries 


u6  MATERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

around  the  Mediterranean,  which  it  was  already  clear  to 
Plato  must  form  only  a  very  small  portion  of  the  whole 
earth,  the  fables  of  the  Hyperboreans  and  the  peoples  inha- 
biting the  farthest  west  beyond  the  setting  of  the  sun,  the 
myths  of  Scylla  and  Charybdis :  all  these  are  traits  from 
which  we  learn  at  once  that  the  conceptions  of  science 
and  poetry  are  as  yet  scarcely  distinguished.  The  events 
correspond  with  the  scene.  Every  natural  occurrence 
appears  muffled  by  some  divine  apparition.  Those  beings 
out  of  which  the  popular  sense  of  beauty  created  such 
splendid  types  of  human  strength  and  grace,  are  every- 
where and  nowhere,  and  subvert  every  thought  of  a  rigid 
connection  between  cause  and  effect.  The  gods  are  not 
wholly  omnipotent,  and  yet  there  are  no  fixed  limits  to 
their  power.  Everything  is  possible,  and  nothing  can  be 
depended  upon.  The  redudio  ad  absurdum  of  the  Greek 
Materialists — "  since  in  that  case  anything  might  arise 
from  anything" — has  in  this  world  no  application :  anything 
may  actually  arise  from  anything,  and  since  no  leaf  can 
fall,  no  streak  of  mist  rise  up,  no  ray  of  light  shine — not 
to  speak  of  lightning  and  thunder — without  the  interven- 
tion of  some  deity,  no  starting-point  for  science  is  here  to 
be  discerned. 

With  the  Eomans,  apart  from  the  fact  that  they  received 
their  first  scientific  impulses  from  the  Greeks,  it  was,  if 
possible,  still  worse ;  except  that  the  augury  by  birds,  and 
especially  the  observation  of  storms,  so  studiously  pursued 
by  the  Etruscans,  made  known  a  series  of  positive  facts 
in  the  sphere  of  natural  occurrences.  But  the  nascent 
Graeco-Eoman  culture  found  scarcely  the  barest  rudi- 
ments of  astronomy  and  meteorology,  no  trace  of  physics 
and  physiology,  not  a  suspicion  of  chemistry.  Whatever 
happened  was  commonplace,  accidental,  or  miraculous,  but 
not  an  object  of  scientific  cognisance.  In  a  word,  there 
was  still  lacking  the  very  beginning  of  natural  science — 
Hypothesis. 

At  the  termination  of  the  short  and  brilliant  career  of 


THE  STOICS  AND  EPIKUROS.  117 

ancient  civilisation,  we  find  a  complete  change.  The 
axiom  of  the  uniformity  and  knowableness  of  natural 
events  stands  removed  above  all  doubt;  the  effort  after 
this  knowledge  has  found  its  destined  path.  Positive 
natural  science,  directed  to  the  precise  investigation  of 
particular  facts,  and  the  clear  co-ordination  of  the  results 
of  these  inquiries,  has  already  completely  separated  itself 
from  the  speculative  philosophy  of  nature,  which  seeks  to 
reach  beyond  the  bounds  of  experience,  and  rise  to  the 
ultimate  causes  of  things. 

Physical  research  has  attained  a  definite  method.  Deli- 
berate has  supplanted  merely  casual  observation :  instru- 
ments lend  precision  to  observation  and  secure  its  results ; 
experiments  even  are  being  made. 

The  exact  sciences,  by  a  brilliant  elaboration  and  per- 
fecting of  mathematics,  had  secured  that  instrument 
which,  in  the  hands  of  the  Greeks,  the  Arabs,  and  the 
Teutonic-Romanic  peoples  of  modern  times,  step  by  step 
brought  about  the  most  magnificent  practical  and  theore- 
tical results.  Plato  and  Pythagoras  inspired  their  pupils 
to  the  cultivation  of  a  mathematical  sense. 

The  books  of  Euklid  constitute  still  in  the  country  of 
Newton,  after  more  than  two  thousand  years,  the  founda- 
tion of  mathematical  instruction,  and  the  primitive  syn- 
thetic method  celebrated  in  the  Mathematical  Elements 
of  Natural  Philosophy — {Naturalis  philosophiae  principia 
mathematica) — its  last  and  greatest  triumph. 

Astronomy,  under  the  guidance  of  subtle  and  compli- 
cated hypotheses  as  to  the  motion  of  the  heavenly  bodies, 
accomplished  incomparably  more  than  those  primitive 
diviners  of  the  stars,  the  peoples  of  India,  Babylon,  and 
Egypt,  had  ever  succeeded  in  attaining.  A  very  nearly 
exact  calculation  of  the  positions  of  the  planets,  of  eclipses 
of  the  sun  and  moon,  an  accurate  representation  and 
grouping  of  the  fixed  stars,  does  not  exhaust  the  list  of 
what  was  achieved ;  and  even  the  root-idea  of  the  Coper- 
nican  system,  the  placing  of  the  sun  in  the  centre  of  the 


n8  MATERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

universe,  is  to  be  found  in  Aristarchos  of  Samos,  with 
whose  views  Copernicus  was  very  probably  acquainted. 

If  we  inspect  the  map  of  Ptolemy,  we  find  still,  it  is 
true,  the  fabulous  southern  land  uniting  Africa  to  Further 
India,  and  converting  the  Indian  Ocean  into  a  second 
and  greater  Mediterranean;  but  Ptolemy  represents  this 
country  as  purely  hypothetical;  and  how  charming  it 
looks  already  in  Europe  and  the  inner  portions  of  Asia 
and  Africa !  Long  before  the  spherical  shape  of  the  earth 
had  been  generally  recognised.  A  methodical  indication  of 
place  by  means  of  degrees  of  longitude  and  latitude  forms 
a  strong  support  for  the  maintenance  of  what  has  been 
reached,  and  the  incorporation  of  all  fresh  discoveries. 
Even  the  circumference  of  the  earth  had  been  already 
estimated  by  means  of  an  ingenious  astronomical  method. 
Though  this  estimate  contained  an  error,  yet  this  very 
error  led  to  the  discovery  of  America,  when  Columbus, 
relying  upon  Ptolemy,  sought  the  western  passage  to  the 
East  Indies. 

Long  before  Ptolemy  the  researches  of  Aristotle  and  his 
predecessors  had  diffused  a  mass  of  information  on  the 
fauna  and  flora  of  more  or  less  distant  countries.  Accu- 
rate description,  anatomical  examination  of  the  internal 
structure  of  organic  bodies,  paved  the  way  for  a  compre- 
hensive survey  of  the  forms  which,  from  the  lowest  upward 
to  the  highest,  were  conceived  as  a  progressive  realisation 
of  formative  forces,  which  end  by  producing  in  man  the 
most  perfect  of  earthly  things.  Although  in  this  view 
again  numerous  errors  were  involved,  yet  so  long  as  the 
spirit  of  inquiry  remained  active,  the  foundation  was  of 
infinite  value.  The  victorious  campaigns  of  Alexander  in 
the  East  enriched  the  sciences,  and  by  the  help  of  compa- 
rison still  further  enlarged  and  opened  the  field  of  obser- 
vation. The  industry  of  Alexandria  accumulated  and 
sifted  materials.  And  so,  when  the  elder  Pliny  attempted 
in  his  encyclopedic  work  to  represent  the  whole  field  of 
nature  and  art,  a  nearer  insight  into  the  relations  between 


THE  STOICS  AND  EPIKUROS.  119 

human  life  and  the  universe  was  already  possible.  To  this 
restless  spirit,  who  closed  his  great  work  with  an  invoca- 
tion to  Nature,  the  universal  mother,  and  ended  his  life 
whilst  engaged  in  observing  a  volcano,  the  influence  of 
nature  upon  the  intellectual  life  of  mankind  constituted  a 
fruitful  point  of  view,  and  an  inspiring  stimulus  to  inquiry. 

The  physics  of  the  ancients  embrace  a  notion,  built  upon 
experiment,  of  the  main  principles  of  acoustics,  of  optics, 
of  statics,  and  the  theory  of  gases  and  vapours.  From  the 
researches  of  the  Pythagoreans  into  the  pitch  and  depth  of 
musical  tones/  as  conditioned  by  the  relative  masses  of  the 
sounding  bodies,  to  the  experiments  of  Ptolemy  on  the 
refraction  of  light,  the  spirit  of  Hellenic  research  accom- 
plished a  long  career  of  fruitful  productiveness.  The 
mighty  "buildings,  war- engines,  and  earthworks  of  the 
Romans  were  based  upon  a  scientific  theory,  by  the  exact 
application  of  which  they  were  carried  out  with  the  utmost 
possible  care  and  expedition,  while  the  much  more  colossal 
works  of  the  Oriental  nations  were  produced  rather  by  the 
prodigal  expenditure  of  time  and  labour  under  the  coercion 
of  despotic  dynasties. 

Scientific  medicine,  culminating  in  Galen  of  Pergamos, 
had  already  explained  the  bodily  life  in  its  most  difficult 
element— the  nervous  activity.  The  brain,  previously 
regarded  as  an  inert  mass,  whose  use  was  still  less  under- 
stood than  that  of  the  spleen  in  modern  times,  had  been 
elevated  to  the  seat  of  the  soul  and  the  functions  of  sensa- 
tion. Sömmering,  in  the  last  century,  found  the  theory  of 
the  brain  almost  where  Galen  had  left  it.  The  ancients 
were  acquainted  with  the  importance  of  the  spinal  marrow, 
and  thousands  of  years  before  Sir  Charles  Bell  they  had 
distinguished  the  nerves  of  sensibility  and  movement ;  and 
Galen  cured  paralysis  of  the  fingers,  to  the  astonishment  of 
his  contemporaries,  by  acting  upon  those  parts  of  the  spine 
from  which  the  implicated  nerves  took  their  rise.  No 
wonder,  then,  that  Galen  already  regarded  ideas  as  results 
of  bodily  conditions. 


1 20  MA  TERIAL1SM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

When  we  behold  knowledge  thus  accumulating  from  all 
sides — knowledge  which  strikes  deep  into  the  heart  of 
nature,  and  already  presupposes  the  axiom  of  the  uni- 
formity of  events — we  must  ask  the  question,  How  far  did 
ancient  Materialism  contribute  to  the  attainment  of  this 
knowledge  and  these  views  ? 

And  the  answer  to  this  question  will  at  first  sight  ap- 
pear very  curious.  For  not  only  does  scarcely  a  single  one 
of  the  great  discoverers — with  the  solitary  exception  of 
Demokritos — distinctly  belong  to  the  Materialistic  school, 
but  we  find  amongst  the  most  honourable  names  a  long 
series  of  men  belonging  to  an  utterly  opposite,  idealistic, 
formalistic,  and  even  enthusiastic  tendency. 

And  special  notice  must  here  be  paid  to  mathematics. 
Plato,  the  first  father  of  an  enthusiasm  which  became  in 
the  course  of  history  at  one  time  beautiful  and  profound, 
at  another  fanatical  and  delirious,  is  at  the  same  time  the 
intellectual  progenitor  of  a  line  of  inquirers  who  carried 
the  clearest  and  most  consequent  of  all  sciences,  mathe- 
matics, to  the  highest  point  it  was  to  reach  in  antiquity. 
The  Alexandrian  mathematicians  belonged  almost  wholly 
to  the  Platonic  school,  and  even  when  the  development  of 
Neo-Platonism  began,  and  the  troubled  fermentations  of 
the  great  religious  crisis  made  their  way  into  philosophy, 
this  school  still  produced  great  mathematicians.  Theon 
and  his  noble  daughter  Hypatia,  martyred  by  the  Chris- 
tian rabble,  may  serve  to  indicate  this  stage.  A  similar 
tendency  proceeded  from  Pythagoras,  whose  school  pro- 
duced in  Archytas  a  mathematician  of  the  first  order.  By 
the  side  of  these  the  Epicurean  Polyaenos  is  scarcely  to  be 
mentioned.  Even  Aristarchos  of  Samos,  the  forerunner  of 
Copernicus,  clung  to  Pythagorean  traditions.  The  great 
Hipparchos,  the  discoverer  of  the  precession  of  the  equi- 
noxes, believed  in  the  divine  origin  of  the  human  soul. 
Eratosthenes  belongs  to  the  middle  academy,  which  cor- 
rupted Platonism  by  a  sceptical  element.  Pliny,  Ptolemy, 
Galen,  without  any  exact  system,  leaned  to  pantheistic 


THE  STOICS  AND  E  PIK  URO  S.  121 

views,  and  would  perhaps,  two  hundred  years  earlier,  have 
been  confounded  with  the  proper  followers  of  Materialism 
under  the  common  name  of  Atheism  and  Naturalism.  But 
Pliny  favoured  no  philosophical  system,  although  he  stands 
in  open  opposition  to  popular  beliefs,  and  leans  in  his  views 
to  Stoicism.  Ptolemy  was  entangled  in  astrology,  and 
in  the  general  principles  of  his  philosophy,  at  all  events, 
follows  Aristotle  rather  than  Epikuros.  Galen,  who  was 
more  of  a  philosopher  than  any  of  them,  is  an  Eclectic,  and 
is  acquainted  with  the  most  various  systems,  yet  he  shows 
himself  least  inclined  to  the  Epikurean :  only  in  the 
theory  of  knowledge  he  held  the  immediate  certainty  of 
sense-perceptions ;  but  he  supplemented  it  by  assuming 
immediate  truths  of  the  reason,  which  are  certain  previous 
to  all  experience.60 

We  see  easily  enough,  however,  that  this  slender  parti- 
cipation of  Materialism  in  the  achievements  of  positive 
inquiry  is  not  casual ;  that  it  is  especially  not  to  be  attri- 
buted merely  to  the  quietistic  and  contemplative  charac- 
ter of  Epikureanism,  but  that,  in  fact,  the  ideal  element 
{Moment)  with  the  conquerors  of  the  sciences  stands  in  the 
closest  connection  with  their  inventions  and  discoveries. 

Here  we  must  not  allow  an  appreciation  to  escape  us  of 
the  great  truth  that  it  is  not  what  is  objectively  right  and 
reasonable  that  most  invites  man,  not  even  that  which 

.  60  The  passage  contained  at  p.  65  of  morphologischen  Ansichten  des  Sta- 
the  first  edition,  in  which  the  Index  of  giriten  lagen  gleichsam  die  Keime 
Hixmboldt's  "  Kosmos  "  was  employ-  aller  späterer  Fortschritte  der  Matur- 
ed to  prove  the  scientific  importance  Wissenschaft."  We  must  not,  indeed, 
of  Aristotle,  has  been  retracted  on  overlook  the  importance  of  teleologi- 
considering  that  the  preservation  of  cal  hypotheses  in  the  sphere  of  orga- 
the  Aristotelian  writings  in  the  gene-  nie  discovery,  but  the  great  develop- 
ral  destruction  of  the  Greek  literature  ment  of  modern  science  rests  upon  the 
was  sufficiently  decisive  on  this  point,  liberation  from  the  tyranny  of  this 
It  is  therefore  perhaps  to  be  doubted  '  organic  view  of  things.'  The  know- 
whether  the  influence  of  Aristotle  has  ledge  of  inorganic  nature,  and  there- 
not  been  too  favourably  estimated  with  of  the  most  universal  laws  of 
in  the  passage  of  Humboldt :  "In  nature,  connects  itself,  in  fact,  much 
Plato's  hoher  Achtung  für  mathema-  more  closely  with  the  principle  of  De- 
tische  Gedankenentwicklung,  wie  in  mokritos,  through  which  physics  and 
den    alle    Organismen    umfassenden  chemistry  first  became  possible. 


122  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

leads  him  to  the  greatest  fulness  of  objective  truth.  As 
the  falling  body  reaches  the  goal  more  quickly  upon  the 
brachystochrone  than  upon  an  inclined  plane,  so  it  is  a 
result  of  the  complex  organisation  of  man  that  in  many 
cases  the  roundabout  course  through  the  play  of  imagina- 
tion leads  more  quickly  to  the  apprehension  of  pure  truth 
than  the  sober  effort  to  penetrate  the  closest  and  most 
various  disguises. 

There  is  no  room  to  doubt  that  the  Atomism  of  the  an- 
cients, though  far  from  possessing  absolute  truth,  yet  comes 
incomparably  nearer  to  the  essential  reality  of  things,  so  far 
as  science  can  understand  it,  than  the  Numerical  theory  of 
the  Pythagoreans  or  the  Ideal  theory  of  Plato ;  at  least  it 
is  a  much  straighter  and  directer  step  to  the  existing  phe- 
nomena of  nature  than  those  vague  and  hesitating  philo- 
sophemes  which  spring  almost  wholly  out  of  the  specula- 
tive poesy  of  individual  souls.  But  the  ideal  theory  of 
Plato  is  not  to  be  separated  from  the  man's  immeasurable 
love  for  the  pure  forms  in  which  all  that  is  fortuitous  and 
abnormal  falls  away,  and  the  mathematical  idea  of  all 
figures  is  regarded.  And  so  it  is  with  the  number-theory 
of  the  Pythagoreans.  The  inner  love  for  all  that  is  har- 
monious, the  tendency  of  the  spirit  to  bury  itself  in  the 
pure  numerical  relations  of  music  and  mathematics,  pro- 
duced inventive  thought  in  the  individual  soul.  So  from 
the  first  erection  of  the  MrjBeh  äyecojjL€Tp7iTo$  elo-lrco  until 
the  termination  of  the  ancient  civilisation,  there  ran  this 
common  characteristic  through  the  history  of  invention  and 
discovery — that  the  tendency  of  the  spirit  to  the  supersen- 
suous  helped  to  open  the  laws  of  the  sense-world  of  phe- 
nomena on  the  path  of  abstraction. 

Where,  then,  are  the  services  of  Materialism  ?  Or,  in 
addition  to  all  its  other  services  to  art,  poetry,  and  sensi- 
bility, must  the  preference  also  be  given  to  fanciful  specu- 
lation in  relation  even  to  the  exact  sciences  ?  Obviously 
not :  the  thing  has  its  reverse  side,  and  this  appears  if  we 


THE  STOICS  AND  EPIKUROS.  123 

regard  the  indirect  effects  of  Materialism  and  its  relation 
to  scientific  method. 

Although  we  may  assign  great  importance  to  the  sub- 
jective impulse,  to  the  individual  conjecture  of  certain  final 
causes  for  the  tendency  and  force  of  the  movement  towards 
truth,  yet  we  must  not  for  a  moment  lose  from  view  how  it 
is  just  this  fantastic  and  arbitrary  mythological  standpoint 
which  has  so  long  and  so  seriously  hampered  the  progress  of 
knowledge,  and  to  the  widest  extent  still  continues  to  do  so. 
As  soon  as  man  attains  to  the  sober,  clear,  and  definite  ob- 
servation of  individual  events,  so  soon  as  he  connects  the 
product  of  this  observation  with  a  definite,  though,  it  may 
be,  an  erroneous  theory,  if  it  be  at  least  a  firm  and  simple 
one,  further  progress  is  secured.  This,  when  it  occurs,  is 
easily  to  be  distinguished  from  the  processes  of  the  devising 
and  imagining  certain  final  causes.  Though  this,  as  we  have 
just  shown,  may  have,  under  favourable  circumstances,  a  high 
subjective  value,  depending  on  the  interchange  of  intellec- 
tual forces,  yet  the  beginning  of  this  clear,  methodical 
observation  of  things  is  in  a  sense  the  first  true  beginning 
of  contact  with  things  themselves.  The  value  of  this  ten- 
dency is  objective.  Things,  at  the  same  time,  demand  that 
we  shall  so  approach  them,  and  only  when  we  put  a  care- 
fully considered  question,  does  nature  afford  us  an  answer. 
And  here  we  must  refer  to  that  starting-point  of  Greek 
scientific  activity  which  is  to  be  sought  in  Demokritos  and 
the  rationalising  influence  of  his  system.  This  rationalis- 
ing influence  benefited  the  whole  nation;  it  was  com- 
pleted in  the  simplest  and  soberest  observation  of  things 
which  can  be  imagined — in  the  resolution  of  the  varying 
and  changeful  universe  into  unalterable  but  mobile  par- 
ticles. Although  this  principle,  most  closely  connected  as 
it  was  with  the  Epikurean  Materialism,  has  only  attained 
its  full  significance  in  modern  ages,  yet  it  obviously  exer- 
cised, as  the  first  instance  of  a  complete  and  vivid  repre- 
sentation of  all  changes,  a  very  deep  influence  upon  the 
ancients  also.     And  yet  Plato  himself  resolved  into  mobile 


124  MA TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY, 

elementary  bodies  his  '  non-existent/  yet  nevertheless  in- 
dispensable, matter ;  and  Aristotle,  who  opposes  with  all  his 
might  the  assumption  of  a  void,  who  maintains  the  dogma 
of  the  continuity  of  matter — seeks,  so  far  as  may  be  done 
from  this  difficult  standpoint,  to  compete  with  Demokritos 
in  the  vividness  of  his  doctrine  of  change  and  motion. 

It  is  indeed  true  that  the  Atomism  of  to-day,  since 
chemistry  has  been  worked  out,  since  the  theory  of  vibra- 
tion, and  the  mathematical  treatment  of  the  forces  at  work 
in  the  smallest  particles,  stands  in  very  much  more  direct 
connection  with  the  positive  sciences.  But  the  connecting 
of  all  these  otherwise  inexplicable  events  of  nature,  of 
becoming  and  perishing,  of  apparent  disappearance,  and  of 
the  unexplained  origin  of  matter  with  a  single  pervading 
principle,  and,  as  one  might  say,  a  palpable  foundation, 
was,  for  the  science  of  antiquity,  the  veritable  Columbus's 
egg.  The  constant  interference  of  gods  and  demons  was 
set  aside  by  one  mighty  blow,  and  whatever  speculative 
natures  might  choose  to  fancy  of  the  things  that  lay  behind 
the  phenomenal  world,  that  world  itself  lay  free  from  mist 
and  exposed  to  view,  and  even  the  genuine  disciples  of  a 
Plato  and  a  Pythagoras  experimented  or  theorised  over 
natural  occurrences  without  confusing  the  world  of  ideas 
and  of  mystic  numbers  with  what  was  immediately  given. 
This  confusion,  so  strongly  manifested  in  some  of  the 
modern  native  philosophers  of  Germany,  first  appeared  in 
classical  antiquity  with  the  decay  of  all  culture  at  the  era 
of  the  Neo-Platonic  and  IsTeo-Pythagorean  extravagances. 
It  was  the  healthy  morality  of  thought  which,  sustained  by 
the  counterbalance  of  sober  Materialism,  kept  the  Greek 
Idealists  so  long  away  from  such  errors.  In  a  certain 
sense,  the  whole  thought  of  Greek  antiquity,  from  its  be- 
ginning till  the  period  of  its  complete  destruction,  was 
under  the  influence  of  a  Materialistic  element.  The  phe- 
nomena of  the  sensible  world  were,  for  the  most,  part,  ex- 
plained out  of  what  are  perceived  by  the  senses  or  repre- 
sented as  so  perceived. 


THE  STOICS  AND  EPIKUROS.  125 

Whatever  judgment,  hen,  we  may  in  other  respects  pass 
upon  the  whole  of  the  Epikurean  system,  so  much,  at  all 
events,  is  certain,  that  the  scientific  research  of  antiquity 
drew  profit  not  out  of  this  system,  but  much  more  from 
the  general  Materialistic  principles  which  underlay  it.  The 
school  of  the  Epikureans  remained,  amongst  all  the  ancient 
schools,  the  most  fixed  and  unalterable.  ISTot  only  are  the 
instances  extremely  rare  in  which  an  Epikurean  went  over 
to  other  systems,  but  we  find  scarcely  a  single  attempt  to 
extend  or  modify  the  doctrines  once  accepted  until  the 
very  last  developments  of  the  school.  This  sectarian 
narrowness  bears  witness  to  the  strong  predominance  of 
the  ethical  over  the  physical  side  of  the  system.  When 
Gassendi,  in  the  seventeenth  century,  revived  the  system 
of  Epikuros,  and  opposed  it  to  that  of  Aristotle,  he  sought, 
of  course,  to  maintain  the  ethics  of  Epikuros  so  far  as  was 
compatible  with  Christianity,  and  it  cannot  be  denied  that 
this  too  had  a  strong  leavening  influence  in  the  develop- 
ment of  the  modern  spirit ;  but  the  most  important  fact 
was  the  immediate  release  of  the  old  Demokritean  prin- 
ciple out  of  the  chains  of  the  system.  Variously  modified 
by  men  like  Descartes,  Newton,  and  Boyle,  the  doctrine  of 
elementary  corpuscles,  and  the  origin  of  all  phenomena  from 
their  movements,  became  the  corner-stone  of  modern 
science.  Yet  the  work  which  had  secured  for  the  Epiku- 
rean system  ever  since  the  revival  of  learning  a  powerful 
influence  on  modern  modes  of  thought,  was  the  poem  of  the 
Eoman  Lucretius  Carus,  to  whom,  on  the  special  ground 
of  his  historical  importance,  we  will  dedicate  a  special 
chapter,  which  will  at  the  same  time  afford  us  a  deeper 
view  of  the  most  important  portions  of  the  Epikurean 
doctrine. 


C   126  ) 


CHAPTEE  Y. 

THE  DIDACTIC  POEM  OF  LUCRETIUS  UPON  NATURE. 

Among-  all  the  peoples  of  antiquity,  none  perhaps  was  "by 
nature  further  removed  than  were  the  Eomans  from  Mate- 
rialistic views.  Their  religion  had  its  roots  deep  in  super- 
stition; their  whole  political  life  was  circumscribed  by 
superstitious  forms.  They  clung  with  peculiar  tenacity  to 
the  sentiments  they  inherited ;  art  and  science  had  little 
charm  for  them,  and  they  were  still  less  inclined  to  bury 
themselves  in  the  contemplation  of  nature.  A  practical 
tendency,  more  than  any  other,  governed  their  life,  and 
yet  this  was  by  no  means  materialistic,  but  was  thoroughly 
spiritual.  They  valued  dominion  more  than  wealth,  glory 
rather  than  comfort,  and  triumph  more  than  all.  Their 
virtues  were  not  those  of  peace,  of  industrial  enterprise;  of 
righteousness,  but  those  of  courage,  of  fortitude,  of  tem- 
perance. The  Eoman  vices  were,  at  least  in  the  begin- 
ning, not  luxury  and  wantonness,  but  hardness,  cruelty, 
and  faithlessness.  Their  power  of  organisation,  in  con- 
junction with  their  warlike  character,  had  made  the  nation 
great,  and  of  this  they  were  proudly  conscious.  For  cen- 
turies after  their  first  contact  with  Greeks  there  continued 
that  antipathy  which  sprang  from  the  difference  in  their 
characters.  It  was  only  after  the  defeat  of  Hannibal  that 
Greek  art  and  literature  gradually  forced  their  way  into 
Eome.  At  the  same  time  came  luxury  and  wantonness, 
with  the  fanaticism  and  immorality  of  the  Asiatic  and 
African  peoples.  The  conquered  nations  crowded  to  their 
new  capital,  and  brought  about  a  confusion  of  all  the  ele- 
ments of  the  old  Eoman  life,  while  the  great  more  and 


THE  POEM  OF  LUCRETIUS.  127 

more  acquired  a  taste  for  culture  and  refined  sensuality ; 
generals  and  governors  made  spoil  of  the  works  of  Greek 
art;  schools  of  Greek  philosophy  and  rhetoric  were 
opened,  and  frequently  again  forbidden :  men  were  afraid 
of  the  dissolving  element  in  Greek  culture,  but  were  less 
and  less  able  to  resist  its  charms.  Even  old  Cato  himself 
learnt  Greek  ;  and  when  once  the  language  and  literature 
were  known,  the  influence  of  philosophy  could  not  remain 
inactive. 

In  the  last  days  of  the  Eepublic  this  process  had  been 
so  far  completed  that  every  educated  Eoman  understood 
Greek,  the  young  nobles  pursued  their  studies  in  Greece, 
and  the  best  minds  endeavoured  to  form  the  national 
literature  on  Greek  models. 

At  that  time,  among  all  the  schools  of  Greek  philosophy, 
there  were  two  which  especially  captivated  the  Eomans — 
the  Stoic  and  the  Epikurean:  the  first,  with  its  blunt 
pride  in  virtue,  naturally  related  to  the  Eoman  character ; 
the  second,  more  in  accord  with  the  spirit  of  the  times 
and  their  state  of  progress,  but  both — and  this  marks  the 
Eoman  character — of  practical  tendency  and  dogmatic  form. 

These  schools,  which,  despite  their  sharp  contrasts,  had 
nevertheless  so  much  in  common,  came  into  more  friendly 
contact  in  Eome  than  in  their  native  land.  It  is  true 
that  the  unmeasured  calumnies  of  the  Epikureans,  which 
since  Chrysippos  had  been  industriously  disseminated  by 
the  Stoics,  were  speedily  transplanted  to  Eome.  There, 
too,  the  mass  of  men  regarded  an  Epikurean  as  a  slave  of 
his  lusts,  and,  with  a  double  measure  of  superficiality,  ven- 
tured to  deny  his  philosophy  of  nature,  because  it  was 
protected  by  no  barrier  of  unintelligible  phrases. 

Cicero,  too,  unfortunately,  popularised  the  Epikurean 
doctrine  in  the  bad  sense  of  the  word,  and  so  threw  a 
ludicrous  colour  over  many  things  which  disappears  when 
they  are  more  seriously  regarded.  But  for  all  that,  the 
Eomans  were  for  the  most  part  admirable  dilettanti,  who 
were  not  so  deeply  concerned  for  their  own  school  but  that 


1 23  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ UITY. 

they  were  able  to  value  opposing  views.  The  security  of 
their  position  in  the  world,  the  universality  of  their  inter- 
course, kept  them  free  from  prejudice ;  and  therefore  we 
find  expressions,  even  in  Seneca,  which  gave  Gassendi 
some  authority  for  making  him  an  Epikurean.  Brutus 
the  Stoic  and  Cassius  the  Epikurean  together  imbrue 
their  hands  in  Csesar's  blood.  But  this  same  popular  and 
superficial  conception  of  the  Epikurean  doctrine,  which  in 
Cicero  seems  so  detrimental  to  it,  not  only  makes  it  pos- 
sible for  friendship  to  exist  between  Epikureanism  and  the 
most  divergent  schools,  but  it  weakens  the  character  of 
the  greater  number  of  the  Eoman  Epikureans,  and  so  gives 
a  certain  foundation  in  fact  for  the  general  reprobation. 
Even  at  a  time  when  Greek  culture  was  still  quite  foreign 
to  them,  the  Eomans  had  begun  to  exchange  the  rude 
austerity  of  primitive  manners  for  an  inclination  to  indul- 
gence and  wantonness,  which,  as  we  see  so  often  in  the 
case  of  individuals,  was  the  more  unrestrained  in  propor- 
tion to  the  novelty  of  the  freer  state  of  things.  The 
change  had  become  distinctly  marked  so  early  as  the  time 
of  Marius  and  Sulla.  The  Bomans  had  become  practical 
Materialists,  often  in  the  very  worst  sense  of  the  term, 
before  they  had  yet  learnt  the  theory. 

The  theory  of  Epikuros  was,  however,  in  every  way 
purer  and  nobler  than  the  practice  of  these  Bomans  ;  and 
so  now  two  courses  were  open  to  them — they  either 
allowed  themselves  to  be  purified,  and  became  modest 
and  temperate,  or  they  corrupted  the  theory,  and  so  com- 
bined the  conceptions  of  its  friends  and  foes,  that  they 
ended  by  having  a  theory  of  Epikureanism  which  corre- 
sponded to  their  habits.  Even  nobler  natures  and  more 
thorough  philosophers  tended  to  hold  by  this  more  conve- 
nient form.  So  it  was  with  Horace  when  he  spoke  of 
himself  as  a  "  hog  of  Epikuros's  herd,"  obviously  with  spor- 
tive irony,  but  not  in  the  serious  and  sober  sense  of  the 
old  Epikureanism.  And,  in  fact,  Horace  not  unfrequently 
points  to  the  Cyrenaic  Aristippos  as  his  model. 


THE  POEM  OF  LUCRETIUS.  129 

A  more  serious  attitude  was  that  of  Virgil,  who  also 
had  an  Epikurean  teacher,  but  appropriated  manifold 
elements  of  other  systems.  Amongst  all  these  semi-philo- 
sophers stands  a  thorough  and  genuine  Epikurean  in  Titus 
Lucretius,  whose  didactic  poem,  "  De  Eerum  Natura,"  con- 
tributed more  than  anything  else,  when  learning  revived, 
to  resuscitate  the  doctrines  of  Epikuros,  and  to  set  them  in 
a  more  favourable  light.  The  Materialists  of  the  last  cen- 
tury studied  and  loved  Lucretius,  and  it  is  only  in  our  own 
days  that,  for  the  first  time,  Materialism  seems  to  have 
broken  completely  away  from  the  old  traditions. 

T.  Lucretius  Carus  was  born  in  the  year  99,  and  died  in 
the  year  55  B.c.  Of  his  life  scarcely  anything  is  known. 
It  appears  that  amidst  the  confusion  of  the  civil  war,  he 
sought  some  stay  for  his  inner  life,  and  found  it  in  the 
philosophy  of  Epikuros.  His  great  poem  was  undertaken 
to  make  a  convert  to  this  school  of  his  friend  the  poet 
Memmius.  The  enthusiasm  with  which  he  opposes  the 
salvation  to  be  found  in  his  philosophy  to  the  troubles 
and  nihilism  of  the  times,  gives  to  his  work  an  elevated 
tone,  a  fervour  of  belief  and  imagination  which  rises  far 
above  the  innocent  serenity  of  Epikurean  life,  and  often 
assumes  a  Stoic  impetus.  And  yet  it  is  a  mistake  when 
Bernhardy  maintains  in  his  ( Eoman  Literature/  that  "  from 
Epikuros  and  his  followers  he  took  nothing  but  the  skele- 
ton of  a  philosophy  of  nature."  This  contains  a  misappre- 
hension of  Epikuros,  which  is  still  more  conspicuous  in 
the  following  expression  of  the  eminent  philologist : 

"  Lucretius  builds  indeed  upon  this  foundation  of  me- 
chanical Nature,  but  as  he  was  concerned  to  save  the  right 
of  personal  freedom  and  of  independence  of  all  religious 
tradition,  he  seeks  to  introduce  knowledge  into  practice, 
to  free  man,  and  to  place  him  upon  his  own  feet,  by  insight 
into  the  origin  and  the  nature  of  things." 

We  have  already  seen  that  this  striving  after  emanci- 

I  pation  is  the  very  marrow  of  the  Epikurean  system.     In 

Cicero's  superficial  statement,  this  was  indeed  left  in  the 

vol.  1.  1 


i so  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ UITY. 

background ;  but  not  in  vain  has  Diogenes  Laertius  pre- 
served for  us  in  his  best  biography  the  very  words  of 
Epikuros,  which  are  the  basis  of  the  view  we  have  already 
given.61 

But  if  there  was  anything  that  attracted  Lucretius  to 
Epikuros,  and  inspired  him  with  this  eager  enthusiasm, 
it  was  just  this  boldness  and  moral  vigour  with  which 
Epikuros  robbed  the  theistic  beliefs  of  their  sting,  in  order 
to  base  morality  upon  an  impregnable  foundation.  This 
is  shown  clearly  enough  by  Lucretius,  for  immediately 
after  the  splendid  poetical  introduction  to  Memmius,  he 
3  on: 

When  human  life  to  view  lay  foully  prostrate  upon 
earth,  crushed  down  under  the  weight  of  religion,  who 
showed  her  head  from  the  quarters  of  heaven  with  hide- 
ous aspect  lowering  upon  mortals,  a  man  of  Greece  ven- 
tured first  to  lift  up  his  mortal  eyes  to  her  face,  and  first 
to  withstand  her  to  her  face.  Him  neither  story  of  gods, 
nor  thunderbolts,  nor  heaven  with  threatening  roar,  could 
quell,  but  only  stirred  up  the  more — the  eager  courage  of 
his  soul  filling  him  with  desire  to  be  the  first  to  burst 
the  fast  bars  of  Nature's  portals."  * 

That  Lucretius  had  recourse  to  many  additional  sources,' 
that  he  industriously  studied  Empedokles,  and  perhaps  inl 

61  A  refutation  of  the  attempts  of  sued  with  dispassionate  calmness. 
Hitter  to  distinguish  between  the  We  may,  of  course,  at  the  same  time, 
theories  of  Lucretius  and  Epikuros  attribute  some  part  of  this  differ- 
may  be  found  in  Zeller,  iii.  i,  2  Aufl.  ence  to  the  special  hatefulness  and 
p.  499.  Everything  is  to  be  said  on  harmfulness  of  Roman  as  compared 
the  other  hand  for  the  emphasis  laid  with  Greek  religious  systems ;  but 
upon  his  enthusiasm  for  '  deliverance  yet  there  remains  a  kernel  still, 
from  the  darkness  of  superstition,'  which  may  be  regarded  as  a  bitter 
in  Teuff el,  Gesch.  d.  röm.  Liter. ,  p.  condemnation  of  religion  absolutely  ; 
326  (2  Aufl.  p.  371).  We  might  say  and  undoubtedly  the  importance 
still  more  confidently,  that  the  really  which  Lucretius  has  acquired  in  mo- 
original  element  in  Lucretius  is  the  dern  ages  rests  no  less  upon  this 
burning  hatred  of  a  pure  and  noble  special  feature  than  upon  his  strict 
character  against  the  degrading  and  Epikureanism. 

demoralising    influence    of    religion,  *  Lib.  i.  61  sqq.     In  this  and  other 

whilst  in  Epikuros  deliverance  from  passages     from     Lucretius,    I    have 

religion  is  indeed  an  essential  aim  of  availed  myself  of  Mr.  Munro's  tran- 

philosophy ,  but  an  aim  which  is  pur-  slation.  — Tß. 


THE  POEM  OF  LUCRETIUS.  131 

the  scientific  parts  of  his  theory  has  added  much  from  his 
own  observation,  we  will  not  deny;  yet  we  must  here  again 
remind  ourselves  that  we  do  not  know  what  treasures 
were  contained  in  the  lost  books  of  Epikuros.  Almost 
all  judges  assign  to  the  poem  of  Lucretius  a  very  high 
place  among  the  productions  of  pre-Augustan  times,  in 
respect  of  its  genius  and  vigour;  and  yet  the  didactic 
portions  are  often  dry  and  careless,  or  connected  by  sud- 
den transitions  with  the  poetical  pictures. 

In  point  of  language,  Lucretius  has  an  extreme  degree 
of  antique  roughness  and  simplicity.  The  poets  of  the 
Augustan  age,  who  felt  themselves  to  be  far  above  the 
rude  art  of  their  predecessors,  had  great  reverence  for 
Lucretius.     Virgil  has  devoted  to  him  the  lines — 

"  Felix  qui  potuit  rerum  cognoscere  causas, 
Atque  metus  omnes  et  inexorabile  fatum 
Subjecit  pedibus  strepitumque  Acherontis  avari." 

Lucretius,  then,  without  doubt  had  a  powerful  influence 
in  the  propagation  of  the  Epikurean  philosophy  among  the 
Eomans.  This  reached  its  highest  point  under  Augustus ; 
for  though  it  had  then  no  such  representative  as  Lucretius, 
yet  all  the  gayer  spirits  of  the  band  of  poets  who  gathered 
around  Maecenas  and  Augustus  were  inspired  and  guided 
by  the  spirit  of  this  system. 

When,  however,  under  Tiberius  and  Nero,  abominations 
of  all  kinds  made  their  appearance,  and  nearly  all  enjoy- 
ment was  poisoned  by  danger  or  by  shame,  the  Epicu- 
reans retired,  and  in  this  last  period  of  heathen  philosophy 
it  was  the  Stoics  especially  who  undertook  the  struggle 
against  vice  and  cowardice,  and  with  untroubled  courage, 
as  in  the  case  of  a  Seneca  or  a  Paetus  Thrasea,  fell  a 
sacrifice  to  tyranny. 

Doubtless  the  Epikurean  philosophy  also  in  its  purity, 
and  especially  in  the  extension  which  had  been  given  to 
it  by  the  strong  moral  character  of  Lucretius,  was  quite 
fitted  to  afford  such  sublimity  of  sentiments,  only  that 


1 32  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ  UITY. 

the  purity,  and  vigour,  and  force  of  comprehension  which 
were  displayed  hy  Lucretius  were  rare  in  this  school,  and 
perhaps  from  the  days  of  Lucretius  to  our  own  are  not 
again  to  be  met  with.  It  is  well  worth  the  trouble,  then, 
to  look  more  closely  into  the  work  of  this  remarkable 
man. 

The  Introduction  to  this  poem  consists  of  an  invocation 
to  the  goddess  Venus,  the  giver  of  life,  of  prosperity,  and 
of  peace,  which  is  marked  by  a  picturesque  mytholo- 
gical imaginativeness,  a  clear  and  yet  profound  reach  of 
thought. 

Here  we  are  at  once  face  to  face  with  the  peculiar 
Epikurean  attitude  towards  religion.  Not  only  the  ideas 
of  religion,  but  its  poetical  personifications  are  employed 
with  an  unmistakable  fervour  and  devotion  by  the 
same  man  who,  immediately  afterwards,  in  the  place 
quoted  above,  represents  it  as  the  strongest  point  of  his 
system  that  it  conquers  the  humiliating  terror  of  the 
gods. 

The  early  Eoman  conception  of  religion,  which,  in  spite 
of  the  uncertainty  of  the  etymology,  yet  certainly  ex- 
presses the  element  of  the  dependence  and  obligation  of 
man  to  the  divine  beings,  must,  of  course,  convey  to  Lucre- 
tius exactly  what  he  most  deprecates.  He  challenges  the 
gods,  therefore,  and  attacks  religion,  without,  on  this  point, 
our  being  able  to  discover  any  shade  of  doubt  or  contra- 
diction in  his  system. 

After  he  has  shown  how,  by  the  bold  unfettered  inves- 
tigations of  the  Greeks — where  he  refers  to  Epikuros,  for 
though  he  also  celebrates  Demokritos,  he  stands  further 
away  from  him — religion,  which  once  cruelly  oppressed 
mankind,  had  been  thrown  down  and  trodden  underfoot, 
he  raises  the  question  whether  this  philosophy  does  not 
lead  us  into  the  paths  of  immorality  and  sin. 

He  shows  how,  on  the  contrary,  religion  is  the  source 
of  the  grossest  abominations,  and  how  it  is  this  unrea- 
sonable terror  of  eternal  punishments  which  leads  man- 


THE  POEM  OF  LUCRETIUS.  133 

kind  to  sacrifice  their  happiness  and  peace  of  mind  to  the 
horrors  of  the  prophets.  62 

Then  the  first  principle  is  developed  that  nothing  can 
ever  come  from  nothing.  This  proposition,  which  to-day 
would  rather  be  regarded  as  a  generalisation  from  experi- 
ence, is,  quite  in  accordance  with  the  then  scientific  stand- 
point, to  he  posited  as  a  directive  principle  at  the  founda- 
tion of  all  scientific  experience. 

Any  one  who  imagines  that  anything  can  arise  out  of 
nothing,  can  find  his  prejudice  refuted  every  instant.  He 
who  is  convinced  of  the  contrary  has  the  true  spirit  of 
inquiry,  and  will  discover  also  the  true  causes  of  pheno- 
mena. The  proposition  is,  however,  established  by  the 
consideration  that,  if  things  could  arise  from  nothing,  this 
mode  of  development  could,  of  course,  have  no  limits,  and 
anything  might  then  arise  from  anything.  In  that  case 
men  might  emerge  out  of  the  sea,  and  fishes  spring  from 
the  soil ;  no  animal,  no  plant,  would  continue  to  propagate 
itself  only  after  its  kind. 

This  view  has  so  much  truth  in  it,  that  if  things  could 
spring  from  nothing,  we  could  no  longer  conceive  of  any 
absolute  reason  why  anything  should  not  arise ;  and  such 
an  order  of  things  must  become  an  ever- varying  and  sense- 
less play  of  the  birth  and  death  of  grotesque  creations. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  regularity  of  nature,  which  offers 
us  in  spring  roses,  in  summer  corn,  in  autumn  grapes, 
will  lead  us  to  conclude  that  creation  accomplishes  itself 
through  a  concourse  of  the  seeds  of  things  taking  place 
at  a  fixed  time,  and  thence  we  may  assume  that  there 
exist  certain  bodies  which  are  common  constituents  of 
many  things,  as  letters  are  of  words. 

Similarly  it  is^  shown  that  nothing,  again,  is  really  de- 
stroyed, but  that  the  particles  of  perishing  things  are  dis- 

62  Here    occurs,    i.    101    (we    cite     "  Tantum  religio  potuit  suadere  ma- 
from  the  edition  of  Lachmann),  the     lorum.'' 
often-quoted  and   pregnant  verse — 


1 34  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ  UITY. 

persed,  just  as  they  come  together  in  order  to  constitute 
the  thing. 

The  obvious  objection  that  we  cannot  perceive  the  par- 
ticles which  are  gathered  together  or  dispersed,  Lucretius 
meets  by  the  description  of  a  violent  storm.  To  make  his 
meaning  more  clear,  he  introduces  also  the  picture  of  a 
rushing  torrent,  and  shows  how  the  invisible  particles  of 
the  wind  produce  effects  as  obvious  as  the  visible  particles 
of  the  water.  Heat,  cold,  sound  are  in  the  same  way 
adduced  to  prove  the  existence  of  an  invisible  matter. 
Still  finer  observation  is  to  be  seen  in  the  following 
examples :  Garments  which  are  spread  on  a  surfy  shore 
become  damp,  and  then,  if  they  are  placed  in  the  sun, 
become  dry,  without  our  seeing  the  particles  of  water 
either  come  or  go.  They  must,  therefore,  be  so  small  as 
to  be  invisible.  A  ring  worn  on  the  finger  for  many 
years  becomes  thinner;  the  falling  of  water  wears  away 
stone;  the  ploughshare  gets  used  away  in  the  field;  the 
pavement  is  worn  away  by  the  treading  of  feet;  but 
nature  has  not  made  it  possible  for  us  to  see  the  particles 
that  disappear  every  instant.  Just  so  no  power  of  sight 
can  discover  the  particles  which  come  and  go  in  all  the 
processes  of  generation  and  decay.  Nature,  therefore, 
works  by  means  of  invisible  bodies  or  atoms. 

Then  follows  the  proof  that  the  universe  is  not  filled 
with  matter,  that  it  is  rather  a  void  space  in  which  the 
atoms  move. 

Here,  again,  the  weightiest  argument  is  supposed  to 
be  the  a  priori  one: — that  if  space  were  absolutely  filled 
with  matter,  motion  would  be  impossible,  and  yet  this 
we  perceive  constantly.  Then  come  the  arguments  from 
experience.  Drops  of  water  force  their  way  through  the 
thickest  stone.  The  nourishment  of  living  beings  per- 
meates the  whole  body.  Cold  and  sound  force  their  way 
through  walls.  Finally,  differences  of  specific  gravity  can 
only  be  referred  to  the  greater  or  smaller  proportion  of 
void  space.     The  objection  that,  in  the  case  of  fishes,  the 


THE  POEM  OF  LUCRETIUS.  135 

water  they  displace  goes  into  the  space  they  leave  behind 
them,, Lucretius  meets  by  maintaining  that  in  this  case  it 
would  be  quite  inconceivable  that  the  motion  should  com- 
mence ;  for  where  is  the  water  before  the  fish  to  go,  while 
the  void  it  is  to  occupy  does  not  yet  exist  %  So,  again, 
when  two  bodies  start  asunder,  there  must,  for  an  instant, 
be  a  void  between  them.  The  facts  cannot  be  explained 
by  saying  that  the  air  is  condensed  and  then  again  rare- 
fied, for  supposing  this  were  so,  it  could  only  happen  in 
case  the  particles  could  cohere  more  closely  by  filling  up 
the  void  that  previously  held  them  apart. 

There  is  nothing,  however,  besides  the  atoms  and  void. 
All  existing  things  are  either  combinations  of  these  two 
or  an  '  event  of  these/  Even  time  has  no  separate  exist- 
ence, but  is  the  feeling  of  a  succession  of  occurrences 
earlier  and  later :  it  has  not  even  so  much  reality  as  void 
space ;  but  the  events  of  history  are  to  be  regarded  only  as 
accidents  of  bodies  and  of  space. 

These  bodies  are  all  either  simple — atoms,  or  'begin- 
nings,' as  Lucretius  usually  calls  them,  principia  or  pri- 
mordia  rerum — or  are  compound  •  and  if  simple,  cannot  be 
destroyed  by  any  violence.  Infinite  divisibility  is  impos- 
sible, for  in  that  case,  as  things  are  so  much  more  easily 
destroyed  than  they  are  reconstituted,  the  process  of  dis- 
solution in  the  course  of  endless  time  would  have  pro- 
ceeded so  far,  that  the  restoration  of  things  would  have 
become  impossible.  It  is  only  because  there  are  limits  to 
the  divisibility  of  matter  that  things  are  preserved.  In- 
finite divisibility,  moreover,  would  be  incompatible  with 
the  laws  regulating  the  production  of  thing«,  for  if  they 
were  not  composed  of  minute  indestructible  particles,  then 
all  things  might  arise  without  fixed  law  and  order. 

This  rejection  of  endless  divisibility  is  the  keystone  of 
the  doctrine  of  atoms  and  void  space.  After  its  asser- 
tion, then,  the  poet  makes  a  pause,  which  is  devoted  to 
a  polemic  against  different  conceptions  of  nature,  especi- 
ally  against    Herakleitos,   Empedokles   and  Anaxagoras. 


136  MA TER1ALISM  11/  ANTIQUITY. 

But  we  must  note  his  praise  of  Empedokles,  whose  close 
relations  to  Materialism  we  have  already  dwelt  upon. 
After  a  very  lofty  poetical  eulogy  of  the  island  of  Sicily, 
the  poet  proceeds :  "  Now  though  this  great  country  is 
seen  to  deserve,  in  many  ways,  the  wonder  of  mankind, 
and  is  held  to  he  well  worth  visiting,  rich  in  all  good 
tilings,  guarded  by  large  force  of  men,  yet  seems  it  to 
have  held  within  it  nothing  more  glorious  than  this 
man,  and  nothing  more  holy,  marvellous,  and  dear.  The 
verses,  too,  of  his  godlike  genius  cry  with  a  loud  voice, 
and  set  forth  in  such  wise  his  glorious  discoveries,  that 
he  hardly  seems  born  of  a  mortal  stock."  63 

Passing  over  the  polemic,  we  come  to  the  conclusion  of 
the  First  Book,  a  discussion  of  the  constitution  of  the  uni- 
verse. Here,  true  as  ever  to  the  example  of  Epikuros,  he 
declines,  above  all  things,  to  admit  definite  limits  to  the 
world.  Let  us  suppose  an  extreme  limit,  and  imagine  a 
spear  hurled  with  a  strong  arm  from  this  limit :  will  it  be 
stopped  by  something,  or  will  it  continue  its  course  into 
the  infinite  ?  In  either  case  it  is  clear  that  we  cannot  con- 
ceive an  actual  limit  to  the  world. 

Jhere  is  here  a  singular  argument,  that  if  there  were 
fixed  limits  to  the  world,  all  matter  must  long  ago  have  been 
collected  on  the  floor  of  the  limited  space.  Here  we  find 
a  weak  point  in  Epikuros's  whole  scheme  of  nature.  He 
expressly  combats  the  notion  of  gravitation  towards  the 
centre,  which  had  already  been  accepted  by  many  ancient 
thinkers.  Unfortunately  this  passage  of  the  Lucretian 
poem  is  very  much  mutilated;  yet  we  may  still  see  the 
essential  features  of  the  argument,  and  recognise  the  fallacy 

63  I.  v.  726-738  : — 

"  Quae  cum  magna  modis  multis  miranda  videtur 
Gentibus  humanis  regio  visendaque  ferfcur, 
Bebus  opima  bonis,  multa  munita  virum  vi, 
Nil  tarnen  hoc  babuisse  viro  praeclarius  in  se 
Nee  sanctum  magis  et  mirum,  carumque  videtur^ 
Carmina  quinetiam  divini  pectoris  eius 
Vociferantur  et  exponunt  praeclara  reperta, 
TJt  vix  bumana  videatur  stirpe  creatus." 


THE  POEM  OF  LUCRETIUS.  137 

which,  underlies  it.  Epikuros  there  assumes  that  weight 
or  gravity,  as  well  as  resistance,  is  an  essential  property  of 
the  atoms.  On  this  point  the  profound  thinkers  who 
created  the  Materialism  of  antiquity  did  not  succeed  alto- 
gether in  freeing  themselves  from  ordinary  notions;  for 
although  Epikuros  expressly  teaches  that,  strictly  speaking, 
there  is  in  space  no  above  and  no  below,  yet  he  clings  to 
a  determinate  direction  in  the  falling  of  the  atoms  that 
make  up  the  universe.  To  escape  from  the  ordinary  no- 
tions of  weight  was,  in  fact,  no  easy  achievement  for  the 
human  intellect.  The  doctrine  of  the  Antipodes,  which 
had  developed  from  the  shock  inflicted  upon  the  belief  in 
Tartarus,  together  with  the  study  of  astronomy,  struggled 
in  vain  in  antiquity  against  the  ordinary  conception  of  an 
absolute  above  and  odow.  "With  what  reluctance  these 
notions,  which  are  constantly  impressed  upon  us  by  oui 
senses,  yield  to  scientific  abstraction,  we  may  see  from  an- 
other example  in  modern  times, — namely,  the  doctrine  of 
the  revolution  of  the  earth.  Even  so  late  as  a  century 
after  Copernicus,  there  were  scientifically  trained  and  free- 
thinking  astronomers,  who  advanced  their  natural  feeling 
of  the  solidity  and  fixity  of  the  earth  as  a  proof  of  the  in- 
correctness of  the  Copernican  system. 

Starting,  then,  from  the  logic  of  the  gravity  of  the  atoms, 
the  Epikurean  system  cannot  suppose  that  these  have  a 
twofold  direction,  ceasing  in  the  centre.  Eor  since,  as 
everywhere  else,  so  in  this  centre  also,  there  remains  void 
space  between  the  particles,  they  cannot  support  each 
other.  But  if  we  wished  to  suppose  that  they  had  already 
become  compressed  in  the  centre  to  a  certain  absolute  den- 
sity by  immediate  contact,  then,  according  to  the  theory  of 
Epikuros,  already  in  the  infinite  duration  of  time  all  atoms 
must  have  been  collected  here,  and  therefore  nothing  more 
could  happen  in  the  world. 

We  need  not  critically  demonstrate  the  weaknesses  of 
this  whole  manner  of  thinking.^4     It  is  much  more  inter- 

64  It  deserves,  however,  to  be  re-  viewed  from  the  standpoint  of  the 
marked,  that  the  theory  of  Epikuros,     knowledge  and  ideas  of  that  time,  ad- 


1 38  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ UITY. 

esting  to  the  thoughtful  observer  of  human  development 
to  see  how  difficult  it  was  to  attain  to  a  correct  theory  of 
nature.  We  wonder  at  Newton's  discovery  of  the  law  of 
gravitation,  and  scarcely  reflect  how  much  progress  had  to 
be  made  in  order  so  far  to  pave  the  way  for  this  doctrine  that 
it  must  inevitably  be  discovered  by  some  great  thinker. 
When  the  discovery  of  Columbus  instantaneously  placed 
the  old  theory  of  the  Antipodes  in  an  entirely  new  light, 
and  finally  disposed  of  the  Epikurean  theories  on  this  point, 
there  was  indeed  the  necessity  of  a  reform  in  the  whole 
conception  of  gravity.  Then  came  Copernicus,  then 
Keppler,  then  the  inquiry  into  the  laws  of  falling  bodies 
made  by  Galilei,  and  so  at  last  everything  was  ready  for 
the  exposition  of  an  entirely  new  theory. 

Towards  the  end  of  the  First  Book  Lucretius  briefly 
announces  the  magnificent  doctrine,  first  proposed  by 
Empedokles,  that  all  the  adaptations  to  be  found  in  the 
universe,  and  especially  in  organic  life,  is  merely  a  special 
case  of  the  infinite  possibilities  of  mechanical  events.65 

duces  much  better  reasons  in  many  tion  once  begun  could  not  be  stopped, 
important  points  than  the  Aristotelian  while  Aristotle,  starting  from  his 
theory,  and  that  the  latter,  more  by  teleological  idea  of  motion,  finds  in 
chance  than  by  force  of  its  proofs,  the  centre  its  natural  goal.  But  the 
happens  to  be  nearer  to  our  present  superiority  is  most  evident  in  the 
views.  Thus,  for  example,  the  whole  argumentation  of  the  Epikurean  sys- 
theory  of  Aristotle  rests  upon  the  con-  tern  to  overthrow  the  natural  upward 
ception  of  a  centre  of  the  universe,  (centrifugal)  motion  of  Aristotle, 
which  Lucretius  (i.  1070)  rightly  con-  which  is  very  well  refuted  by  Lu- 
troverts  from  the  standpoint  of  the  cretius  (ii.  185  foil. ;  probably  also 
infinity  of  the  universe.  In  the  same  in  the  last  passage  of  the  first  book, 
way  Lucretius  has  the  better  concep-  according  to  v.  1094),  and  referred 
tion  of  motion  when  he  maintains  (i.  to  upward  motion  necessitated  by 
1074  foil.)  that  in  avoid,  even  though  the  laws  of  equilibrium  and  of  colli- 
it  were  the  centre  of  the  universe,  mo-     sion. 

65  Compare  above  pp.  32-35.     The  verses  (i.  21-34)  run  thus : — 
"  Nam  certe  neque  consilio  primordia  rerum 
Ordine  se  sua  quaeque  sagaci  mente  locarunt 
Nee  quos  quaeque  darent  motus  pepigere  profecto, 
Sed  quia  multa  modis  multis  mutata  per  omne 
Ex  infinito  vexantur  percita  plagis, 
Omne  genus  motus  et  coetus  experiundo 
Tandem  deveniunt  in  talis  disposituras, 
Qualibus  haec  rerum  consistit  summa  creata, 
Et  multos  etiam  magnos  servata  per  annos 


THE  POEM  OF  L  UCRE  TIUS.  1 5  0 

If  we  find  any  magnificence  in  the  Aristotelian  teleo- 
logy, yet  we  must  all  the  more  refuse  this  character  to 
the  uncompromising  denial  of  the  idea  of  design.  We  are 
here  dealing  with  the  peculiar  keystone  of  the  whole  edi- 
fice of  Materialistic  philosophy,  a  part  of  the  system  which 
has  by  no  means  always  received  its  proper  share  of  atten- 
tion from  recent  Materialists.  If  the  doctrine  of  design  is 
one  for  which  we  have  naturally  more  sympathy,  yet  it 
also  contains  a  larger  infusion  of  human  one-sidedness  of 
view.  The  entire  dismissal  of  what  has  been  imported  into 
our  view  of  things  from  human  narrowness  may  be  repug- 
nant to  us,  but  feeling  is  not  argument ;  it  is  at  the  best 
but  a  divining  principle,  and  in  face  of  keen  logical  conse- 
quences is,  it  may  be,  an  intimation  of  further  possible 
explanations,  which,  however,  lie  beyond,  and  never  before, 
these  consequences. 

"  Tor  verily  not  by  design  did  the  first  beginnings  of 
things  station  themselves  each  in  its  right  place,  guided  by 
keen-sighted  intelligence,  nor  did  they  bargain,  sooth  to  say, 
what  motions  each  should  assume,  but  because  many  in 
number,  and  shifting  about  in  many  ways  throughout  the 
universe,  they  are  driven  and  tormented  by  blows  during 
infinite  time  past ;  after  trying  motions  and  unions  of  every 
kind,  at  length  they  fall  into  arrangements  such  as  those 
out  of  which  this  our  sum  of  things  has  been  formed,  and 
by  which  too  it  is  preserved  through  many  great  years, 
when  once  it  has  been  thrown  into  the  appropriate  mo- 
tions, and  causes  the  streams  to  replenish  the  greedy  sea 
with  copious  river-waters,  and  the  earth,  fostered  by  the 
heat  of  the  sun,  to  renew  its  produce,  and  the  race  of  liv- 

Ut  semel  in  motus  conjectast  convenientis, 
Efficit  ut  largis  avidum  mare  fluminis  undis 
Integrent  omnes  et  solis  terra  vapore 
Fota  novet  fetus  summissaque  gens  animantum 
Floreat  et  vivant  labentes  aetheris  ignes. " 

A  more  special  treatment  of  the  Empedoklean  principles,  follows  in 
rise  of  organic  existence,  according  to     Book  v.  836  foil. 


140  MA TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

ing  things  to  come  up  and  nourish,  and  the  gliding  fires  of 
ether  to  live."  * 

To  conceive  adaptations  as  only  a  special  case  of  all 
conceivable  possibilities  is  as  magnificent  an  idea,  as  it  is 
an  ingenious  one  to  refer  the  adaptations  in  this  world  to 
the  persistence  of  adaptations.  Thus  this  world,  which 
maintains  itself,  is  merely  the  one  case  which,  among  the 
innumerable  combinations  of  atoms,  must  in  the  course  of 
eternity  spontaneously  result ;  and  it  is  only  the  fact  that 
the  very  nature  of  these  movements  leads  to  their  upon  the 
whole  maintaining  and  constantly  renewing  themselves 
that  lends  to  the  actual  facts  of  this  world  the  persistency 
which  they  enjoy. 

In  the  Second  Book  Lucretius  explains  more  fully  the 
motion  and  the  properties  of  the  atoms.  They  are,  he 
declares,  in  everlasting  movement,  and  this  movement  is 
originally  a  perpetual,  -equable  falling  through  the  bound- 
less infinity  of  void  space. 

But  here  arises  a  formidable  difficulty  for  the  Epikurean 
system :  How  is  this  everlasting  and  equable  descent  of  the 
atoms  to  result  in  the  formation  of  the  world  ?  According 
to  Demokritos  the  atoms  fall  with  varying  degrees  of 
rapidity;  the  heavy  strike  against  the  light,  and  thus 
becoming  is  first  occasioned.  Epikuros  rightly  enough 
refers  the  various  speed  with  which  bodies  fall  in  the  air 
or  in  water  to  the  resistance  of  the  medium.  In  this  he 
follows  Aristotle,  only  to  take  up  later  a  more  decided 
opposition  to  him.  Aristotle  not  only  denies  a  void,  but 
even  the  possibility  of  motion  in  a  void.  Epikuros,  with  a 
more  accurate  conception  of  motion,  finds,  on  the  contrary, 
that  motion  in  a  vacuum  must  be  only  the  more  rapid 
because  there  is  no  resistance.  But  how  rapid  will  it  be  ? 
Here  lies  another  sunken  rock  in  the  system. 

In  the  same  way  it  is  suggested  that  the  atoms  must 
move  in  space  with  incomparably  greater  speed  than  the 
sun  rays  which  in  an  instant  traverse  the  space  from  the 

*  Lucret.,  i.  1021-1034,  Munro. 


THE  POEM  OF  LUCRETIUS.  141 

sun  to  the  earths6  But  is  this  a  standard  ?  Have  we  here 
any  standard  whatever  of  speed  ?  Obviously  not ;  for,  in 
fact,  any  given  space  must  be  traversed  in  infinitely  little 
time,  and  as  space  is  absolutely  endless,  this  motion,  so 
long  as  there  are  no  objects  by  which  it  may  measure  itself, 
will  be  quite  undeterminate ;  but  the  atoms,  which  move 
in  parallel  lines  and  with  equal  rapidity,  are  relatively  in 
complete  rest.  This  consequence  of  his  departure  from 
the  view  of  Demokritos,  Epikuros  does  not  seem  to  have 
realised  to  himself  with  sufficient  clearness.  Very  singular, 
however,  is  the  expedient  he  adopts  in  order  to  begin  the 
formation  of  the  world. 

How  came  the  atoms,  which  naturally  move  in  a  simple 
course  of  straight  parallel  lines,  like  drops  of  rain,  to  attain 
oblique  movements,  rapid  eddying  and  innumerable  com- 
binations, now  inextricably  fixed,  now  releasing  themselves, 
and  engaging  in  new  groups  with  eternal  regularity  ?  It 
must  be  impossible  to  fix  the  time  at  which  they  began  to 
deviate  from  their  straight  course.6?  The  slightest  aberra- 
tion from  the  parallel  lines  must,  in  the  course  of  time, 
bring  about  a  meeting,  a  collision  of  atoms.  When  this 
has  once  occurred,  the  various  forms  of  the  atoms  will  soon 
result  in  the  most  complicated  eddying  movements,  com- 
binations, and  separations.  But  how  did  it  begin  ?  Here 
is  a  fatal  gap  in  the  system  of  Epikuros.  Lucretius  solves 
the  riddle,  or  rather  cuts  the  knot,  by  having  recourse  to 
the  voluntary  movements  of  men  and  animals.68 

68  Because  the  sun  rays,  subtle  as  means  through  empty  space  (ii.  150- 
they  may  be,  do  not  consist  of  single  156).  On  the  other  hand,  we  may 
atoms,  but  of  combinations  of  atoms,  say  of  the  atoms  that  they  must  fall 
and  their  course  lies  through  a  very  many  times  quicker  than  light  (ii. 
rare  medium  it  is  true,  but  by  no     162-164). 

"  Et  multo  citius  ferri  quam  lumina  solis, 
Multiplexque  loci  spatium  transcurrere  eodem 
Tempore  quo  solis  pervolgant  f ulgura  coelum. " 

67  II.  216  foil.  of  his  stronger  moral  character  ;  for, 

68  II.  251-293.  It  is  hard  to  under-  leaving  out  of  view  that  the  point 
stand  how  it  can  have  been  supposed  occurs  also,  of  course,  in  Epikuros, 
that  this  doctrine  of  the  'freedom  of  we  here  find  a  serious  inconsistency 
the  will'  constitutes  a  superiority  of  with  the  physical  theory,  which  lends 
Lucretius  over  Epikuros,  and  a  result     no  support  whatever  to  a  theory  of 


142  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

Whilst,  therefore,  it  is  one  of  the  most  important  efforts 
of  recent  Materialism  to  deduce  the  whole  mass  of  volun- 
tary movements  from  mechanical  causes,  we  find  Epikuros 
adopting  a  quite  incalculable  element  into  his  system. 
True,  according  to  him,  most  human  actions  are  a  conse- 
quence of  the  given  movements  of  the  material  parts,  since 
one  motion  regularly  occasions  another.  But  here  we  have 
not  only  an  obvious  and  violent  break  in  the  causal  chain, 
but  there  lurks  behind  a  further  indistinctness  as  to  the 
nature  of  the  movement.  In  the  case  of  a  living  creature, 
free  will — as  we  see  also  in  the  examples  mentioned  by 
Lucretius — quickly  works  very  important  results,  as  with 
the  horse  that  bursts  into  the  course  when  the  barriers  are 
removed.  And  yet  the  origin  of  this  is  only  an  infinitely 
slight  collision  of  individual  atoms  of  the  soul.  Here  we 
have  at  bottom  a  notion  apparently  very  like  that  of  the 
doctrine  that  the  earth  stands  still  in  the  midst  of  the 
universe,  of  which  more  will  be  said  below. 

In  these  errors  Demokritos  had  probably  no  share ;  and 
yet  we  shall  judge  them  more  leniently  if  we  reflect  that, 
even  to  our  own  day,  the  essence  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
freedom  of  the  will,  with  whatever  metaphysical  subtlety 
it  is  elaborated,  consists  simply  of  the  uncertainty  and  per- 
plexity of  phenomenal  appearances. 

In  order  to  account  for  the  apparent  stillness  of  objects 
whose  constituent  parts  are,  nevertheless,  in  the  most  con- 
stant violent  motion,  the  poet  employs  the  illustration  of 
a  grazing  flock  with  merrily  skipping  lambs,  of  which  we 
see  nothing  more  from  a  distance  than  a  white  spot  on 
the  green  hillside. 

The  atoms  are  represented  by  Lucretius  as  extremely 
various  in  form.     Now  smooth  and  round,  now  rough  and 

moral  responsibility.      On  the  con-  the    equilibrium    arbitrii,    since    no 

trary,  we  might  almost  regard  the  image  could  make  it  clearer  how,  by 

unconscious  arbitrariness  with  which  the  assumption  of  such  a  decision  in 

the   soul-atoms   decide   this   way   or  equilibrium,  any  intimate  connection 

that,  to  determine  the  direction  and  between  the  actions  of  a  person  and 

operation  of  the  will,  as  a  satire  upon  his  character  is  destroyed. 


THE  POEM  OF  LUCRETIUS.  143 

pointed,  branched  or  hook-shaped,  they  exercise,  accord- 
ing to  their  configuration,  a  particular  influence  upon  our 
senses,  or  upon  the  properties  of  the  bodies  into  whose 
composition  they  enter.  The  number  of  different  forms 
is  limited,  but  there  are  an  unlimited  number  of  each 
form,  and  in  every  body  the  most  various  atoms  form  spe- 
cial relationships  with  each  other ;  and  thus,  by  means  of 
this  combination,  as  in  the  combination  of  letters  in  words, 
an  incomparably  greater  variety  of  bodies  is  possible  than 
could  otherwise  result  from  the  different  shapes  of  the 
atoms. 

We  cannot  forbear  from  taking  an  extract  from  a  poeti- 
cal passage  proceeding  right  from  the  poet's  heart,  and 
which  is  bound  up  with  a  criticism  of  the  mythological 
conception  of  nature  : — "  And  if  any  one  thinks  proper  to 
call  the  sea  Neptune,  and  corn  Ceres,  and  chooses  rather 
to  misuse  the  name  of  Bacchus  than  to  utter  the  term 
that  belongs  to  that  liquor,  let  us  allow  him  to  declare 
that  the  earth  is  mother  of  the  gods,  if  he  only  forbear  in 
earnest  to  stain  his  mind  with  foul  religion."  69 

After  Lucretius  has  further  explained  that  colour  and 
the  other  sensible  qualities  do  not  proceed  from  the  atoms 
themselves,  but  are  only  consequences  of  their  operation 
in  particular  relations  and  combinations,  he  proceeds  to 
the  important  question  of  the  relation  between  sensation 
and  matter.  The  fundamental  position  is  that  the  sen- 
tient is  developed  out  of  the  non-sentient.  This  view  is 
limited  by  the  poet  to  this,  that  it  is  not  possible  for  sen- 
sation to  proceed  from  anything  under  any  circumstances, 

»  II.  655-660  (680)  :— 

"  Hie  signis  mare  Neptunum  Cereremque  vocare 
Constituit  fruges  et  Bacchi  nomine  abuti 
Movolt  quam  laticis  proprium  proferre  vocamen, 
Concedamus  ut  hie  terrarum  dictitet  orbem 
Esse  deuni  matrem,  dum  vera  re  tarnen  ipse 
Religione  animum  turpi  contingere  parcat." 
For  the  reading,  compare    Lach-     MSS.,  but  the  correction  (which  Ber- 
mann's    "  Commentary,"   p.   112  [or     nays  also  adopts)  is  obvious,  since  the 
Munro,  in  loc\.      The  last  verse  has     words  "dum  vera  re  tarnen  ipse  "would 
fallen  out  of  its  right  place  in  the     otherwise  only  weaken  the  thought. 


144  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQ UITY. 

but  that  much  depends  upon  the  fineness,  shape,  motion, 
and  arrangement  of  matter  whether  it  shall  produce  the 
sentient  or  capable  of  feeling.  Sensation  is  found  only 
in  the  organic  animal  body,?0  and  here  belongs,  not  to  the 
parts  in  themselves,  but  to  the  whole. 

We  have  thus  reached  the  point  where  Materialism, 
however  consistently  it  may  be  developed  in  other  re- 
spects, always,  either  more  or  less  avowedly,  leaves  its  own 
sphere.  Obviously  with  the  union  into  a  whole  a  new 
metaphysical  principle  has  been  introduced,  that,  by  the 
side  of  the  atoms  and  void  space,  appears  as  a  sufficiently 
striking  supplement. 

The  proof  that  sensation  belongs  not  to  the  individual 
atoms  but  to  the  whole  is  adduced  by  Lucretius  with 
some  humour.  It  would  not  be  a  bad  thing,  he  thinks, 
if  human  atoms  could  laugh  and  weep,  and  speak  sagely 
of  the  composition  of  things,  and  ask  in  their  turn  what 
were  their  original  constituent  parts.  In  any  case,  they 
must  have  such  in  order  to  be  capable  of  sensation ;  and 
then,  again,  they  would  no  longer  be  atoms.  It  is  here, 
of  course,  overlooked  that  developed  human  sensation  may 
also  be  a  whole  composed  of  various  lesser  sensations 
through  a  peculiar  combination  of  influences,  but  the 
essential  difficulty,  nevertheless,  remains  unsolved.  This 
sensation  of  the  whole  can  in  no  case  be  a  mere  conse- 
quence of  any  possible  functions  of  the  individual,  unless 
the  whole  also  has  a  certain  substantial  reality,  since  out 
of  an  otherwise  impossible  summation  of  the  non-sen- 
tiency  of  the  atoms  no  sensation  in  the  whole  can  arise. 

70  II.  904  foil. :  "  Namsensus  jungi-  special  structure,  and  that  the  atom 

tur  omnis  Visceribus  nervis  venis."  of  a  sentient  body  has  no  separate 

The  whole  passage  (a  little  uncertain  existence,  and  is  therefore  incapable 

in  its  readings)  indicates  chiefly  the  in  itself  of  sensation.    The  poet  here 

softness  of  these  particles,  which  are  too  comes  tolerably  near  to  the  Aris- 

therefore  specially  perishable,  and  are  totelian  notion  of  organisms,  and  we 

by  no  means  eternal,  or  capable,  as  have  no  reason  to  doubt  that  this  was 

sentient    elements,     of    propagation  the   doctrine   of   Epikuros.      (Comp. 

from  one  sentient  being  to  another.  912  sqq.  :  "Necmanus  a  nobis  potis 

Lucretius,  however,  shows  often  in  est  secretanequeulla  Corporis  omnino 

the  whole  passage  that  they  have  a  sensum  pars  sola  tenere. ") 


THE  POEM  OF  LUCRETIUS.  14c 

The  organic  whole  is,  then,  a  wholly  new  principle  by 
the  side  of  the  atoms  and  the  void,  though  it  may  not  be 
so  recognised. 

The  conclusion  of  the  Second  Book  consists  of  a  bold 
and  magnificent  corollary  from  the  views  thus  far  pro- 
pounded :  the  theory  of  the  ancient  Materialists  of  the 
infinite  number  of  worlds  which,  at  enormous  periods  and 
distances,  arise  near,  above,  and  below  each  other,  last  for 
a  day  and  then  are  again  dissolved. 

"  ^  Far  beyond  the  limits  of  our  visible  universe  there  exist 
on  all  sides  innumerable  atoms  not  yet  formed  into  bodies, 
or  that  have  been  for  endless  ages  dispersed  again,  which  ^ 
pursue  their  quiet  fall  through  spaces  and  times  which  no 
man  can  measure.  But  as  in  every  direction  through  the 
vast  whole  the  same  conditions  exist,  the  phenomena 
also  must  repeat  themselves.  So  that  above  us,  below  us, 
beside  us,  exist  worlds  in  an  innumerable  host;  and  if 
we  consider  these,  all  idea  of  a  divine  government  of 
the  whole  must  disappear.  All  these  are  subject  to  the 
processes  of  becoming  and  passing  away;  since  they  at  one 
time  are  constantly  attracting  new  atoms  from  the  infinite 
space,  and  at  another,  through  the  separation  of  the  parts, 
undergo  ever-growing  losses.  Our  earth  soon  grows  old. 
The  aged  peasant  shakes  his  head  with  a  sigh,  and 
ascribes  to  the  piety  of  our  ancestors  the  better  fruits 
of  earlier  times,  which  have  been  more  and  more  corrupted 
for  us  by  the  decay  of  our  world. 

In  the  Third  Book  of  his  poem,  Lucretius  summons  all 
the  forces  of  his  philosophy  and  of  his  poetry  to  controvert 
the  existence  of  the  soul,  and  to  refute  the  doctrine  of 
immortality,  and  he  starts  by  trying  to  get  rid  of  the  fear 
of  death.  To  this  terror,  which  poisons  every  pure  plea- 
sure, the  poet  ascribes  a  large  share  of  those  passions 
which  drive  a  man  to  sin.  Poverty  seems  to  those 
whose  hearts  are  not  lightened  by  the  truth  to  be  the 
gate  of  death.  That  he  may  fly  from  death  man  heaps 
up  for  himself  riches  by  the  vilest  sins;  nay,  the  fear 

vol.  1.  k 


146  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

of  death  can  so  far  blind  us  that  we  seek  that  from  which 
we  fly ;  it  may  even  drive  ns  to  suicide,  since  it  makes 
life  intolerable. 

Lucretius  distinguishes  soul  (anima)  and  spirit  (animus) : 
both  he  explains  to  be  closely  united  parts  of  man.  As 
hand,  foot,  eye,  are  organs  of  the  living  being,  so  also  is 
the  spirit.  He  rejects  the  view  that  makes  the  soul  consist 
only  in  the  harmony  of  the  whole  physical  life.  The 
warmth  and  the  breath  which  leave  the  body  at  death  are 
formed  by  the  soul;  and  the  finest  inmost  portion  of  it, 
which  is  situated  in  the  breast,  and  alone  possesses  sensa- 
tion, is  the  spirit;  both  are  corporeal,  and  are  composed 
of  the  smallest,  roundest,  and  most  mobile  atoms. 

If  the  bouquet  of  wine  disappears,  or  the  perfume  of  an 
unguent  is  dissipated  into  the  air,  we  observe  no  loss  of 
weight;  just  so  is  it  with  the  body  when  the  soul  has 
disappeared. 

The  difficulty  which  here  again  suggests  itself  of  fixing 
the  exact  seat  of  sensation  is  in  the  most  important  point 
completely  evaded  by  the  Epikurean  system,  and  in  spite 
of  the  immense  progress  of  physiology,  the  Materialism 
of  the  last  century  found  itself  at  precisely  the  same  point. 
The  individual  atoms  do  not  feel,  or  their  feelings  could 
not  be  fused  together,  since  void  space  which  has  no 
substratum  cannot  conduct  sensation,  and  still  less  par- 
take of  it.  We  must  therefore  constantly  fall  back  on 
the  solution — the  motion  of  the  atoms  is  sensation. 

Epikuros,  and  with  him  Lucretius,  in  vain  seek  to  veil 
this  point  by  saying  that,  besides  the  subtle  atoms  of 
air,  vapour,  and  heat,  of  which  the  soul  is  supposed  to 
consist,  there  is  still  a  fourth  constituent  associated  with 
them,  wholly  without  name,  and  of  the  utmost  fineness  and 
mobility,  which  forms  the  soul  of  the  soul.71     But  with 

71  In  another  aspect,  of  course,  the  deficiency  of  the  theory  of  motion, 

supposition    of    this    unnamed    ex-  Epikuros  appears  to  have  supposed — 

tremely    subtle    matter    appears    to  in  sharp  contrast  with  our  theory  of 

have  a  carefully  considered  value;  the  conservation  of  force — that  a  subtle 

that  is,  in  connection  with  a  great  body  may  pass  on  its  own  movement 


THE  POEM  OF  LUCRETIUS,  147 

regard  to  these  subtlest  soul-atoms,  the  difficulty  still 
remains  the  same,  as  it  also  does  for  the  vibrating  brain- 
filaments  of  De  la  Mettrie. 

How  can  the  motion  of  a  body,  in  itself  non-sentient,  be 
sensation  ?  Who  is  it,  then,  that  feels  ?  How  does  the 
sensation  come  about?  Where?  To  these  questions 
Lucretius  gives  us  no  answer.  Later  we  shall  perhaps 
meet  them  again. 

An  extended  refutation  of  any  possible  form  of  the 
theory  of  immortality  constitutes  an  important  section  of 
the  book.  We  see  what  stress  the  poet  laid  upon  this 
point,  since  the  conclusion  is  already  fully  contained  in 
what  has  preceded.  The  sum  of  the  whole  argument  is 
to  show  that  death  is  indifferent  to  us,  because  when  it 
appears  upon  the  scene  there  is  no  longer  a  subject  capa- 
ble of  feeling  any  evil. 

In  his  fear  of  death,  says  the  poet,  man  has,  in  looking 
upon  the  body  which  decays  in  the  grave,  or  is  destroyed 
by  the  flames,  or  is  torn  by  beasts  of  prey,  ever  a  secret 
relic  of  the  idea  that  he  himself  must  suffer  this.  Even 
where  he  denies  this  idea  he  yet  nurses  it,  nor  does  he 
"separate  himself  from  that  self,  nor  withdraw  himself 
from  the  body  so  thrown  out."  And  so  he  overlooks 
the  fact  that  when  he  really  dies  he  cannot  have  a  dupli- 
cate existence,  only  to  torture  himself  with  such  a  fate. 
"Now  no  more  shall  thy  house  admit  thee  with  glad 
welcome,  nor  a  most  virtuous  wife  and  sweet  children 
run  to  be  the  first  to  snatch  kisses,  and  touch  thy  heart 
with  a  silent  joy.  No  more  mayst  thou  be  prosperous  in 
thy  doings,  a  safeguard  to  thine  own"  —  so  they  com- 
plain— "  one  disastrous  day  has  taken  from  thee,  luckless 

to  a  heavier,  independently  of  the  first  the  sentient  (and  will-endowed: 

bulk,   and    this    in    turn   to  a  still  comp.  ii.  251-93)  element  moves  the 

heavier ;  so  that  the  sum  of  mechani-  caloric,  this  then  in  turn  the  breath 

cal  work  done,  instead  of  remaining  of  life,  this  the  air  mingled  with  the 

stationary,  goes  on  multiplying  from  soul,  this  the  blood,  and  the  blood  at 

step   to    step.      Lucretius    describes  length  the  solid  parts  of  the  body. 
thi3  gradual  rise  iii.  246  foil. ;  that 


143  MATERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

man,  in  luckless  wise,  all  the  many  prizes  of  life."  But 
they  forget  to  add — "  And  now  no  longer  does  any  craving 
for  these  things  beset  thee  withal."  If  they  would  but 
rightly  apprehend  this,  they  would  deliver  themselves  from 
great  distress  and  fear.  "Thou,  even  as  now  thou  art, 
sunk  in  the  sleep  of  death,  shalt  continue  so  to  be  all  time 
to  come,  and  freed  from  all  distressful  pains;  but  we,  with 
a  sorrow  that  would  not  be  sated,  wept  for  thee  when 
close  by  thou  didst  turn  to  ashes  on  thy  appalling  funeral 
pile,  and  no  length  of  days  shall  pluck  from  our  hearts 
our  ever-during  grief."  When  any  one  so  speaks,  we  must 
ask  him  what  is  there  in  it  so  passing  bitter,  if  it  come 
in  the  end  to  sleep  and  rest,  that  any  one  should  pine  in 
never-ending  sorrow  ?  s 

The  whole  conclusion  of  the  Third  Book,  from  the  pas- 
sage here  quoted,  contains  much  that  is  admirable  and 
remarkable.  Nature  itself  is  made  to  speak,  and  proves 
to  the  man  the  vanity  of  his  fear  of  death.  Very  beauti- 
fully also  the  poet  employs  the  terrible  myths  of  the  lower 
world,  which  are  all  transferred  to  human  life  and  its  pains 
and  passions.  One  might  often  fancy  one's  self  listening  to 
a  Bationalist  of  the  last  century,  except  that  we  are  in  the 
sphere  of  classical  ideas. 

It  is  not  that  Tantalus  in  the  lower  world  feels  a  vain 
terror  of  the  rock  that  threatens  his  head,  but  that  mortal 
men  are  so  tormented  in  life  by  fear  of  God  and  death. 
Our  Tityos  is  not  the  giant  of  the  under  world,  who  covers 
nine  acres  as  he  lies  stretched,  and  is  eternally  torn 
by  vultures,  but  every  one  who  is  eaten  up  by  the  tor- 
ments of  love  or  of  any  other  desire.  The  ambitious 
man,  striving  after  high  office  in  the  state,  rolls,  like 
Sisyphos,  the  huge  stone  up  the  mountain,  which  will 
straightway  roll  down  again  to  earth.  The  grim  Cerberus 
and  all  the  terrors  of  Tartarus  typify  the  punishments 
that  the  transgressor  has  to  fear ;  since  though  he  escape 
prison  and  the  ignominy  of  execution,  his  conscience  must 
yet  punish  him  with  all  the  terrors  of  justice. 


THE  POEM  OF  LUCRETIUS.  149 

Heroes  and  kings,  great  poets  and  sages,  have  died,  and 
men  whose  life  has  far  less  valne  think  it  a  grievance  that 
they  must  die.  And  yet  their  whole  life  is  spent  in  tor- 
menting dreams  and  useless  anxieties ;  they  find  the  cause 
of  their  unhappiness  now  in  this  thing  and  again  in  that, 
and  do  not  know  what  they  really  lack.  If  they  knew 
this,  they  would  neglect  all  else,  and  devote  themselves  to 
the  study  of  nature,  since  it  is  a  question  of  the  state  in 
which  man  will  continue  to  he  for  ever  after  the  termina- 
tion of  this  life. 

The  Fourth  Book  contains  the  special  anthropology. 
It  would  lead  us  too  far  were  we  to  introduce  the  nume- 
rous and  often  surprising  observations  upon  which  the 
poet  builds  his  doctrines.  These  doctrines  are  those  of 
Epikuros ;  and  as  we  are  concerned  not  so  much  with  the 
first  beginnings  of  physiological  hypotheses  as  with  the 
development  of  important  principles,  the  little  we  have 
already  recounted  of  the  Epikurean  theory  of  the  sensa- 
tions will  suffice. 

The  conclusion  of  the  book  consists  of  an  extended 
discussion  of  love  and  the  relations  of  the  sexes.  Neither 
the  ordinary  noiions  of  the  Epikurean  system  which  pos- 
sess one's  mind,  nor  the  brilliant  poetical  invocation  of 
Yenus  at  the  beginning  of  the  poem,  lead  one  to  expect  the 
seriousness  and  impressiveness  which  the  poet  here  dis- 
plays. He  deals  with  his  theme  from  a  purely  physical 
point  of  view,  and  in  seeking  to  explain  the  development 
of  the  sexual  impulse,  he  treats  it  from  the  beginniüg  as 
an  evil. 

The  Eifth  Book  is  devoted  to  the  more  special  exposi- 
tion of  the  development  of  all  that  is — of  earth  and  sea,  of 
the  stars,  and  of  living  beings.  Very  peculiar  is  the  pas- 
sage about  the  stationariness  of  the  earth  in  the  middle 
of  the  universe. 

The  cause  assigned  for  this  is  the  inseparable  connection 
of  the  earth  with  atmospheric  atoms,  which  are  spread 
under  it,  and  which  are  not  compressed  by  it,  just  because 


1 50  MA TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

they  are  from  the  beginning  in  firm  union  with  it.  That  a 
certain  want  of  clearness  lies  at  the  bottom  of  this  notion 
we  will  admit ;  moreover,  the  comparison  with  the  human 
body,  which  is  not  burdened  by  its  own  members,  and  is 
borne  about  and  moved  by  the  fine  gaseous  particles  of  the 
soul,  does  not  help  to  bring  the  conception  home  to  us. 
Yet  we  must  observe  that  the  idea  of  an  absolute  rest  of 
the  earth  lies  as  far  from  the  poet  as  it  would  be  obvi- 
ously inconsistent  with  the  whole  system.  The  universe 
must,  like  all  the  atoms,  be  conceived  as  falling,  and  it 
is  only  surprising  that  the  free  deviation  downwards  of 
the  gaseous  atoms  beneath  the  earth  is  not  employed  as  a 
solution.?2 

Of  course,  if  Epikuros  or  his  school  had  fully  explained 
the  relations  of  rest  and  motion,  they  would  have  been 
many  centuries  ahead  of  their  time. 

The  tendency  to  explain  the  universe  by  the  possible 
instead  of  the  actual  we  have  already  learnt  to  know  in 
the  case  of  Epikuros.  Lucretius  expresses  it  with  such 
precision,  that,  taking  it  in  connection  with  the  traditions 
of  Diogenes  Laertius,  we  must  come  to  the  conclusion  that 
on  this  point  we  have  before  us  not  indifference  or  super- 
ficiality, as  many  suppose,  but  a  determinate,  and,  as  far  as 


72  The  matter  is  differently  con-  sion  is  expressly  admitted  by  Lucre- 
ceived  by  Zeller  (iii.  1,  p.  382,  E.  T.  =  this  (v.  366-372)  to  be  possible,  whilst 
Beichel,  Stoics,  &c,  425),  who  main-  destruction  by  many  smaller  colli  - 
tains,  indeed,  that  the  consistency  of  sions  from  the  outside  is  at  the  same 
the  system  would  require  a  falling  of  time  enumerated  as  one  of  the  natural 
the  worlds  (and  therefore  a  relative  causes  for  the  death  of  the  ageing 
motionlessness  of  the  earth  as  com-  world.  As  to  the  manner  in  which 
pared  with  our  universe),  but  without  the  earth  is  kept  suspended  by  con- 
supposing  that  Epikuros  drew  this  stant  collisions  of  subtle  atmospheric 
conclusion.  It  is  not  correct,  how-  atoms,  here  again  the  above-men- 
ever,  to  say  that  in  this  falling  pro-  tioned  (note  71)  peculiarity  of  the  Epi- 
cess  the  world  must  very  soon  come  kurean  theory  of  motion  seems  to 
into  collision.  aSuch  an  accident  is  underly  it,  according  to  which  the 
much  more  likely  to  happen  only  after  mechanical  influence  of  impact  (as  ex- 
a  long  time,  considering  the  immense  pressed  in  our  language)  multiplies 
distances  which  must  be  supposed  to  itself  in  the  transition  from  subtler 
exist  between  the  individual  worlds,  to  heavier  particles. 
A  catastrophe  of  the  worlds  by  a  colli- 


THE  POEM  OF  LUCRETIUS.  151 

is  possible  with  such  a  foundation,  an  exact  method  of  the 
Epikurean  school. 73 

On  the  occasion  of  the  question  as  to  the  causes  of  the 
motions  of  the  stars  the  poet  says  : 

"  For  which  of  these  causes  is  in  operation  in  this  world, 
it  is  not  easy  to  affirm  for  certain ;  but  what  can  be  and  is 
done  throughout  the  universe  in  various  worlds  formed 
on  various  plans,  that  I  teach ;  and  I  go  on  to  set  forth 
several  causes  which  may  exist  throughout  the  universe 
for  the  motions  of  stars ;  one  of  which,  however,  must  in 
this  world  also  be  the  cause  that  imparts  lively  motion  to 
the  signs ;  but  to  dictate  which  of  them  it  is,  is  by  no 
means  the  duty  of  the  man  who  advances  step  by  step."  74 

The  idea  that  the  entire  series  of  possibilities  is  in  the 
infinity  of  worlds  somewhere  in  actual  existence,  is  in 
complete  accordance  with  the  system ;  to  make  the  sum 
of  the  conceivable  correspond  to  that  of  the  actually  pos- 
sible, and  therefore  the  actually  existing  in  some  of  the 
infinitely  numerous  worlds,  is  a  thought  which  even  to- 
day may  throw  a  useful  cross-light  upon  the  favourite 
doctrine  of  the  identity  of  Existence  and  Thought.     Whilst 

73  Obviously,  of  course,  there  is  somewhere  and  at  some  time  realised 
here  no  question  of  an  exact  scientific,  in  the  universe,  and,  in  fact,  has  often 
but  only  of  an  exact  philosophical,  been  realised,  and  that  as  an  inevit- 
method.  Further  details  on  this  able  consequence,  on  the  one  hand,  of 
point  will  be  found  in  the  Neue  Beitr.  the  absolute  infinity  of  the  universe, 
z.  Gesch.  d.  Materialismus  Winter-  but  on  the  other  of  the  finite  and 
thur,  1867,  p.  17  foil.  It  is  interesting  everywhere  constant  number  of  the 
that  recently  a  Frenchman  (A.  Blan-  elements,  whose  possible  combinations 
qui,  '  L'Eternite  par  les  Astres,  By-  must  also  be  finite.  This  last  also  is 
pothese  astronomique,' Paris,  1872),  an  idea  of  Epikuros  (comp.  Lucretius, 
has  carried  out  again,  quite  seriously,  ii.  480-521). 

the  idea  that  everything  possible  is 

74  This  passage  is  v.  527-533  :— 

"  Nam  quid  in  hoc  mundo  sit  eorum  ponere  certum 
Difficile  est :  sed  quid  possit  fiatque  per  omne 
In  varus  mundis,  varia  ratione  creatis, 
Id  doceo,  plurisque  sequor  disponere  causas, 
Motibus  astrorum,  quae  possuit  esse  per  omne  ;  - 
E  quibus  una  tarnen  siet  haec  quoque  causa  necessest 
Quae  vegeat  motum  signis  :  sed  quae  sit  earum 
Praecipere  haut  quaquamst  pedetentim  progredientis." 
Compare  with  this  Epikuros's  letter  to  Empedokles,  Diog.  Laert.,  x.  87  foil. 


152  MATERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

the  Epikurean  nature-study  directs  itself  to  the  sum  of 
the  conceivable,  and  not  to  certain  detached  possibilities, 
it  passes  on  also  to  the  sum  of  the  actually  existing; 
only  that  in  the  decision  as  to  what  is  in  our  particular 
case,  the  sceptical  hrkyeiv  seizes  upon  a  place  and  covers 
an  expression  which  goes  further  than  our  real  knowledge. 
"With  this  profound  and  cautious  method,  however,  the 
theory  of  the  greater  probability  of  a  particular  explana- 
tion admirably  harmonises ;  and  we  have,  as  a  matter  of 
fact,  many  traces  of  such  a  preference  of  the  most  plausi- 
ble explanation. 

Amongst  the  most  important  portions  of  the  whole 
work  we  may  reckon  those  sections  of  the  Fifth  Book 
which  treat  of  the  gradual  development  of  the  human 
race.  With  justice,  observes  Zeller — who  is  in  other 
"respects  not  entirely  fair  to  Epikuros — that  his  philosophy 
established  very  sound  views  upon  these  questions. 

Mankind  were  much  stronger  in  the  primeval  times, 
according  to  Lucretius,  than  they  now  are,  and  had  im- 
mense  bones  and  strong  sinews.  Hardened  against  frost 
and  heat,  they  lived,  like  the  animals,  without  any  agricul- 
tural arts.  The  fruitful  soil  offered  them  spontaneously 
the  means  of  life,  and  they  quenched  their  thirst  in 
streams  and  springs.  They  dwelt  in  forests  and  caves 
without  morality  or  law.  The  use  of  fire,  and  even  a  cloth- 
ing of  skins,  were  unknown.  In  their  contests  with  the 
wild  animals  they  generally  conquered,  and  were  pursued 
by  few  only.  Gradually  they  learnt  to  build  huts,  to  pre- 
pare the  soil  for  crops,  and  the  use  of  fire ;  the  ties  of 
family  life  were  formed,  and  men  began  to  grow  more 
gentle.  Friendship  grew  up  between  neighbours,  mercy 
to  women  and  children  was  introduced,  and  though  per- 
fect harmony  might  not  yet  reign,  yet  for  the  most  part 
men  lived  in  peace  with  one  another. 

The  manifold  sounds  of  speech  were  struck  out  by  men 
at  the  bidding  of  nature,  and  their  application  formed  the 
names  of  things,  very  much  as  their  early  development 


THE  POEM  OF  LUCRETIUS.  153 

leads  children  to  the  employment  of  language,  making 
them  point  out  with  their  finger  what  is  before  them. 
As  the  kid  feels  its  horns  and  tries  to  butt  with  them 
before  they  are  grown  up,  as  the  young  panthers  and  lions 
defend  themselves  with  their  claws  and  mouth  although 
their  talons  and  teeth  are  scarcely  come,  as  we  see  birds 
early  trusting  themselves  upon  their  wings,  so  is  it  with 
men  in  the  case  of  speech.  It  is,  therefore,  absurd  to 
believe  that  some  one  once  gave  things  their  names,  and 
that  men  had  thence  learned  the  first  words;  for  why 
should  one  suppose  that  this  one  man  could  utter  distinc- 
tive sounds,  and  produce  the  various  tones  of  language, 
although,  at  the  same  time,  the  others  could  not  do  this  ? 
and  how  could  this  guide  and  influence  the  rest  to  use 
sounds  whose  use  and  meaning  were  quite  unknown  to 
them? 

Even  the  animals  utter  entirely  different  sounds  when 
they  are  in  fear,  in  pain,  and  in  joy.  The  Molossian 
hound,  which  growls  and  shows  its  teeth,  barks  loudly  or 
plays  with  its  young  ones,  howls  when  its  master  leaves  it 
in  the  house,  or  whines  as  it  runs  from  a  blow,  utters 
spontaneously  the  most  different  tones.  And  the  same 
thing  is  true  of  other  animals.  How  much  more,  then, 
concludes  the  poet,  must  we  suppose  that  men  in  pri- 
meval times  could  indicate  the  various  objects  by  con- 
stantly varying  sounds. 

In  the  same  way  he  treats  the  gradual  development  of 
the  arts.  Lucretius  admits  the  force  of  sentiments  and 
discoveries,  but,  in  strict  fidelity  to  his  theory,  he  assigns 
the  most  important  share  to  the  more  or  less  unconscious 
effort.  Only  after  exhausting  many  false  paths  did  man 
attain  the  right,  which  then  maintains  itself  by  its  ob- 
vious worth.  Spinning  and  weaving  were  first  invented  by 
men,  and  only  later  turned  over  to  women,  while  men 
applied  themselves  again  to  more  difficult  labours. 

In  our  own  day,  when  the  industry  of  women,  step  by 
step — sometimes  even  with  a  leap — is  forcing  its  way  into 


1 54  MA TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY, 

vocations  devised  and  hitherto  exclusively  pursued  by 
men,  this  thought  is  much  more  pertinent  than  in  the 
times  of  Epikuros  and  Lucretius,  when  such  transferences 
of  whole  professions,  so  far  as  we  know,  did  not  occur. 

And  thus  into  the  structure  of  these  historico-philoso- 
phical  considerations  are  woven  also  the  thoughts  of  the  poet 
as  to  the  formation  of  political  and  religious  arrangements. 
Lucretius  thinks  that  the  men  who  were  distinguished  by 
their  talents  and  their  courage  began  to  found  cities  and 
build  themselves  castles,  and  then  as  kings  shared  their 
lands  and  goods  at  their  will  among  the  handsomest, 
strongest,  and  cleverest  of  their  adherents.  Only  later, 
when  gold  had  been  found,  were  those  economic  conditions 
produced  which  soon  enabled  riches  to  exalt  themselves 
above  might  and  beauty.  But  wealth  also  gains  adherents, 
and  allies  itself  with  ambition.  Gradually  many  strive  for 
power  and  influence.  Envy  undermines  power,  kings  are 
overthrown,  and  the  more  their  sceptre  was  before  dreaded, 
the  more  eagerly  is  it  trodden  in  the  dust.  iSTow  the  rude 
mob  is  for  some  time  supreme,  until,  from  an  interreg- 
num of  anarchy  and  transition,  law  and  order  are  de- 
veloped. 

The  remarks  here  and  there  interwoven  bear  that  char- 
acter of  resignation  and  of  the  dislike  of  political  activity 
which  was,  generally  speaking,  characteristic  of  ancient 
Materialism.  As  Lucretius  preaches  frugality  and  content- 
ment in  place  of  the  chase  after  wealth,  so  he  is  of  opinion 
that  it  is  far  better  quietly  (quietus  I)  to  obey,  than  to  wish 
to  exercise  mastery  over  affairs,  and  to  maintain  the  form 
of  monarchy.  We  see  that  the  idea  of  the  old  civic  virtue 
and  genuine  republican  community  of  self-government  has 
disappeared.  The  praise  of  passive  obedience  is  equi- 
valent to  denying  the  state  to  be  a  moral  community. 

This  exclusive  assertion  of  the  standpoint  of  the  in- 
dividual has  been  unjustly  brought  into  too  close  connection 
with  the  Atomism  of  the  nature-theory.  Even  the  Stoics, 
whose  whole  system  in  other  respects  brought  politics 


THE  POEM  OF  LUCRETIUS.  155 

into  near  relation  with  moral  action,  turned  with  especial 
distinctness  in  later  times  from  public  business :  on  the 
other  hand,  the  community  of  the  wise,  which  the  Stoics 
ranked  so  high,  is  represented  among  the  Epikureans  in  the 
narrower  and  more  exclusive  form  of  friendship. 

It  is  much  more  the  exhaustion  of  the  political  energy 
of  the  peoples  of  antiquity,  the  disappearance  of  freedom, 
and  the  rottenness  and  hopelessness  of  the  political  con- 
dition of  things,  that  drives  the  philosophers  of  this  period 
into  quietism. 

Eeligion  is  traced  by  Lucretius  to  sources  that  were 
originally  pure.  Waking,  and  still  more  in  dreams,  men 
beheld  in  spirit  the  noble  and  mighty  figures  of  the  gods, 
and  assigned  to  these  pictures  of  fancy,  life,  sensation,  and 
superhuman  powers.  But,  at  the  same  time,  they  observed 
the  regular  change  of  the  seasons,  and  the  risings  and  set- 
tings of  the  stars.  Since  they  did  not  know  the  reason  of 
these  things,  they  transferred  the  gods  into  the  sky,  the 
abode  of  light,  and  ascribed  to  them,  along  with  all  the 
celestial  phenomena,  storm  also  and  hail,  the  lightning 
flash,  and  the  growling,  threatening  thunder. 

"  0  hapless  race  of  men,  when  that  they  charged  the 
gods  with  such  acts,  and  coupled  with  them  bitter  wrath ! 
What  groanings  did  they  then  beget  for  themselves,  what 
wounds  for  us,  what  tears  for  our  children's  children  ! "  75 

At  some  length  the  poet  describes  how  easy  it  was  for 
man,  when  he  beheld  the  terrors  of  the  sky,  instead  of  the 
quiet  contemplation  of  things  which  is  the  only  real  piety, 
to  appease  the  supposed  anger  of  the  gods  by  sacrifice  and 
vows,  which  yet  avail  nothing. 

The  last  Book  of  the  poem  treats,  if  I  may  use  the 
expression,  of  pathology.  Here  are  explained  the  causes 
of  the  heavenly  appearances ;  lightning  and  thunder,  hail 
and  clouds,  the  overflowing  of  the  Mle  and  the  eruptions 
of  iEtna  are  discussed.  But,  as  in  the  previous  Book  the 
early  history  of  mankind  forms  but  a  part  of  the  cos- 

75  Lib.  v.  1194-1197. 


156  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ÄNTIQ  UITY. 

mogony;  so  here  the  diseases  of  man  are  interpolated 
among  the  wonderful  phenomena  of  the  universe,  and 
the  whole  work  is  concluded  by  a  deservedly  famous 
description  of  the  plague.  Perhaps  the  poet  intentionally 
finishes  his  work  with  an  affecting  picture  of  the  might  of 
death,  as  he  had  begun  it  with  an  invocation  to  the  god- 
dess of  springing  life. 

Of  the  more  special  contents  of  the  Sixth  Book,  we  will 
only  mention  the  lengthy  account  of  the  c  Avernian  spots/ 
and  of  the  phenomena  of  the  loadstone.  The  former 
especially  challenged  the  rationalising  tendency  of  the 
poet,  the  latter  offered  a  special  difficulty  to  his  explana- 
tion of  nature,  which  he  attempts  to  overcome  by  a  very 
careful  and  involved  hypothesis. 

'  Avernian  spots '  was  the  name  given  by  the  ancients 
to  such  places  in  the  ground  as  are  not  seldom  found  in 
Italy,  Greece,  and  Asia  Minor,  in  which  the  ground  gives 
vent  to  gases  which  produce  stupefaction  or  death  in  men 
and  animals.  The  popular  belief  naturally  supposed  that 
there  was  a  connection  between  these  places  and  the  lower 
world,  the  realm  of  the  god  of  death,  and  explained  the 
fatal  influence  by  the  uprising  of  spirits  and  demons  of  the 
shadowy  realm,  who  try  to  drag  down  with  them  the  souls 
of  the  living.  The  poet  then  attempts  to  show,  from  the 
various  nature  of  the  atoms,  how  they  must  be  either 
beneficial  or  hurtful  to  different  creatures,  some  to  one 
kind  and  some  to  another.  He  then  examines  the  case  of 
many  kinds  of  poisons,  which  spread  imperceptibly,  and 
mentions,  in  addition  to  some  superstitious  notions,  the 
cases  of  metal-poisoning  by  working  in  mines,  and,  what  is 
most  pertinent  to  his  problem,  the  fatal  action  of  carbonic 
vapours.  Of  course  he  attributes  this,  since  the  ancients 
were  not  acquainted  with  carbonic  acid,  to  malodorous 
sulphurous  vapours.  The  Tightness  of  his  conclusion  to 
a  poisoning  of  the  air  by  exhalations  from  the  ground  in 
these  places  may  well  supply  a  proof  how  an  orderly  and 
analogical  study  of  nature,  even  without  the  application  of 


THE  POEM  OF  LUCRETIUS.  157 

more  stringent  methods,  must  lead  to  great  advances  in 
knowledge. 

The  explanation  of  the  operation  of  the  magnet,  inade- 
quate as  it  may  otherwise  be,  affords  us  a  view  of  the 
exact  and  consequent  carrying  out  of  hypotheses  which  is 
characteristic  of  the  whole  natural  philosophy  of  the  Epi- 
kureans.  Lucretius  reminds  us,  to  begin  with,  of  the  con- 
tinual extremely  rapid  and  tempestuous  motions  of  the 
subtle  atoms  which  circulate  in  the  pores  of  all  bodies,  and 
stream  out  from  their  surfaces.  Every  body,  on  this  view, 
is  always  sending  out  in  every  direction  streams  of  such 
atoms,  which  produce  a  ceaseless  interchange  amongst  all 
the  objects  in  space.  It  is  a  theory  of  universal  emanation 
as  against  the  vibration  theory  of  modern  physical  science. 
The  relations  of  these  interchanges  in  themselves,  apart 
from  their  form,  have  been  in  our  own  days  not  only  de- 
monstrated by  experiment,  but  have  had  an  incomparably 
greater  importance  assigned  to  them  in  their  kind,  quan- 
tity, and  rapidity  than  the  boldest  imaginations  of  the 
Epikureans  could  have  conceived. 

Lucretius  tells  us  that  from  the  magnet  there  proceeds 
such  a  violent  stream  outwards,  that  it  produces  through 
the  driving  out  of  the  air  a  vacuum  between  the  magnet 
and  the  iron,  into  which  the  iron  rushes.  That  there  is  no 
idea  here  of  a  mystically  acting  l  horror  vacui '  is,  of  course, 
obvious,  if  we  consider  the  physical  philosophy  of  this 
school.  The  result  is  rather  produced  because  every  body 
is  constantly  assailed  on  every  hand  by  blows  from  atmo- 
spheric atoms,  and  must  therefore  yield  in  any  direction  in 
which  a  passage  opens  itself,  unless  its  weight  is  too  great, 
or  its  density  is  so  slight  that  the  air-atoms  can  make  their 
way  unhindered  through  the  pores  of  the  body.  And  this 
explains  why  it  is  iron  of  all  things  that  is  so  violently 
attracted  by  the  magnet.  The  poem  refers  it  simply  to  its 
structure  and  its  specific  gravity ;  other  bodies  being  partly 
too  heavy,  as  in  the  case  of  gold,  to  be  moved  by  the 
streams,  and  so  carried  through  the  void  space  to  the  mag- 


153  MA  TERIALISM  IN  ANTIQUITY. 

net,  and  partly,  as  in  the  case  of  wood,  so  porous,  that  the 
streams  can  fly  through  them  freely  without  any  mechani- 
cal collision. 

This  explanation  leaves  much  still  unexplained,  but  the 
whole  treatment  of  the  subject  advantageously  contrasts 
with  the  hypotheses  and  theories  of  the  Aristotelian  school 
by  its  vividness  and  clearness.  "We  first  ask,  how  is  it  pos- 
sible that  the  currents  from  the  magnet  can  expel  the  air 
without  repelling  the  iron  by  the  same  force  ? 76  And  it 
might  have  been  readily  ascertained  by  an  easy  experiment 
that  into  the  void  created  by  rarefied  air,  not  iron  alone, 
but  all  other  bodies,  are  carried.  But  the  fact  that  we  can 
raise  such  objections  shows  that  the  attempt  at  an  explana- 
tion is  a  fruitful  one,  whilst  the  assumption  of  secret  forces, 
specific  sympathies,  and  similar  devices,  is  hostile  to  all 
further  reflection. 

This  example  also  shows  us,  it  is  true,  why  this  fashion  of 
natural  inquiry  could  make  so  little  progress  in  antiquity. 
Almost  all  the  real  achievements  of  physical  science  among 
the  ancients,  are  mathematical,  and  therefore  in  astronomy, 
in  statics  and  mechanics,  and  in  the  rudiments  of  optics 
and  acoustics.  There  was  further  a  valuable  mass  of 
materials  accumulated  by  the  descriptive  sciences ;  but 
everywhere,  where  what  was  needed  was  the  attainment  by 
the  variation  and  combination  of  observations  to  the  dis- 
covery of  laws,  the  ancients  remained  in  a  backward  condi- 
tion. To  the  Idealist  was  lacking  the  sense  for  and  interest 
in  concrete  phenomena ;  the  Materialists  were  always  too 
much  inclined  to  stop  short  with  the  individual  view,  and  to 
content  themselves  with  the  first  explanation  that  offered 
itself,  instead  of  probing  the  matter  to  the  bottom. 


76  We  may  compare  the  well-known  and  the  plate  (Müller's  Physik.,  i.  9, 

experiment  in  which  a  plate  which  is  96).     Even  though  we  cannot  assume 

held  over  the   opening   of  a  vessel  that  the  Epikureans  were  acquainted 

through  which  a  stream  of  air  is  flow-  with  this  phenomenon,  yet  they  may 

ing,  is  attracted  and  held  fast  because  have  conceived  in  a  similar  way  the 

the  air,  which  streams  rapidly  side-  expulsion  of  the  air  by  the  currents 

wards,  is  rarefied  between  the  vessel  proceeding  from  the  stone. 


SECOND  SECTION. 


THE  PERIOD   OF  TRANSITION. 


SECOND    SECTION. 

THE   PERIOD   OF   TRANSITION. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  MONOTHEISTIC  RELIGIONS  IN  THEIE  RELATION 
TO  MATERIALISM. 

The  disappearance  of  the  ancient  civilisation  in  the  early 
centuries  of  the  Christian  era  is  an  event  the  serious  pro- 
blems of  which  are  in  great  part  still  unexplained, 

It  is  difficult  enough  to  follow  the  intricate  events  of 
the  Eoman  Empire  in  all  their  extent,  and  to  grasp  the 
important  facts  ;  but  it  is  incomparably  more  difficult  to 
estimate  in  their  full  extent  the  workings  of  the  slight  but 
endlessly  multiplied  changes  in  the  daily  intercourse  of 
nations,  in  the  hearts  of  the  lower  orders,  by  the  hearth  of 
humble  families,  whether  in  the  city  or  the  countryside.1 

And  yet,  so  much  at  least  is  certain,  that  from  the  lower 

1  A  very  valuable  insight  into  the  the  exhaustion  of  the  soil  has  been 

physiology  of  nations   has  been  re-  carried  by  Carey  (Principles  of  Social 

cently  afforded  us  by  the  considera-  Science,  vol.  i.  chaps,  iii.  ix. ,  vol.  iii. 

tion  of  history  from  the  standpoints  chap,  xlvi.,  &c.)to  wrong  and  exag- 

of  the  natural  sciences  and  of  politi-  gerated  conclusions,  and  been  fused 

cal  economy,  and  the  light  thus  kin-  with  entirely  absurd  doctrines  (comp, 

died  extends  into  the  poorest  hovels ;  my  essay,  Mill's  Ansichten  über  die 

yet  it  shows  us  only  one  side  of  the  sociale  Erage  u.  d.  angebl.  Umwäl- 

matter,  and  the  changes  in  the  intel-  zung  der  Social wissensch.  durch  Carey, 

lectual  condition  of  peoples  remain  Duisb.  1866),  but  the  correctness  of 

still  covered  with  darkness,  so  far  as  this  theory  in  its  main  features,  and 

they  cannot  be   explained  from  the  its  applicability  to  the  civilisation  of 

social    changes.      Liebig's  theory  of  the  old  world,   cannot  be  doubted. 
VOL.  I.  L 


IÖ2 


PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 


and  middle  strata  of  the  population  alone  is  this  mighty 
revolution  to  be  explained. 

We  have,  unhappily,  been  accustomed  to  regard  the  so- 
called  law  which  governs  the  development  of  philosophy 
as  a  peculiar  mysteriously  working  force,  which  neces- 
sarily leads  us  from  the  sunlight  of  knowledge  back  into 
the  night  of  superstition,  only  to  begin  its  course  again 


The  corn-exporting  provinces  must 
have  gradually  become  poor  and  de- 
populated, while  around  Rome,  and 
likewise  about  the  subordinate  cen- 
tres, wealth  and  population  led  to  the 
most  forced  system  of  agriculture,  in 
which  heavily-manured  and  carefully 
cultivated  little  gardens  produced 
richer  results  in  fruit,  flowers,  &c, 
than  extensive  holdings  in  distant 
neighbourhoods.  (Comp.  Röscher,  Na- 
tionalökorj.  des  Ackerbaus,  §  46,  where 
it  is  said,  inter  alia,  that  single, 
fruit-trees  in  the  vicinity  of  Rome 
produced  as  much  as  ^15  yearly, 
while  wheat  in  Italy  for  the  most 
part  produced  only  fourfold,  because 
only  inferior  soils  were  devoted  to 
the  growing  of  wheat.)  But  the 
whole  concentrated  economy  of  the 
rich  commercial  centre  is  not  only 
more  sensitive  to  blows  from  without 
than  the  economy  of  a  country  in 
more  moderate  circumstances,  but  it 
is  also  dependent  upon  the  produc- 
tiveness of  the  circle  which  delivers 
to  the  centre  the  indispensable  neces- 
saries of  life.  The  devastation  of  a 
fertile  country  by  war,  even  though 
it  is  accompanied  by  a  decimation  of 
its  inhabitants,  is  speedily  compen- 
sated by  the  efforts  of  nature  and  of 
man  ;  while  a  blow  inflicted  upon  the 
capital,  especially  if  the  resources  of 
the  provinces  are  already  diminishing, 
very  easily  produces  complete  ruin, 
because  it  hampers  the  entire  system 
of  commercial  exchange  at  its  centre, 
and  so  suddenly  annihilates  the  exag- 
gerated values  enjoyed  and  created 
by  luxury.  But  even  without  such 
blows  from  without,  the  fall  must 


have  come  with  increasing  accelera- 
tion, as  soon  as  the  pauperisation  and 
depopulation  of  the  provinces  was  so 
far  gone  that,  even  by  means  of  in- 
creased pressure,  their  contributions 
could  no  longer  be  kept  up  to  their 
standard.  The  whole  picture  of  this 
process  would,  so  far  as  the  Roman 
Empire  is  concerned,  be  much  more 
clearly  displayed  to  us,  but  that  the 
advantages  of  a  magnificent  and  pow- 
erfully maintained  centralising  pro- 
cess among  the  great  emperors  of  the 
second  century  counterbalanced  the 
evil,  and,  in  fact,  evoked  a  new  period 
of  material  splendour  at  the  very 
brink  of  the  general  downfall.  It  is 
upon  this  last  brilliant  display  of  the 
ancient  civilisation,  the  benefits  of 
which  fell,  of  course,  for  the  most 
part,  to  the  towns  and  to  certain 
favoured  tracts  of  country,  that  the 
favourable  picture  chiefly  rests  which 
Gibbon  draws  of  the  condition  of  the 
Empire  in  the  first  chapter  of  the 
"  History  of  the  Decline  and  Fall  of 
the  Roman  Empire."  It  is  evident, 
however,  that  the  economic  evil  to 
which  the  Empire  must  ultimately 
succumb  had  already  attained  a  seri- 
ous development.  A  splendour  which 
rests  upon  the  accumulation  and 
concentration  of  riches  can  very 
easily  reach  its  climax  if  the  means 
of  accumulation  are  already  begin- 
ning to  disappear,  just  as  the  greatest 
heat  of  the  day  occurs  when  the  sun 
is  already  setting. 

Much  earlier  must  the  moral  ruin 
appear  in  this  great  process  of  centra- 
lisation, because  the  subjection  and 
fusion  of  numerous  and  utterly  dif- 


MONOTHEISM  AND  MATERIALISM. 


163 


from  thence  under  newer  and  higher  forms.  It  is  with 
this  impulse  of  national  development  as  it  is  with  the  life- 
force  of  organisms.  It  is  there — but  there  only  as  the  result- 
ant of  all  the  natural  forces.  To  assume  it  frequently  helps 
our  observations ;  but  it  veils  their  uncertainty,  and  leads  to 
errors  if  we  set  it  down  as  a  complementary  explanation 


ferent  peoples  and  races  brings  con- 
fusion not  only  into  the  specific 
forms  of  morality,  but  also  into  its 
very  principles.  Lecky  shows  quite 
rightly  (History  of  European  Morals 
from  Augustus  to  Charlemagne,  1869, 
vol.  i.  p.  271  foil.)  how  the  So- 
man virtue,  so  intimately  fused  with 
the  local  patriotism  of  the  early 
Bom  ans  and  the  native  religion, 
must  inevitably  perish  through  the 
destruction  of  the  old  political 
forms,  and  the  rise  of  scepticism  and 
introduction  of  foreign  cults.  That 
the  progress  of  civilisation  did  not 
substitute  new  and  superior  vir- 
tues— "gentler manners  and  enlarged 
benevolence" — in  place  of  the  old 
ones,  is  attributed  to  three  causes  : 
the  Empire,  slavery,  and  the  gladia- 
torial games.  Does  this  not  involve 
a  confusion  of  cause  and  effect  ?  Com- 
pare the  admirable  contrast  just  be- 
fore drawn  by  Lecky  himself  between 
the  noble  sentiments  of  the  Emperor 
Marcus  Aurelius  and  the  character 
of  the  masses  over  whom  he  ruled. 
The  individual  can  raise  himself  with 
the  help  of  philosophy  to  ethical 
principles  which  are  independent  of 
religion  and  politics;  the  masses  of 
the  people  found  morality — and  that 
still  more  in  antiquity  than  in  onr 
own  days  —  only  in  the  connection, 
which  had  been  taught  in  local  tradi- 
tions, and  had  become  inseparable,  of 
the  general  and  the  individual,  of  the 
permanently  valid  and  the  variable  ; 
and  accordingly  the  great  centralisa- 
tion of  the  world-empire  must  in  this 
sphere  have  exercised  everywhere, 
alike  amongst  conquerors  and  con- 
quered, a  dissolving  and  disturbing 


influence.  Where,  however,  is  the 
"  normal  condition  of  society"  (Lecky, 
loc.  cit.,  p.  271)  which  could  forth- 
with replace  by  new  ones  the  virtues 
of  the  perishing  social  order?  Time, 
above  all  things,  and,  as  a  rule,  also 
the  appearance  of  a  new  type  of 
people,  are  needed  for  the  fusion  of 
moral  principles  with  sensational 
elements  and  fanciful  additions.  And 
so  the  same  process  of  accumulation 
and  concentration  which  developed 
the  ancient  civilisation  to  its  utmost 
point  appears  also  as  the  cause  of  its 
fall.  In  fact,  the  peculiarly  enthu- 
siastic feature  of  the  fermenting  pro- 
cess from  which  mediaeval  Christian- 
ity finally  proceeded  seems  to  find  its 
explanation  here  ;  for  it  distinctly 
points  to  an  overstraining  of  the  ner- 
vous system  by  the  extremes  of  luxury 
and  abstinence,  voluptuousness  and 
suffering,  extending  through  all  classes 
of  the  population;  and  this  condi- 
tion, again,  is  merely  a  consequence 
of  the  accumulation  of  wealth,  al- 
though, indeed,  slavery  lends  to  its 
consequences  a  specially  disagreeable 
colouring.  For  the  facts  as  to  the 
accumulation  in  ancient  Rome,  see 
Röscher,  Grundl.  der  JSTational- 
ökon.  §  204,  and  especially  Anm.  10  ; 
for  the  senseless  luxury  of  decaying 
nations,  ibid.,  §  233  ff.,  as  well  as  the 
essay  on  luxury  in  Roscher's  'An- 
sichten der  Volkswirthschaft  aus 
geschichtl.  Standpunkte.'  The  in- 
fluence of  slavery  has  been  specially 
pointed  out  by  Contzen,  Die  Sociale 
Frage,  ihre  Geschichte,  Literatur  u. 
Bedeut.  in  d.  Gegen w.,  2te  Aufl., 
Leipzig,  1872.  Compare  also  the  fol- 
lowing note. 


1 64  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

by  the  side  of  those  elements  with  the  sum  of  which  it 
is  really  identical. 

For  our  purpose  it  is  well  to  keep  in  mind  that  ignor- 
ance cannot  be  the  proper  consequence  of  knowledge,  or 
fantastic  caprice  the  consequence  of  method ;  that  ration- 
alism does  not,  and  never  can  of  itself,  lead  us  back  to 
superstition.  We  have  seen  how  in  antiquity,  amidst 
the  progress  of  rationalism,  of  knowledge,  of  method,  the 
intellectual  aristocracy  broke  away  from  the  masses.  The 
lack  of  a  thorough  popular  education  must  have  hastened 
and  intensified  this  separation.  Slavery,  which  was  in  a 
sense  the  basis  of  the  whole  civilisation  of  antiquity,  changed 
its  character  in  imperial  times,  and  became  only  the  more 
untenable  because  of  the  efforts  that  were  made  to  ame- 
liorate this  dangerous  institution.2 

The  increasing  intercourse  of  nations  began  to  produce 
amongst  the  superstitious  masses  a  confusion  of  religions. 
Oriental  mysticism  veiled  itself  in  Hellenic  forms.     At 

2  Gibbon,  Hist,  of  the  Decline,  &c,  i.  318,  rightly  distinguishes  three 
chap,  ii.,  describes  how  the  slaves,  periods  in  the  position  of  the  slaves  : 
who  had  become  comparatively  the  earliest,  in  which  they  were  a  part 
cheaper  since  the  Roman  conquests,  of  the  family,  and  were  comparatively 
rose  in  value,  and  were  better  treated  well  treated ;  the  second,  in  which 
in  consequence,  with  the  falling  off  their  numbers  were  very  largely  in- 
in  the  importation  of  prisoners  of  creased,  while  their  treatment  grew 
war,  who  in  the  times  of  the  wars  of  worse ;  and  finally,  the  third,  which 
conquest  had  often  been  sold  by  begins  with  the  turning-points  indi- 
thousands  at  a  very  cheap  rate.  It  cated  by  Gibbon.  Lecky  specially 
became  more  and  more  necessary  to  points  out,  too,  the  influence  of  the 
breed  slaves  at  home,  and  to  promote  Stoic  philosophy  in  the  milder  treat- 
marriages  amongst  them.  By  this  ment  of  the  slaves. 
means  the  whole  mass,  which  had  Slavery  no  longer  reacted  in  this 
previously  on  every  estate,  often  with  third  period  upon  the  civilisation  of 
the  most  careful  calculation  (see  the  the  ancient  world  by  means  of  the 
letters  of  Cato  in  Contzen,  loc.  cit. ,  dread  of  great  servile  wars,  but  did 
S.  174),  been  composed  of  as  many  so,  of  course,  by  the  influence  which 
different  nationalities  as  possible,  be-  the  subject  class  more  and  more  exer- 
came  more  homogeneous.  To  this  cised  on  the  whole  modes  of  thought 
was  added  the  enormous  accumula-  of  the  population.  This  influence, 
tion  of  slaves  on  the  large  estates  and  one  diametrically  opposed  to  the 
in  the  palaces  of  the  rich  ;  and  again,  ancient  ideals,  became  especially 
too,  the  important  part  played  by  marked  with  the  spread  of  Christian- 
the  freedmen  in  the  social  life  of  im-  ity.  Comp,  as  to  this  Lecky,  -Hist, 
perial  times.                Lecky,  loc.  cit.,  Eur.  Morals,  ii.  66  foil. 


MONO  THEISM  AND  MA  TERIALISM.  165 

Rome,  whither  the  conquered  nations  flocked,  there  was 
soon  no  creed  that  did  not  find  believers,  while  there  was 
none  that  was  not  scoffed  at  by  the  majority.  To  the  fana- 
ticism of  the  deluded  multitude  was  opposed  either  a  light- 
hearted  contempt  or  a  blase  indifference  :  the  formation  of 
sharp,  well-disciplined  parties,  amidst  the  universal  divi- 
sion of  interests  among  the  higher  classes,  had  become 
impossible. 

To  such  an  extent  there  forced  a  way  through  the  incre- 
dible growth  of  literature,  through  the  desultory  studies  of 
officious  spirits,  through  daily  intercourse,  disjected  frag- 
ments of  scientific  discoveries,  and  produced  that  state  of 
semi-culture  which  has  been  declared,  perhaps  with  less 
reason,  to  characterise  our  own  days.  We  must  not,  how- 
ever, forget  that  this  semi- culture  was  chiefly  the  condition 
of  the  rich  and  powerful,  of  the  men  of  influence  up  to  the 
imperial  throne.  The  fullest  social  training,  elegant  social 
traits  in  wide  command  of  affairs,  are,  in  a  philosophical 
sense,  only  too  often  united  with  the  most  pitiable  defi- 
ciencies, and  the  dangers  which  are  attributed  to  the  doc- 
trines of  philosophers  tend  to  become  only  too  real  in  those 
circles  where  the  flexible,  unprincipled  semi-eulture  is  a 
slave  of  natural  inclinations  or  disordered  passions. 

When  Epikuros,  with  a  lofty  enthusiasm,  flung  away 
the  fetters  of  religion,  that  he  might  be  righteous  and  noble, 
because  it  was  a  delight  to  be  so,  there  came  these  profli- 
gate favourites  of  the  moment,  as  they  are  pictured  in  rich 
variety  by  Horace  and  Juvenal  and  Petronius,  who,  with 
shameless  front,  rushed  into  the  most  unnatural  forms  of 
vice ;  and  who  was  there  to  protect  poor  Philosophy  when 
such  reprobates  claimed  the  name  of  Epikuros,  if  indeed 
they  did  not  claim  that  of  the  Porch  ? 

Contempt  of  the  popular  belief  was  here  assumed  as  a 
mask  for  inner  hollowness,  utter  absence  of  belief  and  true 
knowledge.  To  smile  at  the  idea  of  immortality  was  a  sign 
of  vice :  but  the  vice  was  due  to  the  circumstances  of  the 
time,  and  had  arisen  not  through,  but  in  spite  of  philosophy. 


1 66  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

And  in  these  very  classes  the  priests  of  Isis,  the  thau- 
niaturgists,  and  prophets,  with  their  train  of  jugglery,  found 
a  rich  harvest •  nay,  sometimes  even  the  Jews  found  a 
proselyte.  The  utterly  uneducated  mob  shared  in  the 
towns  the  character  of  characterlessness  with  the  great  in 
their  semi-culture.  Thence  ensued,  then,  in  those  times, 
in  the  fullest  bloom,  that  practical  Materialism,  as  it  may 
be  called — Materialism  of  life. 

On  this  point  also  the  prevailing  notions  require  an 
explanation.  There  is  also  a  Materialism  of  life  which, 
reviled  by  some,  prized  by  others,  may,  by  the  side  of 
any  other  practical  tendency,  still  venture  to  show  its 
face. 3 

When  effort  is  directed  not  to  transitory  enjoyment,  but 
to  a  real  perfecting  of  our  condition ;  when  the  energy  of 
material  enterprise  is  guided  by  a  clear  calculation,  which 
in  all  things  has  ultimate  principles  in  view,  and  therefore 
reaches  its  aim;  then  there  ensues  that  giant  progress 
which  in  our  own  time  has  made  England  in  two  hundred 
years  a  mighty  people,  which  in  the  Athens  of  Perikles 
went  hand  in  hand  with  the  highest  blossom  of  intellectual 
life  which  any  state  has  ever  attained. 

But  of  quite  another  character  was  the  Materialism  of 
imperial  Home,  which  repeated  itself  at  Byzantium,  Alex- 
andria, and  in  all  the  capitals  of  the  Empire.  Here  also 
the  search  for  money  dominated  the  distracted  multitudes, 
as  we  see  in  the  trenchant  pictures  of  Juvenal  and  Horace  ; 
but  there  were  lacking  the  great  principles  of  the  elevation 

3  Mommsen,    History    of    Borne,  gions  into  Eome.    "  When  the  Senate 

E.  T.,  iv.  560  (chap,  xii.),  observes:  (in  50  b.c.)  ordered  the  temples  of  Isis 

"  Unbelief  and  superstition,  different  constructed  within  the  ring-wall  to  be 

hues  of  the  same  historical  phenome-  pulled  down,  no  labourer  ventured  to 

non,  went  in  the  Roman  world  of  that  lay  the  first  hand  on  them,  and  the 

day  hand  in  hand,  and  there  was  no  consul  Lucius    Paullus  was  himself 

lack  of  individuals  who  themselves  obliged  to  apply  the  first  stroke  of  the 

combined  both — who  denied  the  gods  axe.   A  wager  might  be  laid  that  the 

with  Epikuros,  and  yet  prayed  and  more  lax  any  woman  was,  the  more 

sacrificed  before  every  shrine."    In  piously  she  worshipped  Isis." 

the  same  chapter  are  some  details  as  Compare  further  Lecky,  Hist.   Eur. 

to  the  introduction  of  Oriental  reli-  Morals,  i.  338  foil. 


MONOTHEISM  AND  MA  TERIALISM.  167 

of  national  power,  of  the  utilisation  for  the  common  advan- 
tage of  national  resources,  which  ennoble  a  Materialistic 
tendency,  because,  though  they  start  from  matter,  yet  they 
leaven  it  with  force.  This  would  result  in  the  Materialism 
of  prosperity :  Eome  knew  that  of  decay.  Philosophy  is 
compatible  with  the  first,  as  with  all  that  has  principles ; 
she  disappears,  or  has  rather  already  disappeared,  when 
those  horrors  break  in  of  which  we  will  here  forbear  to  say 
anything. 

Yet  we  must  point  out  the  undeniable  fact,  that,  in  the 
centuries  when  the  abominations  of  a  Nero,  a  Caligula, 
or  even  of  a  Heliogabalus,  polluted  the  globe,  no  philosophy 
was  more  neglected,  none  was  more  foreign  to  the  spirit  of 
the  time,  than  that  of  all  which  demanded  the  coldest  blood, 
the  calmest  contemplation, the  most  sober  and  purelyprosaic 
inquiry — the  philosophy  of  Demokritos  and  Epikuros. 

The  age  of  Perikles  was  the  blossoming-time  of  the 
materialistic  and  sensationalistic  philosophy  of  antiquity  : 
its  fruits  ripened  in  the  time  of  Alexandrian  learning,  in 
the  two  centuries  immediately  before  Christ.4 

But  as  the  masses  under  the  Empire  were  drunk  with 
the  double  intoxication  of  vice  and  of  the  mysteries,  no 
sober  disciple  was  to  be  found,  and  philosophy  died  out. 
In  those  times,  as  everybody  knows,  prevailed  Neo-Pla- 
tonic  and  ISTeo-Pythagorean  systems,  in  which  many  nobler 
elements  of  the  past  were  overpowered  by  fanaticism  and 
Oriental  mysticism.  Plotinus  was  ashamed  that  he  had  a 
body,  and  would  never  name  his  parents.  Here  we  have 
already  in  philosophy  the  height  of  the  anti-Materialistic 
tendency — an  element  that  was  still  mightier  in  the  field 

4  It  is  therefore  at  once  unfair  and  pendent  as  Draper  shows  himself  in 

inaccurate  when  Draper,   in  his  in  his  final  judgments  and  his  whole  mode 

many  respects  valuable  "History  of  of  thought,  there  nevertheless  appears 

the  Intellectual  Development  of  Eu-  in  his  account  of  Epikuros,  and  per- 

rope,"  identifies  Epikureanism  with  haps  still  more  in  the  way  in  which 

the  hypocritical  infidelity  of  the  men  he  makes  Aristotle  an    experience- 

of  the  world,  to  whom  "  society  is  in-  philosopher,  the  obvious  influence  of 

debted  for  more  than  half  its  corrup-  erroneous  traditions, 
tions"  (vol.  i.  pp.  168,  169).     Inde- 


i68        .  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

to  -which  it  properly  belonged — that  of  Beligion.  Never 
have  religions  flourished  with  such  wild  luxuriance  and  in 
such  wide  variety,  from  the  purest  to  the  most  abomin- 
able shapes,  as  in  the  three  first  centuries  after  Christ. 
No  wonder,  then,  that  even  the  philosophers  of  this  time 
often  appeared  as  priests  and  apostles.  Stoicism,  whose 
doctrine  had  naturally  a  theological  turn,  first  yielded  to 
this  tendency,  and  was  therefore  the  longest  respected  of 
the  older  schools,  till  it  was  outbid  and  supplanted  by  the 
ascetic  mysteries  of  Eeo-Platonism.5 

It  has  been  often  said  that  incredulity  and  superstition 
further  and  excite  each  other ;  yet  we  must  not  allow  our- 
selves to  be  dazzled  by  the  antithesis.  Only  by  weighing 
the  specific  causes  and  by  the  severe  discrimination  of  time 
and  circumstance  can  we  see  how  far  it  is  true. 

When  a  rigorously  scientific  system,  resting  upon  solid 
principles,  on  well-considered  grounds  excludes  faith  from 
science,  it  will  most  certainly,  and  even  more  entirely,  ex- 
clude all  vague  superstitions.  In  times,  however,  and  under 
circumstances  in  which  scientific  studies  are  as  much  dis- 
ordered and  disorganised  as  the  national  and  primitive 

5  Zeller,  Phil.  d.  Griech.,  iii.  i,  S.  who  resorted  to  them  for  a  solution  of 
289,  E.  T.  tr.  Reich  el  (=  Stoics,  &c),  perplexing  cases  of  practical  morals, 
p.  323:  "In  a  word,  Stoicism  is  not  or  under  the  influence  of  despondency- 
only  a  philosophic,  but  also  a  religious  or  remorse."    For  the  extinction  of 


im.     As  such  it  was  regarded  by  the  Stoic  influence,  and  its  supplant- 

its  first  adherents,  .  .  .  and  as  such,  ing  by  the  Neo-Platonic  mysticism, 

together  with  Platonism,  it  afforded  comp.  Lecky,  loc.  cii.,  p.  337. 

in  subsequent  times,  to  the  best  and  Zeller,  iii.  2,  S.  381,  observes  :  "Neo- 

most  cultivated  men,  a  substitute  for  Platonism  is  a  religious  system,  and 

declining  natural  religion,  a  satisfac-  it  is  so  not  merely  in  the  sense  in 

tion  for  religious  cravings,  and  a  sup-  which  Platonism  and  Stoicism  may 

port  for  moral  life,  wherever  the  in-  also  be  so  described  :  it  is  not  merely 

fluence  of  Greek  culture  extended."  content  to  apply  to  the  moral  duties 

Lecky,     Hist.  Eur.  Morals,    i.    327,  and  spiritual  life  of  man  a  philosophy 

Gays  of  the  Roman  Stoics  of  the  first  starting  from  the  idea  of  God,   but 

two    centuries  :    "  On    occasions    of  nevertheless  attained  by  a  scientific 

family  bereavement,  when  the  mind  method.     But  even  its  scientific  view 

is  most  susceptible  of    impressions,  of  the  world  reflects  from  first  to  last 

they  were  habitually  called  in  to  con-  the  religious  disposition  of  man,  and 

sole  the  survivors.     Dying  men  asked  is  thoroughly  dominated  by  the  wish 

their  comfort  and  support  in  the  last  to  meet  his  religious  needs,  and  to 

hours  of  their  life.     They  became  the  bring  him  into  the  most  intimate  per- 

directors  of  the  conscience  of  numbers  sonal  communion  with  the  Deity." 


MONOTHEISM  AND  MATERIALISM.  169 

forms  of  faith,  this  proposition  has  indeed  its  application. 
So  was  it  in  imperial  times. 

There  was  then,  in  truth,  no  tendency,  no  need  of  life 
which  had  not  a  corresponding  religions  form ;  but  by  the 
side  of  the  wanton  festivals  of  Bacchus,  the  secret  and 
alluring  mysteries  of  Isis,  there  silently  spread,  wider  and 
wider,  the  love  of  a  strict  and  self-denying  asceticism. 

As  in  the  case  of  individuals  who  have  become  blase 
and  enervate  after  exhausting  all  pleasures,  at  last  the 
one  charm  of  novelty  remains — that  of  an  austere,  self- 
denying  life;  so  was  it  on  a  large  scale  in  the  ancient 
world ;  and  thus  it  was  only  natural  that  this  new  tendency, 
being  as  it  was  in  sharpest  contrast  with  the  cheerful  sen- 
suousness  of  the  older  world,  led  men  to  an  extreme  of 
world-avoidance  and  self-renunciation.6 

Christianity,  with  its  wonderfully  fascinating  doctrine 
of  the  kingdom  that  is  not  of  this  world,  seemed  to  offer 
the  most  admirable  support  to  these  views. 

The  religion  of  the  oppressed  and  the  slave,  of  the  weary 
and  heavy-laden,  attracted  also  the  luxurious  rich  who 
could  no  longer  be  satisfied  with  luxury  and  wealth.  And 
so  with  the  principle  of  renunciation  was  allied  that  of 
universal  brotherhood,  which  contained  new  spiritual  de- 
lights for  the  heart  seared  by  selfishness.  The  longing  of 
the  wandering  and  isolated  spirit  after  a  close  tie  of  com- 
munity and  a  positive  belief  was  satisfied ;  and  the  firm 
coherence  of  the  believers,  the  imposing  union  of  commu- 
nities ramifying  everywhere  through  the  wide  world, 
effected  more  for  the  propagation  of  the  new  religion  than 
the  mass  of  miracles  that  was  related  to  willingly  be- 
lieving ears.  Miracle  was,  in  short,  not  so  much  a  mis- 
sionary instrument  as  a  necessary  complement  of  faith 
in  a  time  that  set  no  measure  to  its  love  or  its  belief  in 
miracles.  In  this  respect  not  only  did  priests  of  Isis  and 
magicians  compete  with  Christianity,  but  even  philosophers 
appeared  in  the  character  of  miracle-workers  and  God- 

6  An  account  of  this  extreme,  as  it    third  century,  is  to  be  found  in  Lecky, 
made  itself  specially  felt  after  the     Hist.  Eur.  Morals,  ii.  107  foil. 


1 70 


PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION, 


accredited  prophets.  The  feats  of  a  Cagliostro  and  a  Gass- 
ner  in  modern  times  are  but  a  faint  copy  of  the  perform- 
ances of  Apollonius  of  Tyana,  the  most  famous  of  the 
prophets,  whose  miracles  and  oracles  were  partly  believed 
even  by  Lucian  and  Origen.  But  the  result  of  all  this 
was  to  show  that  only  simple  and  consistent  principles  can 
work  a  lasting  miracle — that  miracle,  at  least,  which  gradu- 
ally united  the  scattered  nations  and  creeds  around  the 
altar  of  the  Christians.7 

Christianity,  by  preaching  the  gospel  to  the  poor,  un- 
hinged the  ancient  world. 8  What  will  appear  in  the  ful- 
ness of  time  as  an  actual  fact,  the  spirit  of  faith  already 
apprehended  in  imagination — the  kingdom  of  love,  in  which 
the  last  are  to  be  first.  The  stern  legal  idea  of  the  Eo- 
mans,  which  built  order  upon  force,  and  made  property 


7  As  to  the  spread  of  Christianity, 
compare  the  celebrated  fifteenth  chap- 
ter of  Gibbon,  which  is  full  of  mate- 
rial for  the  estimation  of  this  fact 
from  the  most  varied  standpoints. 
More  correct  views,  however,  are  put 
forward  by  Lecky  in  his  "History  of 
European  Morals,"  and  in  the  "  His- 
tory of  Rationalism  in  Europe."  As 
the  chief  work  on  the  theological  side, 
may  be  named  Baur,  das  Christen- 
thum,  u.  die  christliche.  Kirche  der 
drei  ersten  Jahrhunderte.  From  the 
philosophico  -  historical  standpoint, 
E.  von  Lasaulx,  der  Untergang  des 
Hellenismus  u.  die  Einziehung  seiner 
Tempelgüter  durch  die  christl.  Kaiser, 
München,  1854.  For    further 

literature,  see  in  Ueberweg  in  the 
"History  of  the  Patristic  Philosophy," 
a  section  of  his  history  which  unfortu- 
nately has  not  met  with  the  approba- 
tion it  deserves  (comp,  my  Biographie 
TJeberwegs,  Berlin,  1871,  S.  21,  22). 
On  the  miracle-mania  which 
marked  this  period,  compare  particu- 
larly Lecky,  Hist,  of  Eur.  Morals, 
i.  393.  Also  p.  395  as  to  miracle- 
working  philosophers  :  "  Christianity 
floated  into  the  Ponian  Empire  on 


the  wave  of  credulity  that  brought 
with  it  this  long  train  of  Oriental 
superstitions  and  legends.  .  .  .Its 
miracles  were  accepted  by  both  friend 
and  foe  as  the  ordinary  accompani- 
ments of  religious  teaching." 

8  How  much  the  influence  of  the 
Christian  care  for  the  poor  was  felt  is 
shown  by  the  remarkable  fact  that 
Julian  'the  Apostate,'  in  his  attempt 
to  supplant  Christianity  by  a  philo- 
sophic Greek  State  -  religion,  openly 
recognised  the  superiority  of  Chris- 
tianity in  this  respect  to  the  old  reli- 
gion. He  recommended,  accordingly, 
in  order  to  rival  the  Christians  in 
this  respect,  the  establishment  in 
every  town  of  Xenodocheia,  in  which 
strangers  should  be  received  without 
respect  to  creed.  For  the  mainte- 
nance of  them,  and  also  for  distri- 
bution to  the  poor,  he  devoted  con- 
siderable sums  of  money.  "  For  it  is 
disgraceful,"  he  wrote  to  Arsacius, 
the  high  -  priest  of  the  Galatians, 
"that  no  one  of  the  Jews  begs,  while 
the  atheistic  Galileans  not  only  main- 
tain their  own  poor,  but  also  any 
whom  we  leave  helpless." — Lasaulx, 
Untergang  des  Hellenismus,  S.  68. 


MONO  THEISM  AND  MA  TERIALISM.  1 7 1 

the  immovable  foundation  of  human  relations,  was  met 
by  a  demand,  made  with  incredible  weight,  that  one  should 
renounce  all  private  claims,  should  love  one's  enemies, 
sacrifice  one's  treasures,  and  esteem  the  malefactor  on  the 
scaffold  equally  with  one's  self. 

A  mysterious  awe  of  these  doctrines  seized  the  ancient 
world,9  and  those  in  power  sought  in  vain  by  cruel  perse- 
cutions to  repress  a  revolution  which  overturned  all  exist- 
ing things,  and  laughed  not  only  at  the  prison  and  the  stake, 
but  even  at  religion  and  law.  In  the  bold  self-sufficiency  of 
the  salvation  which  a  Jewish  traitor,  who  had  suffered  the 
death  of  a  slave,  had  brought  down  from  heaven  as  a  graci- 
ous gift  from  the  eternal  Father,  this  sect  conquered  country 
after  country,  and  was  able,  while  clinging  to  its  main  prin- 
ciples, little  by  little  to  press  into  the  service  of  the  new 
creation  the  superstitious  ideas,  the  sensuous  inclinations, 
the  passions,  and  the  legal  conceptions  of  the  heathen  world, 
since  they  could  not  be  wholly  destroyed.  The  place  of 
old  Olympus,  with  its  wealth  of  myth,  was  occupied  by  the 
saints  and  martyrs.     Gnosticism  constituted  the  elements 

s  Compare  Tacitus,     Annals,   xv.  dating  amongst  themselves,  together 

44,  where  it  is  said  that  Nero  laid  the  with  their   hatred    of    others,    was 

blame  of  the  burning  of  Eome  upon  frequently    made    a  subject    of  re- 

the  Christians.     He   "  inflicted  the  proach  to  the  Jews  also.     Lasaulx, 

most  exquisite  tortures   on  a  class  Untergang    des   Hellenismus,    S.    7 

hated  for  their  abominations,  called  foil.,  shows  the  internal  necessity  of 

Christians  by  the  populace.   Christus,  this  view  of  the  Romans,  and  quotes 

from  whom'the  name  had  its  origin,  suf-  similar  judgments  from  Suetonius  and 

f  ered  the  extreme  penalty  during  the  the  younger  Pliny.  In  the  same  place, 

reign  of  Tiberius,  at  the  hands  of  one  of  very  accurate  references  to  theintoler- 

our  procurators,  Pontius  Pilatus,  and  ance  (strange  to  Greeks  and  Romans 

a  most  mischievous  superstition,  thus  alike)  of  the  Monotheistic  religions, 

checked  for  the  moment,  again  broke  amongst  which  Christianity  particu- 

out,   not  only  in  Judaea,  the   first  larly  from  the  first  took  up  an  offensive 

source  of  the  evil,  but  even  in  Eome,  attitude.  Gibbon  reckons  as  one 

where  all  things  hideous  and  shame-  of  the  chief  causes  of  the  rapid  propa- 

ful  from  every  part  of  the  world  find  gation  of  Christianity  its  intolerant 

their    centre  and    become    popular,  zeal,  and  the  expectation  of  another 

Accordingly,  an  arrest  was  first  made  world.  For  the  threatening  of 

of  all  who  pleaded  guilty ;  then,  upon  the  whole  human  race  with  the  ever- 

their  information,  an  immense  multi-  lasting  torments  of  hell,  and  the  in- 

tude  was  convicted,  not  so  much  of  fluence  of  this  threat  upon  the  Ro- 

the  crime  of  firing  the  city,  as  of  hat-  mans,     comp.     Lecky,    Hist.     Eur. 

red  against  mankind."    Their  asso-  Morals,  i.  447  foil. 


172  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

of  a  Christian  philosophy.  Christian  schools  of  rhetoric 
were  opened  for  all  those  who  sought  to  combine  the  an- 
cient culture  with  the  new  belief.  From  the  simple  and 
austere  discipline  of  the  early  Church  were  developed  the 
elements  of  a  hierarchy.  The  bishops  gathered  unto  them- 
selves riches,  and  led  an  arrogant  and  worldly  life ;  the 
rabble  of  the  great  cities  became  intoxicated  with  hatred 
and  fanaticism.  The  care  of  the  poor  disappeared,  and  the 
usurious  rich  protected  their  nefarious  gains  by  a  system  of 
police.  The  festivals  speedily  resembled  in  their  wanton- 
ness and  ostentation  those  of  the  decaying  heathenism,  and 
the  piety  of  devotion  in  the  surge  of  disordered  emotions 
appeared  bent  upon  destroying  the  life-germs  of  the  new 
religion.  But  it  was  not  so  destroyed.  Struggling  against 
the  foreign  forces,  it  made  its  way.  Even  the  ancient  phi- 
losophy, which,  from  the  turbid  sources  of  IsTeo-Platonism, 
poured  into  the  Christian  world,  had  to  adapt  itself  to  the 
character  of  this  religion  ;  and  whilst  cunning,  treachery, 
and  cruelty  helped  to  found  the  Christian  state — in  itself  a 
contradiction — the  thought  of  the  equal  calling  of  all  men 
to  a  higher  existence  remained  the  basis  of  modern  popular 
development.  So,  says  Schlosser,  was  the  caprice  and 
deceit  of  mankind  one  of  the  means  by  which  the  Deity 
developed  a  new  life  from  the  mouldering  ruins  of  the 
ancient  world.10 

It  now  becomes  our  duty  to  examine  the  influence  that 
the  carrying  out  of  the  Christian  principle  must  have  exer- 
cised upon  the  history  of  Materialism,  and  with  this  we  will 
connect  the  consideration  of  Judaism  and  of  Mohamme- 
danism, which  latter  is  of  special  importance. 

What  these  three  relioions  have  in  common  is  Mono- 

o 

theism. 

When  the  heathen  regards  everything  as  full  of  gods, 
and  has  become  accustomed  to  treat  every  individual 
event  as  the  special  sphere  of  some  daemonic  influence,  the 

10  Schlosser,  Weltgesch.  f.   d.  deutsche  Volk,  bearb.  v.   Kriegk,  iv.  426 
Gesch.  der  Körner,  xiv.  7). 


MONOTHEISM  AND  MATERIALISM.  173 

difficulties  which  are  thus  opposed  to  a  Materialistic  ex- 
planation of  the  universe  are  as  thousandfold  as  the  ranks 
of  the  divine  community.  If  some  inquirer  conceives  the 
mighty  thought  of  explaining  everything  that  happens  out 
of  necessity,  of  the  reign  of  laws,  and  of  an  eternal  matter 
whose  conduct  is  governed  by  rules,  there  is  no  more  any 
reconciliation  possible  with  religion.  Epikuros's  forced 
attempt  at  mediation  is  but  a  weakly  effort,  therefore,  and 
more  consistent  were  those .  philosophers  who  denied  the 
existence  of  the  gods.  But  the  Monotheist  occupies  a  dif- 
ferent position  in  relation  to  science.  We  admit  that  even 
Monotheism  admits  of  a  low  and  sensuous  interpretation, 
in  which  every  particular  event  is  again  attributed  to  the 
special  and  local  activity  of  God  in  anthropomorphic  fashion. 
And  this  is  the  more  possible  because  every  man  naturally 
thinks  only  of  himself  and  his  own  surroundings.  The 
idea  of  omnipresence  remains  a  mere  empty  formula,  and 
one  has  really  again  a  multiplicity  of  gods,  with  the  tacit 
proviso  that  we  shall  conceive  them  all  as  one  and  the  same. 

From  this  standpoint,  which  is  peculiarly  that  of  the 
charcoal-burner's  creed,  science  remains  as  impossible  as  it 
was  in  the  case  of  the  heathen  creed. 

Only  when  we  have  a  liberal  theory  of  the  harmonious 
guidance  of  the  whole  universe  of  things  by  one  God,  does 
the  cause  and  effect  connection  between  things  become 
not  only  conceivable,  but  is,  in  fact,  a  necessary  conse- 
quence of  the  theory.  For  if  I  were  to  see  anywhere 
thousands  upon  thousands  of  wheels  in  motion,  and  sup- 
posed that  there  was  one  who  appeared  to  direct  them  all, 
I  should  be  compelled  to  suppose  that  I  had  before  me  a 
mechanism  in  which  the  movements  of  all  the  smallest  parts 
are  unalterably  determined  by  the  plan  of  the  whole.  But  if 
I  suppose  this,  then  I  must  be  able  to  discover  the  struc- 
ture of  the  machine,  at  least  partially  to  understand  its 
working,  and  so  a  way  is  opened  on  which  science  may 
freely  enter. 

For  this  very  reason  developments  might  go  on  for  cen- 


174  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

turies,  and  enrich  science  with  positive  material,  before  it 
would  be  necessary  to  suppose  that  this  machine  was  a 
perjpetuum  mobile.  But  when  once  entertained,  this  con- 
clusion must  appear  with  a  weight  of  facts  by  the  side  of 
which  the  apparatus  of  the  old  Sophists  appears  to  us 
utterly  weak  and  inadequate. 

And  here,  therefore,  we  may  compare  the  working  of 
Monotheism  to  a  mighty  lake,  which  gathers  the  floods  of 
science  together,  until  they  suddenly  begin  to  break 
through  the  dam.11 

But  then  there  came  into  view  a  fresh  trait  of  Mono- 
theism. The  main  idea  of  Monotheism  possesses  a  dog- 
matic ductility  and  a  speculative  ambiguity  which  spe- 
cially adapt  it,  amid  the  changing  circumstances  of  civili- 
sation, and  in  the  greatest  advances  of  scientific  culture,  to 
serve  as  the  support  of  religious  life.  The  theory  of  a 
recurrent  or  independent  regulation  of  the  universe,  in 
pursuance  of  eternal  laws,  did  not,  as  might  have  been 
expected,  lead  at  once  to  a  mortal  struggle  between  reli- 
gion and  science;  but,  on  the  contrary,  there  arose  an 
attempt  to  compare  the  relation  between  God  and  the 
world  to  that  of  body  and  soul.  The  three  great  Mono- 
theistic religions  have  therefore  all,  in  the  period  of  the 
highest  intellectual  development  of  their  disciples,  tended 
to  Pantheism.  And  even  this  involves  hostility  to  tradi- 
tion ;  but  the  strife  is  very  far  from  being  mortal. 

It  is  the  Mosaic  creed  which  was  the  first  of  all  reli- 
gions to  conceive  the  idea  of  creation  as  a  creation  out  of 
nothing. 

Let  us  call  to  mind  how  the  young  Epikuros,  according 
to  the  story,  while  yet  at  school,  began  to  devote  himself 
to  philosophy,  when  he  was  obliged  to  learn  that  all  things 
arose  from  chaos,  and  when  none  of  his  teachers  could  tell 
him  what  then  was  the  origin  of  chaos. 

There  are  peoples  which  believe  that  the  earth  rests 

11  This  in  modern  times  refers  espe-     the  popularising  of  Newton's  system 
cially  to  the  turning-point  made  by     of  the  universe  by  Voltaire. 


MONO  THEISM  AND  MA  TER1ALISM.  1 75 

upon  a  tortoise,  but  you  must  not  ask  on  what  the  tortoise 
rests.  So  easily  is  mankind  for  many  generations  con- 
tented with  a  solution  which  no  one  could  find  really  satis- 
factory. 

By  the  side  of  such  fantasies  the  creation  of  the  world 
from  nothing  is  at  least  a  clear  and  honest  theory.  It 
contains  so  open  and  direct  a  contradiction  of  all  thought, 
that  all  weaker  and  more  reserved  contradictions  must  feel 
ashamed  beside  it.12 

But  what  is  more :  even  this  idea  is  capable  of  transfor- 
mation ;  it  too  has  a  share  of  the  elasticity  which  charac- 
terises Monotheism ;  the  attempt  was  ventured  to  make 
the  priority  of  a  worldless  God  one  purely  of  conception, 
and  the  days  of  creation  became  aeons  of  development. 

In  addition  to  these  features,  which  had  already  be- 
longed to  Judaism,  it  is  important  that  Christianity  first 
requires  that  God  shall  be  conceived  as  free  from  any  physi- 
cal shape,  and  strictly  as  an  invisible  spirit.  Anthro- 
pomorphism is  thus  set  aside,  but  returns  first  in  the  tur- 
bid popular  conception,  and  then  a  hundredfold  in  the 
broad  historical  development  of  the  dogma. 

We  might  suppose,  since  these  are  the  prominent  traits  of 
Christianity,  that,  when  it  gained  its  victory,  a  new  science 
might  have  blossomed  more  luxuriantly;  but  it  is  easy 
to  see  why  that  was  not  the  case.  On  the  one  hand  we 
must  bear  in  mind  that  Christianity  was  a  popular  religion, 
which  had  developed  and  spread  from  beneath  upwards 
until  the  point  at  which  it  became  the  religion  of  the  State. 
But  the  philosophers  were  just  the  people  who  stood 
furthest  removed  from  it,  and  the  more  so  as  they  were  the 
less  inclined  to  pietism  or  the  mystical  treatment  of 
philosophy.13     Christianity  extended  itself  to  new  peoples 

12  It  is  interesting  to  observe  how,  13  It  is  true,  indeed,  that  the  mystic 

in  Mohammedan  orthodoxy,  recourse  Neo-Platonists  such  as  Plotinus  and 

is  had  to  atoms  to  render  more  intel-  Porphyry  were  decided  opponents  of 

ligible  the  transcendental  creation  by  Christianity  (Porphyry  wrote  fifteen 

a  God  who  is   outside  the  universe,  books  against  the  Christians),  but  in- 

Compare  Eenan,  Averroes  et  l'Aver-  ternally  they  stood  very  near  to  the 

roisme,  Paris,  1852,  p.  80.  Christian  doctrine,  just  as  it  cannot 


1 76  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

hitherto  inaccessible  to  civilisation,  and  it  is  no  wonder 
that  in  a  school  beginning  again  from  the  foundations, 
all  those  preliminary  steps  had  again  to  be  made  which 
ancient  Greece  and  Italy  had  been  through  since  the 
period  of  the  earliest  colonisations.  Above  all,  however, 
we  must  bear  in  mind  that  the  emphasis  of  the  Christian 
doctrine  by  no  means  rested  originally  on  its  great  theolo- 
gical principles,  but  much  rather  on  the  sphere  of  moral 
purification  through  the  renunciation  of  worldly  desires, 
on  the  theory  of  redemption,  and  on  the  hope  of  the 
advent  of  Christ. 

Moreover,  it  was  a  psychological  necessity  that  as  soon 
as  this  immense  success  had  restored  religion  generally  to 
its  ancient  privileges,  heathen  elements  in  mass  forced 
their  way  into  Christianity,  so  that  it  speedily  acquired  a 
rich  mythology  of  its  own.  And  so,  not  merely  Material- 
ism, but  all  consistent  monistic  philosophy,  became,  for 
hundreds  of  years  to  come,  an  impossibility. 

But  a  dark  shadow  fell  especially  upon  Materialism. 
The  dualistic  tendency  of  the  religion  of  the  Zend-Avesta, 
in  which  the  world  and  matter  represent  the  evil  principle, 
God  and  light  the  good,  is  related  to  Christianity  in  its 
fundamental  idea,  and  especially  in  its  historical  develop- 
ment. Nothing,  therefore,  could  appear  more  repugnant 
than  that  tendency  of  the  ancient  philosophy,  which  not 
only  assumed  an  eternal  matter,  but  went  so  far  as  to 
make  this  the  only  really  existing  substance.  If  we  add 
the  Epikurean  moral  principle,  however  purely  it  may  be 
conceived,  the  true  antithesis  of  the  Christian  theory  is 
complete,  and  we  can  comprehend  the  perverse  condemna- 
tion of  this  system  which  prevailed  in  the  Middle  Ages.14 

be  doubted  that  they  acquired  great  sceptics  of  the  school  of  Aenesidemus 

influence  over  the  late  development  and    the    "  empirical    physicians  " 

of  Christian  philosophy.      Much  fur-  (Zeller,  iii.  2,  2  Aufl.  S.  1  foil.),  espe- 

ther  really  stood  Galen   and  Celsus  cially  Sextus  Empiricus. 

(although  he,  too,  is  not,  as  was  for-  u  From  a  very  early  period,  there- 

merly  believed,  an  Epikurean,  but  a  fore,  dates  the  vulgarisation  of  the 

Platonist :   See  Ueberweg's  Hist,   of  notions  of  '  Epikurean '  and  '  Epiku- 

Phil.  §  65).  Furthest  removed  are  the  reanism'  in  the  sense  of  absolute  oppo- 


MONOTHEISM  AND  MATERIALISM.  177 

In  this  last  point,  the  third  of  the  great  monotheistic 
religions,  Mohammedanism,  is  more  favourable  to  Mate- 
rialism. This,  the  youngest  of  them,  was  also  the  first 
to  develop,  in  connection  with  the  brilliant  outburst  of 
Arabian  civilisation,  a  free  philosophical  spirit,  which 
exercised  a  powerful  influence  primarily  upon  the  Jews 
of  the  middle  ages,  and  so  indirectly  upon  the  Christians 
of  the  West. 

Even  before  the  communication  of  Greek  philosophy 
to  the  Arabians,  Islam  had  produced  numerous  sects  and 
theological  schools,  some  of  which  entertained  so  abstract 
a  notion  of  God  that  no  philosophical  speculation  could 
proceed  further  in  this  direction,  whilst  others  believed 
nothing  but  what  could  be  understood  and  demonstrated ; 
others,  again,  combined  fanaticism  and  incredulity  into 
fantastic  systems.  In  the  high  school  at  Basra  there 
arose,  under  the  protection  of  the  Abbassides,  a  school  of 
rationalists  which  sought  to  reconcile  reason  and  faith.15 

By  the  side  of  this  rich  stream  of  purely  Islamitic  theo- 
logy and  philosophy,  which  has  not  unjustly  been  com- 
pared with  the  Christian  Scholasticism,  the  Peripatetics  of 
whom  we  usually  think  when  the  Arabian  medieval  phi- 
losophy is  mentioned,  form  but  a  relatively  unimportant 
branch,  with  little  internal  variety ;  and  Averroes,  whose 
name  was,  next  to  that  of  Aristotle,  the  most  frequently 
mentioned  in  the  West,  is  by  no  means  a  star  of  the  first 
magnitude  in  the  heavens  of  the  Mohammedan  philosophy. 

sition  to  the  transcendental  theism  and  Dante  describes  as  lying  in  fiery  pits 

ascetic  dogmatism.    While  the  Epiku-  (comp.  Renan,  Averroes,  pp.  123  and 

rean  school  (see  above,  p.  125),  among  227).     A  similar  vulgarisation  has,  of 

all  the  ancient  philosophical  schools,  course,  befallen  also  the  name  of  the 

preserved  the  most  distinctive  stamp  'Stoics.' 

and  the  most  self-contained  system  15  Eenan,  Averroes,  p.  76  ff.,  shows 

of    doctrines,    the    Talmud    already  how  the  most  abstract  shape  of  the 

describes  Sadducees  and  Freethinkers  idea  of  God  was  essentially  promoted 

generally    as    Epikureans.       In    the  by  the  opposition  waged  against  the 

twelfth     century    there    appears    in  Christian  doctrines  of  the  Trinity  and 

Florence    a    sect    of     '  Epikureans,'  the  incarnation  of  the   Deity.     The 

which  can  scarcely  be  considered  so  mediatising   school   of   the    'Motaze- 

in   the    strict  Scholastic   sense,    any  lites '  is  compared  by  Eenan  with  the 

more    than    the    Epikureans    whom  school  of  Schleiermacher. 

VOL.  I.  M 


178  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

His  true  importance  lies  much  rather  in  the  fact  that  it 
was  he  who  gathered  together  the  results  of  the  Arabico- 
Aristotelian  philosophy  as  the  last  of  its  great  representa- 
tives, and  delivered  them  to  the  West  in  a  wide  range  of 
literary  activity,  and  especially  by  his  commentaries  on 
Aristotle.  This  philosophy  was  developed,  like  the  Christian 
Scholasticism,  from  a  JSTeo-Platonically  coloured  interpreta- 
tion of  Aristotle ;  only  that  while  the  Scholastics  of  the 
first  period  possessed  a  very  slender  stock  of  Peripatetic 
traditions,  and  those  thoroughly  intermingled  and  con- 
trolled by  the  Christian  theology,  the  springs  flowed  to 
the  Arabians  through  the  channel  of  the  Syrian  schools  in 
much  greater  abundance,  and  thought  was  with  them  de- 
veloped with  greater  freedom  from  the  influence  of  theo- 
logy, which  pursued  its  own  paths  of  speculation.  So  it 
resulted  that  the  naturalistic  side  of  the  Aristotelian  sys- 
tem (cf.  above,  p.  85)  could  develop  itself  amongst  the 
Arabians  in  a  manner  which  remained  quite  foreign  to 
the  earlier  Scholasticism,  and  which  later  made  the  Chris- 
tian Church  regard  Averroism  as  a  source  of  the  most  arrant 
heresies.  There  are  three  points  in  particular  here  to  be 
regarded :  the  eternity  of  the  world  and  of  matter  in  its 
opposition  to  the  Christian  doctrine  of  creation ;  the  rela- 
tion of  God  to  the  world,  according  to  which  he  influences 
either  only  the  outermost  sphere  of  the  fixed  stars,  and  all 
earthly  things  are  only  indirectly  governed  by  God  through 
the  power  of  the  stars,  or  God  and  the  world  run  into  each 
other  in  pantheistic  fashion  ; 16  finally,  the  doctrine  of  the 
unity  of  the  reason,  which  is  the  only  immortal  part  of 

16  To  the  first  of  these  views  Avi-  soon  as  we  place  ourselves  at   the 

cenna  gave  his  adhesion,  while  the  standpoint  of  eternity,  the  distinction 

second,  according  to  an  opinion  start-  between    potentiality  and    actuality 

ed  by  Averroes,  is  supposed  to  have  disappears,  since  in  the  course  of  eter- 

been  his  real  view.     Averroes  himself  nity  all  potentialities  become  actuali- 

makes  all   change  and  movement  in  ties.     But  thus  disappears  also  from 

the  world,  and  especially  the  becoming  the  highest  standpoint  of  observation 

and  perishing  of  organisms,   poten-  the  opposition,  too,  of  God  and  the 

tially  inherent  in  matter,  and  God  world.     Cf.  Renan,  Averroes,  pp.  73 

has  nothing  to  do  but  to  turn  this  and  82  foil, 
potentiality  into  actuality.     But  as 


MONOTHEISM  AND  MATERIALISM.  179 

man — a  doctrine  which  denies  individual  immortality, 
since  the  reason  is  only  the  one  divine  light  which  shines 
in  upon  the  soul  of  man,  and  makes  knowledge  possible.1? 

It  is  intelligible  enough  that  such  doctrines  must  have 
exercised  a  mischievous  interference  in  the  world  under 
the  sway  of  Christian  dogma,  and  that  in  this  way,  as  well 
as  through  its  naturalistic  elements,  Averroism  prepared 
the  way  for  the  new  Materialism.  For  all  that,  the  two 
tendencies  are  fundamentally  different,  and  Averroism 
became  a  chief  pillar  of  that  Scholasticism  which,  by  the 
unconditional  reverence  for  Aristotle,  and  by  the  strength- 
ening of  those  principles  which  we  shall  examine  more 
closely  in  the  following  chapter,  rendered  so  long  impos- 
sible a  Materialistic  consideration  of  things. 

But  besides  its  philosophy,  we  have  to  thank  the  Ara- 
bian civilisation  of  the  middle  ages  for  still  another 
element,  which  stands  perhaps  in  yet  closer  relation  to 
the  history  of  Materialism ;  that  is,  its  achievements  in 
the  sphere  of  positive  inquiry,  of  mathematics  and  the 
natural  sciences,  in  the  broadest  sense  of  the  term.  The 
brilliant  services  of  the  Arabians  in  the  field  of  astronomy 
and  of  mathematics  are  sufficiently  known.18  And  it  was 
these  studies  particularly  which,  connecting  themselves 
with  Greek  traditions,  again  made  room  for  the  idea  of 
the  regularity  and  subjection  to  law  of  the  course  of 
nature.  This  happened  at  a  time  when  the  degeneracy  of 
belief  in  the  Christian  world  had  brought  more  disorder 
into  the  moral  and  logical  order  of  things  than  had  been 
the  case  at  any  period  of  Grseco-Eonian  heathenism ;  at  a 

37  This  view,  which  rests  upon  the  cf.  582.     Draper,  Intellectual  Deve- 

Aristotelian  theory  of  the  vovs  wotrj-  lopment  of  Europe   (ed.  1875),  ii.  36 

tlk6s  (De  Anima,  iii.  5),  has  been  de-  foil.     The  author,  who  is  best  quali- 

signated  "  Monopsychism,"  that  is,  fied  to  speak  in  the  matter  of  natural 

the  doctrine  that  the  immortal  soul  science  (cf.  above,  note  4),  complains 

(in  distinction  from  the  perishable  (p.  42)  of  "  the  systematic  manner  in 

animal  soul)  in  all  beings  that  partake  which  the  literature  of  Europe  has 

of  a  soul  is  one  and  the  same.  contrived  to  put  out  of  sight    our 

18  Comp.  Humboldt's  Kosmos,  ii.  scientific  obligations  to  the  Moham- 

258  foil.  E.  T. ;    Bonn's  ed.,  ii.  592,  medans." 


i  So  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

time  when  everything  was  regarded  as  possible  and 
nothing  as  necessary,  and,  an  unlimited  field  was  allowed 
for  the  discretion  of  beings,  which  were  ever  endowed  by 
the  imagination  with  fresh  properties. 

The  mingling  of  astronomy  with  the  fantasies  of  astro- 
logy was,  for  this  very  reason,  not  so  disadvantageous  as 
might  be  supposed.  Astrology,  as  well  as  the  essentially 
related  alchemy,  possessed  in  every  respect  the  regular 
form  of  sciences,19  and  were,  in  the  purer  shape  in  which 
they  were  practised  by  the  Arabian  and  the  Christian 
savants  of  the  middle  ages,  far  removed  from  the  measure- 
less charlatanry  which  made  its  appearance  in  the  six- 
teenth and  especially  in  the  seventeenth  century,  and 
after  austerer  science  had  rejected  these  fanciful  elements. 
Apart  from  the  fact  that  the  impulse  to  inquiry  into  im- 
portant and  unfathomable  secrets  through  that  early  con- 
nection came  to  the  aid  of  the  scientific  discoveries  in 
astronomy  and  chemistry,  in  those  deep  mysterious  studies 

19  Comp.  Liebig,  Chemische  Briefe,  experiment  is  indeed  still  active 
3  and  4  Br.  The  remark,  "  Alchemy  enough  in  our  modern  chemistry,  and 
was  never  anything  more  than  che-  the  authority  of  general  theories,  if 
mistry,"  goes,  of  course,  a  little  too  not  in  our  own  days,  at  all  events  in 
far.  As  to  the  caution  against  con-  a  period  not  very  far  behind  us,  was 
founding  it  with  the  gold-making  art  very  great.  Yet  the  real  principle  of 
of  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  cen-  modern  chemistry  is  the  empirical ; 
turies,  it  must  not  escape  us  that  this  that  of  alchemy,  despite  its  empirical 
is  only  alchemy  run  wild,  just  as  the  results,  was  the  Aristotelo-scholastic. 
nativity  delusion  of  the  same  period  The  scientific  form  of  alchemy  as  well 
is  astrology  run  wild.  The  most  im-  as  of  astrology  rests  upon  the  con- 
portant  contrast  between  the  spirit  of  sistent  carrying  out  of  certain  axioms 
modern  chemistry  and  of  medieval  as  to  the  nature  of  all  bodies  and 
alchemy  maybe  most  clearly  shown  their  mutual  relations — axioms  simple 
in  the  relation  between  theory  and  in  themselves,  but  capable  of  the 
experiment.  With  the  alchemists  utmost  varieties  in  their  combina- 
the  theory  in  all  its  main  features  tions.  As  to  the  furtherance 
stood  unshakably  firm  ;  it  was  ranked  of  the  scientific  spirit  by  means  of 
above  experiment ;  and  if  this  gave  astrology  in  its  purer  forms,  compare, 
an  unexpected  result,  this  was  forced  further,  Lecky,  Hist,  of  .Rationalism 
into  an  artificial  conformity  with  the  in  Europe,  i.  302  foil. ;  where  also,  in 
theory,  which  was  of  aprioristic  origin,  note  2  to  p.  303,  several  instances 
It  was  therefore  essentially  directed  are  given  of  the  bold  ideas  of  astro- 
to  the  production  of  this  previously  logical  freethinkers.  Corn- 
anticipated  result  rather  than  to  pare  also  Humboldt's  Kosmos,  ii.  256 
free  investigation.     This  tendency  of  folL 


MONOTHEISM  AND  MATERIALISM.  1S1 

themselves  was  implied,  as  a  necessary  presupposition,  the 
belief  in  a  regular  progress  of  events  following  eternal 
laws.  And  this  belief  has  formed  one  of  the  most  power- 
ful springs  in  the  whole  development  of  culture  from 
the  middle  ages  to  modern  times. 

"We  must  here  also  have  special  regard  to  medicine, 
which  in  our  days  has  become  in  a  certain  measure  the 
theology  of  Materialists.  This  science  was  treated  by 
the  Arabs  with  especial  zeal.20  Here  too,  whilst  attach- 
ing themselves  chiefly  to  Greek  traditions,  they  neverthe- 
less set  to  work  with  an  independent  feeling  for  exact 
observation,  and  developed  especially  the  doctrine  of  life, 
which  stands  in  so  close  a  connection  with  the  pro- 
blems of  Materialism.  In  the  case  of  man,  as  well  as  in 
those  of  the  animal  and  vegetable  worlds,  everywhere,  in 
short,  in  organic  nature,  the  fine  sense  of  the  Arabians 
traced  not  only  the  particularities  of  the  given  object,  but 
its  development,  its  generation,  and  decay — just  those 
departments,  therefore,  in  which  the  mystic  theory  of  life 
finds  its  foundation. 

Every  one  has  heard  of  the  early  rise  of  schools  of  medi- 
cine on  the  soil  of  Lower  Italy,  where  Saracens  and  the 
more  cultivated  Christian  races  came  into  such  close  con- 
tact. As  early  as  the  tenth  century,  the  monk  Constan- 
tine  taught  in  the  monastery  of  Monte  Cassino,  the  man 
whom  his  contemporaries  named  the  second  Hippokrates, 
and  who,  after  wandering  through  all  the  East,  dedicated 
his  leisure  to  the  translation  from  the  Arabic  of  medical 
works.  At  Monte  Cassino,  and  later  at  Salerno  and 
Naples,  arose  those  famous  schools  of  medicine,  to  which 
the  seekers  for  knowledge  streamed  from  the  whole 
"Western  world.21 

20  Draper,  Intell.  Develp.  of  Eu-  cales  (Paris,  1870).  Yet  their  great 
rope,  i.  384  foil.  Less  favourable  activity  in  this  department  is  shown 
judgments  of  Arabian  medicine  will  clearly  enough  even  in  these  ac- 
te found  in  Häser,  Gesch.   d.  Med.  counts. 

(2  Aufl.,  Jena,  1853),  173  foil.,  and  in  21  Comp.    Wachler,     Handb.     der 

Daremberg,  Hist,  des  Sciences  Ble'di-  Gesch.   d.  Liter.,  ii.  S.  87.     Meiners, 


x82  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

Let  us  observe,  that  it  was  upon  the  same  territory  that 
the  spirit  of  freedom  first  took  its  rise  in  Europe — a  spirit 
which  we  must  not  indeed  confound  with  complete  Mate- 
rialism, but  which  is  at  all  events  closely  related  to  it. 
For  that  strip  of  land  in  Lower  Italy,  and  especially  that 
in  Sicily,  where  to-day  blind  superstition  and  mad  fana- 
ticism are  at  their  height,  was  then  the  native  home 
of  enlightened  minds  and  the  cradle  of  the  idea  of 
toleration. 

Whether  the  Emperor  Frederick  IL,  the  highly  culti- 
vated friend  of  the  Saracens,  the  scientific  protector  of  the 
positive  sciences,  really  uttered  the  famous  expression 
about  the  three  impostors,  Moses,  Mohammed,  and  Christ,22 
this  time  and  place  at  least  produced  such  opinions.  Not 
without  reason  did  Dante  count  by  thousands  the  bold 
doubters  who,  resting  in  their  fiery  graves,  ever  preserve 
their  contempt  for  hell.  In  that  close  contact  of  the  differ- 
ent monotheistic  religions — for  at  that  time  the  Jews  were 
there  very  numerous,  and  were  in  point  of  culture  scarcely 
behind  the  Arabians — it  was  inevitable  that,  as  soon  as 
intellectual  intercourse  took  place,  the  reverence  for  specific 
forms  should  be  blunted ;  and  yet  it  is  in  the  specific  that 
the  force  of  religion  lies,  as  the  force  of  poetry  lies  in 
the  individual. 

Hist.  Vergleich    der  Sitten  u.  s.  w.  hatred  and  suspicion  upon  persons  of 

des  Mittelalters  mit  d.  unsr.  Jahrh.,  freethinking  tendency.     Later  a  hook 

ii.   413  foil.     Daremberg,   Hist,  des  on  the  Three  Impostors  became  the 

Sciences   Med.,   i.    259  foil.,   shows  subject  of  this  fabulous  story,  and  a 

that  the  importance   of  Salerno  in  long  series  of  liberal  men  (see  the  list 

medicine  is  older  than  the  influence  of  them  in  Genthe,  De  Impostura  Ee- 

of  the  Arabians,  and  that  here  pro-  ligionum,  Leipz.    1833,  p.  10  sq.,  as 

bably  ancient  traditions  had  survived,  well  as  in  Renan,  Averroes,  p.  235) 

Yet  the  school  certainly  received  a  were  accused    of    having  written  a 

great  impulse  through  the  Emperor  book  which  did  not  even  exist,  until 

Frederick  II.  at  length  the  zeal  with  which  the 

22  The  assertion  that  Averroes,  or  question  of  its  existence  was  debated 

the  Emperor  Frederick  II.,  or  some  led  certain  industrious  forgers  to  the 

other  insolent  freethinker,  spoke  of  fabrication  of  such  writings,  which, 

Mohammed,  Christ,  and  Moses  as  the ^  however,     turned    out     very   feeble 

'three impostors, 'appears  in  the  mid-  productions.    For  further  details  see 

die  ages  to  have  been  merely  unfound-  Genthe,  loc.  tit. 
ed  calumny,  and  a  means  of  drawing 


MONOTHEISM  AND  MATERIALISM.  183 

How  much  Frederick  II.  was  distrusted  is  shown  by  the 
accusation  that  he  was  in  complicity  with  the  Assassins, 
those  murdering  Jesuits  of  Mohammedanism,  who  are  said 
to  have  had  a  secret  doctrine  which  openly  and  freely  ex- 
pressed to  the  utmost  a  complete  atheism,  with  all  the 
logical  consequences  of  an  egoism  seeking  to  gratify  its  lust 
of  pleasure  and  power.  If  the  tradition  of  the  doctrines  of 
the  Assassins  were  true,  we  should  have  to  pay  this  sect 
more  respect  than  that  of  this  incidental  mention.  The 
Assassins  of  the  highest  type  would  then  represent  the 
model  of  a  Materialist  such  as  the  ignorant  and  fanatical 
partisans  of  our  day  love  to  imagine  him  in  order  to  be 
able  to  urge  a  successful  contest  with  him.  The  Assas- 
sins would  be  the  solitary  historical  example  of  a  combi- 
nation of  Materialistic  philosophy  with  cruelty,  lust  of 
power,  and  systematic  crime. 

Let  us  not  forget,  however,  that  all  our  information  as 
to  this  sect  proceeds  from  their  bitterest  foes.  It  amounts 
to  the  highest  degree  of  internal  improbability  that  from 
the  most  harmless  of  all  theories  of  the  universe  should 
have  proceeded  an  energy  so  fearful  that  it  demands 
the  utmost  strain  of  all  the  forces  of  the  soul — an  energy 
which  in  all  other  cases  we  find  only  in  union  with  reli- 
gious ideas.  They  are  also,  in  their  awful  sublimity  and 
transporting  charm,  the  one  element  in  the  world's  history 
to  which  we  can  pardon  even  the  extremest  abominations 
of  fanaticism  from  the  highest  standpoint ;  and  this  is 
rooted  deep  in  human  nature.  We  would  not  venture,  in  the 
face  of  tradition,  to  build  a  conjecture  upon  purely  inter- 
nal grounds,  that  religious  ideas  were  in  the  utmost  acti- 
vity amongst  the  Assassins,  unless  the  sources  of  our 
knowledge  of  the  Assassins  afforded  room  for  such  consi- 
deration.23     That  a  high  degree  of  freethinking  may  be 

23  Hammer,  in  his'book,  based  upon  and  deluded,  and  in  the  highest  grades 

Oriental  sources, "  The  History  of  the  finds  nothing  but  cold-blooded  calcu- 

Assassins,"  Stutt.  and  Tub.  1818,  E.  lation,   absolute    unbelief,   and    the 

T.  1835,  is  entirely  of  the  view  which  most  vicious  egotism.       Enough,   in- 

divides  the  Assassins  into  deluders  deed,  to  this  effect  can  be  found  in 


1 84  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

combined  with  the  fanatical  conception  of  a  religions  idea, 
is  proved  by  the  case  of  the  Jesuits,  with  whose  whole  being 
that  of  the  Assassins  has  a  striking  similarity. 

To  return  to  the  natural  science  of  the  Arabians,  we 
cannot,  in  conclusion,  avoid  quoting  the  bold  expression 
of  Humboldt,  that  the  Arabians  are  to  be  considered  the 
proper  founders  of  the  physical  sciences,  "  in  the  significa- 
tion of  the  term  which  we  are  now  accustomed  to  give 
it."  Experiment  and  measurement  are  the  great  instru- 
ments with  the  aid  of  which  they  made  a  path  for  progress, 
and  raised  themselves  to  a  position  which  is  to  be  placed 
between  the  achievements  of  the  brief  inductive  period  of 
Greece,  and  those  of  the  more  modern  natural  sciences. 

That  Mohammedanism  exhibits  most  of  that  furtherance 
of  natural  study  which  we  assign  to  the  Monotheistic 
principle,  falls  in  with  the  talents  of  the  Arabians  with 
their  historical  and  local  relation  to  Greek  traditions, 
without  doubt,  however,  also  with  the  circumstance  that 
the  Monotheism  of  Mohammed  was  the  most  absolute,  and 
comparatively  the  freest  from  mythical  adulterations. 
Finally,  let  us  place  among  the  new  elements  of  culture 
which  might  react  upon  a  Materialistic  theory  of  nature 

the  sources;  arid  yet  we  must  not  the  tongue,  the  pen,  or  the  sword, 

forget  that  this  is  the  usual  way  in  which  have   overturned  the  throne, 

which    victorious    orthodoxy     deals  and  shaken  the  altar  to  its  base,  am- 

with    defeated    sects.       It  is  really  bition  is  the  first  and  mightiest.     It 

here,    apart  from  the   frequent    in-  uses  crime  as  a  means,  virtue  as  a 

stances      of      malicious      misrepre-  mask.      It  respects  nothing  sacred, 

sentation,    just    as    it   is  with    our  and  yet  it  has  recourse  to  that  which 

judgment   of  so-called   '  hypocrites '  is  most  beloved,  because  the   most 

in  private  life.     Unusual  piety  is  in  secure,  that  of  all  held  most  sacred 

the  popular  eyes  either  genuine  saint-  by  man — religion.   Hence  the  history 

ship  or  a  wicked  cloak  of  all  that  is  of  religion  is  never  more  tempestuous 

vile.     For  the  psychological  subtlety  and  sanguinary  than  when  the  tiara, 

of  the  mixture  of  genuine  religious  united  to  the  diadem,  imparts  and 

emotions  with  coarse  selfishness  and  receives  an  increased  power."     But 

vicious  habits  the  ordinary  mind  has  when  was  there    ever  a  priesthood 

no  appreciation.     Hammer  sets  forth  which  was  not  ambitious  ;  and  how 

his  own !  view  of    the  psychological  can  religion  be  the  most  sacred  ele- 

explanation  of    the  Assassin  move-  ment  of  humanity  if  its  first  servants 

ment  in  the  following  words  (S.  20,  find  in  it  only  a  means  to  satisfy  their 

E.  T.  p.  13): — "Of  all  the  passions  ambition?    And  why  is  ambition  so 

which  have  ever  called  into  action  common  and  so  dangerous  a  passion, 


MONO  THEISM  AND  MA  TERIALISM.  1 85 

this  further  one,  which  is  handled  at  length  by  Humboldt 
in  the  second  volume  of  his  Kosmos — the  development  of 
the  aesthetical  contemplation  of  nature  under  the  influ- 
ence of  Monotheism  and  of  Semitic  culture. 

The  ancients  had  carried  personification  to  the  utmost 
pitch,  and  seldom  got  so  far  as  to  regard  or  to  represent 
nature  simply  as  nature.  A  man  crowned  with  reeds 
represented  the  ocean,  a  nymph  the  fountain,  a  faun  or 
Pan  the  plain  and  the  grove.  When  the  landscape  was 
robbed  of  its  gods,  then  began  the  true  observation  of 
nature,  and  joy  at  the  mere  greatness  and  beauty  of 
natural  phenomena. 

"  It  is  a  characteristic,"  says  Humboldt,*  "  of  the  poetry 
of  the  Hebrews,  that,  as  a  reflex  of  Monotheism,  it  always 
embraces  the  universe  in  its  unity,  comprising  both  terres- 
trial life  and  the  luminous  realms  of  space.  It  dwells  but 
rarely  on  the  individual  phenomenon,  preferring  the  con- 
templation of  great  masses.  ...  It  might  be  said  that  one 
single  psalm  (Ps.  civ.)  represents  the  image  of  the  whole 
kosmos :  The  Lord,  '  who  coverest  thyself  with  light  as 
with  a  garment ;  who  stretchest  out  the  heavens  like  a 

since  for  the  most  part  it  only  leads,  very  near  to  the  Assassins,  as  Hammer 

by  a  very  thorny  and  extremely  un-  represents  them  ;  while,  at  the  same 

certain  way,  to  that  life  of  pleasure  time,  they  would  scarcely  have  been 

which    is  regarded  as  the  object  of  able  to  establish  their  power  in  the 

every  selfish  man?  There  is  obviously  souls  of  believers  without  the  help  of 

acting,   often    at    least,   and   almost  genuine  fanaticism.     Hammer  often 

always  in  the  great  events  of  world-  adduces  them,    and  certainly   with 

history,  in  connection  with  ambition,  justice,  as  a  parallel  to  the  case  of 

an    ideal  which  is    partly  in  itself  the    Assassins    (S.    337,    et   passim, 

overprized,  but  partly  passes  into  a  E.T.  216) ;  but  when  he  thinks  the 

one-sided  relation  to  the  particular  regicides  of  the  French  Eevolution 

person  regarded  as  its  special  bearer,  worthy  to  have  been  satellites  of  the 

And  this  is  the  reason  why  it  is  reli-  '  old  man  of  the  mountain,'  this  shows 

gious  ambition  especially  that  is  so  how  easily  such  generalisations  may 

frequent,  for  the  cases  in  which  reli-  lead  to  a  misapprehension  of  peculiar 

gion  is   employed  by  an  ambitious  historical  phenomena.     It  is  certain 

but  not  religious  person  as  a  valuable  that  the  political  fanaticism  of  the 

means  must  be  very  rare  in  history.  French  '  men  of  terror  '  was,  on  the 

These  considerations  apply  also  whole,  very  sincere,  and  by  no  means 

to  the  Jesuits,  who  at  certain  periods  hypocritical, 
of  their  history  have  certainly  come 

*  Kosmos,  E.  T.,  Bohn's  ed.,  ii.  412,  413. 


186  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

curtain ;  who  laid  the  foundations  of  the  earth,  that  it 
should  not  be  removed  for  ever.  He  sendeth  the  springs 
into  the  valleys,  which  run  among  the  hills :  thou  hast 
set  a  bound  that  they  may  not  pass  over ;  that  they  turn 
not  again  to  cover  the  earth.  They  give  drink  to  every 
beast  of  the  field.  By  them  shall  the  fowls  of  the  air 
have  their  habitation,  which  sing  among  the  branches. 
The  trees  of  the  Lord  are  full  of  sap ;  the  cedars  of  Leba- 
non which  he  hath  planted,  where  the  birds  make  their 
nests ;  as  for  the  stork,  the  fir-trees  are  her  house.' " 

To  the  times  of  the  Christian  anchorites  belongs  a  letter 
of  Basil  the  Great,  which  in  Humboldt's  translation  affords 
a  magnificent  and  feeling  description  of  the  lonely  forest 
in  which  stood  the  hermit's  hut. 

So  the  sources  flowed  on  all  sides  to  form  the  mighty 
stream  of  modern  intellectual  life,  in  which,  under  nume- 
rous modifications,  we  have  again  to  seek  for  the  object  of 
our  inquiry,  Materialism.    ; 


(    187    ) 


CHAPTEE  IT. 

SCHOLASTICISM  AND  THE  PREDOMINANCE  OF  THE  ARISTO- 
TELIAN NOTIONS   OF  MATTER  AND  FORM. 

While  the  Arabians,  as  we  saw  in  the  previous  chapter, 
drew  their  knowledge  of  Aristotle  from  abundant  though 
much  polluted  sources,  the  Scholastic  philosophy  of  the 
West  began  by  dealing  with  extremely  scanty,  and,  at  the 
same  time,  much  corrupted  traditions.24  The  chief  portion 
of  these  materials  consisted  of  Aristotle's  work  on  the 
'  Categories/  and  an  introduction  to  it  by  Porphyry  in 
which  the  "  five  words  "  are  discussed.  These  five  words, 
which  form  the  entrance  to  the  whole  Scholastic  philo- 
sophy, are  genus,  species,  difference,  property,  and  acci- 
dent. The  ten  categories  are  substance,  quantity,  qua- 
lity, relation,  place,  time,  position,  possession,  action,  and 
passion. 

It  is  well  known  that  there  is  a  large  and  still  steadily 
increasing  body  of  literature  on  the  question  what  Aris- 
totle exactly  meant  by  his  categories,  that  is,  predications, 
or  species  of  predication.  And  this  object  would  have 
been  sooner  attained  if  men  had  only  begun  by  making 
up  their  minds  to  treat  as  such  all  that  is  crude  and  un- 

24  Prantl,    Gesch.    der   Logik   im  division  into  the  three  periods  of  the 

Abendlande,  ii.   4,   finds  in  Scholas-  incomplete,   the  complete,   and  the 

ticism  only  theology  and  logic,  but  no  again  inadequate  accommodation  of 

trace  at  all  of   '  philosophy.'     It  is  Aristotelianism  to  ecclesiastical  doc« 

quite  correct,  however,  to  say  that  trines,  is  untenable).     In  the  same 

the  different  periods  of  Scholasticism  place  will  be  found  a  complete  enu- 

can  only  be  distinguished  according  meration  of  the  Scholastic  material 

to  the  varying  influence  of  the  gradu-  which  the  middle  ages  had  at  their 

ally    increasing    Scholastic    material  disposition, 
(and  so,  for  example,  even  Ueberweg's 


1 83  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

certain  in  the  Aristotelian  notions,  instead  of  seeking 
behind  every  unintelligible  expression  for  some  mystery 
of  the  profoundest  wisdom.  It  may  now,  however,  be 
regarded  as  settled  that  the  categories  were  an  attempt 
on  the  part  of  Aristotle  to  determine  in  how  many  main 
ways  we  can  say  of  any  object  what  it  is,  and  that  he 
allowed  himself  to  be  misled  by  the  authority  of  lan- 
guage into  identifying  modes  of  predication  and  modes  of 
existence.25 

Without  entering  here  upon  the  question  how  far  we 
can  justify  {e.g.,  with  Ueberweg's  logic,  or  in  the  sense  of 
Schleiermacher  and  Trendelenburg)  the  exhibition  of 
forms  of  being  and  forms  of  thought  as  parallel,  and  the 
assumption  of  a  more  or  less  exact  correspondence  between 
them,  we  must  at  once  point  out,  what  will  be  made 
clearer  further  on,  that  the  confusion  of  subjective  and  ob- 
jective elements  in  our  conception  of  things  is  one  of  the 
most  essential  features  of  Aristotelian  thought,  and  that 
this  very  confusion,  for  the  most  part  in  its  clumsiest 
shape,  became  the  foundation  of  Scholasticism. 

Aristotle,  indeed,  did  not  introduce  this  confusion  into 
philosophy,  but,  on  the  contrary,  made  the  first  attempt  to 
distinguish  what  the  unscientific  consciousness  is  always 
inclined  to  identify.  But  Aristotle  never  got  beyond 
extremely  imperfect  attempts  to  make  this  distinction ; 
and  yet  precisely  that  element  in  his  logic  and  metaphysic, 
which  is  in  consequence  especially  perverse  and  immature, 
was  regarded  by  the  rude  nations  of  the  West  äs  the 
corner-stone  of  their  wisdom,  because  it  best  suited  their 
undeveloped  understanding.  We  find  an  interesting  ex- 
ample of  this  in  Fredegisus,   a  pupil  of  Alcuin's,  who 

25  This   latter    point  is   very  well  this  controversy,  winch  it  would  here 

shown  by  Dr.  Schuppe  in  his  work,  lead  us  too  far  to  discuss.    According 

"  The  Aristotelian  Categories,"  Ber-  to  Prantl,  Gesch.  der  Logik,  i.  192, 

lin,  1871.     Less  forcible  seems  to  me  what    actually    exists    receives    its 

the  argument  against  Bonitz,  with  re-  full  concrete  determination  by  means 

gard  to  the  meaning  of  the  expres-  of    the    elements    expressed    in    the 

sion  KaTrjyopiai  rod  ouros.   The  phrase  categories, 
employed  in  the  text  seeks  to  avoid 


SCHOLASTICISM.  189 

honoured  Charles  the  Great  with  a  theological  epistle  '  De 
Nihilo  et  Tenebris/  in  which  that  '  Nothing '  out  of  which 
God  created  the  world  is  explained  as  an  actually  existing 
entity,  and  that  for  the  extremely  simple  reason  that  every 
name  refers  to  some  corresponding  thing.26 

A  much  higher  position  was  taken  by  Scotus  Erigena, 
who  declares  f  darkness/  '  silence/  and  similar  expressions, 
to  be  notions  of  the  thinking  subject;  only,  of  course, 
Scotus  also  thinks  that  the  '  absentia '  of  a  thing  and  the 
thing  itself  are  of  the  like  kind :  so  therefore  are  light  and 
darkness,  sound  and  silence.  I  have,  then,  at  one  time  a 
notion  of  the  thing,  at  another  a  notion  of  the  absence  of 
the  thing,  in  a  precisely  similar  manner.  The  '  absence/ 
therefore,  is  also  objectively  given :  it  is  something  real. 

This  is  an  error  which  we  find  also  in  Aristotle  him- 
self. Negation  in  a  proposition  (airofyacns)  he  correctly 
explained  as  an  act  of  the  thinking  subject :  •  Privation ' 
((TTep7](TLs),  for  example,  the  blindness  of  a  creature  that 
naturally  sees,  he  regards,  however,  as  a  property  of  the 
object.  And  yet,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  we  find,  instead  of 
the  eyes  in  such  a  creature,  some  degenerate  form  which 
has  nevertheless  only  positive  qualities  :  we  find,  it  may  be, 
that  the  creature  moves  only  with  much  groping  and  diffi- 
culty, but  in  the  motions  themselves  everything  is  in  its 
way  fixed  and  positive.  It  is  only  our  comparison  of  this 
creature  with  others  that,  on  the  ground  of  our  experience, 
we  call  normal,  that  gives  us  the  notion  of  blindness. 
Sight  is  wanting  only  in  our  -conception.  The  thing, 
regarded  in  itself,  is  as  it  is,  without  any  reference  to  see- 
ing or  not  seeinsr. 

It  is  easy  to  perceive  that  serious  blunders  like  this  are 
to  be  found  also  in  the  Aristotelian  enumeration  of  the 
categories;  most  conspicuously  in  the  category  of  rela- 
tion (7T/30?  tl),  as,  e.g.,  '  double/  '  half/  '  greater/  where 
no  one  will  seriously  maintain  that  such  expressions  can 

26  Prantl,  Gesch.  der  Logik,  ii.  17  foil.,  esp.  Anm.  75. 


190  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

be  applied  to  things  except  in  so  far  as  they  may  be  com- 
pared by  the  thinking  subject. 

Much  more  important,  however,  became  the  vagueness 
as  to  the  relation  of  word  and  thing  in  dealing  with  the 
notion  of  substance  and  the  species. 

We  have  seen  how,  on  the  threshold  of  all  philosophy, 
appear  the  c  five  words '  of  Porphyry — a  selection  from 
the  logical  writings  of  Aristotle,  intended  to  supply  to 
the  student,  in  a  convenient  form,  what  he  chiefly  needs 
at  starting.  At  the  head  of  these  expositions  stand  those 
of  '  genus '  and  c  species ; '  and  at  the  very  introduction  of 
this  introduction  stand  the  eventful  words  which  probably 
aroused  .the  great  medieval  controversy  about  universale. 
Porphyry  mentions  the  great  question  whether  the  genera 
and  species  have  an  independent  existence,  or  whether 
they  are  merely  in  the  mind ;  whether  they  are  corporeal 
or  incorporeal  substances ;  whether  they  are  separate  from 
sensible  objects,  or  exist  only  in  and  through  them  ?  The 
decision  of  the  problem  so  solemnly  propounded  is  post- 
poned, because  it  is  one  of  the  highest  problems.  Yet  we 
see  enough  to  perceive  that  the  position  of  the  '  five 
words '  at  the  entrance  to  philosophy  is  quite  in  accord- 
ance with  the  speculative  importance  of  the  notions  of 
genus  and  species,  and  the  expression  betrays  clearly 
enough  the  Platonic  sympathies  of  the  writer,  although 
he  suspends  his  judgment. 

The  Platonic  view  of  the  notions  of  genus  and  species 
(comp.  p.  74  ff.)  was,  therefore,  in  spite  of  all  inclination 
towards  Aristotle,  the  prevailing  view  of  earlier  medieval 
times.  The  Peripatetic  school  had  received  a  Platonic 
portico,  and  the  young  disciple  on  his  entrance  into  the 
halls  of  philosophy  was  at  once  greeted  with  a  Platonic 
consecration ;  perhaps,  at  the  same  time,  with  an  inten- 
tional counterbalance  to  a  dangerous  feature  of  the  Aris- 
totelian categories.  For  in  the  discussion  of  substance 
{ova la),  he  declares  that,  in  the  primary  and  strict  sense, 
the  concrete  particulars,  such  as  this  particular  man,  this 


SCHOLASTICISM.  191 

horse  standing  here,  are  substances.  This  is,  of  course, 
scarcely  in  accordance  with  the  Platonic  contempt  for  the 
concrete,  and  we  must  not  be  surprised  at  the  rejection  of 
this  doctrine  by  Scotus  Erigena.  Aristotle  calls  the  spe- 
cies substances  only  of  the  second  order,  and  it  is  only  by 
the  mediation  of  the  species  that  the  genus  also  has  a  cer- 
tain substantiality.  Here  then  was  opened,  at  the  very 
outset  of  philosophical  studies,  a  wide  source  of  school 
controversy,  although  on  the  whole  the  Platonic  view 
(Eealism,  because  the  universals  are  regarded  as  'res') 
remained,  until  nearly  the  close  of  the  middle  ages,  the 
prevailing,  and,  at  the  same  time,  the  orthodox  doctrine. 
It  is,  therefore,  the  most  absolute  antithesis  to  Materialism 
produced  by  all  antiquity  that  controls  from  the  first  the 
philosophical  development  of  the  middle  ages ;  and  even 
at  the  dawnings  of  Nominalism  there  appeared  for  many 
centuries  scarcely  any  tendency  to  start  from  the  concrete 
phenomena  which  could  in  any  degree  remind  us  of  Mate- 
rialism. The  whole  era  was  swayed  by  the  name,  by  the 
thought-thing,  and  by  an  utter  confusion  as  to  the  mean- 
ing of  sensible  phenomena,  which  passed  like  dream-pic- 
tures through  the  miracle-loving  brain  of  philosophising 
priests. 

Things  changed,  however,  more  and  more  after  the  in- 
fluence of  Arabian  and  Jewish  philosophers  had  become 
observable,  from  the  middle  of  the  twelfth  century,  and 
gradually  a  fuller  knowledge  of  Aristotle  had  been  spread 
by  means  of  translations,  first  from  the  Arabic,  and  later 
also  from  the  Greek  originals  preserved  at  Byzantium. 
But,  simultaneously,  the  principles  of  the  Aristotelian 
metaphysic  became  only  more  and  more  fully  and  deeply 
rooted. 

These  principles  are,  however,  of  importance  for  us,  not 
only  because  of  the  negative  part  which  they  play  in  the 
history  of  Materialism,  but  also  as  indispensable  contribu- 
tions to  the  criticism  of  Materialism  ;  not  indeed  as  though 
we  must  still  measure  and  try  the  Materialism  of  to-day  by 


192  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

them,  but  because  only  by  their  assistance  can  we  thor- 
oughly overcome  the  misunderstandings  which  constantly 
threaten  us  in  the  discussion  of  this  subject.  One  portion 
of  the  question  here  concerned  has  been  already  decided, 
what  is  right  and  what  is  wrong  in  Materialism  being 
already  shewn,  as  soon  as  the  notions  with  which  we  have 
here  constantly  to  ..deal  are  made  clear ;  and  further,  it  is 
essential  that  we  should  take  them  at  their  immediate 
source,  and  observe  the  gradual  modifications  they  undergo. 

Aristotle  is  the  creator  of  metaphysic,  which,  as  every- 
body knows,  is  indebted  for  its  unmeaning  name  merely 
to  the  position  of  these  books  in  the  series  of  Aristotle's 
writings.  The  object  of  this  science  is  the  investigation 
of  the  principles  common  to  all  existence,  and  Aristotle 
therefore  calls  it  the  '  first  philosophy ' — that  is,  the  gene- 
ral philosophy,  which  has  not  yet  devoted  itself  to  a  spe- 
cial branch.  The  idea  of  the  necessity  of  such  a  philo- 
sophy was  correct  enough,  but  the  solution  of  the  problem 
could  not  even  be  approached  until  it  was  recognised  that 
the  universal  is  above  all  that  which  lies  in  the  nature  of 
our  mind,  and  through  which  it  is  that  we  receive  all 
knowledge.  The  failure  to  separate  the  subject  and  the 
object,  the  phenomenon  and  the  thing-in-itself,  is  here 
therefore  especially  noticeable,  as,  owing  to  this  failure, 
the  Aristotelian  philosophy  becomes  an  inexhaustible 
source  of  self-delusion.  And  the  middle  ages  were  espe- 
cially inclined  eagerly  to  embrace  the  very  worst  delusions 
of  this  kind ;  and  these  are  at  the  same  time  of  special 
importance  for  our  subject:  they  lie  in  the  notions  of 
matter  and  potentiality,  as  related  to  form  and  actuality. 

Aristotle  mentions  four  universal  principles  of  all  exist- 
ence :  form  (or  essence),  matter  (v\rj,  materia,  as  it  was 
rendered  by  the  Latin  translators),  the  efficient  cause,  and 
the  end.2?  We  are  here  chiefly  concerned  with  the  first 
two. 

27  Ueberweg,  Hist,  of  Phil.,  4  references  there  given  are  quite  enough 
Aufl.,  i.  172-175,  E.  T.  i.  157-159.  The     for  our  purpose,  as  we  are  not  here 


SCHOLASTICISM.  193 

The  notion  of  matter  is,  in  the  first  place,  entirely 
different  from  what  we  nowadays  understand  by  'matter.' 
While  our  thought  retains  in  so  many  departments  the 
stamp  of  Aristotelian  conceptions,  on  this  point,  through 
the  influence  of  natural  science,  a  Materialistic  element 
has  forced  itself  into  our  modes  of  thinking.  With  or 
without  Atomism,  we  conceive  of  matter  as  a  corporeal 
thing  distributed  universally,  save  where  there  is  a  vacuum, 
and  of  an  essentially  uniform  nature,  although  subject  to 
certain  modifications. 

In  Aristotle  the  notion  of  matter  is  relative ;  it  is  matter 
in  relation  to  that  which  is  to  result  from  it  through  the 
accession  of  form.  Without  form  the  thing  cannot  be 
what  it  is ;  through  form  the  thing  becomes  what  it  is — 
reality;  whilst  previously  matter  had  only  supplied  the 
potentiality  of  the  thing.  Matter  has,  nevertheless,  to 
begin  with  a  form  of  its  own,  though  of  but  a  low  order, 
and  one  quite  indifferent  in  relation  to  the  thing  which  is  to 
result. 

The  bronze  of  a  statue, for  example,  is  the  matter;  the  idea 
of  the  work  is  the  form ;  and  from  the  union  of  the  two 
results  the  actual  statue.  Yet  the  bronze  was  not  the 
matter  in  the  sense  of  this  particular  piece  of  metal  (for 
as  such  it  had  a  form  which  had  nothing  to  do  with  the 
statue),  but  as  bronze  in  general,  i.e.,  as  something  having 
no  reality  in  itself,  but  which  '  can '  only  become  something. 
And  so  matter  also  is  only  potentially  existing  (Bvvdfiec 
ov),  form  only  in  reality  or  in  actuality  (ivepyela  ov  or 
eVreXe^e/a  ov).  The  passing  of  the  possible  into  actuality 
is  Becoming,  and  this  is,  therefore,  the  moulding  of  matter 
by  form. 

As  we  see,  there  is  here  no  question  whatever  of  an  in- 
dependent corporeal  substrate  of  all  things.  The  concrete, 
phenomenal  thing  itself,  as  it  here  or  there  exists — e.g.,  a 

concerned  with  a  new  view  of  the     nised  Aristotelian  notions  and  doc- 
Aristotelian  metaphysic,  but  merely     trines. 
with  a  critical  exposition  of  recog- 

VOL.  I.  N 


194  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

log  of  wood  lying  yonder — is  at  one  time  e  substance/  that 
is,  an  actualised  thing  consisting  of  form  and  matter,  at 
another  time  is  merely  matter.  The  log  is  'substance/ 
a  complete  thing,  as  a  log  having  received  from  nature 
the  form  of  a  log ;  but  it  is  '  matter '  with  regard  to  the 
rafter,  or  the  carving  which  is  to  be  made  from  it.  We 
have  only  to  add  the  qualifying  words,  "  in  so  far  as  we 
regard  it  as  matter  "  (i.e.,  material).  Then  everything  would 
be  clear,  but  the  conception  would  no  longer  be  strictly 
Aristotelian,  for  Aristotle,  in  fact,  transfers  to  the  things 
themselves  these  relations  to  our  thought. 

Besides  matter  and  form,  Aristotle  further  regards  effi- 
cient causes  and  ends  as  grounds  of  all  existence,  the  last 
of  which,  in  the  nature  of  things,  coincides  with  the  form. 
As  the  form  is  the  end  of  the  statue,  so  also  Aristotle  re- 
gards in  nature  the  form  that  realises  itself  in  matter  as 
the  end,  or  the  final  cause,  in  which  Becoming  finds  its 
natural  consummation. 

But  while  this  manner  of  regarding  things  is  consistent 
enough  in  its  own  way,  it  was  completely  lost  from  view 
that  the  related  notions  are  throughout  of  such  a  kind  that 
they  cannot,  without  producing  error,  be  assumed  as  actually 
recognised  properties  of  the  objective  world,  though  they 
may  supply  a  well-articulated  system  from  a  subjective 
standpoint.  And  it  is  therefore  of  the  more  importance 
that  we  should  make  this  clear,  because  only  a  very  few 
of  the  keenest  thinkers,  such  as  Leibniz,  Kant,  and  Her- 
bart  have  entirely  avoided  this  rock,  simple  as  the  matter 
really  is. 

The  underlying  error  consists  in  this,  that  the  notion  of 
the  possible,  of  the  Swafiei  ov,  which  is  in  its  nature  a 
purely  subjective  assumption,  is  transferred  to  things. 

It  is  undeniable  that  matter  and  form  are  but  two  sides 
from  which  we  may  contemplate  the  essence  of  things ;  and 
even  Aristotle  was  cautious  enough  not  to  say  that  the 
essence  was  compounded  from  these  two,  as  if  they  were 
separable  parts ;  but  if  we  refer  the  becoming  and  actually 


SCHOLASTICISM.  195 

happening  to  the  interpenetration  of  matter  and  form,  of 
potentiality  and  actuality,  the  error  we  have  just  avoided 
meets  us  at  this  point  with  redoubled  force. 

It  must  much  rather  be  indisputably  concluded  that  if 
there  is  no  formless  matter,  even  though  this  can  be  only 
assumed  and  not  imagined,  then  there  exists  also  no 
potentiality  in  things.  The  Swa/xec  6v,  the  potentially 
existing,  is,  as  soon  as  we  leave  the  sphere  of  fiction,  a 
pure  nonentity,  no  longer  to  be  found.  In  external  nature 
there  is  only  actuality  and  no  potentiality. 

Aristotle  regards,  for  example,  the  general  who  has  won 
a  battle  as  an  actual  conqueror.  This  actual  conqueror, 
however,  was  a  conqueror  before  the  battle,  yet  only 
SwdfieL,  potentia,  potentially.  So  much  we  may  readily 
concede,  that  there  lay  even  before  the  battle  in  his  per- 
son, in  the  strength  and  disposition  of  his  army,  and  so 
on,  conditions  which  brought  about  his  victory —  his  vic- 
tory was  possible ;  but  this  whole  employment  of  the 
notion  of  potentiality  rests  upon  this,  that  we  mortals  can 
never  see  more  than  a  portion  of  the  causes  in  action :  if 
we  could  view  all,  we  should  find  out  that  the  victory 
was  not '  potential/  but  that  it  was  '  necessary  ; '  since  the 
incidental  and  contributory  circumstances  stand  also  in  a 
fixed  causal  connection,  which  is  so  ordered  that  a  parti- 
cular consequence  will  result,  and  no  other. 

It  might  be  objected  that  this  is  quite  in  harmony  with 
the  Aristotelian  assumptions;  for  the  general  who  is 
necessarily  victorious  is  in  a  certain  way  already  the 
conqueror,  and  still  he  is  not  yet  actually  so,  but  only 
'  potential 

Here  we  should  have  an  admirable  example  of  the  con- 
fusion of  notions  and  of  objects.  Whether  I  call  the 
general  conqueror  or  not,  he  is  what  he  is — a  real  person, 
standing  at  a  certain  point  of  time  in  the  course  of  inner 
and  outer  properties  and  events.  The  circumstances  that 
have  not  yet  come  into  play  have  for  him  as  yet  no 
existence  at  all ;  he  has  only  a  certain  plan  in  his  concep- 


196 


PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 


tions,  a  certain  strength  in  his  arm  and  voice,  certain 
moral  relations  to  his  army,  certain  feelings  of  hope  and 
apprehension ;  he  is,  in  short,  conditioned  on  every  hand. 
That  from  these  conditions,  in  connection  with  other  con- 
ditions on  the  side  of  his  opponent,  of  the  gronnd,  of  the 
armies,  of  the  weather,  his  victory  will  result,  is  a  relation 
which,  if  conceived  by  onr  thought,  produces  the  notion  of 
the  possibility,  or  even  of  the  necessity,  of  a  result,  without 
thereby  taking  anything  from  him  or  adding  anything  to 
him.  No  addition  is  necessary  to  this  notional  possibility 
in  order  to  turn  it  into  actuality,  except  in  our  thought. 

"  A  hundred  actual  thalers,"  says  Kant,  "  contain  no 
whit  more  than  a  hundred  potential  thalers."  28 


28  Kant's*  Kritik  d.  v.  Vernunft, 
Elementar!,  II.  Thl.  2  Abth.  2  Buch. 
Haupst.  4  Abschn.,  E.  T.  Meiklejohn, 
p.  368,  ed.  Hartenstein,  409. 

Kant  is  there  discussing  the  impos- 
sibility of  an  ontological  proof  of  the 
existence  of  God,  and  shows  that 
'  existence '  is  not  a  real  predicate 
at  all,  that  is,  not  a  "conception  of 
something  which  is  added  to  the 
conception  of  some  other  thing." 
And  so,  therefore,  the  real  con- 
tains no  more  (in  its  conception) 
than  the  merely  possible,  and  rea- 
lity is  the  existence  of  the  same 
thing  as  an  object,  of  which  the 
(merely  logical)  possibility  gave  me 
only  the  conception.  In  order  to 
explain  this  relation  Kant  employs 
the  following  example  :  "  A  hundred 
real  dollars  contain  no  more  than  a 
hundred  possible  dollars.  For,  as  the 
latter  indicate  the  conception,  and 
the  former  the  object,  on  the  suppo- 
sition that  the  content  of  the  former 
was  greater  than  that  of  the  latter, 
my  conception  would  not  be  an  ex- 
pression of  the  whole  object,  and 
would  consequently  be  an  inadequate 
conception  of  it.  In  another  sense, 
however,  it  may  be  said  that  there 
is  more  in  a  hundred  real  dollars 
than  in  a  hundred  possible  dollars — 


that  is,  in  the  mere  conception  of 
them.  For  the  real  object — the  dol- 
lars— is  not  analytically  contained  in 
my  conception,  but  forms  a  syntheti- 
cal addition  to  my  conception  (which 
is  merely  a  determination  of  my 
mental  state),  although  this  objec- 
tive reality  —  this  existence  —  apart 
from  my  conception,  does  not  in  the 
least  degree  increase  the  aforesaid 
hundred  dollars."  The  illustration 
of  a  treasury -bill,  added  in  the  text, 
attempts  to  make  the  matter  still 
clearer,  since,  in  addition  to  the 
merely  logical  possibility  (the  idea  of 
a  hundred  dollars)  an  additional 
ground  of  probability  is  brought  into 
play,  which  rests  upon  a  partial  view 
of  the  conditions  influencing  the 
actual  payment  of  a  hundred  dollars. 
These  conditions  (partially  recog- 
nised) are  what  Ueberweg  (apropos 
of  Trendelenburg  ;  comp.  Ueber- 
weg's  Logik,  3  Aufl.  S.  167,  §  69) 
calls  "real  or  objective  possibility." 
The  appearance  of  a  problematical 
relation  is  due  to  this  fact,  that  we 
transfer  to  the  object  the  relation 
which  is  conceived  by  our  mind 
between  the  mere  actual  presence 
of  the  conditions,  and  the  later, 
also  actual  existence  of  the  condi- 
ditioned. 


SCHOLASTICISM.  197 

This  proposition  would  appear  to  a  financier  doubtful, 
if  not  absurd.  A  few  years  after  Kant's  death  (July  1 808), 
a  treasury-bill  for  a  hundred  thalers  sold  in  Königsberg 
for  scarcely  twenty-five.29  So  that  in  the  birthplace  of 
the  great  philosopher,  a  hundred  actual  thalers  were  worth 
more  than  four  hundred  merely  potential  thalers;  and 
this  might  be  regarded  as  a  brilliant  justification  of  Aris- 
totle and  all  the  Scholastics  down  to  Wolff  and  Baum- 
garten.  The  treasury-bill  which  is  to  be  obtained  for 
twenty-five  actual  thalers  represents  a  hundred  potential 
thalers.  If  we  look  a  little  more  closely,  we  see,  of  course, 
that  what  we  really  get  for  twenty-five  thalers  is  the  very 
doubtful  prospect  of  the  payment  at  some  future  time 
of  the  hundred  thalers ;  and  this  is  the  actual  value  of 
the  prospect  in  question,  and  therefore,  of  course,  the 
actual  value  of  the  bill,  which  carries  the  chance  with  it. 
But  the  thing  of  which  we  possess  the  chance  is,  as 
before,  the  full  hundred  thalers  of  the  nominal  value. 
This  nominal  value  represents  the  amount  of  that  which  is 
regarded  as  potentially  to  be  obtained,  with  a  probability, 
however,  of  only  one-fourth  in  its  favour.  The  actual 
value  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  amount  of  the  potential 
sum ;  and  so  far  Kant  was  entirely  right. 

Kant,  however,  meant  by  this  illustration  something 
more  than  this,  and  here  again  he  was  right.  For  when  our 
financier,  after  the  13th  January  18 16,  had  his  hundred 
thalers  paid  to  him  in  full,  nothing  was  added  to  the 
potentiality,  so  that  it  became  an  actuality.  The  poten- 
tiality, as  the  merely  conceived  in  thought,  can  never  pass 
into  actuality,  but  actuality  arises  out  of  preceding  actual 
circumstances  by  which  it  is  entirely  conditioned.  Besides 
the  restoration  of  the  national  credit  and  other  circum- 
stances, there  is  also  necessary  the  presentation  of  an 
actual  treasury-bill — not  of  a  '  potential '  hundred  thalers  ; 
for  these  exist  only  in  the  brain  of  the  speculator,  who 
represents  to  himself  one  portion  of  the  circumstances 


19S  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

•which  influence  the  conversion  of  the  paper  notes  into 
silver,  and  makes  this  the  subject  of  his  hopes,  and  his 
fears,  and  his  thoughts. 

Perhaps  we  shall  be  pardoned  the  length  of  these  re- 
marks, if  we  again  very  briefly  point  out  that  the  notion 
of  potentiality  is  the  source  of  most  of  the  worst  metaphy- 
sical fallacies.  Aristotle,  of  course,  cannot  be  blamed  for 
this,  since  the  primary  error  is  grounded  deep  in  our 
organisation ;  and  this  must  inevitably  be  doubly  fatal  in 
a  system  which,  more  than  any  previous  one,  based  meta- 
physics upon  dialectical  discussion ;  and  the  high  esteem 
which  Aristotle  gained  through  this  very  procedure,  in 
other  respects  so  fertile,  appeared  as  though  it  would  per- 
petuate this  misfortune. 

After  Aristotle,  then,  had  so  unhappily  explained  be- 
coming and  motion  generally,  as  results  of  purely  poten- 
tial matter,  and  the  actualising  of  form,  it  was  a  logical 
consequence  that  the  form  or  the  end  of  things  must  be 
the  true  source  of  motion;  and  as  the  soul  moves  the 
body,  so  is  God  as  Form  and  End  of  the  world  the  first 
cause  of  all  motion.  It  could  not  be  expected  that  Aris- 
totle should  regard  matter  as  moved  in  itself,  since  all 
that  he  ever  allows  to  it  is  the  negative  determination, 
the  potentiality  of  becoming  anything  or  everything. 

The  same  false  conception  of  potentiality  which  exer- 
cises this  corrupting  influence  on  the  notion  of  matter, 
meets  us  once  more  in  the  relation  of  the  permanent  thing 
to  its  changing  circumstances,  or,  to  keep  within  the  voca- 
bulary of  the  system,  in  the  relation  between  substance 
and  accident.  The  substance  is  the  self-existent  essence 
of  the  thing,  the  accident  a  casual  property  which  is 
only  '  potentially '  in  the  substance.  There  is  really,  how- 
ever,  nothing  casual  in  things,  although,  out  of  ignorance 
of  the  causes,  some  of  them  I  am  obliged  to  describe  as 
casual. 

Just  as  little  can  the  potentiality  of  any  property  or 
attribute  be  latent  in  a  thing.     This  is  only  a  creature  of 


SCHOLASTICISM.  199 

our  combining  imagination.  Nor,  again,  can  any  property 
be  c  potentially '  in  things,  since  this  is  not  a  form  of 
existence  but  a  form  of  thought.  The  seed-corn  is  not 
a  potential  halm,  but  a  seed-corn.  If  a  cloth  is  wet,  this 
wetness  for  the  moment  in  which  it  is,  is  as  much  there 
as  a  necessary  result  of  general  laws,  as  any  other  property 
of  the  cloth ;  and  if  it  can  be  thought  of  previously  as 
potential,  yet  the  cloth  which  I  shall  later  dip  in  water 
has  absolutely  no  other  qualities  than  another  cloth  which 
is  to  be  subjected  to  no  such  experiment. 

The  separation  in  thought  of  substance  and  accident 
is  indeed  a  convenient,  perhaps  an  indispensable,  assist- 
ance to  us  in  taking  our  bearings,  but  as  soon  as  we  begin 
to  go  more  deeply  into  the  essence  of  things,  we  must 
admit  that  the  distinction  between  substance  and  accident 
likewise  disappears.  A  thing  has,  it  is  true,  certain  quali- 
ties which  stand  in  a  more  durable  relation  to  it  than 
others ;  but  none  is  absolutely  permanent,  and  at  bottom 
all  are  in  constant  change.  If  we  once  conceive,  then,  of 
substance  as  a  single  object,  not  as  a  species,  nor  as  a  uni- 
versal corporeal  substrate,  we  must,  in  order  to  determine 
fully  its  form,  limit  the  consideration  of  it  to  a  certain 
period  of  time,  and  within  this  regard  all  the  properties 
in  their  mutual  interpenetration  as  the  substantial  form, 
and  this  again  as  the  only  essence  of  the  thing. 

If  we  speak,  on  the  other  hand,  with  Aristotle,  of  the 
notional  {to  tl  rjv  ehat)  in  things  as  their  true  substance, 
we  find  ourselves  already  in  the  field  of  abstraction;  for  the 
logical  abstracting  process  is  eventually  the  same,  whether 
we  frame  a  generic  notion  from  our  experience  of  a  dozen 
cats,  or  whether  we  follow  our  own  domestic  cat  through 
its  life  history,  through  all  its  changes  and  vicissitudes, 
regarding  it  as  one  and  the  same  being.  Only  in  the 
sphere  of  abstraction  has  the  opposition  of  substance  and 
accident  its  importance.  For  taking  our  bearings  for  the 
practical  treatment  of  things,  we  shall  never  be  able  to 
dispense  entirely  with  the  antithesis  worked  out  by  Aris- 


200  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

totle  with  masterly  acuteness  of  the  potential  and  the 
actual,  of  form  and  matter,  of  substance  and  accident.  It 
is  equally  certain,  however,  that  in  positive  inquiry  we  are 
always  led  astray  by  these  notions,  as  soon  as  we  lose  sight 
of  their  subjective  nature  and  relative  validity,  and  of  their 
consequent  inability  to  help  us  to  see  further  into  the 
objective  essence  of  things. 

The  standpoint  of  ordinary  empirical  thought,  which  in 
the  main  remains  that  of  modern  Materialism,  is  by  no 
means  free  from  these  defects  of  the  Aristotelian  system, 
since  it  maintains  more  firmly  and  obstinately,  if  possible, 
the  false  antithesis,  though  in  an  opposite  direction.  We 
ascribe  the  true  being  to  stuff  or  matter,  which,  however, 
only  represents  a  notion  reached  by  abstraction :  we  are 
inclined  to  regard  the  matter  of  things  as  their  substance, 
and  the  form  as  a  mere  accident.  The  block  out  of  which 
a  statue  is  to  come  every  one  holds  to  be  real ;  the  form 
which  it  is  to  receive  we  look  upon  as  merely  potential. 
Nevertheless,  it  is  easy  to  see  that  this  is  only  true  in  so  far 
as  the  block  has  a  form,  which  I  leave  out  of  consideration, 
namely,  the  form  in  which  it  came  from  the  quarry.  The 
block  as  material  of  the  statue,  on  the  other  hand,  is  only 
so  in  thought,  whilst  the  idea  of  the  statue,  so  far  as  it  is 
conceived  by  the  artist,  at  least  as  a  conception,  possesses 
a  kind  of  actuality.  So  far,  then,  Aristotle  was  right  as 
against  the  ordinary  empiricism.  His  mistake  lies  only 
in  this,  that  he  transfers  what  is  actually  the  idea  of  a 
thinking  being  to  a  foreign  object,  which  is  the  subject  of 
this  being's  thought,  as  a  potentially  present  property  of 
the  same. 

The  Aristotelian  definitions  of  substance,  form,  matter, 
and  so  on,  prevailed  so  long  as  they  were  understood,  so 
long  as  Scholasticism  reigned  alone — that  is,  in  our  own 
country  of  Germany,  until  after  the  time  of  Cartesius. 

If,  however,  Aristotle  had  already  treated  matter  some- 
what depreciatingly,  and  in  particular  had  denied  to  it  any 
motion  of  its  own,  this  depreciation  of  matter  must  have 


SCHOLASTICISM.  201 

been  increased  through  the  influence  of  Christianity,  which 
we  have  sketched  in  the  previous  chapter.  Men  did  not 
reflect  that  everything  by  which  matter  can  be  anything 
determinate — for  example,  evil  or  sinful — must  be  form 
in  the  Aristotelian  sense ;  the  system  had  not  been  so  far 
modified  that  matter  was  distinguished  as  the  bad  or  evil 
principle,  but  they  were  still  fond  of  representing  it  as 
absolutely  passive ;  and  this  they  conceived  to  be  an  im- 
perfection, without  reflecting  that  the  perfection  of  every 
being  consists  in  its  answering  to  its  end,  and  that,  therefore, 
if  we  are  childish  enough  to  play-  the  censor  over  the  last 
Grounds  of  all  existence,  it  must  much  rather  redound  to 
the  praise  of  matter,  that  it  keeps  so  beautifully  quiet. 
When,  later,  Wolff  endowed  matter  with  the  vis  inertice, 
and  the  physicists  empirically  transferred  the  properties 
of  weight  and  impenetrability  to  matter,  while  these  must 
in  themselves  be  forms,  the  melancholy  picture  was  soon 
complete. 

"  Matter  is  a  dark,  inert,  rigid,  and  absolutely  passive 
substance." 

"  And  this  substance  is  to  think  ? "  asked  the  one  party, 
while  the  others  complain  that  there  ought  to  be  immaterial 
substances,  because  meanwhile  the  notion  of  substance 
in  colloquial  usage  has  become  identical  with  that  of 
matter. 

Modern  Materialism  has,  of  course,  not  been  without 
influence  on  these  modifications  of  the  notions,  although 
the  reaction  of  the  Aristotelian  notions  and  the  authority 
of  religion  were  strong  enough  to  turn  the  effects  of  this 
influence  into  quite  another  course.  The  two  men  who 
have  exercised  the  greatest  influence  in  the  modelling  of 
the  notion  of  matter  are  certainly  Descartes  and  Newton. 
Both  occupy  in  the  main  the  ground  of  the  Atomism 
which  Gassendi  had  revived  (although  Descartes,  by  his 
denial  of  vacuum,  seeks  as  far  as  possible  to  conceal  this) ; 
yet  in  this  both  are  distinguished  from  Demokritos  and 
Epikuros,  that  they  separate   motion  from  matter,  and 


202 


PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 


make  it  arise  through  the  will  of  God,  who  first  creates 
matter,  and  then,  "by  an  act  which  may,  at  least  in  thought, 
be  regarded  as  separate,  brings  motion  into  it. 

For  the  rest,  however,  the  Aristotelian  view  lingered 
longest,  and  with,  a  comparative  exclusiveness  in  that 
particular  department  for  which  the  great  laws  of  Material- 
ism have  an  especially  critical  importance — in  the  sphere 
of  psychology.  The  foundation  of  this  theory  of  the  soul 
rests  upon  the  delusion  of  potentiality  and  actuality.  For 
Aristotle  defines  the  soul  as  the  actualisation  of  an 
organic  body  possessing  a  '  potential '  life.30  This  expres- 
sion is  in  itself  neither  so  puzzling  nor  so  ambiguous  as 
many  have  found  it.  '  Actualisation,'  or  l  consummation,' 
is  rendered  by  ivreke^eia,  and  it  is  difficult  to  say  how 
much  has  been  imported  into  this  expression.  In  Aristotle 
it  indicates  the  well-known  antithesis  to  Sumz/m?;  what 
further   force   it   may    have   has   crept  into   it.31      The 


30  The  full  definition  (De  Anima,  ii. 
i)  runs :    ipv%ri    icrriv    hvTekixeia    V 

7rp<JüT7]  aWfJLCLTOS  cpvaiKov   fafjV   ^OPTOS 

SvvdfieL  tolovtov  de  o  av  fj  opyavLKov. 
Comp.  V.  Kirchmann's  translation 
(Phil.Bibl.Band.43).  The  commentary- 
then  is,  on  the  whole,  excellent;  but 
when  v.  Kirchmann  says  (S.  58),  that 
this  definition  is  no  definition  at  all  of 
the  soul  in  the  modern  sense,  but  only 
a  definition  of  the  organic  force  which 
is  common  to  man  with  animals  and 
plants,  this  cannot  be  right,  for  Aris- 
totle has  already  premised  the  expla- 
nation that  he  proposes  to  give  a 
universal  idea  of  the  soul,  and  ac- 
cordingly one  which  embraces  all 
kinds  of  souls.  This  cannot  mean, 
however,  as  Kirchmann  supposes, 
the  idea  of  a  kind  of  soul  which  is 
common  to  all  animated  beings,  but, 
in  addition  to  which,  a  portion  of 
these  beings  may  have  still  another 
kind  of  soul,  and  one  not  included  in 
the  definition.  The  definition  must 
rather  embrace  the  whole  human  soul, 
including  its  higher  faculties,  just  as 


much  as,  e.g.,  the  plant-soul,  and 
this  in  fact  it  does.  For  according 
to  Aristotle,  the  human  body  as  an 
organism  is  adapted  for  a  rational 
soul ;  and  this  soul,  therefore,  con- 
stitutes its  actualisation,  including 
within  itself  the  lower  faculties. 

31  Fortlage,  System  der  Psycho- 
logie, 1855,  i.  S.  24,  says  :  "Die  nega- 
tive Grösse  eines  Immateriellen,  von 
welcher  die  Sphäre  des  äusseren  Sin- 
nes beherrscht  sei,  wurde  von  Aris- 
totles  durch  den  räthselhaften  und 
vieldeutigen,  darum  tiefsinnig  schei- 
nenden Ausdruck  der  ivreX  e%eta  fixirt, 
und  gleichsam  aus  nichts  zu  etwas 
gemacht. "  Here  the  latter  statement  is 
undoubtedly  true  that  Aristotle,  in  the 
doctrine  of  the  entelechy,  has  made  an 
apparent  entity  out  of  nothing.  But 
this  applies  not  merely  to  the  idea  of 
the  soul,  but  to  the  whole  application  of 
the  word  eVreX^xeta,  and,  moreover,  to 
the  entire  Aristotelian  doctrine  of 
potentiality  and  actuality.  In  things 
there  is  from  first  to  last  nothing  but 
complete  actuality.    Each  thing,  con- 


SCHOLASTICISM.  203 

organic  body  possesses  life  only  potentially.  The  actual- 
isation  of  this  potentiality  comes  from  without,  and 
that  is  all.  The  internal  untruth  of  the  whole  theory  is 
even  more  obvious  than  in  the  relation  of  form  and  matter, 
although  the  antithesis  of  the  two  pairs  of  notions  is 
exactly  parallel.  That  the  organic  body  as  the  mere  po- 
tentiality of  a  human  being  is  in  no  way  conceivable  with- 
out human  form,  which,  again,  on  its  side,  presupposes  the 
active  realisation  of  a  human  being  in  plastic  material,  the 
soul,  that  is,  is  a  sunken  rock  in  the  orthodox  Aristotelian 
view,  which,  it  cannot  be  doubted,  essentially  contributed 
to  the  extensive  development  of  Stratonism.  Aristotle,  in 
order  to  avoid  this  rock,  fell  back  upon  the  act  of  genera- 
tion, as  though  here  at  least  a  formless  material,  through 
the  psychical  energy  of  the  generator,  received  its  actualisa- 
tion  as  a  human  creature ;  but  this  is  only  to  transfer  the 
separation  of  form  and  matter,  actualisation  and  potenti- 
ality which  is  demanded  by  the  system,  into  the  twilight  of 
an  unfamiliar  process,  and  so  to  fish  in  troubled  waters.32 

sidered  in  itself,  is  entelechy,  and  also  into  the  notion  of  the  entelechy,  in 

when  we  imagine  a  thing  and  its  en-  which  it  could  then  indeed  admirably 

telechy  side  by  side,  this  is  in  effect  luxuriate. 

nothing  but  a  mere  tautology.  And  S2  Comp.  De  An.  ii.  1,  v.  Kirch- 
the  case  of  the  soul  differs  in  no  re-  mann's  Translation,  S.  61 :  "  Auch 
spect  at  all  from  any  other  case.  The  ist  nicht  das,  was  seine  Seele  verloren 
soul  of  the  man,  according  to  Arts-  hat,  das  dem  Vermögen  nach  Leben- 
totle,  is  the  man.  This  tautology  only  dige,  sondern  das,  was  sie  hat ;  dagegen 
acquires  a  deeper  significance  within  ist  der  Same  und  die  Frucht  ein  sol- 
the  system  because  (1)  the  deceptive  eher  Körper  dem  Vermögen  nach." 
phenomenon  of  the  body  as  a  merely  Here  Aristotle  is  endeavouring  to 
potential  man  is  opposed  to  the  actual  avoid  the  very  proper  objection  that 
and  perfect  man  (comp,  further  the  on  his  system  every  man  must  arise 
following  note) ;  (2)  the  actual  and  out  of  a  dead  body  by  the  accession 
perfect  being  is  then  subsequently  of  the  entelechy.  He  may  then  quite 
again  confused  with  the  essential  or  rightly  maintain  that  the  corpse  is  no 
logical  portion  of  the  being,  with  the  longer  in  a  proper  condition  for  this, 
same  equivocalness  which  is  so  strik-  because  it  is  no  longer  a  perfect 
ing  in  the  notion  of  the  ovaia.  And  organisation  (although  there  is  still 
so  Aristotle  has  not  fixed  "  die  nega-  some  doubt  whether  Aristotle's  ideas 
tive  Grösse  eines  Immateriellen "  any  were  so  advanced  ;  comp.  Kirch- 
more  in  his  notion  of  the  soul  than  in  mann's  note  on  the  passage) ;  but, 
the  notion  of  form  generally.  It  was  then,  it  becomes  impossible  to  adduce 
the  Neo-Platonic  view  of  the  supersen-  any  case  in  which  the  '  potentially  ' 
suous  that  first  brought  mysticism  living  body  would  differ  from  the 


204  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

The  medieval  philosophers  were  able  to  make  good  use 
of  this  doctrine,  however,  and  brought  it  into  admirable 
harmony  with  dogma. 

Of  much  greater  value  is  the  profound  doctrine  of  the 
Stagirite,  that  man,  as  the  highest  product  of  creation, 
carries  within  himself  the  nature  of  all  the  lower  stages. 
The  function  of  plants  is  to  grow  and  to  multiply;  the 
essence  of  the  plant  soul  is  therefore  of  vegetation.  In  an 
animal  arise,  besides,  sensation,  motion,  appetite ;  the  vege- 
tative life  has  here  entered  into  the  service  of  the  higher 
or  sensitive  life.  Finally,  in  man  appears  the  highest 
principle,  that  of  intellect  (vov$)}  and  dominates  the 
others.  By  a  certain  mechanical  process,  to  which  Scholas- 
ticism was  prone,  there  were  made  from  these  elements 
of  human  existence  three  almost  completely  independent 
souls — the  anima  vegetativa,  the  anima  sensitiva,  and  the 
anima  rationalis,  of  which  man  has  the  first  in  common 
with  the  animal  and  the  plant ;  the  second,  at  least,  in 
common  with  the  animal;  while  the  last  is  alone  im- 
mortal, and  of  divine  origin,  and  includes  all  the  higher 
intellectual  faculties  which  are  denied  to  the  beasts.33 
From  this  separation  proceeded  the  favourite  distinction  of 
Christian  dogmatists  between  soul  and  spirit,  the  two 
higher  forces,  while  the  lowest,  or  anima  vegetativa,  be- 
came the  foundation  of  the  later  doctrine  of  vital  force. 

actually  living  body,  and  so  Aristotle  only,  and  hastily  pass  over  the  act  of 

has  recourse  to  seeds  and  fruit.     In  realisation.      But  if  we  pursue  this 

them  he  finds  the  appearance  of  a  method,   and  follow  it  through  the 

justification    of   his    antithesis,   but  separate  steps,   the  whole    delusion 

only  the  appearance,  for  seeds  and  breaks  up  into  nothing  ;  for  Aristotle 

fruit  are  themselves    living   things,  can  scarcely  have  meant  to  say  that 

and  have  a  form  corresponding    to  the  youth  is  the  body  of  the  man, 

the  nature  of  man.    But  suppose  we  because  he  is  his  potentiality, 

were  to  apply  the  relativity  explained  s3  The  separation    of    the    anima 

in  the  text  and  say :  The  embryo  has  rationalis  from  the  lower  faculties  of 

indeed  the  form  (and  therefore  the  the  soul  was  indeed  denied  by  the 

entelechy)  of  the  embryo,  but  in  rela-  Church,    and  the   converse   doctrine 

tion  to  the  developed  man  it  is  only  was  raised  to  the  dignity  of  a  dogma 

a  'potentiality,  and  therefore  matter,  in  the  Council  of  Vienne  (1311) :  but 

That  sounds  well  enough  so  long  as  the  more  convenient  and  more  Aris- 

we  keep  our  eyes  upon  the  extremes  totelian  view  steadily  returned. 


SCHOLASTICISM.  205 

There  is  no  room  for  doubt  that  Aristotle  only  mentally 
separated  these  forces  in  man.  As  the  human  body  has 
its  animal  nature,  not  by  the  side  of  the  specific  human 
nature,  but  in  it,  it  is  a  complete  animal  body  of  the 
noblest  kind,  that,  nevertheless,  in  its  particular  conforma- 
tion is  specially  and  thoroughly  human ;  so,  according  to 
him,  we  must  conceive  the  relation  of  the  gradations  of  the 
soul.  The  human  form  contains  the  spiritual  being  in 
complete  interpenetration  with  the  sensitive  and  appeti- 
tive faculties,  as  these  constitute  in  the  animal  one  and 
the  same  thing  with  the  merely  vital  principle.  Only  in 
the  doctrine  of  the  'inseparable'  reason — that  doctrine 
upon  which  rest  the  Averroistic  monopsychism  on  the  one 
hand,  and  the  Scholastic  doctrine  of  immortality  on  the 
other,  is  the  unity  abandoned,  but  even  here  not  without 
obvious  violence  to  the  main  features  of  the  system.  This 
unity,  which  makes  the  form  of  man,  uniting  all  lower 
forms  in  itself,  his  soul,  was  broken  up  by  the  Scho- 
lastics. Tor  doing  this,  quite  apart  from  the  '  inseparable 
reason,'  they  could  rely  upon  many  an  expression  of 
the  great  philosopher,  who  everywhere  in  his  system 
unites  with  the  keenest  consistency  in  certain  main 
features  a  striking  hesitation  in  its  development.  So 
particularly  with  the  doctrine  of  immortality,  which,  like 
that  of  the  existence  of  God,  adheres  very  loosely  to  the 
system,  and  in  many  points  contradicts  it.34 

Prom  the  Aristotelian  philosophy  are  to  be  explained 
many  more  of  the  assumptions  of  the  older  metaphysic 
which  the  Materialists  are  fond  of  rejecting  as  simply 
absurd.  Of  this  class  is  especially  the  assertion  that  the 
soul  is  not  only  distributed  through  the  whole  body,  but 
that  it  is  also  wholly  present  in  every  part  of  it.  Thomas 
of  Aquin  expressly  taught  that  it  is  not  only  potentially 
but  actually  present  in  every  part  of  the  body,  with  its 

34  The  contradiction  in  the  doctrine  Ueberweg,  Grund.,  1.  4  Aufl.,  p.  182, 
of  vovs  in  relation  to  the  doctrine  of  E.  T.  168.  For  the  rest,  compare  note 
immortality  is    recognised    also    by    55  to  the  first  section. 


2o6  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

one  and  indivisible  essence.  This,  to  many  Material- 
ists, was  the  height  of  absurdity,  but  within  the  Aristo- 
telian system  it  is  at  least  as  rational  as  if  we  say  that  the 
principle  of  the  circle,  expressed  by  the  one  indivisible 
proposition,  aß  +  y%  =  r2,  is  actualised  in  any  particular 
portion  of  a  given  circle  of  the  radius  r  whose  centre  falls 
at  the  springing  of  the  co-ordinates. 

Let  us  compare  the  formal  principle  of  the  human  body 
with  the  equation  of  the  circle,  and  we  shall  perhaps 
understand  the  root-idea  of  the  Stagirite  more  purely  and 
clearly  than  he  knew  how  himself  to  express  it.  The 
question  is  a  quite  different  one  as  to  the  seat  of  the 
conscious  functions  of  sensation  and  appetite.  This  Aris- 
totle places  in  the  heart ;  the  Scholastics,  following  Galen, 
in  the  brain.  Aristotle,  however,  quite  consistently  leaves 
to  these  functions  their  physical  nature,  and  hence  agrees 
in  one  very  important  point  with  the  Materialists  (cf.  note 
31).  There,  however,  the  Scholastics  would,  of  course,  not 
follow  him,  as  it  cannot  be  denied  that  the  later  meta- 
physic  in  many  ways  introduced  a  mysterious  confusion 
into  their,  in  themselves,  simple  and  intelligible  formulae, 
a  confusion  more  akin  to  utter  absurdity  than  to  clear 
thought. 

But  if  we  are  here  to  fully  understand  the  opposition 
of  Materialism  to  metaphysic,  we  need  only  go  back  to 
that  confusion  of  existence  and  thought  which  had  such 
momentous  consequences  in  the  case  of  the  notion  of 
potentiality.  We  maintain  firmly  that  this  confusion  had 
originally  the  character  of  vulgar  error.  It  was  reserved 
for  modern  philosophers  to  make  a  virtue  of  their  inability 
to  free  themselves  from  the  chains  worn  for  thousands  of 
years,  and  to  erect  into  a  principle  this  very  unestablished 
identity  of  being  and  thought. 

If  .by  the  aid  of  a  mathematical  construction,  I  describe 
a  circle  with  chalk,  the  form  of  the  local  disposition  of  the 
chalk  particles  is  first  present,  of  course,  in  my  mind  as 
end.     The  end  becomes  the  moving  cause,  the  form  be- 


SCHOLASTICISM.  207 

comes  the  realisation  of  the  principle  in  the  material 
parts.  But  where,  then,  is  the  principle  ?  In  the  chalk  ? 
Obviously  not  in  the  individual  particles;  nor,  again, 
in  their  sum.  But  it  is  in  their  '  disposition,'  i.e.,  in  an 
abstraction.  The  principle  is,  and  remains,  in  the  human 
thought.  Who,  then,  gives  us  the  right  to  transfer  such  a 
previously  existing  principle  into  those  things  which  do 
not  come  to  pass  through  human  ingenuity,  as,  for  exam- 
ple, the  form  of  the  human  body  ?  Is  this  form  anything  ? 
Certainly  in  our  conception.  It  is  the  way  in  which  mat- 
ter manifests  itself,  that  is,  the  fashion  in  which  it  appears 
to  us.  Only,  can  this  way  in  which  the  thing  appears 
exist  previously  to  the  thing  itself  ?  Can  it  be  separated 
from  it  ? 

As  we  see  the  opposition  of  form  and  matter,  as  soon  as 
we  go  to  the  root  of  the  matter,  leads  us  back  to  the  ques- 
tion of  the  existence  of  universals,  for  only  as  a  universal 
could  the  form  in  general  be  regarded  as  having  an  exist- 
ence of  its  own  outside  man's  thinking  faculty.  And  these 
Aristotelian  modes  of  thought  everywhere  lead  us  back 
when  we  go  thoroughly  into  things  to  Platonism,  and  as 
often  as  we  find  an  opposition  between  Aristotelian  empi- 
ricism and  Platonic  idealism,  we  have  also  a  point  before 
us  in  which  Aristotle  contradicts  himself.  Thus,  in  the 
doctrine  of  substance,  Aristotle  begins  quite  empirically 
with  the  substantiality  of  the  individual  concrete  things. 
This  notion  is  immediately  refined  away  into  the  theory 
that  the  notional  in  the  things,  or  the  form,  is  substance. 
But  the  notional  is  the  universal,  and  it  is  yet  the  deter- 
mining element  in  its  relation  with  the  in  itself  quite 
undetermined  matter.  This  is  sensible  enough  in  Plato- 
nism, which  regards  the  individual  things  as  futile  appear- 
ances ;  but  in  Aristotle  it  remains  an  utter  inconsistency, 
and  is,  therefore,  of  course,  just  as  puzzling  to  the  wise  as 
to  the  foolish.35 

If  we  now  apply  these  remarks    to   the   controversy 

35  See  Prantl,  Gesch.  d.  Logik  im  Abendl,  iv.  184. 


2o8  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

"between  the  Nominalists  and  the  Eealists  (cf.  above  p.  85 
foil.),  we  understand  that  the  origin  of  the  individual 
must  to  the  Eealist  have  presented  especial  difficulties. 
The  form  as  universal  can  produce  no  individual  out  of 
matter ;  whence  therefore  do  we  get  a  jprincijpium  indivi- 
dioationis,  to  use  scholastic  language?  Aristotle  never 
gives  us  the  answer  to  which  we  are  entitled.  Avicenna 
attempted  to  shift  on  to  matter  the  principle  of  individua- 
tion, and  that,  therefore,  whereby,  from  the  notion  of  dog, 
this  particular  dog  is  produced — a  device  which  involves 
either  the  fall  of  the  whole  Aristotelian  notion  of  matter 
(and  previously,  of  course,  the  Platonic),  or  the  Platonic 
subversion  of  the  individual.  Here  stumbled  even  St. 
Thomas,  who  otherwise  contrived  so  carefully  to  avoid 
the  errors  of  the  Arabian  commentators  wThile  employing 
their  works.     He  laid  the  principle  of  individuation  in 

matter  and became  a  heretic ;  for,  as  was  shown  by 

Bishop  Stephan  Tempier,  this  view  conflicts  with  the  doc- 
trine of  immaterial  individuals,  as  the  angels  and  departed 
souls. 

Duns  Scotus  tried  to  help  himself  by  the  device  of  the 
notorious  Haecceitas,  which  is  often  cited  without  much 
regard  to  the  connection  of  the  notions  as  the  height  of 
Scholastic  absurdity.  It  does,  in  fact,  seem  an  absurd 
idea  to  apply  the  individuality  in  turn  for  the  purpose  of 
obtaining  a  universal  ad  hoc  ;  and  yet  this  solution  of  the 
difficulty  is,  of  all  the  expedients  that  have  been  proposed, 
the  one  most  in  harmony — or,  let  us  rather  say,  the 
one  least  inconsistent — with  the  collective  Aristotelian 
doctrine. 

The  Nominalists,  however,  found  no  great  difficulty 
here.  Occam  very  calmly  explains  that  the  principle  of 
individuation  lies  in  the  individuals  themselves,  and  this 
harmonises  excellently  with  the  Aristotle  wrio  makes 
individuals  substances,  but  all  the  worse  with  the  Platonis- 
ing  Aristotle,  who  invented  the  '  second  substances '  (no- 
tions of  species  and  genus)  and  substantial  forms.     To 


SCHOLASTICISM.  209 

take  the  first  Aristotle  literally,  means  to  reject  the  second 
Aristotle  altogether.  But  the  second  is  the  reigning  one, 
and  that  not  only  in  Scholasticism,  amongst  the  Arabians 
and  the  old  commentators,  but  also  in  the  genuine  un- 
adulterated Aristotelian  system.  And  therefore,  we  may 
in  fact  regard  Nominalism,  and  especially  the  Nominalism 
of  the  second  Scholastic  period,  as  the  beginning  of  the 
end  of  Scholasticism.  In  the  history  of  Materialism,  how- 
ever, Nominalism  is  of  importance  not  only  through  its 
general  opposition  to  Platonism  and  its  recognition  of  the 
concrete,  but  also  through  perfectly  distinct  historical 
traces,  which  indicate  that  Nominalism  did  actually  pre- 
pare the  way  for  Materialism,  and  that  it  was  chiefly  and 
most  strongly  cultivated  above  all  in  England,  where  Mate- 
rialism also  later  found  its  most  vigorous  development. 

If  the  older  Nominalism  connects  itself  with  the  tenor 
of  the  Aristotelian  categories  against  the  Neo-Platonic 
commentators,36  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  the  spread  of 
the  whole  body  of  Aristotle's  writings  had  a  very  great 
influence  on  the  origin  and  extension  of  the  later  Nomi- 
nalism. Once  freed  from  the  leading  strings  of  Neo-Pla- 
tonic tradition,  and  launched  out  on  the  high  sea  of  the 
Aristotelian  system,  the  Scholastics  must  soon  have  dis- 
covered so  many  difficulties  in  the  doctrine  of  the  uni- 
versal, or,  more  fully  expressed,  the  doctrine  of  word, 
notion,  and  thing,  that  innumerable  attempts  were  made 
to  solve  the  great  problem.  In  fact,  as  Prantl  has  shown 
in  his  "  Gesch.  der  Logik  im  Abendlande,"  instead  of  the 
three  main  conceptions  (universalia  ante  rem,  post  rem,  or 
in  re),  there  appear  the  most  manifold  combinations  and 
attempts  at  reconciliation ;  and  the  opinion  that  the  '  uni- 
versalia/  in  fact,  have  their  first  origin  in  the  human  mind, 
is  found  isolated  in  writers  who,  on  the  whole,  distinctly 
belong  to  Eealism.37 

36  Comp,    on   this    point,    besides  developed  Nominalism  is  traced  in  a 

Prantl,    in    particular    Barach,    Zur  manuscript  of  the  tenth  century. 

Gesch.  des  Nominalism,  vor  Eoscel-  S7  So  also  in  isolated  passages  Alber- 

lin,  Wien,  1866,  where  a  very  fully  tus  Magnus;  comp.  Prantl,  iii.  97  fr. 

VOL.  I.     .-  Ü 


2io  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

Besides  the  spread  of  Aristotle's  writings,  Averroism 
also  may  have  had  some  influence,  although,  as  the  fore- 
runner of  Materialism,  it  is  chiefly  to  be  regarded  from  the 
standpoint  of  freethought ;  for  the  Arabian  philosophy  is, 
in  spite  of  its  leaning  to  naturalism,  yet  essentially  realistic 
in  the  sense  of  the  medieval  factions,  i.e.,  it  Platonises ;  and 
even  its  naturalism  is  fain  to  adopt  a  mystic  colouring. 
But  in  so  far  as  the  Arabian  commentators  energetically 
raised  the  questions  with  which  we  are  here  concerned, 
and  in  general  compelled  men  to  increased  independence  of 
thought,  they  must  indirectly  have  furthered  Nominalism. 
The  main  influence  nevertheless  came  from  a  quarter  from 
which  one  at  first  sight  would  least  expect  it — from  that 
Byzantine  logic  which  has  been  so  much  decried  on 
account  of  its  abstract  subtleties.88 

It  cannot  indeed  but  surprise  us  that  the  very  extreme  of 
Scholasticism,  that  ultra-formal  logic  of  the  schools  and  of 
the  sophistical  dialectic,  should  be  connected  with  that  re- 
awakening empiricism  which  ended  by  sweeping  Scholas- 
ticism away ;  and  yet  we  have  traces  of  this  connection 
lasting  down  to  the  present  time.  The  most  distinct 
empiricist  among  the  chief  logicians  of  our  time,  John 
Stuart  Mill,  opens  his  "  System  of  Logic  "  with  two  utter- 
ances of  Condorcet  and  Sir  W.  Hamilton  bestowing  high 
praise  upon  the  Scholastics  for  the  subtlety  and  precision 


38  The  proof  of  the  connection  be-  nies   to   '  universalia '    the  name    of 

tween  the  spread  of  the  Byzantine  things.     With  Occam  they  are,  of 

logic  in  the  West  and  the  victory  of  course,  not  '  names '  but  '  termini,' 

Nominalism  is  one  of  the  most  valua-  which  represent  the  things  compre- 

bleresultsof  Prantl's  "Geschichte  der  hended  in  them.     The  'terminus 'is 

Logik  im  Abendlande."    That  Prantl  one   element  of  a  mentally  formed 

himself  designates  the   tendency  of  judgment ;  it  has  no  existence  what- 

Occam,  not  as  '  Nominalism,'  but  as  ever  outside  the  soul,  but  it  is  also 

'  Terminism '  (from  the  logical  '  ter-  not  purely  arbitrary,  like  the  word 

minus,'  the  chief  implement  of  this  by  which  it  may  be  expressed,  but  it 

school),  is  irrelevant  to  our  purpose,  arises  by  a  natural  necessity  in  the 

as  we  only  just  touch  the  subject,  contact  of  the    mind  with    things. 

Accordingly   we   still  use   'Nomina-  Comp.    Prantl,   iii.    S.   344  ff.    esp. 

lism '  in  the  wider  sense  of  that  body ,  Anm.  782. 
of  opposition  to  Platonism  which  de- 


SCHOLASTICISM.  211 

which  they  have  lent  to  the  expression  of  thought  in  lan- 
guage. Mill  himself  adopts  into  his  "Logic"  several  distinc- 
tions of  various  kinds  in  the  signification  of  words  which 
belong  to  the  Scholasticism  of  those  last  centuries  of  the 
middle  ages,  which  we  are  wont  to  regard  as  an  unbroken 
chain  of  absurdities. 

The  riddle  is,  however,  soon  solved  if  we  start  with  the 
consideration  that  it  was  a  principal  service  of  English 
philosophy  since  Hobbes  and  Locke  to  deliver  us  from 
the  usurpation  of  idle  words  in  speculation,  and  to  connect 
our  thoughts  more  with  things  than  traditional  expres- 
sions. But  in  order  to  attain  this,  the  doctrine  of  the  si^- 
nificance  of  words  must  be  thoroughly  comprehended,  and 
be  begun  with  a  keen  criticism  of  the  relation  of  the  word 
and  its  meaning.  And  to  this  end  the  Byzantine  logic,  in 
the  development  which  it  had  attained  in  the  West,  and 
especially  in  the  school  of  Occam,  exhibits  preliminary 
efforts  which  are  still  of  positive  interest. 

That  empiricism  and  logical  formalism  go  hand  in  hand 
is  in  other  respects,  apart  from  this,  by  no  means  a  rare 
phenomenon.  The  more  our  efforts  are  directed  to  allow 
of  things  acting  on  us  as  freely  as  possible,  and  to  making 
experience  and  natural  science  the  foundation  of  our  views, 
the  more  shall  we  feel  the  necessity  of  connecting  our 
conclusions  with  accurately  defined  signs  for  the  things 
we  mean  to  express,  instead  of  allowing  the  ordinary  forms 
of  expression  to  bring  in  with  them  into  our  opinions  the 
prejudices  of  past  centuries  and  of  the  childish  stages  in 
the  development  of  the  human  spirit. 

It  was  not,  of  course,  that  the  whole  body  of  the  Byzan- 
tine logic  had  originally  been  worked  out  as  a  conscious 
emancipation  from  the  forms  of  language,  but  much  rather 
as  an  attempt  to  follow  to  its  consequences  the  supposi- 
titious identity  of  speech  and  thought.  Yet  the  result 
could  not  but  end  in  the  emancipation  of  the  precise 
expression  of  thought  from  the  forms  of  speech.  He  who 
is  still  in  these  days  disposed,  with  Trendelenburg,  K.  F. 


212  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

Becker,  and  TTeberweg,  to  identify  grammar  and  logic, 
might  certainly  have  learnt  much  from  the  logicians  of 
those  ages,  for  they  made  earnest  efforts  at  a  logical  ana- 
lysis of  all  grammar,  and  in  doing  so  at  least  succeeded  in 
creating  a  new  language,  at  whose  barbarism  the  Human- 
ists could  never  express  sufficient  horror. 

In  Aristotle  the  identification  of  grammar  and  logic  is 
still  naive,  because  in  this  case,  as  Trendelenburg  has 
very  rightly  observed,  both  sciences  sprang  up  from  a 
common  root :  indeed,  to  Aristotle  came  certain  penetrating 
gleams  of  light  upon  the  distinction  of  word  and  notion, 
though  they  are  not  as  yet  sufficient  to  scatter  the  general 
darkness.  There  appear  in  his  logic  always  only  subject 
and  predicate,  considered  as  parts  of  speech,  noun  and 
verb,  or  the  adjective  and  copula  instead  of  the  verb ;  in 
addition,  negation,  the  words  that  indicate  the  extent  to 
which  the  predicate  applies  to  the  subject,  as  '  all,'  '  some,' 
and  certain  adverbs  expressing  the  modality  of  propositions, 
The  Byzantine  logic,  on  the  other  hand,  as  it  was  created, 
as  it  spread  in  the  thirteenth  century  over  the  West,  had  not 
only  brought  the  adverb  into  play,  enlarged  the  circle  of 
the  adverbs  employed  in  logic,  and  treated  the  signification 
of  the  cases  of  the  noun,  but  had  above  all  things  per- 
ceived and  endeavoured  to  overcome  the  ambiguities  which 
are  brought  in  by  the  relation  of  the  noun  to  the  group  of 
ideas  that  it  denotes.  These  ambiguities  are  in  Latin, 
which  possesses  no  article,  much  more  numerous  than  in 
German ;  as,  for  example,  in  the  well-known  example  in 
which  a  drunken  student  says  that  he  has  not  drunk  'vinum,' 
because  he  avails  himself  of  the  reservatio  mentalis  of 
understanding  by  f  vinum,'  wine  in  its  full  extent,  that  is, 
all  the  wine  that  exists,  and  the  wine  that  exists  in  India, 
or  even  in  his  neighbour's  glass,  he  has,  of  course,  not  drunk. 
Such  sophisms,  indeed,  formed  the  regular  business  of  the 
late  Scholastic  logic,  and  its  extravagance  in  this  respect, 
as  well  as  in  the  subtle  application  of  the  Scholastic  dis- 
tinctions, has  rightly  been  condemned,  and  has  often  enough 


SCHOLASTICISM.  213 

helped  the  Humanists  to  victory  in  their  contest  with  the 
Scholastics.  Yet  the  main  motive  to  this  activity  was  a 
very  serious  one,  and  the  whole  problem  will,  perhaps, 
sooner  or  later,  have  to  be  taken  up  again — of  course  in 
another  connection,  and  with  another  ultimate  purpose. 

The  result  of  the  great  experiment  was  so  far  negative, 
that  a  perfect  logic  was  not  to  be  reached  by  this  path, 
and  a  natural  reaction  against  the  extravagance  of  its 
artificiality  soon  caused  the  child  to  be  thrown  away 
together  with  the  bath.  And  yet  there  was  attained 
not  merely  a  habit  of  precision  in  the  expression  of 
thought  which  had  been  'unknown  to  the  ancients,'  as 
Condorcet  says,  but  also  a  view  of  the  nature  of  lan- 
guage admirably  harmonising  with  empiricism. 

Sokrates  had  thought  that  all  words  must  originally 
have  expressed  as  completely  as  possible  the  true  nature 
of  the  things  they  denoted ;  Aristotle,  in  a  moment  of  his 
empiricism,  declared  language  to  be  conventional;  the 
school  of  Occam  tended,  though  it  may  have  been  without 
a  full  consciousness  of  it,  to  make  the  language  of  science 
conventional,  that  is,  by  an  arbitrary  fixing  of  the  notions, 
to  free  it  from  the  type  of  expressions  that  had  become 
historical,  and  so  to  get  rid  of  innumerable  ambiguities 
and  confusing  by-notions.  This  whole  process  was,  how- 
ever, necessary  if  a  science  was  to  arise  which,  instead 
of  creating  everything  out  of  the  subject,  should  allow  the 
"things  themselves  to  speak,  whose  language  is  often  quite 
other  than  that  of  our  grammars  and  dictionaries.  This 
one  circumstance  alone  makes  Occam  a  most  important 
forerunner  of  a  Bacon,  a  Hobbes,  and  a  Locke.  This  he 
was,  moreover,  by  the  greater  activity  of  independent 
speculation,  instead  of  mere  repetition,  which  was  part 
of  his  tendency ;  but  above  all,  by  the  natural  harmony 
of  his  logical  activity  with  the  bases  of  the  old  Nominal- 
ism, which  in  all '  universals '  regards  comprehensive  terms 
only  as  the  only  substantial  things,  the  only  concrete,  in- 
dividual, sensible  things  existing  outside  human  thought. 


214  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

Nominalism  was,  for  the  rest,  more  than  a  mere  opinion  of 
the  schools,  like  any  other.  It  was  really  the  principle  of 
scepticism  asserting  itself  against  the  whole  medieval  love 
of  authority.  Cultivated  by  the  Franciscans  in  their  stand- 
point of  opposition,  it  turned  the  edge  of  its  analytical 
modes  of  thought  against  the  edifice  of  the  hierarchy  in 
the  Church's  constitution,  just  as  it  attacked  the  hierarchy 
of  the  intellectual  world ;  and  therefore  we  must  not  be 
surprised  that  Occam  demanded  freedom  of  thought,  that 
in  religion  he  held  fast  to  the  practical  side,  and  that  he, 
as  did  later  his  countryman  Hobbes,  threw  the  whole  of 
theology  overboard  by  declaring  the  doctrines  of  the  faith 
to  be  incapable  of  proof.3^  His  doctrine  that  science, 
in  the  last  line,  has  no  other  subject-matter  than  the 
sensible  particular,  is  in  our  day  the  foundation  of  Stuart 
Mill's  "Logic;"  and  thus  he  expresses  generally  the  opposi- 
tion of  the  healthy  human  reason  to  Platonism,  with  a 
keenness  which  gives  him  a  lasting  significance.40 

39  Prantl,    iii.  328.      The   demand  40  At  the  same  time  Occam  by  no 

for  freedom  of  thought  applies  indeed  means    mistakes  the  value   of    uni- 

only  to  philosophical  principles  (comp,  versal  propositions.     He  teaches  ex- 

the  remarks  in  the  following  chapter  pressly  that  science  is  concerned  with 

about  twofold  truth  in  the  middle  universals  (and  not  directly  with  in- 

ages) ;  but  as  theology  remains  essen-  dividual  things),  but  yet  it  does  not 

tially  only  a  province  of  belief,  and  treat  of  universals  as  such,  but  merely 

not  of  knowledge,   the  demand  ap-  as  the  expression  of  the  particulars 

plies  to  the  whole  sphere  of  scientific  included  in  them.     Prantl,   iii.    332 

thought.  foil.  esp.  note  750. 


(     215      ) 


CHAPTEE  III. 

THE  EETUEN   OF  MATERIALISTIC   THEOEIES  WITH  THE 
BEGENERATION  OF  THE   SCIENCES. 

In  the  place  of  positive  achievements,  the  domination  of 
Scholasticism  in  the  sphere  of  the  sciences  resnlted  only 
in  a  system  of  notions  and  terms,  which  was  deeply  rooted, 
and  consecrated  by  many  centuries.  Progress  had  indeed 
to  commence  its  work  by  shattering  this  system,  in  which 
were  embodied  the  prejudices  and  fundamental  errors  of 
the  traditional  philosophy.  Nevertheless,  even  the  fetters 
of  Scholasticism  in  their  time  rendered  important  services 
to  the  intellectual  development  of  humanity.  Like  the 
theological  Latin  of  the  same  period,  so  the  formulas  of 
Scholasticism  formed  a  common  element  of  intellectual 
intercourse  for  the  whole  of  Europe.  Apart  from  the 
formal  exercise  of  thought,  which  remained  very  impor- 
tant and  real  even  in  the  most  degenerate  form  of  the 
Aristotelian  philosophy,  this  community  of  thought,  which 
the  old  system  had  created,  soon  became  an  excellent 
medium  for  the  propagation  of  new  ideas.  The  period  of 
the  renascence  of  the  sciences  formed  a  connection  among 
the  learned  men  of  Europe  such  as  has  never  existed  since. 
The  fame  of  a  discovery,  of  an  important  book,  of  a  lite- 
rary controversy,  spread,  if  not  quicker,  at  all  events  more 
generally  and  thoroughly,  than  in  our  own  days,  through 
all  civilised  countries. 

If  we  reckon  the  whole  course  of  the  regenerative  move- 
ment, whose  beginning  and  end  are  difficult  to  fix,  as  from 
the  middle  of  the  fifteenth  to  the  middle  of  the  seven- 
teenth century,  we  may  then  distinguish  within  this  term 


2i6  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

of  two  centuries  four  epochs,  which,  although  not  sharply 
marked  off  from  each  other,  are  nevertheless  in  their  main 
features  clearly  distinguishable  from  each  other.  The 
first  of  them  concentrates  the  chief  interest  of  Europe  upon 
philology.  It  was  the  age  of  Laurentius  Valla,  of  Angelo 
Politiano,  and  of  the  great  Erasmus,  who  forms  the  tran- 
sition to  the  theological  epoch.  The  dominion  of  theology 
is  sufficiently  indicated  by  the  storms  of  the  Eeformation 
era  :  it  suppressed  for.  a  long  time  almost  all  other  scien- 
tific interests,  especially  in  Germany.  Then  the  natural 
sciences,  which  had  been  gaining  strength  since  the  begin- 
ning of  the  renascence  in  the  quiet  workshops  of  inquirers 
in  the  brilliant  era  of  Kepler  and  Galilei,  first  took  up 
a  commanding  and  prominent  position.  Only  in  the 
fourth  line  came  philosophy,  although  the  culminating 
point  of  Bacon's  and  Descartes'  activity  in  establishing 
principles  falls  not  much  later  than  the  great  discoveries 
of  Kepler.  All  these  epochs  of  creative  labour  were  still 
exercising  an  unslackening  influence  upon  their  contem- 
poraries, when  the  materialistic  physic  was  again  syste- 
matically developed,  about  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth 
century,  by  Gassendi  and  Hobbes. 

In  placing  the  regeneration  of  philosophy  at  the  con- 
clusion of  this  survey,  we  shall  scarcely  meet  with  any 
serious  objection  if  we  take  the  f  renascence,'  the  '  revival 
of  antiquity/  not  in  a  mere  literal  sense,  but  in  the  sense 
of  the  true  character  which  belongs  to  this  great  and  essen- 
tially homogeneous  movement.  It  is  a  time  which  enthu- 
siastically clings  to  the  efforts  and  traditions  of  antiquity, 
but  in  which,  at  the  same  time,  there  are  everywhere 
present  the  germs  of  a  new,  a  great,  and  an  independent 
period  of  thought.  It  might  indeed  be  possible  to  sepa- 
rate from  the  '  renascence,'  in  the  strict  sense,  this  charac- 
ter of  '  independence,'  and  the  appearance  of  new  and 
completely  modern  efforts  and  aims,  and,  with  the  names 
of  Galilei  and  Kepler,  Bacon  and  Descartes,  to  begin  an 
entirely  new  period ;  but,  as  in  all  attempts  to  mark  off 


THE  SCIENTIFIC  RENASCENCE.  217 

historical  periods,  we  everywhere  come  upon  intersect- 
ing threads  and  overlapping  characteristics.  Thus,  as 
we  shall  see,  Gassendi  and  Boyle,  in  the  seventeenth 
century,  take  hands  with  the  Atomism  of  the  ancients, 
while  Leonardi  cla  Vinci  and  Luis  Vives,  undoubt- 
edly men  of  the  freshest  type  of  the  new  movement, 
are  already  passed  far  beyond  the  traditions  of  anti- 
quity, and  attempt  to  found  a  science  of  experience  in 
complete  independence  of  Aristotle  and  the  whole  of 
antiquity. 

Similarly,  it  is  very  difficult  to  mark  off  sharply  the 
beginnings  of  the  reflorescence  of  antiquity.  We  spoke 
above  of  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth  century,  because  it 
Was  at  that  time  that  Italian  philology  attained  its  com- 
plete development,  and  that  Humanism  entered  upon  its 
struggle  against  Scholasticism.  But  this  movement  had 
its  prelude  a  full  century  earlier  in  the  era  of  Petrarca 
and  Boccaccio,  and  we  cannot  deny  that  the  new  spirit 
which  then  showed  itself  in  Italy  may  be  traced  at  least 
as  far  back  as  the  age  of  the  Emperor  Frederick  the 
Second,  whose  importance  we  have  ascertained  in  the  first 
chapter  of  this  section.  In  this  connection,  however,  the 
transformation  of  Scholasticism  through  the  knowledge  of 
Aristotle  and  the  spread  of  Arabian  literature,41  may  also 
be  regarded  as  one  of  the  first  and  most  important  facts 
in  the  great  process  of  regeneration.  Philosophy,  which 
forms  the  conclusion  of  the  whole  movement,  and  im- 
presses its  seal  upon  the  completion  of  the  great  revolu- 
tion, appears  also  at  the  beginning  of  the  movement. 

We  have  already  seen,  in  the  two  last  chapters,  how,  in 
the  last  centuries  of  the  middle  ages,  under  the  influence 
of  Arabian  philosophy  and  Byzantine  logic,  there  appeared 
now  unbridled  freethinking,  and  now  painful  struggle  for 

41  Prantl.   Gesch.  d.  Logik,  iii.  S.  science,  took  place  in  great  part  as 

1,  remarks  that  it  cannot  be  often  early  as  the  thirteenth  century,  and 

enough  pointed  out   "  that  the  so-  chiefly  through  the  knowledge  then 

called  revival  of  antiquity,  as  regards  made    possible  of  Aristotle  and    of 

philosophy,  mathematic  and  natural  Arabian  literature. 


2i8  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

liberty  of  thought.  A  special  form  of  this  abortive  effort 
after  liberty  of  thought  is  the  doctrine  of  twofold  truth, 
philosophical  and  theological,  which  may  exist  side  by 
side  in  spite  of  their  entire  inconsistency.  It  is  obvious 
that  this  doctrine  is  the  true  original  of  what  has  recently 
been  called  by  a  very  ill-chosen  but  now  firmly-rooted 
expression,  '  book-keeping  by  double  entry.'  42 

The  chief  seat  of  this  doctrine  in  the  thirteenth  century 
was  the  University  of  Paris,  where,  even  before  the  middle 
of  the  century,  in  fact,  there  appeared  the  curiously  sound- 
ing doctrine,  "that  there  have  been  many  truths  from 
eternity  till  now  which  were  not  God  himself."  A  teacher 
at  Paris,  Jean  de  Brescain,  excused  himself  in  the  year 
1247  for  his  '  errors,'  by  observing  that  he  had  taught  that 
the  doctrines  found  heretical  by  the  bishop  as  not  '  theo- 
logically '  but  only  '  philosophically '  true.  In  spite  of  the 
bishop's  absolute  prohibition  of  all  such  subterfuges,  the 
audacity  of  these  'merely  philosophical'  assertions  ap- 
pears to  have  gone  on  increasing.  Por  in  the  years  1 270 
and  1276,  there  is  another  long  series  of  such  propositions 
condemned,  the  whole  of  which  are  of  obviously  Aver- 
roistic  origin.  The  resurrection,  the  creation  of  the  world 
in  time,  the  changeableness  of  the  individual  soul,  were 
denied  in  the  name  of  philosophy,  while  it  was  at  the 
same  time  admitted  that  all  these  doctrines  are  true 
'  according  to  the  Catholic  faith.'  Their  real  attitude, 
however,  by  this  freely  admitted  theological  truth,  appears 
by  the  circumstance  that  doctrines  of  the  following  kind 
appear  among  the  condemned  doctrines :  "  Nothing  more 
can  be  known,  because  of  the  science  of  theology."  "  The 
Christian  religion  prevents  us  from  learning  anything 
more."     "  The  only  wise  men  in  the  world  are  the  philoso- 

42  The  facts  will  be  found  exhaus-  contained  in  Maywald,  Die  Lehre  von 

tively    given    in    Renan's    Averroes  der  Zweifachen  Wahrheit,   ein  Ver- 

(Paris,  1852),  ii.   2,  3.     A  summary  such   der    Trennung  von    Theologie 

statement  of  all  that  specially  relates  und  Philosophie  im  Mittelalter  (Ber- 

to  the  doctrine  of  twofold  truth  is  lin,  1871). 


THE  SCIENTIFIC  RENASCENCE.  219 

pliers."  "  Tlie  teachings  of  the  theologians  are  "based  upon 
fables."  43 

It  is  true  that  we  do  not  know  the  originators  of  these 
propositions.  They  may  possibly  in  great  part  never  have 
been  maintained  in  books,  at  least,  not  with  this  publicity, 
but  maintained  only  in  lectures  and  disputations.  But 
the  way  in  which  the  bishops  attack  the  evil  shows  plainly 
enough  that  the  spirit  which  produced  such  doctrines  was 
widely  spread  and  venturesome.  The  modestly  sounding 
statement  that  all  this  is  only  '  philosophically  true,'  taken 
in  connection  with  doctrines  that  exalt  philosophy  far 
above  theology,  and  find  the  latter  a  hindrance  to  science, 
is  obviously  nothing  more  than  a  shield  against  persecu- 
tion, and  a  means  of  keeping  open  a  retreat  in  case  of  a 
trial.  It  is  clear,  moreover,  that  there  was  at  that  time  a 
party  which  did  not  occasionally,  only  when  interpreting 
Aristotle,  advance  these  propositions,  but  also  put  them 
forth  deliberately  in  opposition  to  the  orthodox  Domini- 
cans. The  same  spirit  appeared  also  in  England  and 
Italy,  where,  in  the  thirteenth  century,  almost  simul- 
taneously with  these  events  in  Paris,  exactly  similar 
principles  crop  up  and  are  condemned  by  the  bishops.44 

In  Italy,  at  this  time,  Averroism  was  quietly  taking 
deep  root  at  the  High  School  of  Padua.  It  was  this  uni- 
versity that  gave  the  intellectual  tone  to  the  whole  north- 
east of  Italy,  and  it  was  itself  in  turn  under  the  influence 
of  the  statesmen  and  merchants  of  Venice,  who  were 
freethinking  men  of  the  world,  with  an  inclination  to 
practical  Materialism.4^     Here  Averroism  held  its  ground, 

43  Maywald,  Zweif .  Wahrh.,  S.  11.;  doue.  Les  universites  de  Padoue  et 
Kenan,  Averroes,  p.  219.  de    Bologne     n'en    font    reellement 

44  Maywald,  S.  13;  Renan,  p.  208,  qn'nne,  au  moins  ponr  l'enseignement 
where  may  be  found  also,  after  Hau-  philosophique  et  medical.  C'etaient 
reau,  Philos.  Scholast.,  some  remarks  les  memes  professetirs  qui,  presque 
on  the  connection  of  English  Aver-  tous  les  ans,  emigraient  de  l'une  ä 
roism  with  the  Franciscan  party.  l'autre  pour  obtenir  une  augmenta- 

45  Eenan,  Averroes,  p.  258:  "  Le  tion  de  salaire.  Padoue  d'un  autre 
mouvement  intellectuel  du  nord-est  cote,  n'est  que  le  quartier  latin  de 
de  l'ltalie,  Bologne,  Ferrare,  Yenise,  Venise ;  tout  ce  qui  s'enseignait  ä 
se  rattache  tout  entier  ä  celui  de  Pa-  Padoue,  s'  imprimait  ä  Venise." 


220  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

although,  to  be  sure,  in  company  with  the  worshipping  of 
Aristotle  and  all  the  barbarism  of  the  Scholastics,  until 
the  seventeenth  century ;  less  controverted  than  at  any 
other  university,  and  on  that  account  also  seldomer  men- 
tioned. Like  a  'strong  fortress  of  barbarism,'  Padua 
struggled  against  the  Humanists,  who,  especially  in  Italy, 
almost  all  inclined  to  Plato,  whose  beautiful  forms  of  lan- 
guage and  conceptions  charmed  them,  while  they  took 
care,  with  a  few  exceptions,  not  to  lose  themselves  in  the 
mystical  side  of  Platonism.  As  against  the  Humanists,  so 
the  Scholastics  of  Padua,  rationalistic  indeed,  but  fettered 
by  their  traditions,  struggled  as  long  as  they  could  against 
the  physicists.  Cremonini,  the  last  of  this  school,  taught 
at  the  University  of  Padua  contemporaneously  with  Gali- 
lei :  while  the  latter  taught  the  Elements  of  Euclid  for  a 
trifling  remuneration,  Cremonini  received  a  salary  of  2000 
gulden  for  his  lectures  on  the  scientific  writings  of  Aris- 
totle. It  is  said  that  when  Galilei  discovered  the  satellites 
of  Jupiter,  Cremonini  would  from  that  time  never  again 
look  through  a  telescope,  because  the  thing  was  contrary 
to  Aristotle.  But  Cremonini  was  a  freethinker,  whose 
views  as  to  the  soul,  although  not  strictly  Averroistic, 
were  certainly  anything  but  ecclesiastical ;  and  he  main- 
tained his  right  to  teach  anything  that  was  in  Aristotle 
with  a  firmness  that  deserves  our  recognition.4^ 

One  man  in  this  series  of  scholastic  freethinkers  de- 
serves to  be  specially  mentioned  here :  Petrus  Pompona- 
tius,  the  author  of  a  book  which  appeared  in  15 16  on  the 
immortality  of  the  soul.  The  question  of  immortality 
was  at  that  time  so  popular  in  Italy,  that  the  students  of 
a  newly-appointed  professor,  whose  tendency  they  wanted 
to  learn,  called  to  him  in  his  first  lecture  to  discuss  the 
soul.47  And  it  does  not  appear  that  the  orthodox  doctrine 
was  the  favourite  one ;  for  Pomponatius,  who,  from  beneath 
the  shield  of  the  doctrine  of  twofold  truth,  delivered  per- 

46  Kenan,  Averroes,  pp.  257,  326  foil.  47  Renan,  Averroes,  p.  283. 


THE  SCIENTIFIC  RENASCENCE.  221 

haps  the  boldest  and  acutest  attacks  upon  immortality 
which  were  then  known,  was  a  very  favourite  teacher. 

He  was  certainly  not  an  Averroist;  nay,  he  was  the 
head  of  a  school  which  engaged  in  a  bitter  war  with  the 
Averroists,  and  which  quoted  the  commentator  Alexander 
of  Aphrodisias  as  the  authority  for  its  doctrines.  But  the 
apple  of  discord  in  this  controversy  was  in  reality  only 
the  doctrine  of  the  soul  and  of  immortality,  and  the 
'  Alexandrists '  stood  on  all  main  points  in  the  full 
current  of  Averroistic  modes  of  thought.  With  regard, 
however,  to  the  question  of  immortality,  the  'Alexan- 
drists '  went  more  thoroughly  to  work ;  they  rejected 
monopsychism,  and  declared  the  soul  simply, "  according  to 
Aristotle,"  to  be  not  immortal — the  rights  of  the  Catholic 
faith  being  at  the  same  time  reserved  as  already  ex- 
plained. 

Pomponatius,  in  his  book  on  immortality,  adopts  a  very 
respectful  attitude  towards  the  Church.  He  zealously 
approves  the  confutation  of  Averroism  by  Saint  Thomas. 
But  all  the  more  bold  are  the  ideas  conveyed  in  his 
own  criticism  of  the  question  of  immortality.  The 
treatment  is  on  the  whole  strictly  Scholastic — the  bad 
Latin  inseparable  from  Scholasticism  not  excluded.  But 
in  the  last  section48  of  the  work,  where  Pompona- 
tius discusses  "  eight  great  difficulties "  in  the  doctrine 
of  immortality,  he  is  by  no  means  content  with  verbal 
expositions  and  quotations  from  Aristotle.  Here  all  the 
scepticism  of  the  age  finds  expression,  even  to  the  extent 
of  very  distinct  approbation  of  the  theory  of  'the  three 
impostors.' 

48  Cap.  xiii.  and  xiv.     In  the  last  editions  are  unknown  to  me.     The 

cap.  (xv. )  is  expressed  his  submission  passages  quoted  in  my  first  edition 

to  the    judgment    of    the    Church,  were  taken  from    M.  Carriere,    Die 

There  are  no  natural  proofs  of  im-  Philos.   Weltanschauung  der  Refor- 

mortality,  and  it  rests  therefore  solely  mationszeit,  Stuttg.   u.  Tub.,    1847. 

upon  revelation.     The  strongest  pas-  They  are,  indeed,  in  essential  points 

sages  are  in  pp.  101  until  near  the  end  faithful,  but  are  freer  than  is  neces- 

in  the  edition  of  Bardili  (Tübingen,  sary,  and  the  somewhat  pathetic  and 

I791))    PP-    IX8    foil,  in  an    edition  elevated  tone  is  foreign  to  the  origi- 

without  any  place,  1534.    The  earlier  nal. 


222  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

Pomponatius  here  considers  the  mortality  of  the  soul  as 
philosophically  proved.  The  eight  difficulties  of  the  doc- 
trine are  the  commonest  general  arguments  for  immorta- 
lity ;  and  these  arguments  Pomponatius  refutes  no  more  on 
the  Scholastic  method,  but  by  sound  common  sense  and  by 
moral  considerations.  Among  these  difficulties  the  fourth 
runs  thus  :  Since  all  religions  ("omnes  leges")  maintain  im- 
mortality, then  if  there  is  really  no  such  thing,  the  whole 
world  is  deluded.  To  this,  however,  the  answer  is  :  That 
almost  every  one  is  deluded  by  religion  must  be  admitted ; 
but  there  is  no  particular  misfortune  in  that.  For  as  there 
are  three  laws — those  of  Moses,  Christ,  and  Mohammed, — 
they  are  either  all  three  false,  and  then  the  whole  world  is 
deluded — or  two  at  least  are  false,  and  then  the  majority 
are  deluded.  We  must  know,  however,  that  according  to 
Plato  and  Aristotle,  the  legislator  ("  politicus  ")  is  a  physi- 
cian of  the  soul,  and  as  the  legislator  is  more  concerned  to 
make  men  virtuous  than  to  make  them  enlightened,  he 
must  adapt  himself  to  their  different  natures.  The  less 
noble  require  rewards  and  punishments.  But  some  cannot 
be  kept  in  check  by  these,  and  it  is  for  them  that  immor- 
tality has  been  invented.  As  the  physician  says  what  is  not 
true, — as  the  nurse  allures  the  child  to  many  things  of 
which  it  cannot  as  yet  understand  the  true  reason :  so 
acts  the  founder  of  a  religion,  and  is  completely  justified 
in  so  acting,  his  final  end  being  regarded  as  a  purely  poli- 
tical one. 

We  must  not  forget  that  this  view  was  very  widely  held 
among  the  upper  classes  in  Italy,  and  especially  among 
practical  statesmen.  Thus  Macchiavelii  speaks  in  his 
Discourses  on  Livy :  49  «  The  princes  of  a  republic  or  a 
kingdom  must  maintain  the  pillars  of  the  religion  they 
hold.  If  this  is  done,  it  will  be  an  easy  thing  for  them  to 
keep  their  state  religious,  and  therefore  in  prosperity  and 
unity.     And  everything  that  favours  their  interests,  even 

49  Comp.  Macchiavelii,  Erörter.  überg.  von  Dr.  Grutzniacher,  Berlin, 
über    d.  Erste  Decade  des  T.  Livius,     1871,  S.  41. 


THE  SCIENTIFIC  RENASCENCE.  223 

although  they  hold  it  to  be  false,  they  must  favour  and 
assist,  and  must  do  so  all  the  more,  the  more  prudent  and 
politic  they  are.  And  as  this  conduct  of  the  wise  has 
been  observed,  the  belief  in  miracles  has  arisen,  which  are 
exalted  by  religion,  although  they  are  equally  false,  because 
the  prudent  magnify  them,  no  matter  what  their  origin 
may  have  been,  and  then  the  respect  paid  to  them  by  these 
men  secures  them  universal  belief."  Thus  Leo  X.  may 
have  very  well  said  within  himself,  when  preparing  to  sit 
in  judgment  on  Pomponatius's  book :  "  The  man  is  quite 
right,  if  only  it  would  make  no  scandal ! " 

To  the  third  objection,  that  if  our  souls  were  mortal 
there  could  be  no  just  ruler  of  the  world,  Pomponatius 
replies :  "  The  true  reward  of  virtue  is  virtue  itself,  which 
makes  man  happy ;  for  human  nature  can  have  nothing 
higher  than  virtue,  since  it  alone  makes  man  secure  and 
free  from  all  disturbances.  In  the  virtuous  man  all  is  in 
harmony;  he  has  nothing  to  fear  or  hope,  and  remains 
unmoved  in  fortune  or  misfortune.  To  the  vicious  man 
vice  itself  is  punishment.  As  Aristotle  shows  in  the 
seventh  book  of  the  Ethics,  to  the  vicious  man  everything 
is  spoiled.  He  trusts  nobody ;  he  has  no  rest,  waking  or 
sleeping ;  and  leads,  in  tortures  of  soul  and  body,  such  a 
miserable  life,  that  no  wise  man,  however  poor  and  weak 
he  may  be,  would  choose  the  life  of  a  tyrant  or  a  vicious 
aristocrat." 

Spiritual  apparitions  are  explained  by  Pomponatius  to 
be  the  delusions  of  the  excited  fancy  or  the  deceptions  of 
priests.  The  '  possessed '  are  sick  (Object.  5  and  6).  At 
the  same  time,  he  admits  a  residuum  of  these  appearances, 
and  refers  them  to  the  influence  of  good  and  evil  spirits, 
or  to  astrological  causes.  Belief  in  astrology  was  indisso- 
lubly  bound  up  with  the  Averroistic  rationalism. 

In  conclusion,  Pomponatius  protests  with  great  energy 
against  those  persons  (Object.  8)  who  maintain  that  vicious 
and  guilty  men  commonly  deny  the  immortality  of  the 
soul,  while  good  and  upright  men  believe  it.      On  the 


224  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

contrary,  he  nays,  it  is  quite  obvious  that  many  vicious 
persons  believe  in  immortality,  and  at  the  same  time 
allow  themselves  to  be  carried  away  by  their  pacsions, 
while  many  righteous  and  noble  men  have  held  the  soul 
to  be  mortal.  Among  these  he  reckons  Homer  and 
Simonides,  Hippokrates  and  Galen,  Alexander  of  Aphro- 
disias  and  the  great  Arabian  philosophers  ;  finally,  of  our 
own  countrymen  ('  ex  nostratibus,'  here  we  see,  even  in  the 
Scholastic,  the  spirit  of  the  renascence!),  Pliny  and 
Seneca. 

In  a  similar  spirit  Pomponatius  wrote  of  the  freedom  of 
the  will,  and  boldly  set  forth  its  inconsistencies.  Here, 
in  fact,  he  criticises  the  Christian  idea  of  God  as  he 
acutely  tracks  out  and  exposes  the  contradiction  between 
the  doctrine  of  the  omnipotence,  omniscience,  and  good- 
ness of  God,  and  the  responsibility  of  man.  In  a  special 
treatise,  moreover,  Pomponatius  attacked  the  belief  in 
miracles,  where  it  is  indeed  true  that  we  must  also  take 
astrological  influences,  as  natural  and  actual  facts,  as  part 
of  our  bargain.  Thus  it  is  genuinely  Arabian,  for  exam- 
ple, when  he  refers  the  gift  of  prophecy  to  the  influence 
of  the  stars  and  to  a  mysterious  communion  with  un- 
known spirits.^O  On  the  other  hand,  the  efficacy  of  relics 
depends  upon  the  imagination  of  the  credulous,  and  would 
be  just  as  great  if  the  relics  were  the  bones  of  a  dog. 

There  has  been  some  controversy  whether,  in  regard  to 
these  views  of  Pomponatius,  his  submission  to  the  Catho- 
lic faith  was  more  than  a  mere  form.  Such  questions  are, 
it  is  very  true,  in  many  similar  cases  extremely  difficult 
to  decide,  since  we  are  in  no  way  justified  in  applying  to 
them  the  standard  of  our  own  time.  The  immense  respect 
for  the  Church — increased  by  so  many  a  stake  and  auto- 
da-fe — was  quite  sufficient  to  shed  a  holy  awe  about  the 
creed,  even  in  the  minds  of  the  boldest  thinkers — an  awe 
which  veiled  in  impenetrable  cloud  the  border-line  be- 
tween word  and  fact.     But  in  what  direction  Pomponatius 

50  Maywald,  Lehre  von  d.  Zweif.  Walarh.,  S.  45  ff. 


THE  SCIENTIFIC  RENASCENCE.  225 

made  the  tongue  of  the  balance  incline  in  this  contest  be- 
tween philosophical  and  theological  truth,  he  has  suffi- 
ciently indicated  for  us  when  he  declares  the  philosophers 
alone  to  be  the  gods  of  the  earth,  and  as  far  removed  from 
all  other  men,  of  whatever  condition,  as  real  men  are  from 
painted  men ! 

This  equivocal  character  of  the  relation  between  faith 
and  knowledge  is  in  many  ways  a  characteristic  and  con- 
stant feature  of  the  period  of  transition  to  the  modern 
freedom  of  thought.  Nor  could  even  the  Eeformation 
discard  it;  and  we  find  it,  from  Pomponatius  and  Cardan 
down  to  Gassendi  and  Hobbes,  in  the  most  various  grada- 
tions, from  timidly-concealed  doubt  to  conscious  irony. 
In  connection  with  it  appears  the  tendency  to  an  equi- 
vocal defence  of  Christianity,  or  of  individual  doctrines, 
which  loves  to  turn  the  darker  side  outwards;  and 
there  are  instances  as  well  of  obvious  intention  to  pro- 
duce an  unfavourable  conviction,  as  in  Yanini,  as  also 
cases  such  as  that  of  Mersenne's  "  Commentary  on 
Genesis,"  where  it  is  hard  to  say  what  is  the  precise 
object. 

Any  one  who  finds  the  essential  element  of  Mate- 
rialism in  its  opposition  to  the  belief  of  the  Church,  might 
reckon  Pomponatius  and  his  numerous  more  or  less  bold 
successors  among  the  Materialists.  If,  on  the  contrary, 
we  seek  the  beginnings  of  a  positive  Materialistic  inter- 
pretation of  nature,  we  shall  fail  to  find  any  rudiment  of 
such  an  interpretation  even  amongst  the  most  enlightened 
Scholastics.  A  single,  and  an  as  yet  quite  unique,  in- 
stance that  may  be  thus  reckoned  appeared,  indeed,  as 
early  as  the  fourteenth  century.  In  the  year  1348,  at 
Paris,  Nicolaus  de  Autricuria 51  was  compelled  to  make 
recantation  of  severa]  doctrines,  and  amongst  others,  this 
doctrine,  that  in  the  processes  of  nature  there  is  nothing  to  he 
found  but  the  motion  of  the  combination  and  separation  of 
atoms.     Here,  then,  is  a  formal  Atomist  in  the  very  heart 

51  Prantl,  Gesch.  d.  Logik  im  Abend!.,  iv.  S.  2  foil. 
VOL.  L  P 


226  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

of  the  dominion  of  the  Aristotelian  theory  of  nature.  But 
the  same  hold  spirit  ventured  also  upon  a  general  declara- 
tion that  we  should  put  Aristotle,  and  Averroes  with  him, 
on  one  side,  and  apply  ourselves  directly  to  things  them- 
selves. Thus  Atomism  and  Empiricism  here  go  hand  in 
hand  together ! 

In  reality,  the  authority  of  Aristotle  had  first  to  be 
broken  before  men  could  attain  to  direct  intercourse  with 
things  themselves.  While,  however,  Mcolaus  de  Autri- 
curia,  in  complete  isolation,  so  far  as  we  yet  know,  was 
making  a  fruitless  effort  in  this  direction,  there  began 
about  the  same  time  in  Italy  the  prelude  to  the  great 
struggle  between  Humanists  and  Scholastics  in  Petrarca's 
violent  assaults. 

The  decisive  struggle  fell  in  the  fifteenth  century,  and 
although,  on  the  whole,  the  relations  to  Materialism  are 
somewhat  distant  —  since  the  great  Italian  Humanists 
were  for  the  most  part  Platonists — it  is  nevertheless  in- 
teresting to  observe  that  one  of  the  earliest  champions  of 
Humanism,  Laurentius  Valla,  first  made  himself  exten- 
sively known  by  a  "  Dialogue  on  Pleasure,"  which  may  be 
regarded  as  the  first  attempt  at  a  vindication  of  Epiku- 
reanism.52  It  is  true  that  in  the  issue  the  representative 
in  the  dialogue  of  Christian  ethic  carries  off  the  victory 
over  the  Epikurean  as  over  the  Stoic ;  but  the  Epikurean 
is  treated  with  a  visible  liking,  which  is  of  great  weight  in 
view  of  the  general  horror  of  Epikureanism  which  was 
still  prevalent.  In  his  attempts  to  reform  logic,  Valla 
was  not  always  fair  to  the  subtleties  of  Scholasticism,  and 
his  own  treatment  tinges  logic  very  strongly  with  rheto- 
rical elements.  Yet  the  undertaking  was  of  great  histo- 
rical importance,  as  the  first  attempt  at  a  serious  criticism 
which  not  only  attacked  the  corruptions  of  Scholasticism, 
but  did  not  shrink  even  before  the  authority  of  Aristotle 
himself.  Valla  is  in  other  provinces  also  one  of  the  first 
leaders  of  awakening  criticism.      His  appearance   is   in 

52  Comp.  Lorenzo  Valla,  ein  Vortrag  von  J.  Vahlen.   Berlin,  1870,  S.  6  foil. 


THE  SCIENTIFIC  RENASCENCE.  227 

every  respect  a  sign  of  the  end  of  the  unconditional  domi- 
nion of  tradition  and  infallible  authorities. 

In  Germany,  the  Humanist  movement,  powerfully  as  it 
had  begun,  was  early  and  completely  absorbed  by  the 
theological  movement.  The  very  circumstance  that  here 
the  opposition  made  the  most  decided  and  open  break 
with  the  hierarchy,  perhaps  brought  with  it  that  the 
scientific  department  was  partly  neglected,  partly  treated 
in  a  more  conservative  spirit  than  elsewhere.  It  was  only 
after  the  lapse  of  centuries  that  the  attainment  of  liberty 
of  thought  atoned  for  this  sacrifice. 

It  was  Philip  Melanchthon  who  presented  the  most 
decided  example  for  the  reform  of  philosophy  on  the  old 
foundation  of  Aristotle.  He  gave  out  openly  that  he 
intended  to  introduce  into  philosophy,  by  going  back  to 
the  genuine  writings  of  Aristotle,  a  reform  like  that  in- 
tended for  theology  by  Luther  in  going  back  to  the  Bible. 

But  this  reform  of  Melanchthon's  did  not,  on  the  whole, 
result  for  the  good  of  Germany.  It  was,  on  the  one  hand, 
not  radical  enough ;  for  Melanchthon  himself,  with  all  his 
subtlety  of  thought,  was  thoroughly  hampered  by  the 
fetters  of  theology,  and  even  of  astrology.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  immense  weight  of  the  reformer  and  the 
influence  of  his  academical  activity  brought  about  in  Ger- 
many a  return  to  Scholasticism,  which  lasted  until  long 
after  Descartes,  and  formed  the  chief  hindrance  to  philo- 
sophy in  Germany. 

It  is  worth  observing,  however,  that  Melanchthon  intro- 
duced regular  lectures  upon  psychology  with  his  own 
textbook.  His  views  often  border  closely  enough  upon 
Materialism,  but  are  everywhere  restrained  within  narrow 
limits  by  the  doctrine  of  the  Church,  without  any  attempt 
at  deeper  reconciliation.  The  soul  was  explained  by 
Melanchthon,  after  the  false  reading  IvhiKkr^ta  for  eWeXe- 
%eia,  as  the  uninterrupted ;  a  reading  upon  which  chiefly 
rested  the  assumption  that  Aristotle  believed  in  the  im- 
mortality of  the  soul.     Amerbach,  the  professor  at  Wit- 


228  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

tenberg  wbo  wrote  a  strictly  Aristotelian  Psychology,  was 
so  embroiled  with  the  reformer  over  this  reading,  that 
he  left  Wittenberg  in  consequence,  and  became  a  Catholic 
again. 

A  third  treatise  on  psychology  appeared  about  the  same 
time  from  the  hand  of  the  Spaniard  Luis  Vives. 

Vives  must  be  regarded  as  the  most  important  philoso- 
phical reformer  of  this  period,  and  as  a  forerunner  of  Des- 
cartes and  of  Bacon.  His  whole  life  was  an  uninterrupted 
and  successful  struggle  against  Scholasticism.  With  re- 
gard to  Aristotle,  his  view  was  that  the  genuine  disciples 
of  his  spirit  should  go  beyond  him,  and  interrogate  nature 
herself,  as  the  ancients  had  done.  Not  out  of  blind  tradi- 
tions nor  subtle  hypotheses  is  nature  to  be  known,  but 
through  direct  investigation  by  the  method  of  experiment. 
In  spite  of  this  unusual  clearness  as  to  the  true  founda- 
tions of  inquiry,  Vives  seldom  appeals  in  his  Psychology 
to  the  facts  of  life  in  order  to  communicate  the  observa- 
tions of  himself  and  others.  The  chapter  on  the  immor- 
tality of  the  soul  is  written  in  a  thoroughly  rhetorical 
style,  and  founds  what  is  offered  as  an  irrefutable  argu- 
ment on  the  slenderest  proofs — in  what  has  continued 
down  to  our  own  day  to  be  a  favourite  fashion.  And  yet 
Vives  was  one  of  the  clearest  heads  of  his  century,  and 
his  psychology,  especially  in  the  doctrine  of  the  emotions, 
abounds  in  subtle  observations  and  happy  appreciations  of 
character. 

The  honest  naturalist  of  Zürich,  Konrad  Gessner,  also 
wrote  a  Psychology  about  this  time,  which  is  interest- 
ing in  its  contents  and  treatment.  After  an  extremely 
concise,  almost  tabular,  statement  of  all  possible  views  as 
to  the  nature  of  the  soul,  follows  abruptly  a  detailed  doc- 
trine of  the  senses.  Here  Gessner  feels  himself  at  home, 
and  lingers  complacently  in  physiological  expositions, 
which  are  in  part  of  a  very  thorough  character.  It  pro- 
duces a  very  curious  impression,  on  the  other  hand,  if  we 
cast  a  slance  at  the  same  time  over  the  fearful  chaos  of 


THE  SCIENTIFIC  RENASCENCE.  229 

theories  and  opinions  on  the  soul  in  the  first  part  of  the 
work.  "  Some  hold,"  as  Gessner  tells  us,  with  imper- 
turbable calm,  "  the  soul  to  be  nothing ;  some  hold  it  to 
be  a  substance."  53 

On  all  sides,  then,  we  see  the  shaking  of  the  old  Aris- 
totelian tradition,  the  unsettling  of  opinions,  and  the  excit- 
ing of  doubts,  which  probably  only  exhibit  themselves  very 
partially  in  literature.  But  very  soon  psychology,  which 
was  treated  in  such  an  extraordinary  number  of  works 
from  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  century,  again  becomes  sys- 
tematised,  and  the  fermentation  of  the  period  of  transition 
makes  room  for  a  dogmatic  Scholasticism,  whose  chief 
object  it  is  to  reconcile  itself  with  theology. 

But  while  theology  still  held  full  dominion  over  the 
sphere  of  mind,  and  violent  controversies  drowned  the 
voice  of  calm  judgment,  rigid  inquiry  was  quietly  laying 
in  the  province  of  external  nature  an  impregnable  basis 
for  an  entirely  revolutionised  theory  of  the  universe. 

In  the  year  1543  appeared,  with  a  dedication  to  the 
Pope,  the  book  on  the  "  Orbits  of  the  Heavenly  Bodies," 
by  Mcolaus  Copernicus  of  Thorn.  Within  the  last  days 
of  his  life  the  grey-headed  inquirer  received  the  first  copy 
of  his  book,  and  then  in  contentment  departed  from  the 
world.54 

What  now,  after  the  lapse  of  three  centuries,  every 
school  child  must  learn,  that  the  earth  revolves  upon  its 
own  axis  and  round  the  sun,  was  then  a  great,  and,  despite 
a  few  forerunners,  a  new  truth,  diametrically  opposed  to 
the  general  consciousness.  It  was,  however,  a  truth  which 
contradicted  Aristotle,  and  with  which  the  Church  had 
not  yet  reconciled  herself.  What  to  some  extent  shel- 
tered the  doctrine  of  Copernicus  against  the  scorn  of  the 

53  All  the  psychological  treatises  of  articles  "Seelenlehre"  and  "Vives" 

the   Reformation    period    here  men-  in  the  Encl.    des  ges.   Erzieh.-  und. 

tioned  appeared  printed  together  in  a  Unterrichtswesens. 
single  volume  through  Jacob  Gessner         54  Comp.    Humboldt's  Kosmos,  ii. 

at  Zurich  in  1563 ;    the  three  first  S.  344  (E.  T.  ed.  Otte",  ii.  684,  and 

named  also  at  Basel.        Compare  the  note),  and  Anm.  22,  S.  497  foil. 


23o  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

conservative  masses,  against  the  Scholastic  and  ecclesias- 
tical fanaticism,  was  the  rigidly  scientific  form  and  the 
superfluity  of  proof  of  the  work,  on  which  the  author  had 
laboured,  in  the  quiet  leisure  of  his  prebendal  stall  at 
Frauenburg,  with  admirable  patience  for  three-and-thirty 
years.  There  is  something  really  great  in  the  thought 
that  a  man  who  is  seized  in  the  period  of  fiery  creative- 
ness  .by  a  world- stirring  idea,  with  full  consciousness  of 
its  range,  should  retire  in  order  to  devote  the  whole 
of  his  future  life  to  the  calm  working  out  of  this  idea. 
And  this  explains  the  enthusiasm  of  his  few  earliest  dis- 
ciples, as  well  as  the  discomposure  of  the  pedants  and 
the  reserve  of  the  Church. 

How  critical  the  undertaking  appeared  in  this  aspect  is 
shown  by  the  circumstance  that  Professor  Oslander,  who 
carried  the  book  through  the  press,  in  the  customary  pre- 
face added  by  him  represented  the  whole  doctrine  of 
Copernicus  as  a  hypothesis.  Copernicus  himself  had  no 
share  in  this  concealment.  Kepler,  himself  animated  by 
haughty  freedom  of  thought,  calls  him  a  man  of  free 
spirit;  and,  in  fact,  only  such  a  man  could  have  com- 
pleted the  gigantic  task.  ^ 

55  Humboldt's  Kosmos,  ii.  S.  345  rect  contradiction  with  his  dedication 
(E.  T.  ii.  686).  "An  erroneous  to  Pope  Paul  III."  The  author  of 
opinion  unfortunately  prevails,  even  the  preface,  according  to  Gassendi, 
in  the  present  day,  that  Copernicus,  was  Andreas  Osiander ;  not  indeed, 
from  timidity  and  from  apprehension  as  Humboldt  says,  "  a  mathematician 
of  priestly  persecution,  advanced  his  then  living  at  Nuremberg,"  but  the 
views  regarding  the  planetary  move-  well-known  Lutheran  theologian, 
ment  of  the  earth,  and  the  position  The  astronomica]  revision  of  the 
of  the  sun  in  the  centre  of  the  plane-  proofs  was  undoubtedly  done  by 
tary  system,  as  mere  hypotheses,  which  Johannes  Schoner,  professor  of  ma- 
fulfilled  the  object  of  submitting  the  thematics  and  astronomy  in  Nurem- 
orbits  of  the  heavenly  bodies  more  berg.  To  Schoner  and  Osiander  the 
conveniently  to  calculation,  'but  charge  of  the  printing  was  assigned 
which  need  not  necessarily  be  either  by  Ehäticus,  professor  at  Witten- 
true,  or  even  probable.'  These  sin-  berg,  and  a  pupil  of  Copernicus,  be- 
gular  words  do  certainly  occur  in  the  cause  he  considered  Nuremberg  to  be 
anonymous  preface  attached  to  the  a  "  more  suitable "  place  of  publica- 
work  of  Copernicus,  and  inscribed,  tion  than  Wittenberg  (Humboldt's 
De  hypothesibus  hujus  operis  ;  but  Kosmos,  Anm.  24  to  passage  above 
they  are  quite  contrary  to  the  opinions  quoted,  ii.  S.  498,  E.  T.  at  p.  686). 
expressed  by  Copernicus,  and  in  di-  These  proceedings  were,  in  all  proba« 


THE  SCIENTIFIC  RENASCENCE. 


231 


"  The  earth  moves "  became  speedily  the  formula  by 
which  belief  in  science  and  in  the  infallibility  of  the 
reason  was  distinguished  from  blind  adherence  to  tradi- 
tion. And  when,  after  a  struggle  of  centuries,  the  victory 
in  this  matter  had  definitively  to  be  yielded  to  science» 


bility,  very  largely  influenced  by  con- 
sideration for  Melanclithon ;  for  he 
devoted  himself  with  predilection  to 
astronomy  and  astrology,  and  was  one 
of  the  keenest  opponents  of  the  Co- 
pernican  system. 

At  Eome  there  was  at  that  time 
greater  freedom,  and  the  order  of  the 
Jesuits  must  first  be  founded  in  order 
to  render  possible  the  burning  of 
Giordano  Bruno  and  the  trial  of 
Galilei.  With  regard  to  this  change, 
Ad.  Franck  observes,  in  his  notice  of 
Martin's  Galilee  (Moralistes  et  Philo- 
sophies, Paris,  1872,  p.  143):  "Chose 
etrange !  le  double  mouvement  de  la 
terre  avait  dejä  ete  enseigne,  .  au 
xve  siecle,  par  Nicolas  de  Cus,  et 
cette  proposition  ne  l'avait  pas  em» 
peche  de  devenir  cardinal.  En  1533, 
un  Allemand,  du  nom  de  Widmann- 
stadt, avait  soutenu  la  meme  doc- 
trine ä  Eome,  en  presence  du  Pape 
Clement  VII.,  et  le  souverain  pon- 
tife,  entemoignage  de  sa  satisfaction, 
lui  fit  present  d'un  beau  manuscrit 
grec.  En  1543  un  autre  pape,  Paul 
III.,  acceptait  la  dedicace  de  l'ouv- 
rage  ou  Copernic  developpait  son 
Systeme.  Pourquoi  done  Galilee, 
soixante  et  dix  ans  plus  tard,  ren- 
contrait-il  tant  de  resistance,  soule- 
vait-il  tant  de  coleres?"  The  con- 
trast is  very  happily  put,  but  the 
solution  is  very  unhappy  if  Franck 
thinks  that  the  difference  consists  in 
this,  that  Galilei  does  not  content 
himself  with  pure  mathematical  ab- 
stractions, but  (with  a  disparaging 
reflection  upon  the  speculations  of 
Kepler!)  called  to  his  assistance  ac- 
tual observation  and  experience.  As 
a  matter  of  fact,  whatever  may  have 
been  the  differences  of  their  charac- 
ter and  talents,  Copernicus,  Kepler, 


and  Galilei  worked  in  precisely  the 
same  spirit  of  scientific  reform,  of 
progress,  and  the  breaking  down  of 
narrowing  prejudices,  without  any 
regard  to  the  limit  separating  the 
learned  world  and  the  common  people. 
We  will,  therefore,  not  omit  to  quote 
the  following  passage  —  one  which 
does  its  author  honour — from  Hum- 
boldt's Kosmos,  ii.  S.  346,  E.  T.  ii. 
687:  "The  founder  of  our  present 
system  of  the  universe  was  almost 
more  distinguished,  if  possible,  by 
the  intrepidity  and  confidence  with 
which  he  expressed  his  opinions,  than 
for  the  knowledge  to  which  they  owed 
their  origin.  He  deserves  to  a  high 
degree  the  fine  eulogium  passed  upon 
him  by  Kepler,  who,  in  the  intro- 
duction to  the  Rudolphine  Tables, 
calls  him  'the  man  of  free  soul;' 
6  vir  f  uit  maximo  ingenio  et  quod  in 
hoc  exercitio  (combating  prejudices) 
magni  momenti  est,  animo  liber.' 
When  Copernicus  is  describing,  in  his 
dedication  to  the  Pope,  the  origin  of 
his  work,  he  does  not  scruple  to 
term  the  opinion  generally  expressed 
amongst  theologians  of  the  immo- 
bility and  central  position  of  the 
earth  an  'absurd  acroama,'  and  to 
attack  the  stupidity  of  those  who 
adhere  to  so  erroneous  a  doctrine. 
'  If  ever/  he  writes,  '  any  empty- 
headed  babblers  (/xarcuoAoyot),  igno- 
rant of  all  mathematical  science, 
should  take  upon  themselves  to  pro- 
nounce judgment  on  his  work, 
through  an  intentional  distortion  of 
any  passage  in  the  holy  Scriptures 
(propter  aliquem  locum  Scripturae 
male  ad  suum  propositum  detor- 
tum),  he  should  despise  so  presump- 
tuous an  attack  ! ' " 


232  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

this  threw  a  weight  into  the  scale  in  its  favour,  as  though 
it  had  first  given  movement  by  a  miracle  to  the  hitherto 
motionless  earth. 

One  of  the  earliest  and  most  decided  adherents  of  the 
new  system  of  the  world,  the  Italian  Giordano  Bruno,  is  a 
thorough  philosopher ;  and  although  his  system  as  a  whole 
must  be  described  as  pantheistic,  it  is,  nevertheless,  in  so 
many  ways  related  to  Materialism,  that  we  must  not  omit 
its  consideration. 

While  Copernicus  clung  to  Pythagorean  traditions  56 — 
the  Index  Congregation  later  described  his  whole  doctrine 
as  simply  a  doctrina  Pythagorica — Bruno  took  Lucretius 
as  his  model.  He  very  happily  selected  the  ancient  Epi- 
kurean  doctrine  of  the  infinity  of  worlds,  and  taught,  com- 
bining it  with  the  Copernican  system,  that  all  fixed  stars 
are  suns,  which  extend  in  infinite  number  throughout 
space,  and  have  in  turn  their  invisible  satellites,  which  are 
related  to  them  just  as  the  earth  is  to  the  sun  or  the 
moon  to  the  earth ;  a  theory  which,  as  against  the  old 
assumption  of  limited  space,  is  of  almost  as  much  import- 
ance as  the  doctrine  of  the  revolution  of  the  earth.57 

"  The  infinity  of  forms  under  which  matter  appears," 
taught  Bruno,  "  it  does  not  receive  from  another  and  some- 
thing external,  but  produces  them  from  itself,  and  engen- 

55  I  may  take  this  opportunity  of  cited  to  inquiry  by  the  ideas  of  Greek 

adding  a   supplementary  remark  to  antiquity  is  rendered  quite  certain, 

what  has  been  said  of  Copernicus  and  therefore,  by  Copernicus's  own  state- 

Aristarchos  of  Samos  on  pp.  117,  118.  ments  ;  but  at  the  same  time  he  no- 

That  Copernicus  was  acquainted  with  where  refers  to  Aristarchos  in  parti- 

the  view  of  the  ancient  astronomer,  cular.      Comp.   Humboldt,   loc.   ci&t 

is  (according  to  Humboldt,  Kosmos,  and  Lichtenberg,  Nicolaus  Coperni- 

ii.  S.    349  ff.,   E.  T.  ii.  691)  not  im-  cus,    in    fifth    vol.     of   Vermischte 

probable;    he  refers,    however,    ex-  Schriften    ("Neue     Original- Ausgabe, 

pressly  to  two    passages    of    Cicero  Göttingen,  1844),  S.  193  ff. 

(Acad.    Qu.    iv.    30)    and    Plutarch  57  Bruno  is  not  only  very  fond  of 

(De  Placitis  Philos.,  iii.    13),  which  quoting  Lucretius,  but  he  also  sedu- 

first  set  him  thinking  as  to  the  possi-  lously  imitates  him  in  his   didactic 

ble  revolution  of  the  earth.  In  Cicero  poem  "  De  TJniverso  etMundis."  His 

the  opinion  of  Hiketas  of  Syracuse  is  '  Polemic    against    the     Aristotelian 

referred  to  ;  and  in  Plutarch,  that  of  Cosmology '    is    discussed    by  Hugo 

the    Pythagoreans    Ekphantos    and  Wernekke  (Leipziger Dissert., printed 

Herakleides.     That  he  was  first  in-  Dresden,  1871). 


THE  SCIENTIFIC  RENASCENCE.  233 

ders  them  from  its  "bosom.  Matter  is  not  that  prope  nihil 
which  some  philosophers  have  wished  to  make  it,  and  as 
to  which  they  have  so  much  contradicted  each  other ;  not 
that  naked,  mere  empty  capacity,  without  efficiency,  com- 
pleteness, and  fact.  Even  though  it  has  no  form  of  its 
own,  it  is  not  at  least  deprived  of  it,  as  ice  is  of  heat, 
or  as  the  depths  are  of  light,  but  it  is  like  the  travailing 
mother  as  she  expels  her  offspring  from  her  bosom.  Even 
Aristotle  and  his  successors  make  the  forms  proceed  from 
the  inward  potency  of  matter,  rather  than  be  produced  in 
it  after  a  kind  of  external  fashion :  but  instead  of  finding 
this  active  potency  in  the  inward  fashioning  of  the  form, 
they  have  recognised  it  for  the  most  part  only  in  the 
developed  reality,  seeing  that  the  complete  sensible  ap- 
pearance of  a  thing  is  not  the  principal  ground  of  its 
existence,  but  only  a  consequence  and  effect  of  it.  Nature 
produces  its  objects  not  by  substraction  and  addition,  like 
human  art,  but  only  by  separation  and  unfolding.  Thus 
taught  the  wisest  men  among  the  Greeks,  and  Moses,  in 
describing  the  origin  of  things,  introduces  the  universal 
efficient  Being  thus  speaking :  "  Let  the  earth  bring  forth 
the  living  creature ;  let  the  waters  bring  forth  the  moving 
creature  that  hath  life ; "  as  though  he  said,  Let  matter 
bring  them  forth.  Eor  according  to  Moses  the  material 
principle  of  things  is  water,  and  therefore  he  says  that  the 
actively  formative  reason,  which  he  calls  f  spirit,'  moved 
upon  the  face  of  the  waters,  and  the  creation  was  brought 
about  through  its  imparting  to  them  strength  to  bring 
forth.  And  so  they  are  all  of  opinion  that  things  arise, 
not  by  composition,  but  by  separation  and  development, 
and  therefore  matter  is  not  without  forms — nay,  it  con- 
tains them  all,  and  since  it  unfolds  what  it  carries  con- 
cealed within  itself,  it  is  in  truth  all  nature  and  the  mother 
of  all  living  things."  58 

58  This  passage  is  taken  from  Moritz  426,  427.     In  this  thoughtful  work 

Carriere,  Die  philos.  Weltansch.  der  Bruno  is  treated  with  special  liking. 
Reforrnationszeitt  in  ihren  Bez.  zur  Comp.,  besides,  Bartholmess, 

Gegenwart,  Stuttg.  u.  Tüb.  1847,  S.  Jordano  Bruno,  Paris,  1846,  2  vol. 


234  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

If  we  compare  this  definition,  which  is  declared  by  Car- 
riere  to  be  one  of  the  most  important  facts  in  the  history 
of  philosophy,  with  that  of  Aristotle,  we  find  this  great  and 
decisive  difference :  that  Bruno  conceived  matter  not  as  the 
potential  but  as  the  actual  and  active.  Aristotle  also  taught 
that  form  and  matter  in  things  are  one ;  but  as  he  defined 
matter  as  mere  potentiality  of  becoming  all  that  form  may 
make  of  it,  real  substantiality  belonged  to  the  latter 
only.  These  definitions  were  reversed  by  Bruno.  He 
makes  matter  the  true  essence  of  things,  and  makes  it 
bring  forth  all  forms  out  of  itself.  This  principle  is  Mate- 
rialistic, and  we  should  therefore  be  fully  justified  in 
claiming  Bruno  entirely  for  Materialism,  but  that  his  de- 
velopment of  his  system  assumes  a  Pantheistic  turn  on 
certain  decisive  points. 

Even  Pantheism,  it  is  true,  is  in  itself  only  a  modifica- 
tion of  some  other  Monistic  system.  The  Materialist  who 
defines  God  as  the  sum  of  all  animated  matter  becomes  at 
once  a  Pantheist  without  giving  up  his  Materialistic  views. 
But  the  natural  consequence  of  directing  the  spirit  to  God 
and  to  divine  things  is  usually  this,  that  the  starting- 
point  is  forgotten ;  that  our  treatment  of  the  subject  more 
and  more  tends  to  conceive  the  soul  of  the  universe  not  as 
itself  necessarily  implicated  in  matter,  but  as  at  least  in 
thought  the  prime  creative  principle.  In  this  wise  even 
Bruno  developed  his  theology.  He  made  such  a  compro- 
mise with  the  Bible,  that  he  taught  that,  as  the  Bible  was 
intended  for  the  people,  it  was  obliged  to  adapt  itself 
even  to  their  notions  of  natural  history,  since  otherwise 
it  would  never  have  found  any  acceptance.59  Bruno  was 
poetical  in   his  way  of  expressing  himself;  the  greater 

59  Carriere,  "WeUansch,  der  Eefor-  is  found  also  in  Galilei  again  in  his 

mationszeit,  S.  384.    This  distinction,  letter  to  the  Grand-Duchess  Christine: 

one  already  employed  by  the  Arabian  "De    sacrae  Scripturae  testimoniis 

philosophers,    between    the    ethical  in  conclusionibus  mere  naturalibus, 

purpose  of  the  Bible  and  its  way  of  quae  sensata   experientia  et    neces- 

speakipg  in  accordance  with  the  views  sariis  demonstrationibus  evinci  pos- 

of  the  time  at  which  it  was  written,  sunt  temere  non  usurj^andis." 


THE  SCIENTIFIC  RENASCENCE.  235 

number  of  his  works  are  poetical  in  form,  written  partly 
in  Latin,  partly  in  Italian.  His  profound  spirit  was  ever 
ready  to  lose  itself  in  a  mystic  darkness  of  contempla- 
tion ;  but,  again,  with  equal  boldness  and  recklessness,  he 
ventured  also  to  express  his  opinions  with  absolute  clear- 
ness. 

Bruno  had  originally  entered  the  order  of  the  Domini- 
cans, in  order  to  find  leisure  for  his  studies ;  but  having 
become  suspected  of  heresy,  he  was  obliged  to  flee,  and 
from  that  time  forward  his  life  was  unsettled,  and  marked 
by  a  long  chain  of  persecutions  and  hostilities.  He 
stayed  in  turn  at  Geneva,  at  Paris,  in  England  and  in 
Germany,  at  last  to  venture  on  the  fatal  step  of  return- 
ing to  his  native  land.  In  the  year  1592,  at  Yenice,  he 
fell  into  the  hands  of  the  Inquisition. 

After  many  years'  confinement,  he  was  condemned  at 
Eome,  still  unbowed  and  firm  in  his  convictions.  After 
being  degraded  and  excommunicated,  he  was  handed  over 
to  the  secular  authorities,  with  the  request  that  they 
would  "  punish  him  as  mercifully  as  possible,  and  without 
shedding  of  blood ; "  the  well-known  formula  which  meant 
that  he  was  to  be  burnt.  "When  his  sentence  was  an- 
nounced to  him,  he  said :  "  I  suspect  you  pronounce  this 
sentence  with  more  fear  than  I  receive  it."  On  the  17th 
February  1600,  he  was  burnt  in  the  Campofiore  at  Eome. 
His  doctrines  have  undoubtedly  exercised  a  great  in- 
fluence upon  the  succeeding  developments  of  philosophy, 
although  he  fell  into  the  background  after  the  appearance 
of  Descartes  and  Bacon,  and,  like  so  many  great  men  of 
the  Transition  period,  became  forgotten. 

It  was  reserved  for  the  first  half  of  th.j  seventeenth  cen- 
tury to  reap  in  the  sphere  of  philosophy  the  ripe  fruits  of 
the  great  emancipation  which  the  Eenascence  had  secured 
in  turn  for  the  most  various  departments  of  man's  intel- 
lectual life.  In  the  first  decades  of  the  century  Bacon 
made  his  appearance,  towards  its  middle  came  Descartes ; 
his  contemporaries  were  Gassendi  and  Hobbes,  whom  we 


236  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

must  regard  as  the  true  revivers  of  a  Materialistic  philo- 
sophy. But  besides  this,  the  two  more  famous  '  restorers 
of  philosophy/  as  they  are  usually  styled,  Descartes  as 
well  as  Bacon,  stand  in  a  close  and  remarkable  relation- 
ship to  Materialism. 

With  regard  to  Bacon  in  particular,  it  would  be  almost 
more  difficult  in  an  exhaustive  inquiry  to  prove  sharply 
and  clearly  in  what  he  differs  from  Materialism,  than  to 
show  what  he  has  in  common  with  it. 

Among  all  philosophical  systems,  Bacon  places  that 
of  Demokritos  highest.  He  asserts  in  his  praise  that 
his  school  had  penetrated  deeper  than  any  other  into 
the  nature  of  things.  The  study  of  matter  in  its  mani- 
fold transformations  carries  us  farther  than  Abstraction. 
Without  the  assumption  of  atoms  nature  cannot  be  well 
explained.  Whether  final  causes  operate  in  nature  can- 
not be  definitely  decided ;  at  all  events,  the  inquirer  must 
confine  himself  to  efficient  causes  only. 

It  is  very  common  to  carry  back  to  Bacon  and  Des- 
cartes two  opposing  lines  of  philosophy,  one  of  which 
stretches  from  Descartes  through  Spinoza,  Leibniz,  Kant, 
and  Fichte  to  Schelling  and  Hegel ;  while  the  other  runs 
from  Bacon  through  Hobbes  and  Locke  to  the  French 
Materialists  of  the  eighteenth  century;  indirectly  there- 
fore, we  must  trace  upon  this  latter  line  the  Materialism 
of  our  own  days. 

And  it  is,  in  fact,  merely  accidental  that  the  name  of 
Materialism  appeared  first  only  in  the  eighteenth  century ; 
we  have  the  thing  in  all  essential  respects  already  in 
Bacon,  and  we  are  only  restrained  from  designating  Bacon 
as  strictly  the  restorer  of  the  Materialistic  philosophy  by 
the  circumstance  that  he  fixed  his  attention  almost  ex- 
clusively upon  method,  and  that  he  expresses  himself 
upon  the  most  important  points  with  equivocal  reserve. 
The  vain  and  superstitious  absence  of  science  60  in  Bacon 

60  In  this  respect,  the  crushing  Bacon  von  Verulam  und  die  Methode 
judgment  of  Liebig  (Ueber  Francis     der  Naturforschung,  München,  1863) 


THE  SCIENTIFIC  RENASCENCE.  237 

agrees  in  itself  with  the  Materialistic  philosophy — not 
indeed  better,  but  also  not  worse,  than  with  most  other 
systems.  Only,  as  to  the  extensive  use  which  Bacon 
makes  of  '  spirits '  (spiritus)  in  his  natural  philosophy,  we 
may  offer  a  few  observations. 

Bacon  leans  here  upon  tradition,  but  with  a  self-suffi- 
ciency in  his  treatment  which  did  little  honour  to  the 
'  restorer  of  the  sciences.'  '  Spirits '  of  all  kinds  play  a 
great  part  in  the  cosmology  and  physiology  of  the  ISTeo- 
Platonic-Scholastic  philosophy;  especially,  too,  among  the 
Arabians,  where  the  spirits  of  the  stars  govern  the  world  by 
means  of  mystical  sympathies  and  antipathies  with  the 
spirits  that  inhabit  earthly  things.  The  doctrine  of 
'  spiritus '  took  scientific  shape  chiefly  in  psychology  and 
physiology,  in  which  its  effects  may  be  traced  even  to  the 
present  (for  example,  in  the  notion  of  the  slumbering, 
waking,  or  excited  'animal  spirits').  On  this  head 
Galen's  theory  of  the  psychical  and  animal  c  spiritus '  in 
connection  with  the  doctrine  of  the  four  humours  and  the 
temperaments  was  very  early  in  the  Middle  Ages  fused 

cannot  be  softened  by  any  reply  (see  Less  simple  is   the  judgment  upon 

the   literature   in  Ueberweg,    Grun-  Bacon's  method.      Here   Liebig  has 

driss,  iii.  S.  39,  3  Aufl.,  E.T.=Hist.  certainly  emptied  bath  and  babe  to- 

of  Phil.   ii.  35-6);  the  facts  are  too  gether,  although  his  critical  remarks 

forcible.      The  most  frivolous  dilet-  on  the  theory  of    induction   (comp, 

tanteism  in  his  own  scientific  experi-  also    "Induction    und    Deduction," 

ments,  the  degradation  of  science  to  München,    1865)    contain    extremely 

hypocritical  courtliness,  ignorance  or  valuable  contributions  to  a  complete 

misapprehension  of  the  great  seien-  theory  of    scientific    method.      And 

tific  achievements  of   a  Copernicus,  yet  it  is   worthy  of   attention  that 

a   Kepler,    a   Galilei,    who   had    not  thoughtful   and   learned   writers    on 

waited  for  the  '  Instauratio  Magna,'  method  like  W.  Herschel  (Introd.  to 

malignant  hostility  and  depreciation  the   Study   of    Natural   Philosophy, 

of   real  inquirers  in  his  immediate  1832)   and  Stuart   Mill,    still  regard 

neighbourhood,  such  as  Gilbert  and  Bacon's  theory  of  induction   as   the 

Harvey — these  are  points  enough  to  first  although  inadequate  foundation 

display  Bacon's  scientific  character  in  of    their  own  theory.      It    is  quite 

as  unfavourable  a  light  as  his  politi-  right  that  we  have  recently  begun  to 

cal  and  personal  character,  so  that  recall  the  forerunners   of    Bacon  in 

the  view  of  Macaulay  (Critical  and  Methodology,    such  as   Leonardo  da 

Historical  Essays,  'Lord  Bacon')  al-  Vinci,    Luis    Vives,    and    especially 

ready  properly  controverted  by  Kuno  Galilei ;  and  yet  here  again  we  must 

Fischer  (Baco  von  Verulam,  Leipzig,  beware  of  such  exaggerations  as  that, 

1856,  S.  5  ff.),  has  lost  all  support,  for  instance,  in  Ad.  Franck,  Moral- 


238  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

with  the  Aristotelian  psychology.  According  to  this  doc- 
trine, which  may  he  found  at  full  length  even  in  Melanch- 
thon's  Psychology,  the  four  fundamental  humours  are 
prepared  in  the  liver  (second  organic  process  after  the 
first  has  taken  place  in  the  stomach) ;  out  of  the  noblest 
humour,  the  blood,  the  '  spiritus  vitalis '  is  prepared  by  a 
new  process  in  the  heart ;  and  this  is  finally  (the  fourth 
and  last  process)  in  the  cavities  of  the  brain  refined  into 
the  '  spiritus  animalis/ 

This  theory  probably  owed  the  deep  hold  which  it  ob- 
tained chiefly  to  the  fact  that  it  seemed  to  superficial 
thought  a  sufficient  bridging  over  of  the  gulf  between  the 
sensible  and  the  supersensible,  a  need  which  was  felt  as 
well  by  the  Neo-Platonists  as  by  the  Christian  theolo- 
gians. Thus,  for  example,  we  find  still  in  Melanchthon 
that  the  material  and  gradually  refined  '  spiritus '  is  the 
immediate  bearer  of  influences,  which  in  theory  should  be 
purely  spiritual,  but  which,  in  fact,  are  represented  by  this 
learned  theologian  in  very  material  fashion.  Thus  the  divine 
spirit  mingles  with  these  vital  and  animal  spirits  of  man ; 
but  if  a  devil  has  his  abode  in  the  heart,  he  blows  upon 
the  spirits  and  brings  them  into  confusion.61 

To  really  logical  thought  the  gulf  is,  of  course,  equally 

istes  et  Philosophes,  Paris,  1872,  p.  works,  we  also  take  into  account  the 
154;  "La  methode  de  Galilee,  anter-  authority  of  his  exalted  rank,  and 
ieure  ä  celle  de  Bacon  et  de  Des-  the  fact  that  he,  with  a  happy  appre- 
cartes,  leur  est  superieure  ä  toutes  ciation,  gave  its  proper  watchword  to 
deux."  Moreover,  we  must  the  age,  we  shall  be  doing  nothing  to 
not  overlook  the  simple  fact  that,  depreciate  his  historical  import- 
Bacon's    great    reputation    did    not  ance. 

proceed  from  a  later  historical  mis-  .  61  Comp,  the  following  passage  at 

apprehension,  but  that  it  has  come  the  end  of  the  physiological  part  (p. 

down  through  a  constant  tradition  590  of  the  Zürich  edition):  "  Galenus 

from  his  contemporaries  down  to  our-  inquit  de  anima  hominis  :  nos  spiritus 

selves.     This' justifies  us  in  asserting  aut  animam   esse,  aut  immediatum 

the  extent  and  the  intensity  of  his  instrumentum  animae.     Quod  certe 

influence,  and  this  influence,  despite  verum  est,  et  luce  sua  superant  solis 

all  the  weaknesses  of  his  doctrines,  et    omnium    stellarum    lucem.      Et 

yet  essentially  resulted  in  advantage  quod  mirabilius  est,  his  ipsis  spiriti- 

to  scientific  progress  and  the  import-  bus  in  hominibus  piis  misceticr  ipse 

ance  of  the  natural  sciences.  If,  then,  divinus  spiritus,  et  efiicit  magis  ful- 

in  addition  to  his  powerful  style  and  gentes   divina   luce,    ut   agnitio  Dei 

the  kindling  flashes  of  light  in  Bacon's  sit  illustrier  et  assensio  firmior,  et 


THE  SCIENTIFIC  RENASCENCE.  239 

great  between  the  supersensible  and  the  finest  particle 
of  the  finest  matter,  or  the  whole  globe.  The  spirits  of 
the  modern  '  spiritualists '  of  England  and  America,  are 
therefore  quite  right  when  they  shake  their  believers 
roughly  by  the  coat- sleeve,  or  when  they  career  around 
a  room  with  heavy  furniture. 

But  by  the  side  of  this  modest,  and  in  form,  at  least, 
rigidly  scientific  doctrine  of  the  vital  spirits  in  the  animal 
organism,  there  stands  the  fantastic  doctrine  of  the  astro- 
logers and  alchemists,  which  resolves  the  essence  of  all 
things  into  the  workings  of  such  spirits,  and  thus  destroys 
all  distinction  between  the  sensible  and  the  supersensible. 
"We  may  indeed  maintain  that  the  '  spirits '  of  this  theory 
of  nature  are  absolutely  material,  and  identical  with  what 
we  nowadays  call  forces;  but  even  leaving  out  of  sight 
that  in  this  very  notion  of  force  there  still  perhaps  lurks 
a  remnant  of  this  same  want  of  clearness,  what  shall  we 
think  of  a  kind  of  matter  that  acts  upon  other  material 
things,  not  by  pressure  and  collision,  but  by  sympathy  ? 
We  have  only  to  add  to  this,  that  the  idea  of  nature  held 
by  the  astrologers  and  alchemists  in  its  more  fantastic 
forms  attributed  even  to  inanimate  things  a  kind  of  con- 
sciousness, and  we  shall  no  longer  find  it  a  very  great  step 
to  Paracelsus,  who  conceived  the  c  spiritus '  anthropomor- 
phically,  and  peopled  all  the  details  of  the  world,  both 
great  and  small,  with  innumerable  demons,  from  whom  all 
life  and  all  activity  proceed. 

And  now  as  to  Bacon.  To  all  appearance,  indeed,  he 
took  up  a  tolerably  decided  opposition  to  the  alchemistical 
theory  of  nature.  He  repeatedly  treats  the  spirits  as 
matter  and  material  forces,  so  that  we  might  believe  that 
the  Materialism  of  Bacon  is  nowhere  to  be  more  clearly 
seen  than  in  his  doctrine  of  the  '  spiritus.'  If  we  look,  how- 
ever, a  little  closer,  we  find  that  he  not  only  adopts  into  his 

motus  sint  ardentiores   erga  Deum.  cia,  et  manifestos  furores  efficiunt,  et 

E  contra,    tibi  diaboli  occupant  impellunt  corda  et  alia  membra  ad 

corda,  suo  afflatu  turbant  spiritus  in  crudelissimos  motus."   Comp.  Corpus 

corde  et  in  cerebro,  impediunt    udi-  Keformatorum,  xiii.  88  sqq. 


240  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

theory  all  kinds  of  superstitious  assumptions  from  the 
wisdom  of  the  Kabbalists,  but  that  even  his  Materialistic 
rendering  of  magic  into  l  natural '  phenomena  is  extremely 
threadbare,  and  often  enough  is  an  entire  failure.  Thus, 
for  instance,  Bacon  does  not  hesitate  to  attribute  to  bodies 
a  sort  of  power  of  conception,  to  make  the  magnet  "  per- 
ceive" the  neighbourhood  of  the  iron,  and  to  exalt  the 
"sympathy"  and  "antipathy"  of  the  "spiritus"  into  a  cause 
of  natural  phenomena ;  and  accordingly  the  "  evil  eye,"  the 
sympathetic  rubbing  of  warts,  and  so  on,  fit  admirably 
into  this  kind  of  natural  science.62  It  is  also  quite  in  har- 
mony with  it  when  Bacon,  in  his  favourite  theory  of  heat, 
quietly  ranks  the  astrological c  heat '  of  a  metal,  a  star,  and 
so  on,  on  a  line  with  the  physical  heat. 

It  is  indeed  true  that  the  alchemistico-theosophic  theory 
of  nature  derived  from  the  Kabbala  had  won  so  deep  a 
hold  in  England,  and  especially  among  the  aristocratic 
class,  that  Bacon  in  all  these  matters  is  laying  down  nothing 
original,  but  is  simply  moving  among  the  ideas  of  his 
environment ;  and  we  may  in  fact  assume  that  Bacon,  in 
his  boundless  servility,  adopted,  merely  out  of  complaisance 
to  the  court,  many  more  of  such  views  than  he  could 
answer  for  to  himself.  On  the  other  hand,  again,  we  may 
observe  that  the  assumption  of  soul  running  through  all, 
and  even  through  inorganic  nature,  as  it  was  taught  parti- 
cularly by  Paracelsus,  stands  in  a  very  peculiar  correlation 
with  Materialism.  It  is  the  opposite  extreme,  which  not 
only  comes  into  contact  with  Materialism,  but,  in  fact, 
frequently  proceeds  from  it,  since  in  the  last  result  the 
production  of  spirit  must  be  attributed  to  matter  as  such, 
and  therefore  in  infinitely  numerous  gradations.  The  fan- 
tastical and  personifying  ornamentation  of  this  doctrine  of 
the  universal  diffusion  of  soul  in  matter,  such  as  we  find 
it  in  Paracelsus,  belongs  to  the  pointless  absurdities  of  the 
age,  and  from  this  Bacon  managed  to  keep  himself  toler- 

62  Comp,  the  extracts  collected  by  Schauer,  Gesch.  der  Naturphilosophie, 
Leipzig,  1841,  S.  77-80. 


THE  SCIENTIFIC  RENASCENCE.  241 

ably  free.  His  '  spiritus '  have  no  hands  or  feet,  and  yet  it 
is  remarkable  what  a  colossal  misapplication  the  '  Eestorer 
of  the  natural  sciences '  could  make  of  his  spirits  in  the 
explanation  of  nature  without  being  exposed  by  his  more 
knowing  contemporaries.  But  so  is  it  with  our  history : 
we  may  take  it  up  where  we  will,  we  shall  find  similar 
phenomena.  As  to  the  much-debated  question  of 

the  relation  of  Materialism  to  morality,  we  may  unhesi- 
tatingly assume  that  Bacon,  if  his  character  had  been 
purer  and  firmer,  would,  by  the  peculiarity  of  his  thinking, 
have  undoubtedly  been  led  to  strictly  Materialistic  prin- 
ciples. "We  find  not  fearless  consistency,  but  scientific 
halfness  and  hesitation  here  again,  in  connection  with  moral 
degeneracy. 

As  to  Descartes,  the  progenitor  of  the  opposite  line  of 
philosophical  succession,  who  established  the  dualism  be- 
tween mind  and  material  world,  and  took  the  famous 
'  Cogito  ergo  sum '  as  his  starting-point,  it  might  at  first 
appear  that,  as  opposed  to  the  Materialistic  philosophy, 
he  only  reacted  upon  it  in  point  of  its  consequence  and 
clearness.  But  how  then  shall  we  explain  the  fact  that 
the  worst  of  the  French  Materialists,  De  la  Mettrie,  wished 
to  be  a  thoroughgoing  Cartesian,  and  not  without  having 
good  reasons  for  so  wishing  ?  Here  again,  then,  we  find  a 
more  direct  connection,  which  we  will  now  proceed  to 
explain. 

With  regard  to  the  principles  of  investigation,  Bacon 
and  Descartes  occupy  primarily  a  negative  attitude  against 
all  previous  philosophy,  and  especially  against  the  Aristo- 
telian. Both  begin  by  doubting  of  everything ;  but  Bacon, 
in  order  that  he  may  then  be  led  to  the  discovery  of  truth 
by  the  hand  of  external  experience ;  Descartes,  to  elaborate 
it  by  deductive  reasoning  out  of  that  self-consciousness 
which  was  all  that  had  remained  to  him  amidst  his 
doubts. 

Here  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  Materialism  lies  only 
upon  Bacon's  side,  that  the  Cartesian  system,  if  consis- 

vol,  1.  Q 


242  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

tently  carried  out  from  his  fundamental  principles,  must 
have  led  to  an  Idealism  in  which  the  whole  external  world 
appears  as  mere  phenomenon  and  only  the  ego  has  any 
real  existence.63  Materialism  is  empirical,  and  rarely  em- 
ploys the  deductive  method,  and  then  only  when  a  suffi- 
cient stock  of  materials  has  been  acquired  inductively  out 
of  which  we  may  then  attain  to  new  truths  by  a  free  use 
of  the  syllogism.  Descartes  began  with  abstraction  and 
deduction,  and  that  was  not  only  not  Materialistic,  but 
also  not  practical :  it  necessarily  led  him  to  those  obvious 
fallacies  in  which,  among  all  great  philosophers,  perhaps, 
no  one  abounds  so  much  as  Descartes.  But,  for  once,  the 
deductive  method  came  to  the  front,  and  in  connection  with 
it  that  purest  form  of  all  deduction,  in  which,  too,  as  well 
as  in  philosophy,  Descartes  holds  an  honourable  place — 
mathematics.  Bacon  could  not  endure  mathematics ;  the 
pride  of  the  mathematicians — or  perhaps,  more  truly,  their 
rigorousness — displeased  him,  and  he  required  that  this 
science  should  be  only  a  handmaid,  but  should  not  demean 
herself  as  mistress  of  physics. 

Thus  then  proceeded  principally  from  Descartes  that 
mathematical  side  of  natural  philosophy  which  applied 
to  all  the  phenomena  of  nature  the  standard  of  number 
and  of  geometrical  figure.  It  deserves  attention  that  even 
in  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  Materialists 
— before  this  name  had  become  general — were  not  seldom 
described  as  'mechanici,'  that  is,  as  people  who  started 
with  a  mechanical  view  of  nature.  This  mechanical  view 
of  nature  had  really,  however,  been  originated  by  Des- 
cartes, and  had  been  developed  by  Spinoza,  and  not  less 
Leibniz,  although  the  last-named  philosopher  was  very 
far  from  numbering  himself  amongst  the  adherents  of  this 
movement. 


63  In  the  Memoires  pour  1'Histoire  referred  to,  although  without  men- 

des  Sciences  et  des  Beaux  Arts,  Tre-  tion  of  his  name,  who  holds  the  most 

voux  et  Paris,  1713,  p.  922,  a  certain  probable  view  to  be,  that  he  himself 

'  Malebranchist '    living  in  Paris   is  is  the  only  existing  being. 


THE  SCIENTIFIC  RENASCENCE..  243 

Although,  then,  in  the  most  essential  points,  Materialism 
starts  from  Bacon,  it  was  nevertheless  Descartes  who 
finally  impressed  upon  this  whole  way  of  thinking  that 
stamp  of  mechanism  which  appeared  most  strikingly  in  De 
la  Mettrie's  "  L'Homme  Machine."  It  was  really  due  to 
Descartes  that  all  the  functions  as  well  of  intellectual  as 
of  physical  life  were  finally  regarded  as  the  products 
of  mechanical  changes. 

To  the  possibility  of  a  natural  science  at  all,  Descartes 
had  helped  himself  by  the  somewhat  hasty  conclusion,  that 
although  otherwise  we  must  indeed  have  doubted  the 
reality  of  things  outside  us,  we  may  nevertheless  conclude 
that  they  are  really  existing,  because  otherwise  God  must 
be  a  deceiver  in  having  given  us  the  idea  of  the  external 
world. 

This  salto  mortale  accordingly  lands  Descartes  at  once 
in  the  midst  of  nature,  in  a  sphere  where  he  laboured  with 
much  greater  success  than  in  metaphysics.  As  to  the  gene- 
ral basis  of  his  theory  of  external  nature,  Descartes  was  not 
an  adherent  of  rigorous  Atomism :  he  denied  the  conceiv- 
ableness  of  the  atoms.  Even  if  there  are  smallest  particles 
which  cannot  possibly  be  any  further  divided,  yet  God 
must  be  able  to  divide  them  again,  for  their  divisibility 
is  still  constantly  conceivable.  But  in  spite  of  this  denial 
of  atoms,  he  was  yet  very  far  from  striking  into  the  path 
of  Aristotelianism.  His  doctrine  of  the  absolute  fulness 
of  space  has  not  only  an  entirely  different  basis  in  the 
notion  of  matter,  but  it  must  even  in  the  physical  theory 
take  a  shape  which  is  nearly  allied  to  Atomism.  There 
he  substitutes  for  the  atoms  small  round  corpuscles,  which 
remain  in  fact  quite  as  unchanged  as  the  atoms,  and  are 
only  divisible  in  thought,  that  is,  potentially ;  in  place  of 
the  empty  space  which  the  ancient  Atomists  adopted, 
he  had  extremely  fine  splinters,  which  have  been  formed 
in  the  interstices  when  the  corpuscles  were  originally 
rounded.  By  the  side  of  this  view  we  may  seriously 
ask  whether  the  metaphysical  theory  of  the  absolute  ful- 


244  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

ness  of  space  is  not  a  mere  makeshift,  in  order,  on  the  one 
hand,  not  to  swerve  too  far  from  the  orthodox  idea,  and 
yet,  on  the  other  hand,  to  have  all  the  advantages  for  a 
picturable  explanation  of  natural  phenomena  which  are 
possessed  by  Atomism?  Descartes,  moreover,  expressly 
explained  the  movement  of  the  particles  as  well  as  those  of 
bodies  out  of  mere  conduction,  according  to  the  laws  of 
mechanical  impact.  He  named,  indeed,  the  universal 
cause  of  all  movement,  God ;  but  all  bodies,  according  to 
him,  are  subject  to  a  particular  motion,  and  every  natural 
phenomenon  consists,  without  distinction  of  the  organic  or 
inorganic,  merely  of  the  conduction  of  the  motion  of  one 
body  to  another;  and  thus  all  mystical  explanations  of 
nature  were  set  aside  at  once,  and  that  by  the  same  kind 
of  principle  which  was  followed  by  the  Atomists  also. 

In  reference  to  the  human  soul,  the  point  around  which 
all  controversies  turned  in  the  eighteenth  century,  Bacon 
was  at  bottom  again  a  Materialist.  He  assumed,  it  is 
true,  the  anima  rationalis,  but  only  on  religious  grounds  j 
intelligible  he  did  not  consider  it.  But  the  anima  sensi- 
tiva,  which  alone  he  thought  capable  of  a  scientific  treat- 
ment, Bacon  regarded  in  the  sense  of  the  ancients  as  a  fine 
kind  of  matter.  Bacon,  in  fact,  did  not  at  all  recognise  the 
conceivableness  of  an  immaterial  substance,  and  his  whole 
mode  of  thought  was  inconsistent  with  the  view  of  the 
soul  as  the  form  of  the  body  in  the  Aristotelian  sense. 

Although  this  was  just  the  point  on  which  Descartes 
seemed  to  stand  most  sharply  opposed  to  Materialism,  it 
is  nevertheless  in  this  very  sphere  that  the  Materialists 
borrowed  from  him  the  principles  leading  to  the  most 
important  consequences. 

Descartes,  in  his  corpuscular  theory,  made  no  essential 
distinction  between  organic  and  inorganic  nature.  Plants 
were  machines;  and  as  to  animals,  he  suggested,  even 
though,  it  was  only  under  the  form  of  an  hypothesis,  that 
he  regarded  them  also  as  in  fact  mere  machines. 

Now  the  age  of  Descartes  happened  to  occupy  itself 


THE  SCIENTIFIC  RENASCENCE.  245 

very  busily  with  animal  psychology.  In  France  espe- 
cially one  of  the  best-read  and  most  influential  of  authors, 
the  ingenious  sceptic  Montaigne,64  had  rendered  popular 
the  paradoxical  proposition  that  the  animals  display  as 
much,  and  often  more,  reason  than  men.  But  what  Mon- 
taigne had  playfully  suggested,  in  the  shape  of  an  apology 
for  Raymund  of  Sabunde,  was  made  by  Hieronymus 
Eorarius  the  subject  of  a  special  treatise,  published  by 
Gabriel  Naudäus  in  1648,  and  bearing  the  title,  "Quod 
animalia  bruta  saepe  ratione  utantur  melius  homine."  65 

This  proposition  appeared  to  be  a  direct  contradiction 
to  that  of  Descartes,  but  there  was,  nevertheless,  a  syn- 
thesis of  the  two  found  possible  in  this  position — that  the 
animals  are  machines,  and  yet  think.  The  step  from  the 
animal  to  man  was  then  but  a  short  one ;  and,  moreover, 
here  also  Descartes  had  so  prepared  the  way,  that  he  may 
fairly  be  regarded  as  the  immediate  forerunner  of  out- 
spoken Materialism.  In  his  treatise  "  Passiones  Animae," 
he~calls  attention  to  the  important  fact  that  the  dead  body 
is  not  only  dead  because  the  soul  is  wanting  to  it,  but 
because  the  bodily  machine  itself  is  partially  destroyed.66 
If  we  reflect  that  the  entire  sum  of  the  idea  of  the  soul 
possessed  by  primitive  peoples  is  due  to  the  comparison 

64  Montaigne  is  at  the  same  time  of  animals  as  are  most  generally  de- 
one  of  the  most  dangerous  opponents  nied  to  them  as  being  products  of  the 
of  Scholasticism  and  the  founder  of  'higher  faculties  of  the  soul.'  With 
French  scepticism.  The  leading  their  virtues  the  vices  of  men  are  set 
Frenchmen  of  the  seventeenth  cen-  in  sharp  contrast.  We  can  therefore 
tury  were  almost  all  under  his  inflU-  understand  that  the  manuscript,  al- 
ence,  friend  and  foe  alike  ;  nay,  we  though  written  by  a  priest  who  was 
find  that  he  exercised  an  important  a  friend  both  of  Pope  and  Emperor, 
influence  even  upon  the  opponents  of  had  to  wait  so  long  for  publication, 
his  gay  and  somewhat  frivolous  phi-  The  publisher,  Naudäus,  was 
losophy,  as,  for  instance,  upon  Pascal  a  friend  of  Gassendi's,  who  also,  un- 
and  the  men  of  Port  Eoyal.  like  Descartes,  has  a  very  high  esti- 

65  The  work  of  Hieronymus  Eora-  mate  of  the  capacities  of  the  animals, 
rius  waited  a  full  hundred  years  for  66  Passiones  Animae,  Art.  v.  :  "  Er- 
its  publication,  and  it  is  therefore  in  roneum  esse  credere  animam  dare 
its  origin  earlier  than  the  "Essais"  motum  et  calorem  corpori ; "  and  Art. 
of  Montaigne.  It  is  distinguished  by  vi.:  "Quaenam  differentia  sit  inter 
a  grim  and  serious  tone,  and  the  assi-  corpus  vivens  et  cadaver." 

duous  emphasising  of  just  such  traits 


246  PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 

of  the  living  and  the  dead  body,  and  that  the  ignorance  of 
the  physiological  phenomena  in  the  dying  body  is  one  of 
the  strongest  supports  of  the  theory  of  a  ' visionary  soul ' 
' — that  is,  of  that  more  subtle  man  who  is  supposed  by  the 
popular  psychology  to  be  present  as  the  motive  force  in 
the  inside  of  the  man — we  shall  immediately  recognise  in x 
this  single  point  an  important  contribution  to  the  carry- 
ing out  of  anthropological  Materialism.  And  not  less 
important  is  the  unambiguous  recognition  of  Harvey's 
great  discovery  of  the  circulation  of  the  blood.6?  With 
this  the  whole  Aristotelo-Galenian  physiology  fell  to  the 
ground ;  and  although  Descartes  still  held  to  the  '  vital 
spirits/  they  are  at  least  in  him  entirely  free  from  that 
mystical  antithesis  between  matter  and  spirit,  and  from 
the  incomprehensible  relations  of  :  sympathy '  and  t  anti- 
pathy *  to  half-sensible  half-supersensible  '  spirits '  of  all 
kinds.  With  Descartes  the  vital  spirits  are  genuine, 
materially-conceived  matter,  more  logically  imagined  than 
Epikuros's  soul-atoms,  with  their  added  element  of  caprice. 
They  move  themselves,  and  effect  movement,  just  as  in 
Demokritos,  exclusively  according  to  mathematical  and 
physical  laws.  A  mechanism  of  pressure  and  collision, 
which  Descartes  follows  out  with  great  ingenuity  through 
all  the  separate  steps,  forms  an  uninterrupted  chain  of 
effects  produced  by  external  things  through  the  senses 
upon  the  brain,  and  from  the  brain  back  again  outwards 
through  nerves  and  muscular  filaments. 

In  this  state  of  things  we  may  seriously  ask  whether 
De  la  Mettrie  was  not  in  truth  quite  justified  when  he 
traced  his  own  Materialism  to  Descartes,  and  maintained 
that  the  wily  philosopher,  purely  for  the  sake  of  the 
parsons,  had  patched  on  to  his  theory  a  soul,  which  was 
in  reality  quite  superfluous.  If  we  do  not  go  quite  so  far 
as  this,  it  is  chiefly  the  unmistakable  importance  of  the 

67  On  the  universal  denial  with  agreement,  comp,  also  Buckle,  "His- 
which  Harvey's  great  discovery  was  tory  of  Civilisation  in  England,"  ii. 
met,  and  the  importance  of  Descartes's     80,  ed.  1871. 


THE  SCIENTIFIC  RENASCENCE.  247 

idealistic  side  of  Descartes's  philosophy  that  keeps  us  from 
doing  so.  Doubtful  as  is  the  way  in  which  he  deduces 
the  '  Cogito  ergo  sum/  and  crying  as  are  the  logical  tricks 
and  contradictions  by  means  of  which  the  otherwise  clear- 
thinking  man  seeks  to  construct  the  world  from  inside,  yet 
the  thought  that  the  whole  sum  of  phenomena  must  be 
conceived  as  the  representation  of  an  immaterial  subject 
possesses  an  importance  which  cannot  have  escaped  its 
own  originator.  What  Descartes  lacks  is  at  bottom 
exactly  what  Kant  achieved — the  establishing  of  a  tenable 
connection  between  a  materially-conceived  nature  and  an 
idealistic  metaphysic,  which  regards  this  whole  nature 
as  a  mere  sum  of  phenomena  in  an  ego  which  is  as  to 
its  substance  unknown  to  us.  It  is,  however,  psychologi- 
cally quite  possible  that  Descartes  conceived  the  two 
sides  of  knowledge  which  appear  harmoniously  combined 
in  Kantianism  each  by  itself  quite  clearly,  however  they 
may  seem,  taken  thus  separately,  to  contradict  each  other ; 
and  that  he  clung  to  them  the  more  obstinately  as  he  saw 
himself  compelled  to  hold  them  together  by  an  artificial 
cement  of  hazardous  propositions. 

For  the  rest,  Descartes  himself  did  not  originally  con- 
sider very  important  the  whole  metaphysical  theory  with 
which  his  name  is  now  chiefly  connected,  while  he  attri- 
buted the  greatest  value  to  his  scientific  and  mathemati- 
cal inquiries,  and  to  his  mechanical  theory  of  all  natural 
phenomena,68     When,  however,  his  new  proofs  fer  the  im- 

68  This  appears  clearly  enough  from  combien  elles  different  des  principes 
a  passage  in  his  Essay  on  Method,  vol.  dont  on  s'est  servi  jusques  ä  present, 
i.  p.  191  foil,  of  the  edition  of  Victor  j'ai  cru  que  je  ne  pouvois  les  tenir 
Cousin,  Paris,  1824:  ".  .  .  bien  cachees  sans  pecher  grandement 
que  mes  speculations  me  plussent  contre  la  loi  qui  nous  oblige  ä  pro- 
fort,  j'ai  cru  que  les  autres  en  avoi-  eurer  autant  qu'il  est  en  nous  le  bien 
ent  aussi  qui  leur  plaisoient  peut-  general  de  tous  les  hommes  ;  car  elles 
etre  da  vantage.  Mais,  sitöt  que  j'ai  m'ont  fait  voir  qu'il  est  possible  de 
en  acquis  quelques  notions  generates  parvenir  ä  des  connoissances  qui  soient 
touchant  la  physique,  et  que  com-  fort  utiles  ä  la  vie ;  et  qu'au  Heu  de 
mengant  ä  les  eprouver  en  diverses  cette  philosophie  speculative  qu'on 
difficultes  particulieres,  j'ai  remarque  enseigne  dans  les  ecoles,  on  en  peut 
jusques  ou  elles  peuvent  conduire,  et  trouver  une  pratique,  par  laquelle, 


248 


PERIOD  OF  TRANSITION. 


materiality  of  the  soul  and  for  the  existence  of  God  met 
with  great  approbation  in  an  age  disquieted  by  scepticism,, 
Descartes  was  glad  enough  to  pass  for  a  great  metaphy- 
sician, and  paid  increasing  attention  to  this  portion  of  his 
doctrine.  Whether  his  original  system  of  the  Kosmos  may 
have  stood  somewhat  nearer  to  Materialism  than  his  later 
theory,  we  cannot  say ;  for  it  is  well  known  that  out  of 
fear  of  the  clergy  he  called  back  his  already  completely 
finished  work,  and  subjected  it  to  a  thorough  revision. 
Certain  it  is  that  he,  against  his  better  convictions,  with- 
drew from  it  his  theory  of  the  revolution  of  the  earth.69 


connoisant  la  force  et  les  actions  du 
feu,  de  l'eau,  de  l'air,  des  astres,  des 
cieux,  et  de  tous  les  autres  corps  qui 
nous  environnent,  aussi  distincte- 
ment  que  nous  connoissons  les  divers 
metiers  de  nos  artisans,"  etc.  Com- 
pare Note  17  to  the  following  section. 
69  As  to  Descartes's  personal  charac- 
ter, very  different  opinions  have  made 
themselves  heard.  The  point  in 
dispute  is  whether  his  ambition  to 
be  considered  a  great  discoverer,  and 
his  jealousy  of  other  prominent 
mathematicians  and  physicists,  did 
not  sometimes  carry  him  beyond  the 
limits  of  what  is  honourable.  Comp. 
Whewell,  History  of  the  Inductive 
Sciences,  ii.  379,  where  he  is  said 
to  have  used  without  acknowledg- 
ment Snell's  discovery  of  the  law  of 
refraction  ;  and  the  severe  remarks, 
on  the  other  side,  of  Buckle,  Hist. 
Civ.  in  Engl.,  ii.  'j'j  foil.,  who,  how- 
ever, in  several  respects  rates  Des- 
cartes too  high.  With  this 
may  be  compared  his  controversy  with 
the  great  mathematician  Fermat ; 
his  perverse  and  disparaging  judg- 
ments as  to  Galilei's  doctrine  of 
motion;  his  attempt  to  appropriate, 
on  the  strength  of  a  remarkable  but 
by  no  means  sufficiently  clear  expres- 
sion, the  authorship  of  Pascal's  great 
discovery  of  the  rarification  of  the 
atmosphere  upon  mountains,  and  so 
on.               As  to  all  these  things,  the 


last  word  appears  to  us  not  yet  to 
have  been  spoken ;  and  as  to  his  denial 
of  his  own  view  from  fear  of  the 
clergy,  that  rests  upon  quite  a  differ- 
ent footing.  When,  however,  Buckle, 
after  Lerminier  (comp.  Hist,  of  Civ. 
in  Engl. ,  ii.  82),  compares  Descartes 
with  Luther,  we  must  remind  our- 
selves of  the  great  contrast  between 
the  reckless  boldness  of  the  German 
reformer  and  the  cautious  evasion  of 
the  enemy  which  Descartes  intro- 
duced into  the  struggle  between  free- 
thinking  and  suppression.  That  Des- 
cartes modelled  his  system,  against  his 
better  knowledge,  after  the  doctrine 
of  the  Church,  and  apparently  as  far 
as  possible  after  Aristotle,  is  a  fact  of 
which  there  can  be  no  doubt  in  view 
of  the  following  passages  from  his  cor- 
respondence : — 

To  Mersenne,  July  1633  (QSuvres, 
ed.  Cousin,  vi.  239) :  Descartes  has 
heard  with  surprise  of  the  condemna- 
tion of  a  book  of  Galilei's ;  conjec- 
tures that  this  is  because  of  his 
theory  of  the  earth's  movement,  and 
confesses  that  the  same  objection 
will  apply  to  his  own  work  : — "  Et  il 
est  tellement  lie  avec  toutes  les  par- 
ties de  mon  Traite  que  je  ne  l'en 
saurois  detacher,  sans  rendre  le  reste 
tout  defectueux.  Mais  comme  je  ne 
voudrois  pour  rien  du  monde  qu'il 
sortit  de  moi  un  discours  ou  il  se 
trouvät  le  moindre  mot  qui  füt  des- 


THE  SCIENTIFIC  RENASCENCE. 


249 


approuve  de  l'eglise,  aussi  aime-je 
mieux  le  supprimer  que  de  le  faire 
paroitre  estropie."  To  the 

same,  January  10,  1634  (vi.  242 
foil.):  "Vous  savez  sans  doute  que 
Galilee  a  ete  repris  depuis  peu  par 
les  inquisiteurs  de  la  foi,  et  que  son 
opinion  touchant  le  mouvement  de  la 
terre  a  ete  condamne  comme  here- 
tique ;  or  je  vous  dirai,  que  toutes 
les  choses,  que  j'expliquois  en  mon 
traite,  entre  lesquelles  etoit  aussi 
cette  opinion  du  mouvement  de  la 
terre,  dependoient  tellement  les  unes 
des  autres,  que  c'est  assez  de  savoir 
qu'il  en  ait  une  qui  soit  fausse  pour 
connoitre  que  toutes  les  raisons  dout 
je  me  servais  n'ont  point  de  force; 
et  quoique  je  pensasse  qu'elles  f ussent 
appuyees  sur  des  demonstrations 
tres  certaines  et  tres  evidentes,  je  ne 
voudrois  toutefois  pour  rien  du 
monde  les  soutenir  contre  1'autorite 
de  l'eglise.  Je  sais  bien  qu'on  pour- 
roit  dire  que  tout  ce  que  les  inquisi- 
teurs de  Kome  ont  decide  n'est  pas 
incontinent  article  de  foi  pour  cela, 
et  qu'il  faut  premierement  que  le 
concile  y  ait  passe ;  mais  je  ne  suis 
point  si  amoureux  de  mes  pensees  que 


de  me  vouloir  servir  de  telles  excep- 
tions, pour  avoir  moyen  de  les  main- 
tenir ;  et  le  desir  que  j'ai  de  vivre  au 
repos  et  de  continuer  la  vie  que  j'ai 
commencee  en  prenant  pour  ma  de- 
vise '  bene  vixit  qui  bene  latuit,'  fait 
que  je  suis  plus  aise  d'etre  delivre 
de  la  crainte  que  j'avois  d'acquerir 
plus  de  connoissances  que  je  ne  de- 
sire, par  le  moyen  de  mon  ecrit,  que 
je  ne  suis  fache  d'avoir  perdu  le 
temps  et  la  peine  que  j'ai  employee 
ä  le  composer."  Towards  the  end 
of  the  same  letter  he  says,  on  the 
contrary  (p.  246):  "Je  ne  perds 
pas  tout-a-fait  esperance  qu'il  n'en 
arrive  ainsi  que  des  antipodes,  qui 
avoient  e"te  quasi  en  meme  sorte  con- 
damnes  autrefois,  et  ainsi  que  mon 
Monde  ne  puisse  voir  le  jour  avec  le 
temps,  auquel  cas  j'aurois  besoin  moi- 
meme  de  me  servir  de  mes  raisons." 
This  latter  expression  especially  is  as 
clear  as  can  be  desired.  Descartes 
could  not  make  up  his  mind  to  dare 
to  use  his  own  understanding,  and  so 
he  determined  to  propound  a  new 
theory,  which  enabled  him  to  secure 
his  object  of  avoiding  an  open  con- 
flict with  the  Church. 


THIRD  SECTION. 


SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY  MATERIALISM. 


THIRD    SECTION. 

SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY  MATERIALISM. 


CHAPTEE  I. 

GASSENDI. 

When  we  attribute  to  Gassendi  in  particular  the  revival 
of  an  elaborate  Materialistic  philosophy,  the  position  we 
assign  him  needs  some  words  of  vindication.  We  lay 
especial  stress  upon  this,  that  Gassendi  drew  again  into 
the  light,  and  adapted  to  the  circumstances  of  the  time, 
the  fullest  of  the  Materialistic  systems  of  antiquity,  that 
of  Epikuros.  But  this  it  is  upon  which  those  have  relied 
who  reject  Gassendi  from  the  period  of  an  independent 
philosophy  which  was  inaugurated  by  Bacon  and  Descartes, 
and  regard  him  as  a  mere  continuer  of  the  obsolete  period 
of  the  reproduction  of  old  classical  systems.1 

1  Gassendi  is  indeed,  as  was  scarcely  knew  more  of  the  contents  of  the  five 
made  sufficiently  clear  in  the  first  edi-  burnt  books'  from  oral  communica- 
tion of  the  History  of  Materialism,  tion  than  has  been  preserved  to  us 
a  forerunner  of  Descartes,  and  in-  in  the  table  of  contents.  Later,  of 
dependent  of  Bacon  of  Verulam.  course,  when  Descartes,  through  fear 
Descartes,  who  was  usually  not  over  of  the  Church,  invented  a  world 
prone  to  the  recognition  of  others,  re-  which  rested  upon  essentially  differ- 
gards  Gassendi  as  an  authority  in  ent  principles  from  those  of  Gassendi, 
scientific  matters  (comp,  the  follow-  he  changed  his  tone  also  in  reference 
ing  places  in  his  letters  :  Oeuvres,  to  Gassendi ;  especially  as  he  had  be- 
ed.  Cousin,  vi.  72,  83,  97,  121);  come  a  great  man  through  his  at- 
and  we  may  with  the  utmost  proba-  tempt  to  find  a  compromise  between 
bility  assume  that  he  was  also  ac-  science  and  ecclesiastical  doctrine, 
quainted  with  the  "  Exercitationes  And  upon  a  stricter  examina- 
Paradoxicae,"  1624,  and  even  that  he  tion  of  the  relations  between  Gas- 


254  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

This,  however,  is  to  overlook  the  essential  difference 
that  existed  between  the  Epikurean  and  every  other 
ancient  system  in  relation  to  the  times  in  which  Gassendi 
lived.  Whilst  the  prevailing  Aristotelian  philosophy,  dis- 
pleasing as  it  was  to  the  fathers  of  the  Church,  had  in  the 
course  of  the  middle  ages  almost  fused  itself  with  Chris- 
tianity, Epikuros  remained  the  emblem  of  utmost  hea- 
thenism, and  also  of  absolute  contradiction  to  Aristotle. 
If  we  add  to  this  the  impermeable  masses  of  traditional 
calumnies  with  which  Epikuros  was  overwhelmed,  the 
groundlessness  of  which  a  discerning  scholar  here  and 
there  had  pointed  out,  without,  however,  striking  a  deci- 
sive blow,  the  rehabilitation  of  Epikuros,  together  with  the 
revival  of  his  philosophy,  must  appear  a  fact  which,  re- 
garded merely  in  its  negative  aspect  as  the  completed 
opposition  to  Aristotle,  may  be  placed  by  the  side  of  the 
most  independent  enterprises  of  that  time.  Nor  does  this 
consideration  exhaust  the  full  significance  of  Gassendi's 
achievement. 

It  was  not  by  accident,  nor  out  of  mere  love  of  opposi- 
tion, that  Gassendi  lighted  upon  Epikuros  and  his  philo- 
sophy. He  was  a  student  of  nature,  a  physicist  indeed, 
and  an  empiric.  Bacon  had  already  held  up  Demokritos, 
and  not  Aristotle,  as  the  greatest  of  the  ancient  philoso- 
phers. Gassendi,  whose  thorough  philological  and  histori- 
cal training  equipped  him  with  a  knowledge  of  all  the 


sendi  and  Descartes,  the  right  of  the  to  the  denial  of  God  !  It  is 
former  to  be  considered  the  first  re-  incomprehensible  how  Schaller,  in 
presentative  of  a  theory  of  the  world  his  Gesch.  d.  Naturphil. ,  Leipzig, 
which  has  lasted  down  to  our  own  1841,  could  set  Hobbes  before  Gas- 
days  only  becomes  more  clear,  for  sendi.  It  is  true  enough  that  in 
Descartes  also,  the  more  narrowly  we  point  of  years  the  former  is  the  older, 
regard  him,  enters  into  a  more  dis-  but  then  he  was  as  unusually  late  in 
tinct  relation  to  the  extension  and  his  development  as  Gassendi  was  un- 
propagation  of  Materialistic  modes  of  usually  early,  and  during  their  inter- 
thought.  Voltaire,  indeed,  said  in  course  in  Paris,  Hobbes  was  distinctly 
his  "  Elements  of  the  Newtonian  the  learner,  to  say  nothing  of  Gas- 
Philosophy"  (Oeuvres  com  pi.,  1784,  sendi's  literary  productions  pub- 
t.  xxxi.  c.  i.),  that  he  had  kuown  many  lished  so  long  before, 
who  had  been  led  on  by  Cartesianism 


GASSENDL  255 

systems  of  antiquity,  embraced  with  a  sure  glance  exactly 
what  was  best  suited  to  modern  times,  and  to  the  empiri- 
cal tendency  of  his  age.  Atomism,  by  his  means  drawn 
again  from  antiquity,  attained  a  lasting  importance,  how- 
ever much  it  was  gradually  modified  as  it  passed  through 
the  hands  of  later  inquirers.2 

It  might,  indeed,  appear  hazardous  to  make  the  Provost 
of  Digne,  the  orthodox  Catholic  priest  Gassendi,  the  propa- 
gator of  modern  Materialism ;  but  Materialism  and  Atheism 
are  not  identical,  even  if  they  are  related  conceptions. 
Epikuros  himself  sacrificed  to  the  gods.  The  men  of 
science  of  this  time  had  acquired  through  long  practice  a 
wonderful  skill  in  keeping  upon  a  formal  footing  of  friend- 
liness with  theology.  Descartes,  for  example,  introduced 
his  theory  of  the  development  of  the  world  from  small 
particles  with  the  observation,  that  of  course  God  had 
created  the  world  at  one  time,  but  that  it  was  very  inte- 
resting to  see  how  the  world  might  have  developed  itself, 
although  we  know  that  it  had  really  not  done  so.     But 

2  Naumann,  in  his  Grundr.  d.  chemical  phenomena  out  of  physical 
Thermochemie,  Braunschweig,  1869,  changes.  It  is  also  not  correct  to  say 
a -work  of  great  scientific  merit,  ob-  (loc.  cit.,S.  10, 11)  that  before  Dalton 
serves  unjustly,  S.  n :  "The  chemi-  none  had  tested  the  correctness  and 
cal  theory  of  atoms  has,  however,  applicability  of  Atomism  by  reference 
nothing,  or  next  to  nothing,  in  com-  to  the  facts.  This  had  been  done 
mon  with  the  atomistic  doctrine  pre-  immediately  after  Gassendi,  by  Boyle 
viously  propounded  by  Lucretius  and  for  chemistry,  and  by  Newton  for 
Demekritos. "  The  historical  conti-  physics  ;  and  although  it  may  not 
nuity,  which  we  shall  prove  in  the  have  been  done  as  the  science  of  to- 
sequel,  indicates  a  community  right  day  would  have  it  done,  yet  we  must 
from  the  beginning  of  the  develop-  not  forget  that  even  Dalton's  theory 
ment,  in  spite  of  all  the  differences  is  now  a  discarded  standpoint. 
to  be  found  in  the  final  product.  Naumann  is  quite  right  in  saying 
Both  views,  moreover,  have  this  also  (with  Fechner,  Atomlehre,  1855,  S. 
in  common — which  Fechner  points  3),  that  in  order  to  controvert  modern 
out  as  the  most  important  feature  of  Atomism,  it  is  necessary  first  to  know 
Atomism — that  they  both  suppose  what  it  is.  But  we  may  also  remark, 
discrete  molecules  ;  and  although  this  that  in  order  to  controvert  the  con- 
may  not  perhaps  be  so  all-important  nection  of  ancient  with  modern 
to  the  chemist  as  it  is  to  the  physicist,  Atomism,  it  is  necessary  first  to  know 
still  it  remains  an  essential  point :  the  historical  no  less  than  '  the  scien- 
and  yet  the  more  essential  one  is  tific '  facts, 
concerned,  as  is  Naumann,  to  explain 


256  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

when  he  is  once  launched  upon  the  scientific  theory,  then 
this  development  hypothesis  alone  is  visible ;  it  best  har- 
monises with  all  the  facts,  and  fails  in  no  single  point. 
And  thus  the  divine  creation  becomes  a  meaningless  for- 
mula of  acknowledgment.  So  fares  it  likewise  with 
motion,  in  which  God  is  the  prime  cause — which,  however, 
troubles  the  inquirer  no  further.  The  principle  of  the 
maintenance  of  force  through  constant  transmission  of 
mechanical  impact,  with  its  very  untheological  contents, 
yet  receives  a  theological  form.  In  the  same  way,  then,  the 
Provost  Gassendi  goes  to  work.  Mersenne,  another  theo- 
logian, given  to  the  study  of  science,  and  at  the  same  time 
a  good  Hebraist,  had  published  a  Commentary  on  Genesis, 
in  which  all  the  objections  of  Atheists  and  Naturalists 
were  answered,  but  in  such  fashion  that  many  shook  their 
heads ;  and  at  least  the  greatest  industry  was  applied  to 
the  collection  rather  than  the  refutation  of  these  objec- 
tions. Mersenne  occupied  a  middle  position  between 
Descartes  and  Gassendi,  and  was  a  friend  of  both  men,  as 
he  was  of  the  the  English  Hobbes.  This  last  was  a  de- 
cided partisan  of  the  King  and  of  the  Episcopal  High 
Church,  and  is  at  the  same  time  regarded  as  the  head  and 
father  of  the  Atheists. 

It  is  interesting,  too,  that  Gassendi  does  not  draw  the 
theory  of  his  ambiguous  conduct  from  the  Jesuits,  as  he 
well  might  have  done;  but  bases  it  on  the  example  of 
Epikuros.  In  his  Life  of  Epikuros  is  a  long  discussion, 
the  point  of  which  lies  in  the  principle,  that  mentally 
Epikuros  might  think  as  he  would,  but  in  his  outward 
demeanour  he  was  subject  to  the  laws  of  his  country. 
Hobbes  stated  the  doctrine  still  more  sharply :  the  state 
has  unconditional  power  over  worship;  the  individual 
must  resign  his  judgment,  but  not  mentally,  for  our 
thoughts  are  not  subject  to  command,  and  therefore  we 
cannot  compel  any  one  to  believe.3 

3  De  Vita  et  Moribus  Epicuri,  iv.  4  :  Religionis  patriae  interfuit  caerimo- 
"Dico  solum,  si  Epicurus  quibusdam    niis,  quas  mente  tarnen  irnprobaret. 


GASSENDL 


257 


But  the  rehabilitation  of  Epikuros,  and  the  exposition 
of  his  doctrine,  required  great  caution  in  Gassendi.  We 
see  clearly  from  the  preface  to  his  book  on  the  life  and 
morals  of  Epikuros,  that  it  seemed  a  bolder  thing  to  follow 
Epikuros  than  to  set  forth  a  new  cosmogony.4  Never- 
theless the  justification  of  his  cause  he  wisely  does  not 
seek  deeply,  but  puts  together  superficially,  though  with  a 
great  expenditure  of  dialectic  skill — a  proceeding  which 
has  always  succeeded  better  with  the  Church  than  a  seri- 
ous and  independent  attempt  to  reconcile  its  doctrines 
with  strange  or  hostile  ingredients. 

Is  Epikuros  a  heathen  ? — so  too  was  Aristotle.  If  Epikuros 
attacks  superstition  and  religion,  he  was  right,  for  he  knew 
not  the  true  religion.  Does  he  teach  that  the  gods  neither 
reward  nor  punish,  and  does  he  honour  them  for  their 
perfection  ? — we  have  only  the  thought  of  childish  in- 
stead of  servile  reverence,  and  therefore  a  purer  and  more 
Christian  conception.  The  errors  of  Epikuros  must  be  care- 
fully corrected ;  which  is  done,  however,  in  that  Cartesian 


videri  posse,  illi  quandam  excusa- 
tionis  speciem  obtendi.  Intererat 
enim,  quia  jus  civile  et  tranquillitas 
publica  illud  ex  ipso  exigebat:  Im- 
probabat,  quia  nihil  cogit  animum 
Sapientis,  ut  vulgaria  sapiat.  Intus, 
erat  sui  juris,  extra  legibus  obstrictus 
societatis  hominum.  Ita  per  salvebat 
eodem  tempore  quod  et  aliis  debebat, 
et  sibi.  .  .  .  Pars  haec  tum  erat 
Sapientiae,  ut  philosophi  sentirent 
cum  paucis,  loquerentur  vero,  ager- 
entque  cum  multis."  Here  the  last 
clause  especially  seems  to  be  more 
applicable  to  Gassendi's  time  than 
to  Epikuros,  who  enjoyed  great 
liberty  of  teaching  and  speaking,  and 
availed  himself  of  it.  Hobbes  (Levia- 
than, c.  xxxii.)  maintains  that  obe- 
dience to  the  state  religion  involves 
also  the  duty- of  not  contradicting  its 
doctrines.  This  course,  indeed,  he 
followed  according  to  the  letter,  but 
at  the  same  time  was  restrained  by 
no  scruples  from  withdrawing  the 
VOL.  I. 


ground  from  under  all  religion — for 
those  who  are  clever  enough  to  draw 
conclusions.  The  "  Leviathan '*  ap- 
peared in  1651 ;  the  first  edition  of 
the  treatise  "De  Vita  et  Moribus  Epi- 
curi  "  in  1647 ;  yet  here  no  weight  can 
be  laid  on  the  priority  of  the  thought ; 
it  lay  entirely  in  the  time  and  in  the 
general  questions  (where  there  was 
no  reference  to  mathematics  and 
natural  science).  Hobbes  had  un- 
doubtedly been  independent  long 
before  he  came  to  know  Gassendi. 

4  Observe  the  unusually  solemn 
tone  in  which  Gassendi,  towards  the 
conclusion  of  the  preface  to  the  "De 
Vita  et  Moribus  Epicuri,"  reserves 
the  doctrine  of  the  Church:  "In 
Religione  Majores,  hoc  est  Ecclesiam 
Catholicam,  Apostolicam  et  Roma- 
nam  sequor,  cuius  hactenus  decreta 
defendi  ac  porro  defendam,  nee  me 
ab  ilia  ullius  unquam  docti  aut  in- 
docti  separabit  oratio." 


258  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

spirit  which  we  have  just  observed  in  the  doctrines  of  the 
creation  and  of  motion.  The  frankest  eagerness  is  shown 
to  vindicate  for  Epikuros  among  all  ancient  philosophers 
the  greatest  purity  of  morals.  In  this  way,  then,  are  we 
justified  in  regarding  Gassendi  as  the  true  regenerator  of 
Materialism,  and  the  more  so  when  we  consider  how 
great  was  the  actual  influence  he  exercised  upon  succeed- 
ing generations. 

Pierre  Gassendi,  the  son  of  poor  peasants,  was  born  in 
1592,  near  Digne  in  Provence.  He  became  a  student,  and 
was  at  sixteen  years  of  age  a  teacher  of  PJietoric,  and  three 
years  later  Professor  of  Philosophy  at  Aix.  He  had  al- 
ready written  a  book  which  clearly  shows  his  leanings — 
the  "Exercitationes  Paradoxicae  adversus  Aristo teleos,"  a 
work  full  of  youthful  zeal,  one  of  the  sharpest  and  most 
contemptuous  attacks  upon  the  Aristotelian  philosophy. 
This  was  later,  in  the  years  1624  and  1645,  printed  in  part, 
but  five  books  at  the  advice  of  his  friends  were  burnt. 
Advanced  by  the  learned  senator  Peirescius,  Gassendi  was 
soon  afterwards  made  a  canon  and  then  provost  at  Digne. 

This  rapid  career  led  him  through  various  departments. 
As  Professor  of  Ehetoric  he  had  to  give  philological  in- 
struction, and  it  is  not  improbable  that  his  preference  for 
Epikuros  grew  up  in  this  period  from  his  study  of  Lucretius, 
who  in  philological  circles  had  long  been  highly  prized. 
When  Gassendi  in  1628  undertook  a  journey  to  the  Nether- 
lands, the  philologist  Eryceus  Puteanus,  of  Louvain,  gave 
him  a  copy  of  a  gem  with  a  portrait  of  Epikuros,  which 
was  very  highly  reverenced  by  himself.5 

5  De  Vita  et  Moribus  Epicuri,  con-  sic  oculos,  sic  ora  ferebat.     Infcuere 

elusion  of  the  preface  (To  Luiller)  :  imaginem   dignam    istis    lineis,  istis 

"  Habes  ipse  jam  penes  te  duplicem  manibus,     et    porro     oculis     omni- 

illius  effigiem,  alteram  ex  gemma  ex-  urn.'    Alteram  expressam  ex  statua, 

pressam,  quam  dum  Lovanio  facerem  Romae  ad  ingressum  interioris  Palatii 

iter,   communicavit   mecum  vir  ille  Ludovisianorum  hortorum  exstante, 

eximius  Eryceus  Puteanus,  quamque  quam  ad  me  misit  Naudaeus  nostei 

etiam  in  suis  epistolis  cum  hoc  eulo-  (the  publisher  of  the  essay  of  Hier- 

gie  evulgavit :    '  Intxiere,  mi  amice,  onymus  Itorarius  mentioned  in  the 

et  in  lineis    istis    spirantem    adhuc  previous  section)  usus  opera  Henrici 

mentem  magni  viri.     Epicurus  est ;  Howenii  in  eadem  familia  Cardinalitia 


GASSEND  I.  259 

The  "  Exercitationes  Paradoxicae "  must,  in  fact,  have 
been  a  work  of  -uncommon  "boldness  and  great  acuteness, 
and  we  have  every  reason  to  suppose  that  it  did  not  remain 
without  influence  upon  the  learned  world  of  France,  for 
the  friends  who  advised  the  burning  of  the  five  lost  boohs 
must  have  been  acquainted  with  their  contents.  It  is  also 
intelligible  that  Gassendi  would  take  counsel  of  men  who 
were  near  his  own  standpoint,  and  were  capable  of  under- 
standing and  appreciating  the  contents  of  his  work  from 
other  aspects  than  the  consideration  of  its  dangerousness. 
So  may  in  those  times  many  a  fire  have  quietly  smouldered 
unsuspected,  the  flames  of  which  were  to  break  out  later  in 
quite  other  directions.  Happily  at  least  a  brief  statement 
of  the  contents  of  the  lost  books  has  been  preserved  to  us. 
Prom  this  we  see  that  in  the  fourth  book  not  only  the 
Copernican  theory  was  advanced,  but  also  the  doctrine  01 
the  eternity  of  the  world,  which  had  been  drawn  from 
Lucretius  by  Giordano  Bruno.  As  the  same  book  con- 
tained an  assault  upon  the  Aristotelian  elements,  we  may 
very  easily  conjecture  that  Atomism  was  here  taught  in 
opposition  to  Aristotle.  This  is  the  more  probable  because 
the  seventh  book,  according  to  this  table  of  contents,  con- 
tained a  formal  recommendation  of  the  Epikurean  theory 
of  Morals  .6 

Gassendi  was,  moreover,  one  of  those  happy  natures 
who  can  everywhere  allow  themselves  a  little  more  than 
other  people.  The  precocious  development  of  his  mind  had 
not  with  him,  as  with  Pascal,  led  to  an  early  satiety  of 
knowledge  and  a  melancholy  existence.  Light-hearted  and 
amiable,  he  everywhere  won  himself  friends,  and,  with  all 
the  modesty  of  his  demeanour,  he  allowed  himself  gladly, 

pictoris.  Tu  hue  inserito  utram  vales,  sus    Aristoteleos,    Kagae  Comitum, 

quando  et  non  male  altera,  ut  vides,  1656,    Praef.  :     "  Uno    verbo    docet 

refert  alteram,  et  memini  utramque  (b.  vii.)  Epicuri  de  voluptate  senten- 

congruere    cum  alia    in   amplissimo  tiam  :  ostendendo  videlicet,    qua  ra- 

cimeliarcho    Viri      nobilis     Casparis  tione   summum  bonum  in  voluptate 

Monconisii      Lierguii,      propraetoris  constitutum    sit,    et    quemadmodum 

Lugdunensis,  asservata."  laus  virtutum   actionumque   humau- 

6  Exercitationes  Paradoxicae  adver-  arum  ex  hoc  principio  dependeat*" 


26o  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

amongst  those  he  could  trust,  to  give  the  reins  to  his 
inexhaustible  humour.  In  his  anecdotes  the  traditional 
medicine  came  very  badly  off,  and  he  has  suffered  bitterly 
enough  from  her  retaliation.  It  is  notable  that  amongst 
the  authors  who  had  influenced  him  in  his  early  youth, 
and  freed  him  from  Aristotle,  he  mentions  in  the  first  line, 
not  the  witty  scoffer  Montaigne,  but  the  pious  sceptic 
Charron  and  the  serious  Luis  Vives,  who  always  unites  a 
strong  moral  judgment  with  his  logical  acumen. 

Like  Descartes,  so  Gassendi,  too,  must  renounce,  in  setting 
forth  his  philosophy,  "  the  use  of  his  own  intellect,"  only 
it  did  not  occur  to  him  to  push  the  process  of  accom- 
modation to  the  doctrines  of  the  Church  further  than  was 
anywhere  necessary.  Whilst  Descartes  made  a  virtue  of 
necessity,  and  veiled  the  Materialism  of  his  natural  philo- 
sophy in  the  broad  mantle  of  an  idealism  dazzling  by  its 
novelty,  Gassendi  remained  essentially  a  Materialist,  and 
viewed  the  devices  of  him  who  had  formerly  shared  his 
views  with  unconcealed  dissatisfaction.  In  Descartes  the 
mathematician  has  the  upper  hand ;  in  him,  the  physicist : 
while  the  other,  like  Plato  and  Pythagoras  in  antiquity 
allowed  himself  to  be  seduced  by  the  example  of  mathe- 
matics to  overpass  with  his  conclusions  the  field  of  all 
possible  experience,  he  clung  to  empiricism,  and  except 
so  far  as  ecclesiastical  dogma  seemed  unconditionally  to 
demand  it,  never  forsook  the  borders  of  a  speculation  which 
ever  framed  its  very  boldest  theories  on  the  analogy  of 
experience.  Descartes  sold  himself  to  a  system  which 
violently  severs  thought  and  sensuous  intuition,  and  by 
this  very  means  makes  its  way  to  the  most  hazardous 
assertions;  Gassendi  maintained  with  unshaken  steadfast- 
ness the  unity  of  thought  and  sensuous  intuition. 

In  the  year  1643  he  published  his  "  Disquisitiones  Anti- 
cartesianae,"  a  work  justly  distinguished  as  a  model  ol 
controversy,  as  delicate  and  polite  as  it  is  thorough  and 
witty.  If  Descartes  began  by  doubting  of  everything, 
even  of  what  was  given  in  sense,  Gassendi  showed  that  it 


GASSENDL  261 

is  plainly  impossible  to  realise  an  abstraction  from  all  that 
was  given  in  sense — that  therefore  the  '  Cogito  ergo  sum ' 
was  anything  rather  than  the  highest  first  truth  from  which 
all  others  were  deduced. 

In  fact,  that  Cartesian  doubt  which  is  taken  up  some 
fine  morning  ("  semel  in  vita ")  in  order  to  free  the  soul 
from  all  the  prejudices  imbibed  since  childhood,  is  a  mere 
frivolous  playing  with  empty  ideas.  In  a  concrete  psychical 
act  thought  can  never  be  separated  from  sense  elements ; 
but  in  mere  formulae  (as,  e.g.,  we  reckon  with  V—  1,  with- 
out being  able  to  represent  this  magnitude  to  ourselves),  we 
may  amuse  ourselves  by  rejecting  in  the  same  way  the 
doubting  subject,  and  even  the  act  of  doubt.  We  gain 
nothing  by  this,  but  we  also  lose  nothing  except — the 
time  devoted  to  speculations  of  this  kind. 

Gassendi's  most  famous  objection,  that  existence  may 
just  as  well  be  inferred  from  any  other  action  or  from 
thinking,?  is  so  obvious,  indeed,  that  it  has  often  been 
repeated  independently  of  Gassendi,  and  as  often  shown 
to  be  superficial  and  unintelligible.  Büchner  declares 
that  the  argument  is  the  same  as  if  we  were  to  say,  "  The 
dog  barks,  therefore  he  is."  Buckle,8  on  the  contrary, 
declares  such  criticism  to  be  short-sighted,  since  it  is  not 
a  logical  but  a  psychological  process  that  is  in  question. 

But,  as  against  this  well-meant  defence,  we  must  bear 
in  mind  the  fact,  as  clear  as  sunshine,  that  it  is  Descartes, 
in  fact,  who  confuses  the  logical  and  psychological  pro- 
cesses, and  that  when  we  clearly  discriminate  them  the 
whole  argument  collapses. 

To  begin  with,  this  formal  correctness  of  the  objec- 
tion is  quite  indisputably  established  in  the  words  of  the 
"  Principia"  (i.  7),  "  Kepugnat  enim,  ut  putemus  id  quod 
cogitat,  eo  ipso  tempore,  quo  cogitat,  nihil  esse."  Here 
the  purely  logical  argument  of  Descartes  is  employed  to 

7  The  example,  'I  walk,  therefore     his  rejoinder, — in  other  respects  quite 
I  am,'  originates  not  with  Gassendi,     agreeing  with  this  objection, 
but  with  Descartes,  who  uses  it  in        8  Buckle,  Hist,  of  Civilis,  ii.  87  n. 


262  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY, 

challenge  Gassendi's  second  objection.  But  if  it  is  pro- 
posed to  substitute  the  psychological  method,  then  the 
.second  of  Gassendi's  objections  asserts  itself:  This  psycho- 
logical process  does  not,  and  can  not  exist;  it  is  a  pure 
fiction. 

The  justification  adopted  by  Descartes  himself  appears 
to  go  furthest,  which  relies  upon  the  logical  deduction, 
and  makes  the  distinction  that  in  one  case  the  premiss 
'  I  think '  is  certain,  whilst,  on  the  other  hand,  in  '  I  go 
to  walk,  and  therefore  I  am,'  the  premiss  upon  which  it 
rests  is  doubtful,  and  therefore  the  conclusion  is  impos- 
sible. But  this  also  is  idle  sophistry ;  for  if  I  really  go 
to  walk,  I  can  assuredly  consider  my  walking  as  the 
mere  phenomenal  side  of  an  act  entirely  different  in  it- 
self, and  I  can  do  the  same  in  precisely  the  same  way 
with  my  thinking  as  a  psychological  phenomenon ;  I  can- 
not, however,  without  absolute  untruth,  annul  the  idea 
that  I  go  to  walk,  any  more  than  I  can  the  idea  of  my 
thinking,  especially  if  in  cogitare  one  includes,  with  Car- 
tesius,  also  mile,  imaginäre,  and  even  sentire. 

And,  least  of  all,  can  the  inference  to  a  subject  of 
thinking  be  justified,  as  Lichtenberg  has  shown  in  the 
excellent  remark :  "  Shall  we  say  '  it  thinks '  as  we  say 
'  it  lightens ' :  to  say  '  cogito '  is  too  much  if  we  are  to  tran- 
slate it '  I  think.' "  It  is  practically  necessary  to  assume, 
to  postulate  the  Iß 

9  The  credit  for  the  priority  of  this  question,  which,  in  the  simplest  way, 

remark  appears  to  be  due  to  Kant,  demonstrates  so  clearly  the  surrepti- 

who  says  in  the  Kiit.  d.  r.  Vern.  tious  nature  of  the  Subject. 

Elementar!..,    ii.    2,    2,    1    Hauptst.  We  may  mention,  by  the  way,  that 

(Paralogismen  d.  r.  Vern.),  E.  T.,  p.  the  attempt  to  prove  the  existence  of 

239 :  ' '  By  this  I,  or  He,  or  It  which  the  soul  from  the  very  fact  of  doubt, 

thinks,  nothing  more  is  represented  in  very  striking  agreement  with  the 

than    a    transcendental    subject     of  '  Cogito   ergo   sum,'  was  first  intro- 

thought  =  x,  which  is   cognised  only  duced  by  the  Father  Augustine,  who 

by  means  of  the  thoughts  that  are  thus   argues  in  the  10th   Book  '  De 

its   predicates,  and   of  which,  apart  Trinitate : '    "Si   quis   dubitat,   vivit 

from  these,  we  cannot  form  the  least  si  dubitat,   uncle  dubitet    meminit ; 

conception."     At  the  same  time,  this  si    dubitat,    dubitare    se    intelligit." 

does  not  detract  from  the  great  merits  This   passage  is   quoted   in  the  once 

of    Lichtenberg's    statement   of   the  widely    spread  ' '  Margarita  Philoso- 


GASSENDL  263 

In  1646,  Gassendi  became  Regius  Professor  of  Mathe- 
matics at  Paris,  where  his  lecture-room  was  crowded  by- 
listeners  of  all  a^es.  including  well-known  men  of  letters. 
He  had  only  with  difficulty  resolved  to  quit  his  Southern 
home,  and  being  soon  attacked  by  a  lung  complaint,  he 
returned  to  Digne,  where  he  remained  till  1653.  In  this 
period  falls  the  greater  part  of  his  literary  activity  and 
zeal  in  behalf  of  the  philosophy  of  Epikuros,  and  simul- 
taneously the  positive  extension  of  his  own  doctrines.  In 
the  same  period  Gassendi  produced,  besides  several  astro- 
nomical works,  a  series  of  valuable  biographies,  of  which 
those  of  Copernicus  and  of  Tycho  Brahe  are  especially 
noteworthy.  Gassendi  is,  of  all  the  most  prominent  re- 
presentatives of  Materialism,  the  only  one  gifted  with  a 
historic  sense,  and  that  he  has  in  an  eminent  degree. 
Even  in  his  "  Syntagma  Philosophicum,"  he  treats  every 
subject  at  first  historically,  from  all  possible  points  of 
view. 

Of  cosmical  systems,  he  declares  the  Ptolemaic,  the  Co- 
pernican,  and  the  Tychonic  to  be  the  most  important.  Of 
these,  he  entirely  rejects  the  Ptolemaic,  declares  the 
Copernican  to  be  the  simplest  and  the  one  most  thoroughly 
representing  the  facts ;  but  one  must  adopt  that  of  Tycho, 
because  the  Bible  obviously  attributes  motion  to  the  sum 
It  affords  us  an  insight  into  the  time,  that  the  once  so  cau- 
tious Gassendi,  who  on  all  other  points  kept  peace  between 
his  Materialism  and  the  Church,  could  not  even  reject  the 
Copernican  system  without  drawing  upon  himself,  by  his 
laudatory  expressions,  the  reproach  of  a  heretical  view  of 
cosmology.     Yet  the  hatred  of  the  supporters  of  the  old 

phica"  (i486,  1503  and  often)  at  the  had  used  this  argument   in  order  to 

beginning  of    the   ioth   book,    "  De  show    that    that    ego   which    thinks 

Anima."     Descartes,    who    had    his  is    an    immaterial    substance.      Des- 

attention    called    to    its    agreement  cartes    therefore    quite    rightly  em- 

with    his    principle,    seems    not     to  phasises  as  his  special  property  pre- 

have    known    it ;     he    admits     that  cisely  that    element   which   is   most 

Augustine  had,  in  fact,  proposed  to  obviously       surreptitious.         Comp. 

prove  the  certainty  of  our  existence  Oeuvres,  t.  viii.,  ed.  Cousin,  p.  421. 
in  this  way;    he    himself,  however, 


264  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

cosmology  becomes  in  some  measure  intelligible  when  we 
see  how  Gassendi  contrived  to  undermine  its  foundations 
without  open  assault.  A  favourite  argument  of  the  oppo- 
nents of  Copernicus  was,  that  if  the  earth  revolved,  it 
would  be  impossible  for  a  cannon-ball  fired  straight  up  into 
the  air  to  fall  back  upon  the  cannon.  Gassendi  thereupon, 
as  he  relates  himself,  had  an  experiment  made : 10  on  a 
ship  travelling  at  great  speed  a  stone  was  thrown  straight 
up  into  the  air.  It  fell  back,  following  the  motion  of  the 
ship,  upon  the  same  part  of  the  deck  from  which  it  had 
been  thrown.  A  stone  was  dropped  from  the  top  of  the 
mast,  and  it  fell  exactly  at  its  foot.  These  experiments,  to 
us  so  ordinary,  were  then,  when  men  were  only  beginning, 
by  the  aid  of  Galilei,  to  understand  the  laws  of  motion,  of 
great  significance,  and  the  main  argument  of  those  who 
denied  the  motion  of  the  earth  was  by  their  assistance 
hopelessly  overthrown. 

The  world  Gassendi  regarded  as  one  ordered  whole,  and 
the  only  question  is  as  to  the  nature  of  the  order,  espe- 
cially if  the  world  possesses  a  soul  or  not.  If  by  the  world- 
soul  one  means  God,  and  it  is  only  meant  that  God  by  his 
being  and  presence  maintains,  governs,  and  so  in  a  sense 
constitutes  the  soul  of  all  things,  this  may  always  be  pos- 
sible. 

All  are  agreed  also  that  heat  is  diffused  throughout  the 
universe  ;  this  heat  might  also  he  called  the  soul  of  the  world; 
and  yet  to  attribute  to  the  world,  in  the  strict  sense,  a  vege- 
tative feeling  or  thinking  soul  contradicts  the  reality  of 
things.  For  the  world  neither  produces  another  world,  as 
the  plants  and  animals,  nor  grows  or  nourishes  itself  by 
food  and  drink ;  still  less  has  it  sight,  hearing,  and  other 
functions  of  things  possessing  souls. 

Place  and  time  are  viewed  by  Gassendi  as  existing  quite 
independently,    neither   substance  nor  accident.     At  the 

10  In  the  treatise  "  De  Motu   Im-  letter  of  Galilei's  on  the  reconcilia- 

presso  a  MotoreTranslato,"  which,  as  tion  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  with  the 

it  was  pretended,  was  printed  against  doctrine  of  the  earth's  revolution,  at 

the   author's  wish,  together  with  a  Lyons,  1649. 


GASSENDL  265 

point  where  all  corporeal  things  cease  space  still  extends 
without  limit,  and  time  sped  before  the  creation  of  the 
world  as  regularly  as  now.  By  the  material  principle  or 
materia  prima  is  meant  that  matter  which  cannot  be  fur- 
ther dissolved.  So  man  is  composed  of  head,  heart,  belly, 
and  so  on.  These  are  formed  out  of  chyle  and  blood ;  these 
again  from  food,  and  food  from  the  so-called  elements  ;  but 
these  also  are  again  composed  of  atoms,  which  are  there- 
fore the  material  principle  or  materia  prima.  Matter  is 
consequently  in  itself  as  yet  without  form.  But  there  is 
also  no  form  without  a  material  body,  and  this  is  the 
durable  substratum,  while  forms  change  themselves  and  go. 
Matter  is  therefore  itself  indestructible,  and  it  is  incapable 
of  being  produced,  and  no  body  can  arise  out  of  nothing, 
although  this  does  not  go  to  deny  the  creation  of  matter 
by  God.  The  atoms  are  in  point  of  substance  identical, 
but  vary  in  figure. 

The  further  exposition  of  atoms,  void,  the  denial  of  infi- 
nite divisibility,  the  motion  of  the  atoms,  and  so  on,  closely 
follows  Epikuros.  We  need  only  remark,  that  Gassendi 
identifies  the  weight  or  gravity  of  the  atoms  with  their 
inherent  capability  of  self-determined  motion.  For  the 
rest,  this  motion  also  has  been  from  the  beginning  bestowed 
by  God  upon  the  atoms. 

God,  who  made  the  earth  and  sea  bring  forth  plants  and 
animals,  created  a  finite  number  of  atoms,  so  as  to  form  the 
seeds  of  all  things.  Thereupon  commenced  that  alterna- 
tion of  generation  and  dissolution  which  exists  now,  and 
will  continue  to  exist. 

'  The  first  cause  of  everything  is  God/  but  the  whole 
inquiry  is  concerned  only  with  the  secondary  causes,  which 
immediately  produce  each  single  change.  Their  principle, 
however,  must  necessarily  be  corporeal.  In  artistic  pro- 
ductions, the  moving  principle  is  indeed  independent  of 
the  material;  but  in  nature  the  active  cause  works  in- 
wardly, and  is  only  the  most  active  and  mobile  part  of  the 
material.      In   the  case   of  visible  bodies,  one  is  always 


266 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 


moved  by  the  other:  the  self-moving  principles  are  the 
atoms. 

The  falling  of  bodies  Gassendi  explains  to  be  due  to  the 
attraction  of  the  earth;  but  this  attraction  cannot  be 
an  '  actio  in  distans.'  If  no  influence  from  the  earth 
reached  the  stone  and  overpowered  it,  it  would  not  trouble 
itself  about  the  earth ;  just  as  the  magnet  must  in  some 
real  if  invisible  manner  lay  hold  upon  the  iron  in  order  to 
draw  it  to  itself.  That  this  is  not  to  be  conceived  crudely, 
as  done  by  the  throwing  out  of  harpoons  or  hooks,  is  shown 
by  a  remarkable  picture  employed  by  Gassendi  to  explain 
this  attraction,  of  a  boy  attracted  by  an  apple,  a  figure  of 
which  has  reached  him  through  the  senses.11     It  is  worth 


11  With  regard  to  tins,  it  seems  to 
me  very  doubtful  whether  the  account 
in  Ueberweg,  Hist.  Phil.,  iii.  15  foil., 
E.  T.  ii.  14,  is  correct— an  account 
resting  perhaps  partly  on  a  misunder- 
standing of  the  account  in  the  first  edi- 
tion of  the  "  History  of  Materialism," 
but  partly  also  on  an  actual  error  in 
that  account.  Ueberweg  says  of  Gas- 
sendi :  "  Gassendi's  Atomism  is  less  a 
doctrine  of  dead  nature  than  is  that 
of  Epikuros.  Gassendi  ascribed  to  the 
atoms  force,  and  even  sensation,  just 
as  a  boy  is  moved  by  the  image  of  an 
apple  to  turn  aside  from  his  way  and 
approach  the  apple-tree.  So  the  stone 
thrown  into  the  air  is  moved  by  the 
influence  of  the  earth,  reaching  to  it 
to  pass  out  of  the  direct  line  and  to 
approach  the  earth."  Erroneous 
above  all  appears  to  have  been  the 
transference  of  sensation  to  the  atoms, 
as  was  assumed  in  the  first  edition  of 
the  "  History  of  Materialism,"  S.  12^ 
while,  upon  revision,  I  am  not  in  a 
position  to  find  a  voucher  for  this. 
The  error  seems  to  have  arisen  in  this 
way — that  Gassendi,  in  fact,  with  re- 
gard to  the  difficult  question  how  the 
sentient  can  proceed  from  the  non- 
sentient,  does  in  a  very  remarkable 
respect  go  far  beyond  Lucretius.  I 
am  indeed  sorry  that  I  can  here  only 
quote  Bernier,  Abrege  de  la  Philos. 


de  Gassendi,  vi.  48  foil.,  as  while  re- 
vising I  have  no  complete  edition  of 
Gassendi  at  my  service,  and  the  press 
cannot  be  longer  delayed.  There  it 
runs:  "En  second  lieu  (among  the 
reasons  which  Lucretius  has  not  ad- 
duced, but,  according  to  Gassendi, 
might  have  adduced)  que  toute  sorte 
de  semence  estant  animee,  efc  que  non 
seulement  les  animaux  qui  naissent 
de  l'accouplement,  mais  ceux  mesme 
qui  s'engendrent  de  la  pourriture 
estant  formez  de  petites  molecules 
seminales  qui  ont  este  assemblies  eb 
formees  ou  des  le  commencement  du 
monde  ou  dejmis,  on  ne  pent  pas  ab- 
solument  dire,  que  les  choses  sensibles 
se  fassent  de  choses  insensibles,  mais 
plutost  qu'elles  se  font  de  choses  qui 
bien  qu'elles  ne  sentent  pas  effective- 
ment,  sont  neanmoins,  ou  contiennent 
en  effet  les  principes  du  sentiment,  de 
mesme  que  les  principes  du  feu  sont 
contenus,  et  caches  dans  les  veines 
des  cailloux,  ou  dans  quelque  autre 
matiere  grasse. "  Gassendi  therefore 
assumes  here  at  least  the  possibility 
that  organic  germs,  with  the  disposi- 
tion towards  sensation,  exist  right 
from  the  beginning  of  creation.  These 
germs,  however,  despite  their  origi- 
nality (naturally  quite  inconsistent 
with  the  cosmogony  of  Epikuros) 
are  not  atoms,  but  combinations  of 


GASSENDL  267 

remarking  here  that  Newton,  who  in  this  matter  trod  in 
Gassendi's  steps,  by  no  means  thought  of  his  law  of  gravita- 
tion as  an  immediate  operation  exerted  at  a  distance.12 

The  evolution  and  dissolution  of  things  is  nothing  hut 
the  union  and  separation  of  atoms.  When  a  piece  of  wood 
is  burnt,  the  flame,  smell,  and  ashes,  and  so  on,  have  already 
existed  in  their  atoms,  only  in  other  combinations.  All 
change  is  only  movement  in  the  constituents  of  a  thing, 
and  hence  the  simple  substance  cannot  change,  but  only 
continue  its  movements  in  space. 

The  weak  side  of  Atomism,  the  impossibility  of  explain- 
ing sensible  qualities  and  sensation  out  of  atoms  and  space 
(cf.  above,  p.  18  foil,  and  143  foil.),  appears  to  have  been 
quite  appreciated  by  Gassendi,  for  he  discusses  this  pro- 
blem at  great  length,  and  not  only  endeavours  to  put  the 
explanations  offered  by  Lucretius  in  the  best  light,  but  also 
to  strengthen  them  by  new  experiments.  At  the  same 
time  he  admits  that  there  is  something  left  unexplained — 
only  he  maintains  that  this  is  the  same  with  all  other 
systems.13  This  is,  however,  not  quite  correct,  since  the 
form  of  the  combination,  upon  which  the  influence  here 
depends,  is  with  the  Aristotelians  something  essential ; 
but  in  the  case  of  Atomism  it  is  nothing. 

Gassendi  stands  widely  apart  from  Lucretius  in  accept- 
ing an  immortal  and  incorporeal  spirit ;  and  yet  this  spirit, 


atoms,  although  of  the  simplest  cha-  of  the  Philosophy  of  Newton  (Oeuvres 
racter.  A  misunderstanding  is  compl.,  1784,  t.  xxxi.  p.  37):  "New- 
possible  as  to  the  application  of  the  ton  suivait  les  anciennes  opinions  de 
image  of  the  boy  who  sees  an  apple  to  Democrite,  d'Epicure  et  d'une  foule 
a  purely  spiritual  influence.  This  re-  de  philosophes  rectifiees  par  notre 
fers  primarily  only  to  a  complex  pro-  celebre  Gassendi.  Newton  a  ditplu- 
cess  of  attraction,  which,  however,  sieurs  fois  ä  quelques  francois  qui 
takes  place  in  a  purely  physical  way.  vivent  encore,  qu'ilregardait  Gassendi 
It  remains,  indeed,  questionable  whe-  comme  un  esprit  trcs  juste  et  tres 
ther  Gassendi  has  here  carried  out  sage,  et  qu'il  ferait  gloire  d'etre  entie- 
Materialism  as  consistently  as  Des-  rement  de  son  avis  clans  toutes  les 
cartes  in  the  "Passiones  Animae,"  choses  dont  on  vient  de  parier. " 
where  everything  is  resolved  into  13  Bernier,  Abrege  de  la  Phil,  de 
flow  and  impact  of  particles.  Gassendi,  Lyon,  1684,  vi.  32-34. 
12  Voltaire  reports  in  his  Elements 


268  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

like  Gassendi's  God,  stands  so  entirely  out  of  relation  to 
his  system,  that  we  can  very  conveniently  leave  it  out  of 
sight.  Nor  is  Gassendi  led  to  adopt  it  for  the  sake  of  this 
question  of  unity ;  he  does  so  because  religion  demands  it. 
Just  because  his  system  only  recognises  a  material  soul 
composed  of  atoms,  the  qualities  of  immortality  and  imma- 
teriality must  be  supplied  by  the  spirit.  The  manner  in 
which  this  is  established  strikingly  reminds  us  of 
Averroism.  Diseases  of  the  mind,  for  example,  are  dis- 
eases of  the  brain ;  they  do  not  affect  the  immortal  reason, 
only  this  cannot  find  expression  because  its  instrument  is 
destroyed.  But  whether  it  is  in  this  instrument  that  the 
individual  consciousness,  the  ego,  is  seated,  which  is,  in 
fact,  itself  disturbed  by  the  disease,  and  does  not  look 
upon  it  as  a  spectator  ah  extra — this  point  Gassendi  takes 
good  care  not  to  examine  too  closely.  Besides,  quite 
apart  from  the  constraint  of  orthodoxy,  he  might  well  feel 
little  inclination  to  follow  the  windings  of  this  problem, 
because  they  would  lead  him  away  from  the  sphere  of 
experience. 

The  theory  of  the  external  world,  so  admirably  sup- 
ported by  Atomism,  Gassendi  had  very  much  more  at 
heart  than  psychology,  in  which  he  made  shift  with  a 
minimum  amount  of  original  speculation,  and  that  only 
for  the  completion  of  his  system,  while  Descartes,  inde- 
pendently of  his  metaphysical  doctrine  of  the  ego,  at- 
tempted in  this  sphere  also  to  make  an  independent  con- 
tribution. 

At  the  University  of  Paris,  where  the  Aristotelian  phi- 
losophy still  held  sway  over  the  older  teachers,  the  views 
of  Descartes  and  of  Gassendi  gained  increasing  hold  on 
the  younger  blood,  and  there  arose  two  new  schools — those 
of  the  Cartesians  and  the  Gassendists,  one  of  which  in  the 
name  of  reason,  the  other  in  the  name  of  experience,  were 
eager  to  inflict  a  final  blew  upon  Scholasticism.  This 
conflict  was  the  more  remarkable  because  just  at  that 
time,  under  the  influence  of  reactionary  tendencies,  the 


GASSENDL  269 

philosophy  of  Aristotle  had  received  a  fresh  impulse.  The 
theologian  Launoy,  otherwise  a  thoroughly  learned  and 
comparatively  a  freethinking  man,  exclaims  in  astonish- 
ment, as  he  mentions  the  views  of  his  contemporary, 
Gassendi,  "If  Eamus,  Litaudus,  Villonius,  and  Clavius 
had  so  taught,  what  would  have  been  done  to  them  !"  u 

Gassendi  did  not  fall  a  victim  to  theology,  because  he 
was  destined  to  fall  a  victim  to  medicine.  Being  treated 
for  a  fever  in  the  fashion  of  the  time,  he  had  been 
reduced  to  extreme  debility.  He  long,  but  vainly,  sought 
restoration  in  his  Southern  home.  On  returning  to 
Paris,  he  was  again  attacked  by  fever,  and  thirteen 
fresh  blood-lettings  ended  his  life.  He  died  the  24th  of 
October  1655,  in  his  sixty-third  year.  The  reformation 
of  physics  and  natural  philosophy,  usually  ascribed  to 
Descartes,  was  at  least  as  much  the  wrork  of  Gassendi. 
Frequently,  in  consequence  of  the  fame  which  Descartes 
owed  to  his  metaphysic,  those  very  things  have  been 
credited  to  Descartes  which  ought  properly  to  be  assigned 
to  Gassendi :  it  was  also  a  result  of  the  peculiar  mixture 
of  difference  and  agreement,  of  hostility  and  alliance,  be- 
tween the  two  systems,  that  the  influences  resulting  from 
them  became  completely  interfused.  Thus  Hobbes,  the 
Materialist  and  friend  of  Gassendi,  was  a  supporter  of 
Descartes's  corpuscular  theory,  whilst  Newton  conceived 
the  atoms  after  the  fashion  of  Gassendi.  It  was  reserved 
for  later  discoveries  to  reconcile  the  two  theories,  and  to 
permit  of  the  co-existence  of  atoms  and  molecules,  after 
each  conception  had  received  its  natural  development. 
So  much,  however,  is  at  least  certain,  that  the  Atomism  of 
our  own  day  has,  step  by  step,  been  developed  from  the 
theories  of  Gassendi  and  Descartes,  and  so  its  roots  reach 
back  to  Leukippos  and  Demokritos. 

14  Joaimis  Launoii  de  Varia  Aristo-  c.  xviii.  p.  328  of  the  edition  I  have 
telis  in  Academia  Parisiensi  Fortuna,     used,  that  of  Wittenberg,  1720. 


(      270     ) 


CHAPTEK   II. 

THOMAS  HOBBES   OF  MALMESBURY. 

Amongst  the  most  remarkable  characters  that  meet  us  in 
the  history  of  Materialism  must  unquestionably  be  num- 
bered the  Englishman,  Thomas  Hobbes  of  Malmesbury. 
His  father  was  a  simple  country  clergyman  of  modest  edu- 
cation, but  possessed  of  sufficient  ability  to  read  the  neces- 
sary homilies  to  his  flock. 

When,  in  the  year  15  88,  the  haughty  Armada  of  Philip 
of  Spain  was  threatening  the  English  coasts,  and  the  people 
were  in  a  state  of  anxiety  and  excitement,  the  wife  of  this 
clergyman,  in  her  alarm,  gave  premature  birth  to  a  boy, 
who,  in  spite  of  his  delicacy  as  an  infant,  was  destined  to 
live  to  his  ninety-second  year.  This  babe  was  Thomas 
Hobbes. 

Hobbes  was  to  attain  not  merely  his  celebrity,  but  also 
his  later  tendency  and  his  favourite  occupations,  only  very 
late  in  life,  and  by  very  indirect  methods. 

For  when,  in  his  fourteenth  year,  he  repaired  to  the  Uni- 
versity of  Oxford,  he  was,  according  to  the  spirit  of  the 
studies  then  prevailing  there,  initiated  into  logic  and  physic 
based  upon  the  principles  of  Aristotle.  Eor  five  full  years 
he  endeavoured  with  great  zeal  to  master  these  subtleties, 
and  in  logic  especially  made  great  progress.  ISTo  doubt  it 
had  some  influence  upon  his  future  development  that  he 
now  devoted  himself  to  the  Nominalistic  School — that  is, 
to  the  school  which  is  in  principle  so  closely  related  to 
Materialism  ;  and  although  Hobbes  later  entirely  dropped 
these   studies,   nevertheless    he    remained  a  Nominalist. 


HOB  BES.  271 

Indeed,  we  may  assert  that  he  gave  to  this  school  the 
boldest  development  that  history  exhibits,  by  combining 
with  the  doctrine  of  the  merely  conventional  value  of 
universal  concepts  the  doctrine  of  their  relativity,  very 
nearly  in  the  sense  of  the  Greek  Sophists. 

When  in  his  twentieth  year,  he  entered  the  service  of 
Lord  Cavendish,  afterwards  Duke  of  Devonshire.  This 
position  decided  the  wiiole  external  course  of  his  life,  and 
seems,  moreover,  to  have  exercised  a  permanent  influence 
upon  his  views  and  principles. 

He  undertook  the  duties  of  companion  or  tutor  to  the 
son  of  Lord  Cavendish,  who  was  about  his  own  age,  and 
whose  son  again  he  was  to  educate  in  his  later  years ;  so 
that  he  stood  in  intimate  relations  with  three  generations 
of  this  distinguished  house.  His  life  was,  therefore,  that 
of  a  private  tutor  in  the  circles  of  the  highest  English 
nobility. 

This  situation  introduced  him  to  the  world,  and  gave 
him  that  lasting  practical  turn  which  commonly  marked 
the  English  philosophers  of  that  period ;  he  was  emanci- 
pated from  the  narrow  circle  of  Scholastic  wisdom  and 
clerical  prejudices  in  which  he  had  grown  up ;  in  his  fre- 
quent journeyings  he  became  acquainted  with  Erance  and 
Italy,  and  in  Paris  especially  he  found  leisure  and  oppor- 
tunity to  hold  intercourse  with  the  most  famous  men  of 
the  age.  At  the  same  time,  however,  these  very  circum- 
stances early  taught  him  subordination  and  inclination  to 
the  Eoyalist  and  High  Church  party,  in  opposition  to  the 
efforts  of  the  English  democracy  and  the  dissenting  sects. 
His  Latin  and  Greek  he  soon  began  to  forget  in  his  new 
position,  and  by  way  of  compensation  speedily  picked  up 
on  his  first  travels  with  the  young  lord  some  knowledge  of 
Erench  and  Italian.  As  he  everywhere  perceived  that  the 
Scholastic  logic  was  an  object  of  contempt  with  all  sensible 
men,  he  let  it  completely  drop,  and  began  instead  to  apply 
himself  again  zealously  to  his  Greek  and  Latin,  but  more 
on  their  literary  side.     But  even  in  these  studies  he  was 


272  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

helped  by  his  practical  sense,  which  had  already  turned  in 
the  direction  of  politics. 

As  then  the  storms  which  preceded  the  outbreak  of  the 
English  Kevolution  began  to  stir,  he  translated  in  the 
year  1628  Thukydides  into  English,  with  the  express 
object  of  frightening  his  countrymen  by  an  exhibition  of 
the  follies  of  democracy,  as  they  were  pictured  in  the  for- 
tunes of  the  Athenians.  The  superstition  was  at  that 
time  widely  spread,  which  even  in  our  own  days  is  not 
entirely  extinguished,  that  history  is  directly  useful  as  a 
teacher ;  that  examples  drawn  from  it  may  be-  readily  ap- 
plied, and  that  in  the  most  altered  circumstances.  The 
party  that  Hobbes  embraced  was  already  obviously  enough 
the  legitimist  and  conservative,  although  his  own  personal 
way  of  thinking,  and  the  famous  theory  that  was  derived 
from  it,  was  fundamentally  and  directly  opposed  to  all 
conservatism.15 

It  was  in  the  year  1629,  when  travelling  through 
Erance  with  another  young  nobleman,  that  Hobbes  began 
to  study  the  Elements  of  Euklid,  for  which  he  soon  con- 
ceived a  strong  liking.  He  was  then  already  forty-one 
years  old,  and  was  now  for  the  first  time  turning  his  atten- 
tion to  mathematics,  in  which  he  soon  attained  to  the 
summit  of  the  science  as  it  then  was,  and  which  led  him 
to  his  systematic  mechanical  Materialism. 

Two  years  later,  and  upon  a  fresh  tour  through  France 
and  Italy,  he  began  at  Paris  the  study  of  the  natural 
sciences,  and  he  soon  made  the  chief  object  of  his  investi- 
gations a  problem  which,  in  the  very  putting  of  it,  clearly 
indicates  his  Materialism,  and  the  answer  to  which  fur- 
nishes the  watchword  to  the  Materialistic  controversies  of 
the  coming  century.     This  problem  is  as  follows : — 

15  In  the  first  edition  it  was  here  their  policy.  It  is  simpler  to  point 
further  remarked  that  this  theory  out  that  the  principles  of  the  "Levia- 
would  have  hetter  suited  with  the  than  "  may  in  fact  be  still  better  bar- 
Napoleonic  policy  of  our  days.  This  monised  with  the  despotism  of  Crom- 
expressiou  might  be  liable  to  miscon-  well  than  with  the  pretensions  of 
struction,  since  the  Bonaparte  family  the  Stuarts  to  their  hereditary  divine 
seek  to  adopt  a  certain  legitimism  in  right. 


HOBBES.  273 

What  hind  of  motion  can  it  he  that  produces  the  sensation 
and  imagination  of  living  heings  ? 

During  these  studies,  which  lasted  for  many  years,  he 
was  in  daily  communication  with  the  Minim  Friar  Mer- 
senne, with  whom,  moreover,  after  his  return  to  England 
in  1637,  ne  opened  a  correspondence. 

As  soon,  however,  as,  in  1640,  the  Long  Parliament 
"began  its  session,  he,  who  had  so  eagerly  declared  himself 
against  the  popular  side,  had  every  reason  to  withdraw 
himself;  and  he  betook  himself  accordingly  to  Paris,  where 
he  was  now  in  constant  intercourse  with  Gassendi,  as  well 
as  with  Mersenne,  and  not  without  appropriating  much 
from  his  views.  His  stay  in  Paris  lasted  through  a  long 
series  of  years.  Amongst  the  refugee  Englishmen  then 
gathered  in  great  numbers  at  Paris,  he  occupied  a  much 
respected  position,  and  was  selected  to  give  instruction  in 
mathematics  to  the  future  Charles  II.  Meanwhile  he  had 
composed  his  chief  political  treatises,  the  "  De  Cive "  and 
the  "  Leviathan,"  in  which,  and  in  the  "  Leviathan  "  with 
special  outspokenness,  he  propounded  the  doctrine  of  a 
downright  and  paradoxical,  but  by  no  means  a  legitimist 
Absolutism.  This  very  treatise,  in  which,  moreover,  the 
clergy  had  discovered  many  heresies,  destroyed  for  a  time 
his  popularity  at  court.  He  fell  into  disgrace,  and  as  he 
had  at  the  same  time  violently  attacked  the  Papacy,  he 
.was  obliged  to  quit  Paris,  and  avail  himself  of  the  much- 
abused  freedom  of  Englishmen. 

After  the  restoration  of  the  King,  he  reconciled  himself 
with  the  court,  and  lived  in  an  honourable  retirement  of 
devotion  to  Ins  studies.  As  late  as  his  eighty-eighth  year 
he  published  a  translation  of  Homer ;  and  in  his  ninety- 
first  year  a  Cyclometry. 

As  Hobbes  once  lay  ill  at  St.  Germain  of  a  violent  fever, 
Mersenne  was  sent  to  him  to  take  care  that  the  famous 
man  should  not  die  outside  the  Eomish  Church.  After 
Mersenne  had  announced  the  power  of  the  Church  to  remit 
sins,  Hobbes  begged  that  he  would  rather  tell  him  when 

VOL.  I.  S 


274  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

he  had  last  seen  Gassendi,  and  so  the  conversation  im- 
mediately turned  upon  other  subjects.  The  attentions  of 
an  English  bishop,  however,  he  accepted,  on  condition  that 
he  should  confine  himself  to  the  written  prayers  pre- 
scribed by  the  Church. 

Hobbes's  views  upon  natural  philosophy  are  partly 
scattered  through  his  political  writings,  but  partly  laid 
down  in  the  two  works  "  De  Homine  "  and  "  De  Corpore/' 
Thoroughly  characteristic  of  his  way  of  thinking  is  his  in- 
troduction to  philosophy  : — 

"  Philosophy  seems  to  me  to  be  amongst  men  now  in 
the  same  manner  as  corn  and  wine  are  said  to  have  been 
in  the  world  in  ancient  time.  For  from  the  beginning 
there  were  vines  and  ears  of  corn  growing  here  and  there 
in  the  fields,  but  no  care  was  taken  for  the  planting  and 
sowing  of  them.  Men  lived  therefore  upon  acorns  ;  or,  if 
any  were  so  bold  as  to  venture  upon  the  eating  of  these 
unknown  and  doubtful  fruits,  they  did  it  with  danger  of 
their  health.  .  .  .  And  from  hence  it  comes  to  pass  that 
those  who  content  themselves  with  daily  experience,  which 
may  be  likened  to  feeding  upon  acorns,  and  either  reject  or 
not  much  regard  philosophy,  are  commonly  esteemed,  and 
are  indeed,  men  of  sounder  judgment  than  those  who,  from 
opinions,  though  not  vulgar,  yet  full  of  uncertainty,  are 
carelessly  received,  do  nothing  but  dispute  and  wrangle, 
like  men  that  are  not  well  in  their  wits."* 

Hobbes  points  out  how  difficult  it  is  to  expel  from 
men's  minds  a  fallacy  which  has  taken  root,  and  which  has 
been  strengthened  by  the  authority  of  plausible  authors; 
and  the  more  difficult  because  true,  that  is,  exact  philo- 
sophy scorns  not  only  the  "  paint  and  false  colours  of  lan- 
guage, but  even  the  very  ornaments  and  graces  of  the  same," 
and  because  the  first  grounds  of  all  philosophy  are  "  poor, 
and  in  appearance  deformed." 

After  this  introduction  follows  a  definition  of  philosophy, 

*  Vol.  i.  pp.  1,  2,  ed.  Molesworth,  Elements  of  Philosophy :  The  First 
Section,  Concerning  Body. 


HOBBES.  275 

which  might  equally  well  be  called  a  negation  of  philo- 
sophy, in  the  ordinary  sense  of  the  word : 

It  is  the  knowledge  of  effects  or  of  appearances,  ac- 
quired from  the  knowledge  we  have  first  of  their  causes, 
and  conversely  of  possible  causes  from  their  known  effects, 
by  means  of  true  ratiocination.  All  reasoning,  however, 
is  computation ;  and  accordingly  ratiocination  may  be  re- 

1    solved  into  addition  and  subtraction.^ 

[Not  only  does  this   definition  transform  the  whole  of 

.  philosophy  into  natural  science,  and  completely  set  aside 
the  transcendental  principle,  but  the  Materialistic  tendency 
is  still  plainer  in  the  explanation  of  the  object  of  philosophy. 
It  consists  in  this,  that  we  foresee  effects,  and  so  are  able  to 
apply  them  to  the  purposes  of  life.  It  is  well 

known  that  the  notion  of  philosophy  here  expressed  has 
taken  such  deep  root  in  England,  that  it  is  impossible  to 
render  the  sense  of  the  word  "  philosophy  "  by  the  corre- 
sponding German  word,  and  the  true  "  natural  philosopher  "■ 
is  nothing  but  the  experimenting  physicist.  Hobbes 
appears  here  as  the  logical  successor  of  Bacon  ;  and  as  the 
philosophy  of  these  men  has  certainly  exercised  a  consider- 
able influence  in  furthering  the  material  progress  of  Eng- 
land, so,  conversely,  it  was  itself  a  product  of  that  inborn 
national  spirit  then  already  hastening  to  its  mighty  de- 
velopment— the  spirit  of  a  sober  and  practical  people 
striving  after  power  and  wealth. 


13  The  definition  was  still  further  the  words  "conceptis"  and  "quae 
abridged  in  the  first  edition,  in  order  esse  possunt "  are  by  no  means  super- 
to  show  as  clearly  as  possible  the  fluous.  They  denote,  in  definite  op- 
transition  of  philosophy  into  natural  position  to  the  Baconian  induction, 
science.  It  runs  in  the  original :  the  nature  of  the  hypothetical-deduc- 
"  Philosophia  est  effectuum  seu  phae-  tive  method,  which  begins  with  a 
nomenon  ex  conceptis  eorum  causis  theory,  and  tries  and  corrects  it  by 
seu  generationibus,  et  rursus  genera-  reference  to  experience.  Compare 
tionum,  quae  esse  possunt,  ex  cogni-  what  is  said  further  on  in  the  text  as 
tis  effectibus  per  rectam  ratiocina-  to  the  relation  of  Hobbes  to  Bacon 
tionem  acquisita  cognitio. "  If  we  and  Descartes.  The  passages  quoted 
wish  to  observe  more  closely  the  are  in  the  treatise  De  Corpore,  i.  1, 
method  which  is  also  suggested  in  this  Opera  Latina,  ed.  Molesworth,  i. 
definition,  we  must  remember  that  2,  3. 


276  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

In  spite  of  these  so  obvious  relations,  it  is  impossible 
not  to  recognise  also  tlie  influence  of  Descartes  in  this 
definition ;  and  here  we  must,  of  course,  keep  clearly  in 
our  minds  the  Descartes  of  the  "Essay  upon  Method," 
without  troubling  ourselves  with  the  traditional  notions 
of  Cartesianism.*  In  this  maiden  work,  in  which  Descartes 
ranks  his  physical  theories  far  above  his  metaphysical  ones 
in  point  of  importance,  he  boasts  of  the  former  that  they 
open  the  way,  "  in  room  of  the  speculative  philosophy 
usually  taught  in  the  schools,  to  discover  a  practical,  by 
means  of  which,  knowing  the  force  and  action  of  fire, 
water,  air,  the  stars,  the  heavens,  and  all  the  other  bodies 
that  surround  us,  as  distinctly  as  we  know  the  various 
crafts  of  our  artisans,  we  might  also  apply  them  in  the 
same  way  to  all  the  uses  to  which  they  are  adapted,  and 
thus  render  ourselves  the  lords  and  possessors  of  nature."17 
We  might  indeed  remark,  that  all  this  had  already  been 
more  forcibly  said  by  Bacon,  with  whose  doctrine  Hobbes 
had  been  thoroughly  acquainted  from  his  early  youth; 
but  this  agreement  extends  only  to  the  general  tendency, 
while  Descartes'  method  in  one  very  essential  point  differs 
from  the  Baconian. 

Bacon  begins  with  induction,  and  expects  by  his  mount- 
ing from  the  particular  to  the  universal  to  be  able  to  force 
his  way  to  the  real  causes  of  phenomena.  When  these 
have  been  attained,  there  follows  deduction,  partly  for  the 
filling  in  of  details,  partly,  however,  for  the  practical  appli- 
cation of  the  truths  discovered. 

*  Compare  note  66  in  the  previous  of  self -observation!)  from   this  ten- 
section,  dency,  he  entirely  mistakes  the  na- 

17  Kuno  Fischer  and  v.  Kirch-  ture  of  the  dechictive  process,  which 
mann,  in  translating  this  passage  may  in  the  one  sphere  be  regulated 
(Rene  Descartes'  Hauptschriften,  S.  by  experience,  but  not  in  the  other. 
57;  and  Phil.  Bibl.,  Rene  Descartes'  Descartes  himself  was  still  quite  clear 
Phil.  Werke,  i.  S.  70  ff.),  refer  quite  enough  on  this  point  in  the  year  1637, 
rightly  to  the  relationship  between  and  accordingly  claimed  an  objective 
Descartes  and  Bacon.  Yet  when  the  validity  for  his  physical  theories,  but 
latter  {loc.  cit.  Anm.  35)  tries  to  claim  not  for  his  transcendental  specula- 
Descartes  as  an  empiricist,  and  to  de-  tions. 
duce  the  '  Cogito  ergo  sum  '  (as  result 


HOBBES.  277 

Descartes,  on  the  contrary,  proceeds,  in  fact,  syntheti- 
cally, and  yet  not  in  the  sense  of  Plato  and  Aristotle,  with 
pretensions  to  an  absolute  certainty  of  his  principles  (this 
modification  was  reserved  for  the  reactionary  development 
of  his  metaphysic !),  but  with  the  distinct  consciousness 
that  the  real  demonstrative  power  lies  in  experience.  He 
proposes  the  theory  tentatively,  explains  the  phenomena 
by  means  of  it,  and  so  tests  the  theory  by  experience.18 
This  method,  which  may  be  designated  as  the  hypothetico- 
deductive  method  (although,  if  classified  according  to  the 
nervusprobandi,  it  belongs  to  induction,  and  must  be  treated 
under  inductive  logic),  stands  nearer  to  the  actual  proce- 
dure of  scientific  inquiries  than  the  Baconian,  although 
neither  of  them  adequately  represents  the  true  nature  of 
scientific  inquiry.  Hobbes,  however,  has  here  no  doubt 
consciously  sided  with  Descartes  against  Bacon,  whilst 
later  Newton  again  (of  course  more  in  theory  than  in  actual 
practice  !)  reverted  to  Bacon. 

Hobbes  deserves  high  praise  for  this,  that  he  recognised 
frankly  and  unreservedly  the  great  achievement  of  modern 
science.  While  Bacon  and  Descartes  were  still  .refusing- 
it,  Hobbes  gave  to  Copernicus  the  place  of  honour  that  was 
his  due,  just  as,  in  short,  in  nearly  all  controverted  points, 
with  perhaps  the  single  exception  of  the  doctrine  of  vacuum, 
into  the  denial  of  which  he  allowed  himself  to  be  seduced 
by  Descartes,  he  declared  distinctly  and  decidedly  for  the 
rational  and  correct  view.  In  this  respect — as  well  as  for 
the  determination  of  his  tendency — the  dedication  to  his 
treatise  "  De  Corpore  "  is  of  great  interest.19     There  it  is 

13  Especially  decisive  is  the  follow-  Logici  Circulum  vocant,  incidere  ; 
ing  passage  of  the  "Dissertatio  de  nam  cum  experientia  maximam  effec- 
Methodo"  (near  the  end)  :  "Rationes  tuum  istorum  partem  certissimam 
enim  mihi  videntur  in  iis  (that  is,  in  esse  arguat,  causae  a quibus  illoselicio, 
the  '  hypotheses '  of  Dioptrics,  and  so  non  tarn  iis  probandis  quam  explican- 
on)  tali  serie  connexae,  ut  sicut  ulti-  dis  inserviunt,  contraque  ipsae  ab  Ulis 
mae   demonstrantur  a   primis,    quae  probantur." 

illarum    causae    sunt,    ita    reciproce  39  To  the  Earl  of  Devonshire,  Lon- 

primae  ah  ultimis,  quae  ipsarum  sunt  don,  23d  April  1655,  Opera  Latina, 

effecta,    probentur.      Nee  est    quod  ed.  Molesworth,  vol.  i.  p.  vii. 
quis  putet,  me  hie  in  vitium,  quod 


278  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

said  that  the  doctrine  of  the  earth's  diurnal  revolution  was 
the  invention  of  the  ancients,  but  that  both  it  and  astro- 
nomy, that  is,  celestial  physics,  springing  up  together  with 
it,  were,  by  succeeding  philosophers,  strangled  with  the 
snares  of  words.  And  therefore  the  beginning  of  astronomy, 
except  observations,  is  not  to  be  derived  from  farther  time 
than  from  Mcolaus  Copernicus,  who,  in  the  age  next  pre- 
ceding the  present,  revived  the  opinion  of  Pythagoras,  Aris- 
tarchos,  and  Philolaos.  After  this,  Galilei  had  first  opened 
the  gate  of  natural  philosophy  (physics),  and  lastly,  the 
science  of  man's  body  had  been  founded  by  Harvey  through 
his  doctrines  of  the  circulation  of  the  blood  and  the  gene- 
ration of  animals.  Before  this  there  had  been  nothing  but 
every  man's  experiments  by  himself,  and  the  natural  his- 
tories that  were  no  certainer  than  civil  histories.  But  then 
all  the  physical  sciences  had  been  extraordinarily  advanced 
by  Kepler,  Gassendi,  and  Mersenne,  while  Hobbes  vindi- 
cates for  himself  (referring  to  his  book  "  De  Give ")  the 
foundation  of  '  Civil  Philosophy.' 

In  Old  Greece,  he  goes  on,  there  walked  a  certain 
phantasm,  for  superficial  gravity  a  little  like  philosophy, 
though  full  within  of  fraud  and  filth.  With  Christianity 
had  been  mingled  first  some  harmless  sentences  of  Plato, 
but  afterwards  many  foolish  and  false  ones  out  of  Aris- 
totle ;  and  so,  instead  of  the  faith,  there  entered  a  thing 
called  theology,  which,  halting  on  one  foot  (because  she 
rests  partly  on  the  Holy  Scripture,  but  partly  on  the  Aris- 
totelian philosophy),  is  like  the  Empusa,  and  has  raised  an 
infinite  number  of  controversies  and  wars.  This  Empusa 
cannot  be  better  exorcised  than  by  the  establishing  of  a 
State  religion  instead  of  the  opinions  of  private  men,  at 
the  same  time  basing  religion  upon  Holy  Scripture,  but 
philosophy  upon  natural  reason. 

These  ideas  are  very  boldly  carried  out,  especially  in 
the  "  Leviathan,"  and  we  are  surprised  now  by  perverse 
paradoxes,  and  now  by  the  natural  directness  and  keen- 
ness of  his  judgment/   With  regard  to  his  opposition  to 


HOBBES.  2/9 

Aristotle,  there  is  a  specially  notable  passage  in  the  forty- 
sixth  chapter,  where  he  indicates  the  confusion  of  name 
and  thing  as  the  root  of  the  evil.  Hobbes  undoubtedly 
hits  the  nail  upon  the  head  when  he  considers  the  hypos- 
tasising  of  the  copula  est  as  the  original  source  of  innu- 
merable absurdities.  Aristotle  has  made  'being'  into  a 
thing,  just  as  though  there  were  in  the  universe  an  actual 
object  which  could  be  designated  by  the  term  c  being ! ' 
We  may  imagine  to  ourselves  what  would  have  been 
Hobbes's  judgment  upon  Hegel ! 

His  attack  upon  theology,  which  is  treated  as  mischief- 
making  abomination,  is  only  apparently  a  defence  of  belief 
in  the  letter.  It  is,  in  truth,  much  rather  allied  with  a 
concealed  aversion  to  religion.  But  Hobbes  has  a  quite 
uncommon  hatred  of  theology,  in  so  far  as  she  is  connected 
with  the  claims  of  ecclesiastical  supremacy.  This  he 
absolutely  rejects.  The  kingdom  of  Christ  is  not  of  this 
world,  and  therefore  the  spiritual  authority  has  no  claim 
to  any  sort  of  obedience.  Accordingly,  Hobbes  attacks 
with  especial  animosity  the  doctrine  of  papal  infalli- 
bility.20 Generally  speaking,  also,  it  is  a  neces- 
sary consequence  of  his  definition  of  the  notion  of  philo- 
sophy that  any  idea  of  a  speculative  theology  is  quite 
impossible.  The  knowledge  of  God  is  in  no  way  a  part 
of  science,  because  as  soon  as  it  is  no  longer  possible  to 
add  or  to  subtract,  the  province  of  reflection  ceases.  It  is 
true,  indeed,  that  the  connection  between  cause  and  effect 
leads  us  to  the  assumption  of  a  last  cause  of  all  motion,  a 
first  moving  principle ;  but  the  further  definition  of  its 
nature  remains  somewhat  quite  unthinkable,  and  contra- 
dictory in  thought,  so   that  the  actual  recognition  and 

20    The   doctrine  of  papal  infalli-  supremacy  of  the  Pope  over  all  the 

bility  is  controverted  by  Hobbes  in  princes  of  the  earth.     The  whole  ar- 

the  "Leviathan,"  c.  xlii.,  ed.  Moles-  gument    shows    that  Hobbes   recog- 

worth,  iii.  554,   foil.      This  polemic  nised  the  full  force  of   the   dangers 

forms  one  portion  of  the  elaborate  re-  contained    in    these    pretensions  — 

futation  of  Cardinal  Bellarmine's  book  dangers  which  are  only  in  our  own 

in  favour  of  the  Jesuit  doctrine  of  the  days  becoming  visible  to  everybody. 


28o  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

completion  of  the  idea  of  God  must  remain  as  the  function 
of  religious  faith. 

The  blindness  and  thoughtlessness  of  faith  has  "been  in 
no  system  so  expressly  stated  as  in  this,  although  Bacon, 
and  even  Gassendi,  occupy  in  many  respects  a  very  simi- 
lar position.  And  accordingly  Schaller  very  excellently 
says  of  the  attitude  of  Hobbes  to  religion :  "  How  this  is 
psychologically  possible  is  also  a  mystery,  so  that  it  is  first 
necessary  to  have  faith  in  the  possibility  of  such  a  faith."2! 
But  the  true  point  of  support  upon  which  this  theory  of 
faith  rests  is  found  in  Hobbes's  political  system. 

Hobbes,  as  is  well  known,  is  regarded  as  the  founder  of 
the  absolutist  theory  of  government,  which  he  deduces 
from  the  necessity  of  escaping  the  war  of  all  against  all 
by  means  of  a  supreme  will.  He  assumes  that  man,  whose 
thoughts  are  naturally  for  the  preservation  of  his  personal 
interests,  even  though  peaceably  disposed,  yet  cannot  live 
without  hurting  the  interests  of  others,  since  he  only 
struggles  to  preserve  his  own.  Hobbes  denies  the  Aris- 
totelian principle  that  man,  like  the  bee,  the  ant,  the 
beaver,  is,  from  the  very  constitution  of  his  nature,  a  poli- 
tical animal.  It  is  not  through  political  instinct,  but 
through  fear  and  reason,  that  man  enters  into  union  with 
his  fellows,  with  the  object  of  preserving  their  common 

21  Schaller,  Gesch  d.  Naturphil. ,  threads.  A  necessary  consequence  of 
Leipzig,  1 841,  S.  82.  But  we  need  this  is  that  Kuno  Fischer,  who  as  a 
not  seek  any  clearer  explanation  of  rule  estimates  such  phenomena  with 
this  point  in  Schaller ;  very  able,  and  delicate  tact,  has  failed  to  recognise 
in  the  main  certainly  correct,  is  the  the  worldly  frivolity  which,  in  Des- 
judgment  of  Kuno  Fischer  as  to  the  cartes,  underlies  his  reverential  sub- 
position  of  morality  and  religion  in  jection  to  the  judgment  of  the  Church. 
Hobbes  (Baco  von  Verulam,  S.  393  Entirely  hypocritical  Hobbes's  reli- 
ff.,  E.  T.  Oxenford,  p.  420  foil.);  yet  gious  sentiments  can  hardly  have 
in  the  too  one-sided  reference  of  been;  at  least,  he  was  certainly  an 
this  whole  tendency  to  Bacon,  while  honourable  partisan  of  the  Church  of 
Descartes  is  conceived  as  the  exact  his  country  in  opposition  to  Catho- 
antithesis,  there  is  a  defect,  which  is  licism ;  and  it  was  probably  only  in 
due  to  the  Hegelian  method  of  classi-  this  sense  that  men  like  Mersenne 
fication,  which  makes  everything  very  and  Descartes — and  in  a  lesser  degree 
clear,  but  not  unfrequently  does  vio-  even  Gassendi— were  zealous  Catho- 
lence  to  the  often  very  complicated  lies. 


HOBBES.  281 

security.  With  peculiar  consistency,  moreover,  Hobbes 
denies  even  any  absolute  difference  between  good  and 
evil,  virtue  and  vice.  The  individual  man,  therefore,  can- 
not succeed  in  giving  any  established  validity  to  these 
notions  either :  he  allows  himself,  in  fact,  to  be  guided  by 
his  interests ;  and  so  long  as  the  higher  will  of  the  State 
does  not  exist,  this  can  as  little  be  made  a  subject  of  re- 
proach to  him  as  to  the  beast  of  prey  that  destroys  the 
weaker  animals. 

Although  these  principles  are  strictly  in  harmony  with 
each  other  and  with  the  whole  system,  Hobbes  might  at 
the  same  time,  without  any  inconsistency,  have  admitted 
as  probable  at  least  the  existence  of  a  political  impulse, 
and  even  of  a  natural  gravitation,  to  the  adoption  of  such 
customs  as  guarantee  the  happiest  possible  condition  of  all 
men.  The  denial  of  the  freedom  of  the  will,  which  is  a 
matter  of  course  in  Hobbes's  system,  by  no  means  implies 
an  egoistic  ethic  as  its  necessary  result.  It  is  simply 
that,  with  an  unnatural  extension  of  the  idea,  even  the 
effort  to  make  one's  surroundings  happy,  in  so  far  as  this 
gratifies  a  natural  impulse,  is  called  egoistic.  Hobbes* 
however,  knows  nothing  of  this  unnatural  extension  of 
the  idea :  the  egoism  of  his  State-founders  is  a  pure,  com- 
plete, and  unsophisticated  egoism,  in  the  sense  in  which 
this  notion  indicates  just  the  opposition  of  personal 
interests  to  foreign  and  to  joint  interests.  Hobbes,  who 
undervalued  the  euristic  value  of  feeling,  in  rejecting  the 
natural  instinct  to  political  life,  and  to  the  intellectual 
apprehension  and  appropriation  of  the  general  interests, 
missed  the  one  path  which  could  have  conducted  him 
even  from  his  Materialistic  standpoint  to  higher  ethico- 
political  principles.  In  rejecting  the  Aristotelian  %aov 
ttoXltlkov,  he  enters  upon  the  path  which,  co-operating 
with  the  rest  of  his  fundamental  doctrines,  must  neces- 
sarily lead  him  into  paradoxical  consequences.  It  is  just 
because  of  this  unshrinking  consistency  that  Hobbes,  even 
when  he  goes  wrong,  is  still  so  extraordinarily  instructive ; 


282  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

and  we  can,  in  fact,  scarcely  name  a  second  author  who 
has  been  so  unanimously  abused  by  the  disciples  of  all 
schools,  while  at  the  same  time  he  stimulated  them  all  to 
greater  clearness  and  precision. 

The  first  founders  of  the  State,  as  later  in  Rousseau,  so 
in  Hobbes  also,  make  a  compact;  and  in  this  respect 
his  theory  is  thoroughly  revolutionary — knowing  nothing 
of  an  original  divine  arrangement  of  ranks,  of  hereditary 
divine  right  to  the  crown,  and  conservative  fancies  of  that 
kind.22  Hobbes  holds  the  monarchy  to  be  the  best  form 
of  government,  although  he  thinks  that,  of  all  his  princi- 
ples, this  has  been  least  satisfactorily  demonstrated.  Even 
the  hereditariness  of  monarchy  is  a  mere  arrangement  of 
utility;  but  that  the  monarchy,  where  it  exists,  must  be 
absolute,  follows  simply  from  the  demand  that  the  govern- 
ance of  the  State,  even  when  it  is  intrusted  to  a  society  or 
an  assembly,  must  possess  absolute  force. 

For  his  egoistical  rabble  of  human  beings  has  not  the 
slightest  inclination  by  nature  to  maintain  any  form  of 
constitution  or  to  observe  any  laws :  fear  alone  can  com- 
pel it  to  this.  In  order,  therefore,  that  the  multitude  may 
at  least  continue  united,  and  the  war  of  all  against  all 
may  be  avoided  as  the  greatest  possible  evil,  the  egoism  of 
the  rulers  must  have  the  force  to  assert  itself  absolutely, 
so  as  to  keep  in  check  the  unbridled,  and,  in  its  totality, 
the  very  much  more  harmful  egoism  of  all  its  subjects. 

The  government,  besides,  cannot  be  kept  in  check ;  if  it 
violates  the  constitution,  then  the  citizens,  to  offer  a  suc- 
cessful resistance,  must  trust  one  another,  and  that  is  what 
the  egoistic  creatures  cannot  do;  but  each  individual  is 

22  The  formula  out  of  which  grows  multitude  becomes  a  unity  which  we 

the  unity  of  the  State  runs  thus  : —  call  a  State.     "  Atque  haec  est  gene- 

"Ego  huic  homini,  vel  huic  coetui,  ratio  vnagni  illius  Leviathan,  vel  ufe 

auctoritatem    et  jus  meum  regendi  dignius  loquar,   mortalis  Dei." — Le- 

meipsum  concedo,  ea  conditione,  ut  viathan,  c.  xvii.,  iii.  131,  ed.  Moles- 

tu  quoque  tuam  auctoritatem  et  jus  worth.  As  to  the  natural 

tuum  tui  regendi  in  eundem  trans-  equality  of  all  men  (in  opposition  to 

feras."      As  each  individual  speaks  Aristotle,  who  speaks  of  born  masters 

thus  to  every  other,   the  atomistic  and  slaves),  comp.  ibid.  c.  xv.,  p.  n3. 


HOBBES.  283 

weaker  than  the  government.  Why  then  need  it  stand 
upon  ceremony  ? 

That  every  revolution  that  is  strong  enough  is  also 
justified,  as  soon  as  it  succeeds,  in  establishing  any  new 
form  of  authority,  is  a  necessary  consequence  of  this 
system:  tyrants  need  not  comfort  themselves  with  the 
proverb,  'Might  comes  before  right/  since,  in  fact,  might 
and  right  are  absolutely  identical.  Hobbes  does  not 
care  to  linger  among  these  consequences  of  his  system, 
and  rather  loves  to  paint  the  advantages  of  an  absolute 
hereditary  monarchy;  but  all  this  does  not  modify  the 
theory.  The  name  "  Leviathan  "  is  only  too  significant  of 
this  monster  of  a  State,  which  is  guided  by  no  higher  con- 
siderations, which,  like  a  god  upon  earth,  ordains  law  and 
judgment,  right  and  possession,  at  its  own  will,  and  even 
arbitrarily  determines  the  ideas  of  good  and  eviip>  and  in 
return  assures  to  all  those  who  bow  the  knee  before  it  and 
do  it  sacrifice,  protection  for  their  lives  and  property. 

To  the  absolute  authority  of  the  State,  moreover,  belongs 
the  right  of  prescribing  to  its  subjects  their  religion  and 
their  whole  way  of  thinking.  Exactly  like  Epikuros  and 
Lucretius,  so  Hobbes  also  derives  religion  from  terror  and 
superstition ;  but  while  they  for  this  very  reason  declare 
that  to  rise  above  the  limits  of  religion  is  the  highest  and 
noblest  duty  of  the  philosopher,  Hobbes  knows  how  to 
turn  this  common  material  to  account  for  the  purposes 
of  his  State.  His  real  view  of  religion  is  so  trenchantly 
expressed  in  a  single  sentence,  that  we  cannot  but  be  sur- 
prised at  the  unnecessary  breath  that  has  often  been  spent 
upon  the  theology  of  Hobbes.    He  lays  down  the  following 

23  So  long  as  the  State  does  not  out  of  mere  self-will  and  vanity,  are 

interfere,    everything,    according    to  held  inviolable  (loc.  cit. ,  c.  vii.  p.  52). 

Hobbes,  is   good  for  any  particular  That  any  private  person  should  make 

man  that  is  the  object  of  his  desire  himself  the  judge  of  good  and  evil,  and 

(Leviathan,  c.  vi.  iii.  42,  ed.  Molesw.).  hold  it  a  sin  to  do  anything  against 

Conscience  is   nothing  but  a  man's  his  conscience,  is  reckoned  among  the 

secret  consciousness  of  his  deeds  and  worst  offences  against  civic  obedience 

words,  and  this  expression  is  often  (c.  xxix.  p.  232). 
misapplied  to  private  opinions,  which, 


284  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

definition:  "Fear  of  power  invisible,  feigned  by  the  mind  or 
imagined  from  tales  publicly  allowed,  RELIGION  :  not  allowed, 
superstition."  24  When  Hobbes,  then,  in  the  same  book, 
with  the  utmost  calmness  mentions  as  simple  facts  the 
building  of  the  tower  of  Babel,  or  the  miracles  worked 
by  Moses  in  Egypt,  25  we  must  nevertheless  recall  with 
astonishment  his  definition  of  religion.  The  man  who 
compared  the  miracles  to  c  pills '  which  we  must  swallow 
down  without  chewing  26  can,  in  fact,  only  not  have  held 
these  miraculous  stories  for  superstitions,  because  in  Eng- 
land the  authority  of  the  Bible  is  established  by  the 
supreme  political  power.  When,  therefore,  Hobbes  is 
speaking  upon  religious  subjects,  we  must  constantly  dis- 
tinguish these  three  cases.  Either  Hobbes  speaks  directly 
from  his  own  system,  and  then  he  views  religion  as  only 
one  form  of  superstition ; 2?  or  he  is  referring  incidentally 
to  some  particular  points,  when  he  only  practically  applies 
a  principle  of  his  system — then  he  views  the  doctrines 
of  religion  as  simple  facts,  with  which,  however,  science 
has  nothing  more  to  do;  Hobbes  is  then  sacrificing  to 
Leviathan. 

24  Leviathan,  c.  vi.  p.  45  :  "  Metus  tus  ad  turrem  Babel,  quo  tempore 
potentiarum  invisibilium,  sive  fictae  Deus  omnem  hominem  sernionis  sui, 
illae  sint,  sive  ab  historiis  acceptae  propter  rebellionem,  oblivione  per- 
sint  publice,  religio  est;  si  publice  cussit."  Ibid.,  c.  xxxvii.  p.  315: 
acceptae  non  sint  super  stitio."  Hobbes  "Potestatem  ergo  illi  dedit  Deus 
indeed  goes  on  to  add:  "Quandoautem  convertendi  virgam,  quam  in  manu 
potentiae  illae  re  vera  tales  sunt,  quales  habebat,  in  serpentem,  et  rursus  ser- 
accepimus,  vera  religio  ;"  but  this  is  pentem  in  virgam,"  &c. 

only  an  apparent  saving  clause.  For  27  Hobbes  is  speaking  from  this 
as  the  State  alone  decides  which  is  to  standpoint,  for  example,  in  treating 
be  the  accepted  religion,  and  as  it  of  the  origin  of  religion.  This  is  re- 
must  not  be  contradicted  for  political  ferred  absolutely  to  some  natural 
reasons,  obviously  the  notion  of  "  vera  characteristic  or  other  of  man  (comp, 
religio"  is  a  merely  relative  one — and  Lev.,  c.  xii.  ad  init.),  among  others, 
we  may  be  the  more  content  that  it  to  the  inclination  to  hasty  conclusions, 
should  be  so,  since  in  a  scientific  sense  and  so  on.  And  so  we  have  this  sum- 
there  is  nothing  to  be  said  as  to  re-  mary  (p.  89,  Eng.  Works,  iii.  98) : 
ligion  in  general.  "In  these   four   things — opinion  of 

25  Comp.  Kuno  Fischer,  Baco  von  ghosts,  ignorance  of  second  causes, 
Verulam,  S.  404,  E.  T.  430.  Levia-  devotion  towards  what  men  fear,  and 
than,  c.  xxxii.  iii.  266.  taking  of  things  casual  for  prognostics 

26  Comp.  Leviathan,  c.  iv.  iii.  22:  — consisteth  the  natural  seed  (semen 
"  Copia  haec  omnis  .  .  .  interiit  peni-  naturale)  of  religion." 


HOBBES.  285 

The  worst  contradictions  are  thus,  at  least  in  form, 
explained  away,  and  we  have  only  the  third  case  left — 
where  Hobbes  is  offering  to  Leviathan,  as  it  were  de  lege 
ferenda,  respectful  suggestions  for  the  purification  of  religion 
and  for  the  abolishing  of  the  worst  superstitions.  Here  we 
must  indeed  recognise  that  Hobbes  does  all  that  is  in  his 
power  to  lessen  the  gulf  between  faith  and  knowledge.  He 
distinguishes  the  essential  and  the  non-essential  elements 
of  religion;  he  tries  to  explain  away  obvious  contradic- 
tions between  Scripture  and  faith — as,  for  example,  the 
doctrine  of  the  revolution  of  the  earth — by  distinguishing 
between  the  mode  of  expression  and  the  moral  purpose  of 
Scripture ;  he  explains  ' possession'  as  a  disease  ;  maintains 
that  miracles  have  ceased  since  the  founding  of  Christianity, 
and  even  allows  us  to  see  that  the  very  miracles  are  not 
miracles  to  everybody.28  If  we  add  to  this  the  remarkable 
rudiments  of  a  historico-critical  treatment  of  the  Bible,  we 
easily  see  that  the  whole  armoury  of  Eationalism  is  already 
to  be  found  in  Hobbes,  and  only  needs  to  have  its  range  of 
application  extended.29 

Next,  as  to  his  theory  of  external  nature,  we  must  first 
observe  that  Hobbes  absolutely  identifies  the  idea  of  body 
with  that  of  substance  ;  so  that  when  Bacon  carries  on  a 
controversy  against  the  immaterial  substance  of  Aristotle, 
Hobbes  has  already  got  beyond  him,  and  without  hesita- 
tion distinguishes  between  the  '  body '  and  the  '  accidens.' 
Hobbes  declared  everything  to  be  body  that,  independently 
of  our  thought,  occupies  a  portion  of  space,  and  coincides 
with  it.  As  opposed  to  this,  the  accident  is  not  a  really 
objective  thing,  like  body,  but  it  is  the  way  in  which  the 
body  is  conceived.     This  distinction  is  really  sharper  than 

28  Comp,  amongst  others,  the  fol-  ipsa  miracula  non  omnibus  miracula 

lowing  passages  of  the  "Leviathan,"  sunt." 

Op.  Lat.  iii.  64,  foil.  207:  "Miracula  29  Comp,  for  in  stance  "Leviathan," 

enim,  ex  quo   tempore  nobis  Chris-  c.  xxxii.  276  :  "  Libri  testamenti  novi 

tianis  positae  sunt  leges  divinae,  cess-  ab  altiore  tempore  derivari  non  pos- 

averunt."       "Miracula    narrantibus  sunt,  quam  ab  eo,  quo  rectores  ecclesi- 

credere    non    obligamur."      "Etiam  arum  collegerant,"  and  what  follows. 


2  36  THE  SE  VENTEE  NTH  CENTUR  Y. 

tliat  of  Aristotle,  and,  like  all  Hobbes's  definitions,  betrays 
the  mathematically  -  trained  mind.  In  other  respects 
Hobbes  adheres  to  the  explanation  that  the  accident  is  in 
the  subject,  in  such  a  way  that  it  cannot  be  regarded  as 
any  part  of  it,  but  that  it  may  be  away,  and  yet  the  body 
does  not  cease  to  be.  The  only  constant  accidents  which 
cannot  be  wanting  without  the  body's  thereby  ceasing  to 
exist  are  extension  and  figure.  All  others,  such  as  rest, 
motion,  colour,  hardness,  and  so  on,  may  vary,  while  the 
body  itself  remains,  and  they  are,  therefore,  not  corporeal, 
but  simply  modes  in  which  we  conceive  the  body. 
Motion  Hobbes  defines  as  the  c  continual  relinquishing  of 
one  place  and  acquiring  of  another,'  where  it  is  obviously 
overlooked  that  the  idea  of  motion  is  already  contained  in 
the  'relinquishing'  and  'acquiring  of '  a  place.  As  com- 
pared with  Gassendi  and  Bacon,  there  appears  not  unfre- 
quently  in  Hobbes's  definitions  a  return  to  Aristotelianism, 
if  not  in  principle,  at  least  in  the  mode  of  expression — a 
fact  which  is  to  be  explained  by  the  course  of  his  intellec- 
tual development. 

In  the  definition  of  matter,  this  inclination  towards 
Aristotle  is  particularly  evident.  Hobbes  declares  that 
matter  is  neither  one  of  the  bodies  nor  a  special  body  dis- 
tinct from  all  others,  and  it  follows,  therefore,  that  it  is  in 
fact  nothing  else  than  a  mere  name.  Here  the  Aristotelian 
conception  is  obviously  taken  as  the  foundation,  but  it  is 
improved  upon  in  a  way  thoroughly  corresponding  to  the 
improvements  in  the  notion  of  '  accident.'  Hobbes,  who 
sees  that  possibility  or  chance  cannot  be  in  things,  but 
only  in  our  conception  of  things,  quite  rightly  corrects  the 
main  defect  of  the  Aristotelian  system,  by  substituting  for 
the  accident  as  an  accidental  element  in  the  object  the  acci- 
dental subjective  conception.  Instead  of  matter  as  a  sub- 
stance, that  can  become  anything,  and  is  nothing  definite, 
comes  in  the  same  way  the  statement  that  matter  is  the 
body  conceived  generally,  that  is,  an  abstraction  of  the 
thinking  subject.     The  permanent  element,  which  persists 


HOBBES.  2S7 

through. _ail ...  changes,  is  for  Hobbes  not  matter,  but  the 
1  body/  which  only  changes  its  accidentia,  that  is,  is  now 
conceived  by  11s  in  one  way  and  now  in  another.  But  at 
the  bottom  of  this  changing  conception  there  lies  some- 
thing permanent,  namely,  the  motion  of  the  parts  of  the 
body.  And  therefore  when  an  object  changes  its  colour, 
becomes  hard  or  soft,  breaks  into  particles,  or  combines 
with  new  particles,  the  original  quantity  of  the  corporeal 
thing  persists ;  we  name,  however,  the  object  of  our  per- 
ception differently  in  accordance  with  the  new  impressions 
that  it  makes  upon  our  senses.  Whether  we  suppose  a 
new  body  to  be  the  object  of  our  perception,  or  only  attri- 
bute new  qualities  to  the  old  body,  depends  merely  upon 
the  language  in  which  we  express  our  conceptions,  and  so 
indirectly  from  our  own  will,  since  words  are  but  counters. 
And  thus,  too,  the  distinction  between  body  (substance) 
and  accident  is  a  merely  relative  one,  dependent  upon  our 
conceptions.  The  real  body,  which,  by  the  continual  move- 
ment of  its  parts,  excites  the  corresponding  movements  hi 
our  organ  of  sensation,  is  subject  to  no  other  change  what- 
ever than  the  mere  motion  of  its  parts. 

It  is  worth  remarking  here  that  Hobbes,  by  means  of  his 
doctrine  of  the  relativity  of  all  concepts,  as  well  as  his 
theory  of  sensation,  does  in  fact  outrun  Materialism  much 
as  Protagoras  outran  Demokritos.  That  Hobbes  was  not 
an.  Atomist  we  have  already  seen  ;  but  looking  also  at  the 
whole  connection  of  his  ideas  as  to  the  nature  of  things,  he 
could  not  possibly  have  been  an  Atomist.  ■  As  he  applies 
it  to  all  other  concepts,  so  he  applies  the  category  of  rela- 
tivity to  the  idea  of  '  great '  and  '  small '  in  particular. 
The  distance  of  many  of  the  fixed  stars  from  the  earth  is 
so  great,  he  says,  that,  as  compared  with  it„  the  whole  dis- 
tance of  the  earth  from  the  sun  appears  as  a  mere  point ; 
so  also  is  it  with  the  particles  which  to  us  appear  small. 
There  is  in  this  direction  also  an  infinity ;  and  what  the 
human  physicist  regards  as  the  smallest  particle,  because 
he  needs  to  assume  it  for  his  theories,  is  in  its  turn  a 


288 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 


world  with  innumerable  gradations  from  the  greatest  to 
the  smallest.30 

In  his  theory  of  sensation,  we  have  already  in  germ  the 
sensationalism  of  Locke,  Hobbes  supposes  that  the  move- 
ments of  corporeal  things  communicate  themselves  to  our 
senses  by  transmission  through  the  medium  of  the  air,  and 
from  thence  are  continued  to  the  brain,  and  from  the  brain 
finally  to  the  heart.31  To  every  movement  corresponds 
an  answering  movement,  in  the  organism,  as  in  external 
nature.  From  this  principle  of  reaction  Hobbes  derives 
sensation ;  but  it  is  not  the  immediate  reaction  of  the  ex- 
ternal organ  that  constitutes  sensation,  but  only  the  move- 
ment that  starts  from  the  heart,  and  then  returns  from  the 
external  organ  by  way  of  the  brain,  so  that  an  appreciable 
time  always  elapses  between  the  impression  and  the  sensa- 


30  De  Corpore,  iv.  27  (i.  362-364,  ed. 
Molesw.).  Here  also  occurs  (p.  364)  a 
very  noteworthy  passage  in  respect 
of  method :  "  Agnoscunt  mortales 
magna  esse  quaedam,  etsi  finita,  ut 
quae  vident  ita  esse  ;  agnoscunt  item 
infinitam  esse  posse  magnitudinem 
eorum  quae  non  vident :  medium  vero 
esse  inter  infinitum  efc  eorum  quae  vi- 
dent cogitantve  maximum,  non  statim 
nee  nisi  multa  eruditione  persuaden- 
tur."  When,  indeed,  the  theoretical 
question  of  divisibility,  and  of  the  re- 
lativity of  greatness  and  smallness,  no 
longer  comes  into  view,  Hobbes  has 
no  objection  to  make  to  describing  the 
"  corpuscula"  as  "  atomi,"  as,  for  in- 
stance, in  his  theory  of  gravitation, 
De  Corpore,  iv.  30  (p.  415). 

31  A  more  particular  inquiry  into  the 
doctrine  of  '  conatus '  as  the  form  of 
motion  here  referred  to  is  beyond  our 
present  object.  For  a  fuller  exposition 
see  in  Baumann,  Die  Lehren  von 
Kaum,  Zeit  und  Mathem.,  i.  S.  321 
ff.  The  special  fault  found  with  the 
theory  at  S.  327,  that  the  sensation  is 
only  produced  by  the  conatus  return- 
ing from  the  heart,  seems  to  me  to  be 
not  wholly  justified ;  for  even  al- 
though, according  to  Hobbes's  theory, 


a  reaction  against  the  impact  of  the  ob- 
ject takes  place  instantaneously  in  the 
part  first  acted  upon,  yet  this  by  no 
means  hinders  the  propagation  of  the 
motion  under  ever  new  actions  and 
reactions  towards  the  inward  parts, 
where  the  motion  can  become  regres- 
sive. Let  us  suppose,  for  example, 
for  simplicity's  sake,  a  series  of  elastic 
balls  placed  in  a  straight  line,  a,  b, 
C,  .  .  .  n,  and  let  us  suppose  that  A 
impinges  directly  upon  B,  the  im- 
pulse being  then  propagated  through 
C  and  so  on  to  N ;  let  N  strike  at  right 
angles  against  a  fixed  wall,  then  the 
motion  will  return  right  through  the 
whole  series,  without  being  hindered 
by  the  circumstance  that  sometime  be- 
fore B  has  also  reacted  against  a,  thus 
limiting  its  movement.  It  must,  how- 
ever, of  course,  be  allowed  to  the  ori- 
ginator of  the  hypothesis  to  identify 
with  the  sensation  not  the  first  (limit- 
ing) reaction  of  B  against  A,  but  the 
returning  impact  from  B  to  A,  a  view 
which,  there  can  be  no  doubt,  suits 
the  facts  incomparably  better.  Comp, 
the  remarks  in  §  4  (i.  p.  319  sq.,  ed. 
Molesw. )  on  the  effect  of  an  interrup- 
tion of  the  communication. 


HOBBES.  289 

tion.  By  means  of  this  regressiveness  of  the  movement 
of  sensation,  which  is  an  '  endeavour '  (conatus)  towards 
the  objects,  is  explained  the  transposition  outwards  of  the 
images  of  sense.32  The  sensation  is  identical  with  the 
image  of  sense  (phantasma),  and  this  again  is  identical 
with  the  motion  of  the  '  conatus '  towards  the  objects  ;  not 
merely  occasioned  by  it.  And  thus  Hobbes  by  a  bold 
phrase  hews  asunder  the  Gordian  knot  of  the  question 
how  the  sensation  as  a  subjective  condition  is  related  to 
the  movement ;  but  the  matter  is  thereby  made  none  the 
clearer. 

The  subject  of  the  sensation  is  the  man  as  a  whole  ;  the 
object  is  the  thing  which  is  felt :  the  images,  however,  of 
the  sense-qualities,  by  means  of  which  we  perceive  the 
thing,  are  not  the  thing  itself,  but  a  motion  originating 
within  us.  And  thus  there  does  not  proceed  from  shining 
bodies  any  light,  or  from  sounding  bodies  any  noise,  but 
only  certain  forms  of  motion  from  each.  Light  and  sound 
are  sensations,  and  first  arise  as  such  within  us  as  reac- 
tionary motion  proceeding  from  the  heart.  From  this 
results  the  sensationalistic  consequence  that  all  so-called 
sense-qualities,  as  such,  belong  not  to  things,  but  originate 
only  in  ourselves.  Coupled  with  this,  however,  is  the  \ 
Materialistic  principle  that  even  human  sensation  is 
nothing  but  the  motion  of  corporeal  particles,  occasioned 
by  the  external  motion  of  things.  Hobbes  never  thought 
of  abandoning  this  Materialistic  principle  in  favour  of  a 
consistent  Sensationalism,  because,  like  Demokritos  in  an- 
tiquity, he  started  from  the  mathematical  and  physical 
consideration  of  external  things.  Therefore  his  system  re- 
mains an  essentially  Materialistic  system,  in  spite  of  the 
germs  of  Sensationalism  which  it  bears  within  it. 

With  regard  to  his  view  of  the  universe,  Hobbes  con-  \ 

32  De  Corpore,  iv.    xxv.   2   (i.    p.  existit  phantasma;  quod  propter  co- 

318) :  "  Ut  cum  conatus  ille  ad  intima  natum  versus  externa  semper  videtur 

ultimus  actus  sit  eorum  qui  fiunt  in  tanquam  aliquid  situm  extra  orga- 

actu    sensionis,   turn   demum  ex  ea  num." 
reaction  e  aliquandiu  durante  ipsum 

VOL.  I.  T 


290 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 


fines  himself  exclusively  to  the  phenomena  which  are 
knowable,  and  can  be  explained  by  the  law  of  causality. 
Everything  of  which  we  can  know  nothing  he  resigns  to 
theologians.  A  remarkable  paradox  is  contained  in  the 
doctrine  of  the  corporeality  of  God,  which  is,  of  course, 
since  it  contradicts  an  Article  of  the  Anglican  Church,  not 
exactly  asserted,  but  only  suggested  as  a  very  possible 
inference.33  If  one  could  have  overheard  a  confidential 
conversation  between  Gassendi  and  Hobbes,  one  might 
perhaps  have  caught  a  dispute  on  the  question  whether 
the  all-animating  heat  or  the  all-embracing  ether  must  be 
regarded  as  the  Deity. 


33  Compare  as  to  this  especially  the 
Appendix  to  the  "Leviathan,"  c.  i., 
-where  it  is  insisted  that  everything 
possessed  of  real  independent  exist- 
ence is  bodj'-.  Then  it  is  suggested 
that  even  all  spirits,  such  as  the  air, 
are  corporeal,  although  it  may  be 
with  infinite  gradations  of  fineness. 
Finally,  it  is  pointed  out  that  such 
expressions  as  "  incorporeal  sub- 
stance" or  "immaterial  substance," 
are  nowhere  found  in  Holy  Scripture. 
It  is  true  that  the  first  of  the  Thirty- 
nine  Articles  teaches  that  God  is 
without  "body"  or  "parts,"  and, 
therefore,  this  will  not  be  expressly 
denied ;  but  the  twentieth  Article 
says»  that  the  Church  may  require 
nothing  to  be  believed  that  is  not 
founded  upon  Holy  Writ  (iii.  537  ff.). 
The  result  of  this  obvious 
contradiction,  then,  is,  that  Hobbes 
insists,  at  every  opportunity,  upon 
the  incomprehensibility  of  God,  attri- 
butes to  Him  ODly  negative  predi- 
cates, and  so  on ;  while,  by  the  cita- 
tion of  authorities  such  as  Tertullian 
(iii.  561),  by  frequent  discussions  of 
Biblical  expressions,  and  especially 
by  the  cunning  employment  of  pre- 
misses whose  final  conclusion  is  left  to 
be  drawn  by  the  reader,  he  tries  every- 
where to  excite  the  feeling  that  the 


idea  of  God  would  be  very  intelligible 
if  we  conceived  Him  either  as  a  body 
or  as  a  phantasm,  that  is,  nothing ; 
and  that  the  whole  incomprehensible- 
ness  is  due  to  this,  that  we  have  ever 
been  bidden  to  speak  of  God  as  ' '  incor- 
poreal." Comp.,  inter  alia,  Opera, 
iii.  87,  260  sq.,  282  (here,  in  particu- 
lar, the  words  are  very  clear  :  "  Cum 
natura  Dei  incomprehensibilis  sit,  et 
nomina  ei  attribuenda  sint,  non  tarn, 
ad  naturam  eius,  quam  ad  honorem, 
quem  Uli  exhibere  debemus  congruen- 
tia."  The  quintessence  of 

Hobbes's  whole  theology  is  probably, 
however,  most  clearly  expressed  in  a 
passage  in  the  "De  Homine,"  iii.  15, 
Op.  ii.  347  sq.,  where  it  is  bluntly 
said  that  God  rules  only  through 
nature,  and  that  His  will  is  only  an- 
nounced through  the  State.  We  must 
not  indeed  conclude  from  this  that 
Hobbes  identified  God  with  the  sum 
of  nature — pantheistically.  He  seems 
rather  to  have  conceived  as  God  a 
part  of  the  universe — controlling, 
universally  spread,  uniform,  and  by 
its  motion  determining  mechanically 
the  motion  of  the  whole.  As  the 
history  of  the  world  is  an  outflow  of 
natural  laws,  so  the  power  of  the 
State  is,  as  the  actually  effective 
might,  an  outflow  of  the  divine  will. 


(      291      ) 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  LATER  WORKINGS   OF  MATERIALISM  IN  ENGLAND. 

There  is  almost  a  full  century  of  interval  between  the 
modern  development  of  Materialistic  systems,  and  between 
that  reckless  authorship  of  a  De  la  Mettrie,  who  dwelt 
with  special  pleasure  on  just  those  aspects  of  Materialism 
which  must  be  repugnant  to  the  Christian  world.  It  is 
true,  indeed,  that  even  Gassendi  and  Hobbes  had  not 
entirely  avoided  the  ethical  consequences  of  their  sys- 
tems; but  both  had  contrived  a  means  of  making  their 
peace  with  the  Church — Gassendi  by  his  superficiality, 
Hobbes  by  an  arbitrary  and  unnatural  inference.  If  there 
is,  in  this  respect,  a  fundamental  distinction  between  the 
Materialists  of  the  seventeenth  and  those  of  the  eigh- 
teenth century,  yet  the  chasm  between  them,  apart  from 
purely  ecclesiastical  dogma,  is  by  far  the  broadest  in 
the  sphere  of  ethic.  Whilst  De  la  Mettrie,  quite  in  the 
manner  of  the  philosophical  dilettanti  of  ancient  Rome, 
with  a  frivolous  complacency  made  desire  the  principle  of 
life,  and  by  his  low  conception  still  tainted  the  memory 
of  Epikuros  after  thousands  of  years,  Gassendi  had  in 
every  way  brought  forward  the  more  serious  and  deeper 
aspect  of  the  Epikurean  ethic.  Hobbes,  though  only 
after  curious  subterfuges,  ended  by  adopting  the  current 
semi- Christian,  semi  -  bourgeois  morality,  which  he  re- 
garded indeed  as  narrow,  but  as  justifiably  narrow.  Both 
lived  very  simply  and  honestly,  according  to  the  ordinary 
ideas  of  their  time. 

In  spite  of  this  great  distinction,  the  Materialism  of  the 
seventeenth  century,  with  all  its  affinities  even  to  the 


292  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

'  Systeme  de  la  Nature/  forms  one  connected  chain,  while 
the  present,  although  again  hetween  De  la  Mettrie  and 
Vogt  or  Moleschott  there  is  just  such  an  interval  of  a 
century,  must  be  regarded  as  something  entirely  indepen- 
dent. The  philosophy  of  Kant,  and  still  more  the  great 
scientific  achievements  of  the  last  few  decades,  demand 
this  special  estimate  as  distinctly  from  the  standpoint  of 
theoretical  science,  while,  on  the  other  hand,  a  glance  at 
the  material  conditions  and  the  social  circumstances  must 
lead  us  to  embrace  in  an  inner  unity  the  whole  period 
down  to  the  French  Revolution. 

If  we  first  direct  our  attention  to  the  state  and  civil 
society,  we  shall  perceive  an  analogy  between  those  two 
earlier  periods  which  markedly  separates  them  from  the 
present.  Hobbes  and  Gassendi  lived  at  the  courts,  or  in 
the  aristocratic  society  of  England  and  France.  De  la 
Mettrie  was  protected  by  Frederic  the  Great.  The  Mate- 
rialism of  both  the  past  centuries  found  its  support  in 
the  worldly  aristocracy,  and  the  difference  of  its  relation 
to  the  Church  is  partly  a  result  of  the  different  attitudes 
taken  up  by  the  secular  aristocracy  and  the  courts 
towards  the  Church.  The  Materialism  of  our  own  times  has, 
on  the  contrary,  a  thoroughly  popular  tendency;  it  rests 
upon  nothing  but  the  right  to  express  its  convictions  and 
the  receptivity  of  a  great  public,  to  whom  the  results  of 
science,  variously  combined  with  Materialistic  doctrine, 
are  made  accessible  in  the  most  convenient  shape ;  and 
therefore,  to  understand  the  ever-important  transition  from 
the  Materialism  of  the  seventeenth  to  that  of  the  eigh- 
teenth century,  we  must  keep  before  us  the  relations  of 
the  higher  classes  of  society,  and  the  changes  which  were 
at  this  time  taking  place  amongst  them. 

One  most  striking  feature  was  the  peculiar  direction  of 
all  the  efforts  that  appeared  in  the  second  half  of  the 
seventeenth  century  in  England.  After  the  restoration  of 
the  monarchy,  there  had  there  ensued  a  violent  reac- 
tion against  the  eccentric  and  hypocritical   austerity  of 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIALISM.  293 

the  Puritanism  which  had  dominated  the  Bevolutionary 
period. 

Patronage  of  Catholicism  went,  at  the  court  of  Charles 
the  Second,  hand  in  hand  with  riotousness  of  living.  The 
statesmen  of  that  time  were,  according  to  Macaulay,34 
perhaps  the  most  corrupt  portion  of  a  corrupt  society,  and 
their  frivolity  and  luxuriousness  were  only  exceeded  by 
the  shamelessness  with  which,  devoid  of  all  political 
principles,  they  pursued  politics  as  a  plaything  of  their 
ambition. 

The  character  of  frivolity  in  religion  and  morals  was 
the  character  of  the  courts.  France,  it  is  true,  was  in  the 
van,  and  set  the  fashion,  but  France  at  this  period  was  in 
the  full  bloom  of  her  so-called  '  classical  literature,'  and 
the  brilliancy  of  her  influence  abroad,  as  well  in  literature 
as  in  politics,  constituted  the  age  of  Louis  the  Fourteenth, 
and  gave  to  the  efforts  of  the  nation  as  well  as  of  the 
court  a  certain  impetus  and  a  worth  which  carried  them 
far  beyond  the  Materialistic  tendency  towards  the  useful. 
But  in  the  meantime  the  growinsf  centralisation,  combined 
with  the  oppression  and  plundering  of  the  people,  pre- 
pared that  great  mental  fermentation  which  was  to  result 
in  the  Eevolution.  In  France,  as  in  England,  Materialism 
took  root ;  but  in  France  only  its  negative  elements  were 
taken  up,  while  in  England  men  began  to  apply  its  prin- 
ciples in  ever-increasing  measure  to  the  direction  of  the 
whole  life  of  the  people.  And  hence  we  may  compare  the 
Materialism  of  France  with  that  of  the  Eoman  Empire ; 
men  adopted  it  in  order  to  corrupt  it,  and  to  be  corrupted 
by  it.  It  was  quite  otherwise  in  England.  Here  also 
frivolity  reigned  among  the  upper  classes.  One  might  be 
credulous  or  not,  because  one  had  no  principles  either 
way,  and  was  at  bottom  both,  according  as  either  favoured 
one's  passions.  But  Charles  the  Second  had  learned  from 
Hobbes,  besides  the  doctrine  of  his  own   omnipotence, 

34  Macaulay,  Hist,  of  Engl.,  i.  c.  ii.  in  the  Morals  of  the  Community,"  and 
Comp,  especially  the  sections  "Change     "Profligacy  of  Politicians." 


294  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

something  better  also.  He  was  a  zealous  physicist,  and 
had  a  laboratory  of  his  own ;  and  the  whole  aristocracy 
followed  his  example.  Even  Buckingham  took  to  che- 
mistry, which  was  as  yet,  of  course,  not  devoid  of  the 
mystic  attraction  of  alchemy — the  search  for  the  philoso- 
pher's stone.  Peers,  prelates,  and  lawyers  devoted  their 
leisure  hours  to  experiments  in  hydrostatics.  Barome- 
ters were  manufactured  and  optical  instruments  of  the 
most  varied  uses.  Elegant  ladies  of  the  aristocracy  drove 
to  the  laboratories  to  have  shown  to  them  the  experiments 
of  electric  and  magnetic  attraction.  The  aimless  curiosity 
and  idle  dilettanteism  of  the  great  allied  themselves  with 
the  serious  and  solid  studies  of  specialists,  and  England 
entered  upon  a  path  of  scientific  progress  which  appears  as 
the  fulfilment  of  the  prophecies  of  Bacon.35  There  was 
aroused  on  every  hand  a  genuine  Materialistic  spirit, 
which,  far  from  being  destructive  in  its  tendency,  rather 
led  England  at  this  very  time  to  an  unheard  of  develop- 
ment, to  which  in  Erance  the  fragments  of  the  renascent 
Epikureanism  united  themselves  with  increasing  bigotry, 
in  order  to  introduce  that  restless  oscillation  between 
extremes  which  characterises  the  period  previous  to  Vol- 
taire's appearance ;  and  it  was  a  necessary  result  that 
here  the  spirit  of  frivolity  increased,  while  it  formed  in 
England  a  transitional  phenomenon,  appearing  just  while 
the  spiritual  principles  of  the  Eevolution  were  passing 
into  the  Materialistic  principles  of  the  great  mercantile 
epoch. 

"  The  war  between  wit  and  Puritanism,"  writes  Mac- 
aulay  of  this  time,  "  soon  became  a  war  between  wit  and 
morality.     Whatever  the  canting  Eoundhead  had  regarded 

35  Macaulay,  Hist,    of  Engl.,   i.   c.  Literaturgesch.  d.  18  Jahrh.,   i.  (3d 

iii.,  "State  of  Science  in  England;"  ed.),  p.  17,  calls  the  foundation  of 

conip.  also  Buckle,  Hist,  of  Civilisa-  the    '  Regalis   Societas   Londini   pro 

tion,  ii.  363  ff.,  where  particular  men-  scientia  naturali  promovenda '  (15th 

tion  is  made  (p.  371)  of  the  influence  of  July   1662)  "dieruhm  vollste  That 

the  foundation  of  the  Royal  Society,  Karls  II.  "  (the  most  glorious  act  of 

in  whose  activity  centred  the  indue-  Charles  IL),  which  is,  indeed,  strictly 

tive  spirit    of    the    time.     Hetfcner,  speaking,  not  saying  very  much. 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIALISM.  295 

with  reverence  was  insulted ;  whatever  he  had  proscribed 
was  favoured.  As  he  never  opened  his  mouth  except  in 
Scriptural  phrase,  the  new  breed  of  wits  and  fine  gentle- 
men never  opened  their  mouths  without  the  vilest  oaths. 
In  poetry,  the  licentious  style  of  Dryden  replaced  that  of 
Shakespeare,  after  the  Puritanical  hatred  of  secular  poetry 
in  general  had  suppressed  all  talent."  36 

About  this  time  the  female  parts  on  the  stage,  which 
had  been  previously  played  by  youths,  were  first  assigned 
to  actresses :  the  demands  on  their  license  were  ever 
greater  and  greater,  and  the  theatre  became  a  centre  of 
immorality.  But  increasing  luxuriousness  went  hand  in 
hand  with  increasing  productiveness,  until  soon  the  former 
was  more  than  balanced  by  the  latter.  In  the  keen  com- 
petition of  the  race  after  wealth,  the  complacency  of  the 
earlier  period  succumbed,  with  a  portion  of  its  vices,  and 
the  Materialism  of  pleasure  was  supplanted  by  the  Mate- 
rialism of  political  economy.3?  Commerce  and  industry 
rose  to  a  height  which  earlier  times  had  never  conceived. 
The  means  of  transit  were  improved,  long-abandoned  mines 
were  reopened,  all  with  the  energy  peculiar  to  epochs  of 
material  production,  and  which,  wherever  it  is  powerfully 
excited,  reacts  favourably  upon  energy  and  enterprise  in 
other  respects.  At  this  time  began  those  enormous  towns 
of  England,  partly  to  spring  up  out  of  the  ground,  partly 
to-  develop  in  the  gigantic  proportions  which,  within  less 
than  two  centuries,  made  England  the  wealthiest  country 
in  the  world.38 

36  Hist,  of  Engl.,  i.  c.  iii.,  "Immo-  Comp.  Hettner,  Litg.  d.  18  Jahrh.,  i. 
rality  of  the  Polite  Literature  of  Eng-  206  foil. ;  comp,  also  Karl  Marx,  Das 
land."  Comp,  further  on  this  point,  Kapital,  i.  339,  Anm.  57,  on  Mande- 
Hettner,  Literaturg.  des  18  Jahrh.,  ville  as  predecessor  of  Adam  Smith, 
i.  107  foil.  and  ihid.,  377,  Anm.  nr,  on  the  in- 

37  Although  the  classical  political  fluence  of  Descartes  and  of  the  Eng- 
economy  of  the  English  only  later  lish  philosophers,  particularly  Locke, 
arose  as  a  developed  science,  its  roots  upon  political  economy.  On  Locke, 
lie  in  this  period.  And  the  '  Mate-  comp,  further  Note  74  below, 
rialism'of  political  economy  appears  38  Macaulay,  Hist,  of  Engl.,  i.  c. 
in  full  development  so  early  as  in  iii.,  "  Growth  of  the  Towns." 
Mandeville's  Fable  of  the  Bees  (1708). 


296  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

In  England  the  Materialistic  philosophy  burst  into 
luxuriance.  There  is  no  question  that  the  enormous  for- 
ward movement  of  this  country  is  quite  as  intimately  con- 
nected with  the  acts  of  philosophers  and  men  of  science, 
from  Bacon  and  Hobbes  to  Newton,  as  the  French  Bevo- 
lution  with  the  appearance  of  Voltaire.  It  may  just  as 
easily  be  overlooked,  however,  that  the  philosophy  which 
had  passed  into  life  and  practice  had,  in  doing  so,  ceased 
its  independent  existence.  The  completion  of  Mate- 
rialism in  Hobbes  admitted,  in  fact,  of  no  further  develop- 
ment of  the  doctrine. 

Speculative  philosophy  retired,  and  left  the  field  to 
practical  tendencies.  Epikuros  had  wished  to  help  the 
individual,  and  that  by  means  of  his  philosophy  itself; 
Hobbes  endeavoured  to  benefit  the  whole  of  society,  but 
not  directly  through  his  philosophy,  but  rather  through 
the  results  to  be  attained  by  it.  With  Epikuros  the  essen- 
tial object  is  to  set  aside  religion ;  Hobbes  employs  reli- 
gion, and  those  citizens  who  favour  the  popular  supersti- 
tion as  to  nature  must  seem  to  him  better  citizens  than 
those  who  reach  the  same  result  by  the  way  of  philosophy. 
The  object  of  belief  is  for  the  masses  better  and  more 
cheaply  attained  when  belief  is  propagated  simply  from 
generation  to  generation,  than  if  the  individuals  should 
only,  through  respect  for  authority  and  acquiescence  in  its 
necessity,  succeed  in  regulating  their  religious  ideas. 

And,  moreover,  philosophy  is  a  superfluity  in  the  col- 
lective economy  of  the  civic  life  as  soon  as  the  citizens 
can  secure  all  its  results  without  the  philosophy,  i.e.,  as 
soon  as  they,  as  a  rule,  submit  to  the  power  of  the  State, 
only  revolt  when  they  have  some  prospect  of  success, 
and,  in  ordinary  times,  devote  their  whole  strength  and 
activity  to  the  material  improvement  of  their  position,  to 
the  production  of  new  benefits,  and  the  perfection  of 
existing  arrangements.  As  philosophy  is  only  of  advan- 
tage in  furthering  this  line  of  conduct,  as  the  best  and 
most  profitable,  it  will  be  obviously  a  simple  saving  of 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIALISM.  297 

labour  if  we  succeed  in  persuading  the  people  to  this  con- 
duct without  communicating  the  doctrines  of  the  philo- 
sophy to  every  individual.  Only  for  kings  or  their  ad- 
visers, or  for  the  heads  of  the  aristocracy,  will  the  philo- 
sophy be  of  value,  since  these  must  take  care  to  keep  the 
whole  in  its  course.  These  stringent  inferences  from  the 
doctrine  of  Hobbes  look,  in  fact,  as  though  they  had  been 
simply  abstracted  from  the  more  recent  intellectual  his- 
tory of  England,  so  closely  has  the  nation,  on  the  whole, 
developed  itself  after  the  pattern  prescribed  by  Hobbes. 
The  higher  aristocracy  retains  a  personal  freedom  of 
thought,  together  with  a  sincere,  or  shall  we  say,  what  has 
become  a  sincere,  respect  for  ecclesiastical  institutions. 
Men  of  business  regard  all  doubt  of  the  verities  of  religion 
as  '  unpractical ; '  for  the  arguments  for  or  against  their 
theological  foundations  they  have  no  appreciation ;  and  if 
they  shudder  at  c  Germanism,'  that  is  rather  with  refer- 
ence to  the  security  of  the  present  life  than  with  any 
reference  to  the  expectation  of  a  life  heyond  the  grave. 
Women,  children,  and  the  sentimental  are  unreservedly 
devoted  to  religion.  But  in  the  lower  classes  of  society, 
for  whose  maintenance  in  a  state  of  subjection  a  life  of 
refined  sentiment  does  not  seem  requisite,  there  is  again 
scarcely  any  remnant  of  religion,  except  the  fear  of  God  and 
the  clergy.  Speculative  philosophy  is  thought  superfluous, 
if  not  mischievous.  The  notion  of  a  philosophy  of  nature 
has  passed  into  that  of  physical  science ;  and  a  modified 
selfishness,  which  has  secured  an  excellent  understanding 
with  Christianity,  is  fully  recognised  by  all  classes  of  society 
as  the  only  foundation  of  individual  or  public  morality. 

We  are  far  indeed  from  referring  to  the  influence  of  a 
Hobbes  this  wholly  original,  and,  in  its  way,  model  de- 
velopment of  modern  England ;  nay,  it  is  much  rather  the 
lively  characteristic  of  the  nature  of  this  people  in  their 
process  of  development ;  it  is  the  sum  of  all  the  historical 
and  material  circumstances,  from  which  both  are  to  be 
explained — the  philosophy  of  Hobbes,  and  the  subsequent 


298 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY, 


turn  taken  by  the  national  character.  But  at  all  events, 
we  must  regard  Hobbes  in  a  higher  light  when  we  see,  as 
it  were,  prophetically  figured  in  his  doctrines  the  later 
phenomena  of  the  English  national  life.39  Eeality  is 
often  much  more  paradoxical  than  any  philosophical  sys- 
tem, and  the  actual  behaviour  of  mankind  contains  more 
inconsistencies  than  a  thinker  could  with  all  his  efforts 
heap  together ;  and  of  this  orthodox  but  Materialistic  Eng- 
land affords  us  a  striking  example. 

And  again,  in  the  sphere  of  natural  science  there  arose 
at  this  time  that  peculiar  combination,  which  even  to  this 
day  causes  so  much  surprise  to  the  scholars  of  the  Conti- 
nent, of  a  thoroughly  Materialistic  philosophy  with  a  great 
respect  for  the  dogmas  and  customs  of  religious  tradition. 


™  Buckle,  Hist,  of  Civil,  in  Engl., 
i.  390,  says  of  Hobbes:  "The  most 
dangerous  opponent  of  the  clergy  in 
the  seventeenth  century  was  certainly 
Hobbes,  the  subtlest  dialectician  of 
his  time ;  a  writer,  too,  of  singular 
clearness,  and,  among  British  meta- 
physicians, inferior  only  to  Berke- 
ley (?).  .  .  .  During  his  life,  and  for 
several  years  after  his  death,  every 
man  who  ventured  to  think  for  him- 
self was  stigmatised  as  a  Hobbist,  or, 
as  it  was  sometimes  called,  a  Hobbian." 
These  observations  are  not  incorrect, 
although,  unless  we  take  the  other 
side  of  the  matter  into  account,  they 
present  an  incorrect  picture  of  Hobbes 
and  his  influence.  This  other  side 
is  described  by  Macaulay,  Hist,  of 
Engl.,  i.  86,  pop.  ed.  (c.  ii.)— "  Change 
in  the  Morals  of  the  Community : " 
"Thomas  Hobbes  had,  in  language 
more  precise  and  luminous  than  has 
ever  been  employed  by  any  other 
metaphysical  writer,  maintained  that 
the  will  of  the  prince  was  the  stan- 
dard of  right  and  wrong,  and  that 
every  subject  ought  to  be  ready  to 
profess  Popery,  Mahometanism,  or 
Paganism  at  the  royal  command. 
Thousands  who  were  incompetent  to 
appreciate  what  was  really  valuable 


in  his  speculations  eagerly  welcomed 
a  theory  which,  while  it  exalted  the 
kingly  office,  relaxed  the  obligations 
of  morality,  and  degraded  religion 
into  a  mere  affair  of  state.  Hobbism 
soon  became  an  almost  essential  part 
of  the  character  of  the  fine  gentle- 
man." Further  on,  however,  it  is 
said  very  truly  of  this  same  sort  of 
frivolous  gentlemen,  that  by  their 
means  the  English  High  Church  came 
again  to  wealth  and  honour.  Little 
as  these  elegant  voluptuaries  were  in- 
clined to  regulate  their  life  accord- 
ing to  the  precepts  of  the  Church, 
they  were  soon  just  as  ready  "to 
fight  knee-deep  in  blood"  for  her 
cathedrals  and  palaces,  for  every  line 
of  her  formularies,  and  every  thread 
of  her  vestments.  In  Macaulay's  well- 
known  Essay  on  Bacon  occurs  the 
following  noteworthy  passage  as  to 
Hobbes  :  "...  His  quick  eye  soon 
discerned  the  superior  abilities  of 
Thomas  Hobbes.  It  is  not  probable, 
however,  that  he  fully  appreciated 
the  powers  of  his  disciple,  or  foresaw 
the  vast  influence,  both  for  good  or 
for  evil,  which  that  most  vigorous 
and  acute  of  human  intellects  was 
destined  to  exercise  on  the  two  suc- 
ceeding generations." 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIALISM.  299 

Two  men  there  are  in  particular  who  represent  this  spirit 
in  the  generation  after  Hobbes — the  chemist  Eobert 
Boyle,  and  Sir  Isaac  Newton. 

The  modern  world  sees  these  two  men  separated  by  a 
great  gulf.  Boyle  is  now  named  only  in  the  history  of 
chemistry,  and  is,  in  his  significance  for  the  general  intel- 
lectual life  of  modern  times,  almost  forgotten ;  while  the 
name  of  Newton  shines  as  a  star  of  the  first  magnitude.40 
Their  contemporaries  did  not  see  the  matter  quite  in  this 
light,  and  still  less  can  the  more  accurate  investigations  of 
history  be  found  to  affirm  this  judgment.  Newton  will 
have  to  be  less  exclusively  valued  than  is  usually  the 
case,  while  Boyle  will  be  found  entitled  to  a  prominent 
place  of  honour  in  the  history  of  the  sciences.  Yet  New- 
ton remains  the  greater  man ;  and  even  though  his  expla- 
nation of  the  movements  of  the  heavenly  bodies  by  means 
of  gravitation  appears  to  be  a  ripe  product  of  time,  it  was, 
nevertheless,  not  a  mere  chance  that  this  was  gathered  by 
a  man  who  united,  in  so  rare  a  measure,  mathematical 
talent,  physical  modes  of  thought,  and  the  enduring  capa- 
city for  labour.  In  his  leaning  to  a  clear  physical  and 
mechanical  conception  of  the  course  of  nature,  Boyle 
entirely  agreed  with  Newton;  and  Boyle  was  the  older  of 
the  two,  and  must,  in  regard  to  the  introduction  into  natu- 
ral science  of  Materialistic  foundations,  be  considered  as 
one  of  the  greatest  of  the  pioneers.  With  him  chemistry 
enters  upon  a  new  epoch.41-     The  breach  with  alchemy 

40  More  correct  is  the  judgment  of  mathematical  talent  with  the  quali- 

Buckle,  Hist.  Civil,  in  Engl.,  i.  367:  ties  of  character  described  in  the  text. 

"  After  the  death  of  Bacon  one  of  the  41  Thus    even  Gmelin,    Gesch.   d. 

most  distinguished  Englishmen  was  Chemie,    Gott.,    1798,     begins     the 

certainly  Boyle,  who,    if    compared  "Zweite  Hauptepoche,"  or  modem 

with  his  contemporaries,  may  be  said  history  of  chemistry,  with  "  Boyle's 

to  rank  immediately  below  Newton,  Zeitalter  (1661-1690)."      He  rightly 

though,   of    course,    very  inferior  to  observes  (ii.  35),  that  no  man  contri- 

him  as  an  original  thinker."    To  the  buted  so  largely  "to  destroy  the  au- 

latter  remark  we   can   scarcely  sub-  thority  which   alchemy  had  usurped 

scribe,  for  Newton's  greatness  by  no  over  so  many  minds  and  sciences"  as 

means  consisted  in  the  originality  of  did  Boyle.                He  is  treated  with 

his  thinking,  but  in  the  union  of  rare  greater  fulness  in  Kopp,    Gesch.  d. 


300  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

and  with  Aristotelian  notions  was  completed  by  Boyle. 
While  these  two  great  students  of  nature  thus  naturalised 
the  philosophy  of  a  Gassendi  and  a  Hobbes  in  the  positive 
sciences,  and  by  their  discoveries  secured  to  it  a  definitive 
victory,  they  both,  nevertheless,  remained  Deists  in  all 
sincerity,  and  without  any  Hobbian  reservations.  As  they 
remain  occupied  with  the  phenomenal  world,  this  was  not 
to  be  achieved  without  great  weaknesses  and  inconsisten- 
cies; but  if  they  stand  lower  on  this  account  as  philo- 
sophers, their  influence  on  the  unfolding  of  the  scientific 
method  has  thereby  been  all  the  healthier.  As  in  so 
many  other  points,  so  in  this,  Boyle  and  Newton  may  be 
regarded  as  having  set  the  fashion — that  they  initiate  a 
rigid  severance  between  the  fertile  field  of  experimental 
inquiry  and  all  those  problems  which  are  transcendental, 
or  at  least,  in  the  present  condition  of  the  sciences,  are 
unapproachable.  And  hence  both  exhibit  the  liveliest 
interest  for  questions  of  method,  but  only  a  very  slender 
interest  for  speculative  questions.  They  are  distinctly 
empiricists ;  and  this  must  especially  be  firmly  maintained 
of  Newton,  if  any  one  is  inclined,  because  of  the  great 
generality  of  his  principle  of  gravitation  and  his  mathe- 
matical endowments,  to  give  undue  prominence  to  the 
deductive  side  of  his  intellectual  activity. 

Bobert  Boyle  (born  in  1626)  was  a  son  of  Viscount  Cork, 
and  availed  himself  of  his  considerable  property  in  order  to 
live  wholly  for  science.  Naturally  grave  and  inclined  to 
melancholy,  the  doubts  as  to  the  Christian  faith  which 
were  probably  excited  by  his  scientific  studies  were  re- 
garded by  him  very  seriously ;  and  as  he  sought  to  combat 
them  in  his  own  case  by  Bible-reading  and  reflection,  he 

Chemie,    i.    163    ff.  :     "  We    see    in  in    the   history  of    the  doctrine    of 

Boyle  the  first    chemist  whose    en-  affinity,  ii.  274  ff. — where,  amongst 

deavours  in  chemistry  were  chiefly  other  things,  it  is  said  of  Boyle,  that 

directed  by  the  one  noble  impulse  of  he  from  the  beginning  conceived  the 

the  investigation  of    nature  ;  "    and  problem  of  the  elements  in  precisely 

then  again  frequently  in  the  special  the  same  sense  in  which  ifc  is  now 

divisions  of  the  History — especially  being  handled. 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIALISM.  301 

felt  also  the  necessity  of  making  others  also  feel  that  a 
reconciliation  was  possible  between  faith  and  knowledge. 
With  this  aim  he  founded  public  lectures,  to  which  those 
Essays,  amongst  others,  owe  their  origin  by  which  Clarke 
endeavoured  to  convince  the  world  of  the  existence  of 
God.  Clarke,  who  had  put  together  a  natural  religion  out 
of  Newton's  cosmological  notions,  entered  the  lists  against 
every  view  that  would  not  fit  this  system,  and  wrote 
accordingly  not  only  against  Spinoza  and  Leibniz,  but 
also  against  Hobbes  and  Locke,  the  fathers  of  English 
Materialism  and  Sensationalism.  And  yet  the  whole 
cosmology  of  the  great  physicists  Boyle  and  Newton,  in 
whose  footsteps  he  trod,  peculiarly  interwoven  as  it  was 
with  religious  elements,  could  not  have  arisen  without 
that  same  Materialism  from  which  these  quite  other  con- 
sequences were  drawn. 

If  we  think  of  the  religious  and  somewhat  moody 
character  of  Boyle,  we  must  only  wonder  the  more  at 
the  straightforwardness  of  judgment  with  which  he  broke 
through  the  nets  of  alchemy.  It  cannot  be  denied,  more- 
over, that  his  scientific  theories  here  and  there  in  chemistry, 
and  especially  medicine,  still  bear  traces  of  the  mysticism 
which  at  that  time  was  generally  dominant  in  the  sphere 
of  those  sciences,  though  at  the  same  time  he  became  the 
most  influential  opponent  of  this  mysticism.  His  '  Chemista 
Scepticus'  (1661),  whose  very  title  contains  a  declaration 
of  war  with  tradition,  is  with  justice  regarded  as  a  turning- 
point  in  the  history  of  chemistry.  In  physics  he  made 
most  important  discoveries,  some  of  which  were  later 
attributed  to  others;  yet  it  must  be  admitted  that  his 
theories  often  lack  the  necessary  clearness  and  complete- 
ness, so  that  he  does  much  more  in  the  way  of  disturbance 
and  preparation  than  of  final  accomplishment.42 

42  Buckle,  Hist.  Civil,  in  Engl.,  i.  statics,  and  the  original  discovery  of 

368,  attributes  specially  to  Boyle  the  the  law  (later  called  after  Mariotte) 

first  exact  experiments  into  the  rela-  according  to  which  the  density  of  air 

tion  between  colour  and  heat,  the  varies  as  its  pressure.     With  regard 

foundation  of  the  science  of  hydro-  to  hydrostatics,  however,  Buckle  him- 


302 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 


What  safely  guided  him  in  spite  of  all  defects  of  his 
natural  character  was,  above  all,  his  sincere  hatred  of  the 
phrase-building  and  pretended  knowledge  of  Scholasticism, 
and  his  exclusive  confidence  in  what  he  saw  himself  and 
could  show  to  others  as  the  result  of  his  experiments.43 
He  was  one  of  the  first  members  of  the  '  Boyal  Society ' 
founded  by  Charles  II.,  and  scarcely  any  member  worked 
more  zealously  in  the  spirit  of  its  foundation.  In  connection 
with  his  experiments  he  kept  a  regular  diary ^  and  never 
omitted,  on  finding  anything  of  unusual  importance,  to  lay 
it  before  the  eyes  of  his  colleagues  and  other  capable  per- 
sons. This  conduct  alone  would  entitle  him  to  a  place  in 
the  history  of  modern  sciences,  which  could  not  have 
attained  their  present  eminence  without  adding  to  experi- 
ment the  constant  control  of  experiment  as  well. 


self  only  gives  Boyle  the  first  place 
among  Englishmen,  and  in  so  doing 
indirectly  admits  the  greater  im- 
portance of  Pascal  (comp.,  loc.  cit., 
Note  68,  where  indeed  it  may  be 
further  suggested  that  the  import- 
ance of  both  these  men  is  overrated. 
According  to  Dühring,  Gesch.  d. 
Princ.  der  Mechanik,  S.  90  ff.,  Galilei 
was  in  this  branch  also  the  really 
originating  mind ;  Pascal  only  makes 
an  ingenious  application  of  his  prin- 
ciples; and  as  to  Boyle,  whom  Dühring 
does  not  even  name,  in  this  branch 
also  his  chief  service  is  to  have 
clearly  exhibited  the  new  principles 
by  experiment).  As  to  the  '  Law  of 
Mariotte,'  the  absolute  certainty  of 
Boyle's  asserted  priority  appears  to 
me  still  somewhat  doubtful.  Boyle 
had  obviously  a  great  disinclination 
to  hasty  generalisations,  and,  more- 
over, as  it  appears,  was  not  fully 
conscious  of  the  importance  of  sharply 
formulated  laws.  In  his  principal 
work  on  this  subject,  the  "  Continua- 
tion of  New  Experiments  touching 
the  Spring  and  Weight  of  the  Air 
and  their  Effects,"  Oxford,  1669,  the 
dependence  of  pressure  upon  volume 


is  quite  clear;  Boyle,  in  fact,  gives 
methods  for  the  accurate  numerical 
determination  of  the  pressure  and 
quantity  of  the  air  remaining  in  the 
receiver  ;  at  the  same  time  the  result 
is  nowhere  distinctly  drawn  out. 
Thus  we  find,  for  instance,  Exp.  1, 
§  6,  p.  4  of  the  Latin  edition  of 
Geneva,  1694 :  "  .  .  .  .  facta  inter 
varios  aeris  in  phiala  constricti  ex- 
pansions gradus,  et  respectivas  suc- 
crescentes  Mercurii  in  tubum  elati 
altitudines  comparatione,  judicium 
aliquod  ferri  possit  de  vi  aeris  elas- 
tica,  prout  varus  dilatationis  gradibus 
infirmati,  sed  observationibus  tarn 
curiosis  supersedi." 

43  Boyle  must  also  be  mentioned 
with  praise  for  the  stress  which  he  was, 
perhaps,  the  first  among  the  modern 
physicists  to  attach  to  the  demand 
for  well-considered  and  accurately- 
j)repared  apparatus. 

44  Comp,  especially  the  essay  Expe- 
rimentorum  Nov.  Physico-Mecb.  Con- 
tinuatio  II.  (A  Continuation  of  New 
Experiments,  London,  1680),  where 
the  days  are  everywhere  given  on 
which  the  experiments  were  per- 
formed. 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIALISM.  303 

This  love  of  experiment,  however,  is  very  essentially 
supported  by  the  Materialistic  theory  of  the  essence  of 
natural  bodies.  In  this  connection  his  essay  on  the  "  Origin 
of  Forms  and  Qualities  "45  is  of  especial  interest.  He  men- 
tions here  a  long  series  of  opponents  of  Aristotle,  all  of 
whose  writings  had  been  useful  to  him ;  but  he  had  gained 
more  from  Gassendi' s  small,  but  extremely  valuable  com- 
pendium of  the  Philosophy  of  Epikuros  than  from  all 
others.  Boyle  regrets  that  he  had  not  earlier  adopted  his 
theories.46  The  same  laudation  of  the  philosophy  of  Epi- 
kuros is  found  also  in  other  essays  of  Boyle's,  of  course  in 
connection  with  the  most  vehement  protests  against  its 
atheistic  consequences.  "We  have  seen  that,  in  the  case  of 
Gassendi,  there  is  some  doubt  as  to  the  sincerity  of  this 
protest ;  in  Boyle's  case  there  can  be  none.  He  compares 
the  universe  with  the  ingenious  clock  of  Strasburg  Cathe- 
dral ; 4?  to  him  it  is  a  mighty  mechanism,  working  accord- 
ing to  fixed  laws ;  but  for  this  very  reason  it  would,  like  the 
clock  at  Strasburg,  have  an  intelligent  originator.  Of  the 
elements  of  Epikureanism,  Boyle  rejects  most  distinctly  the 
Empedoklean  doctrine  of  the  rise  of  the  homogeneous  from 
the  heterogeneous.  His  cosmology,  exactly  like  that  of  New- 
ton, bases  teleology  upon  the  mechanism  itself.  Whether 
in  this  respect  intercourse  with  his  younger  contemporary, 
Newton,  who  also  thought  much  of  Gassendi,  worked  upon 
Boyle,  or  whether  conversely  Newton  rather  borrowed  from 
Boyle,  we  cannot  certainly  say ;  it  is  enough  that  the  two 
men  were  so  far  agreed  that  they  ascribed  to  God  the  first 
origination  of  motion  among  the  atoms,  and  that  even  later 

45  Origin  of  Forms  and  Qualities,  47  Comp.  Exercitatio  IV.  de  TJtili- 
according  to  the  Corpuscular  Philo-  täte  Phil.  Naturalis,  where  this  sub- 
sophy,  Oxford,  1664,  and  often;  Latin,  ject  is  treated  at  great  length.  "Some 
Oxford,  1669,  and  Geneva,  1688.  I  Considerations  touching  the  TJseful- 
cite  the  latter  edition.  ness  of  Experimental  Natural  Philo- 

46  Loc.  cit. ,  Discursus  ad  Lectorem  :  sophy,"  appeared  first  at  Oxford, 
"Plus  certecommodi  e  parvo  illo  sed  1663-64.  In  Latin  under  the  title 
locupletissimo  Gassendi  syntagmate  Exercitationes  de  Utilitate  Phil.  Nat., 
philosophiae  Epicuri  perceperam,  Lindaviae,  1692, 40.  (Gmelin,  Gesch. 
modo  tempestivius  illi  me  assue-  d.  Chem.,  ii.  ior,  mentions  a  Latin 
vissem."  edition,  'London,  1692,  40.') 


304  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

they  attributed  to  God  certain  modifying  interferences 
with  the  course  of  nature,  but  that  they  sought  the  ordi- 
nary rules  of  everything  that  happens  in  nature  in  the 
mechanical  laws  of  the  motion  of  atoms. 

The  absolute  indivisibility  which  gave  the  name  to  the 
atoms  of  Demokritos  is  entirely  and  readily  given  up  by 
the  moderns.  This  is  due  either  to  the  consideration  that 
God  who  made  the  atoms  must  surely  be  able  to  divide 
them,  or  it  is  a  result  of  that  relativity  which  was  most 
consciously  present  in  Hobbes :  an  absolutely  smallest  is  no 
more  admitted  even  in  the  elements  of  the  physical  world. 
Boyle  troubles  himself  little  on  this  point.  He  gives  his 
view  the  name  of  '  philosophia  corpuscularis/  but  is  very 
far,  indeed,  from  adopting  the  serious  modifications  made 
in  Atomism  by  Descartes.  He  considers  matter  impene- 
trable, and  believes  in  the  void  space  combated  by  Des- 
cartes. With  regard  to  this  question,  he  engaged  in  a 
somewhat  bitter  controversy  with  Hobbes,  who  explained 
vacuum  to  be  only  a  rarer  kind  of  atmosphere.48  To  each 
smallest  particle  of  matter  Boyle  ascribes  its  definite  figure, 
size,  and  movement ;  where  several  of  these  unite,  there 
must  be  further  taken  into  account  their  position  in  space, 
and  the  order  of  their  combination.  And  then  from  the 
varieties  of  these  elements  are  explained,  exactly  as  in 
Demokritos  and  Epikuros,  the  various  impressions  made 
by  bodies  on  the  sense  organs.49  But  everywhere  Boyle 
declines  to  enter  further  into  psychological  questions  :  he 
busies  himself  only  with  the  world  as  it  was  on  the  eve  of 
the  last  day  but  one  of  creation ;  that  is,  so  far  as  we  must 
regard  it,  merely  as  a  system  of  corporeal  things.50     The 

48  Comp,  the  controversial  work:  nature  even  when  at  rest.     Motion, 

Examen    Dialogi    Physici     Domini  however,  is  the  '  modus  primarius '  of 

Hobbes    de    Natura  Aeris,   Geneva,  matter,  and  its  division  into  '  corpus- 

1695.  cula'  is,  as  with  Descartes,  a  conse- 

49DeOrigineQual.  et  Form.,  Geneva,  quence  of  the  motion.     Comp,  in  the 

1688,  p.  28  foil.    Yet  we  must  observe  same  work,  p.  44  foil, 

that  Boyle  does  not  make  motion  an  so  Comp,   the    Tractatus    de  Ip3a 

essential    characteristic    of    matter,  Natura  (I  can  here  again  only  quote 

which    remains    unchanged    in    its  the  Latin  edition  of  Geneva,  1688), 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIALISM.  305 

origin  and  the  destruction  of  things  is  with  Boyle,  as  with 
the  ancient  Atomists,  only  the  combination  and  separation 
of  atoms,  and  in  the  same  light — with  a  reservation  always 
for  the  case  of  miracles51 — he  regards  also  the  processes  of 
organic  life.52  The  principle  everywhere  spread  by  Des- 
cartes, that  in  death  the  machine  of  the  body  is  not  merely 
abandoned  by  the  actuating  forces  of  the  soul,  but  is  in 
its  inner  particles  destroyed,  is  extended  by  Boyle  with 
physiological  demonstrations,  and  he  shows  that  numerous 
phenomena  which  have  been  ascribed  to  the  activity  of  the 
soul  are  purely  corporeal  in  their  nature.53  With  equal 
clearness  he  combats,  as  one  of  the  leaders  of  the  iatro- 
mechanic  tendency,  the  pernicious  doctrine  of  drugs  and 
poisons,  to  which  the  effects  they  have  upon  the  human  body 
— to  produce  perspiration,  for  instance,  to  render  deaf,  and 
so  on — are  attributed  as  a  peculiar  force  and  property;  while 
these  effects  are  really  only  the  result  of  the  contact  of 
the  general  properties  of  those  matters  with  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  organism.  So  to  pounded  glass  was  attributed 
a  special  "facultas  deleteria,"  instead  of  keeping  to  the 
simple  explanation  that  the  small  fragments  of  glass 
wound  the  intestines.54  In  a  series  of  briefer  essays, 
Boyle,  whose  zeal  in  these  questions  of  method  almost 
equalled  his  industry  in  positive  research,  attempted  to 
prove  the  mechanical  nature  of  heat,  of  magnetism,  and  of 

an  "essay  interesting  also  in  a  philo-  ant  cases,  through  the  special  inter- 

sophical  regard,  sect.  i.  ad  fin. ,  p.  8.  position  of  the  Creator. 

51  So,  for  example,  in  the  Tractatus  52  De  Utilitate  Phil.  Exper.,  Exerc. 
de  Ipsa  Natura,  p.  76,  the  regularity  v.  §  4,  Lindaviae,  1692,  p.  308  :  "Cor- 
of  nature  is  praised,  in  which  even  pus  enim  hominis  vivi  non  saltern  con- 
apparent  disturbances,  as,  for  ex-  cipio  tanqtiam  membrorum  et  liquo- 
ample,  the  eclipse  of  the  sun,  the  rum  congeriem  simplicem,  sed  tan- 
inundations  of  the  Nile,  and  so  on,  quam  machinam,  e  partibus  certis 
must  be  regarded  as  foreseen  conse-  sibi  adunitis  consistentem."  De 
quences  of  the  natural  laws  laid  down  Origine  Formarum,  p.  2:  "  Corpore 
once  for  all  by  the  Creator.  By  the  iventium  curiosas  hasce  et  elaboratas 
side  of  these  the  halting  of  the  sun  machinas  ;"  and  very  frequently  else- 
in the  time  of  Joshua,  and  the  pas-  where. 

sage  of  the  Israelites  through  the  Red  s3  De    Orig.   Form.,    Gen.,    1688, 

Sea,  will  be  regarded. as  exceptions,  p.  81. 

which  may  occur  in  rare  and  import-  S4  De  Orig.  Form.,  p.  8. 

VOL.  I.  U 


3o5  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

electricity,  of  the  interchanges  of  solid,  fluid,  or  gaseous 
condition,  and  so  on.  Here,  of  course,  he  must  very  often 
be  content,  like  Epikuros,  though  with  much  correcter 
views,  with  the  supposition  of  mere  possibilities ;  yet  these 
hypotheses  are  everywhere  sufficient  for  his  immediate 
object — the  banishment  of  latent  qualities  and  substantial 
forms,  and  the  introduction  of  the  idea  of  a  really  pic- 
turable  causality  running  through  the  whole  province  of 
nature. 

Less  many-sided  but  more  intense  was  the  influence  of 
^Newton  in  the  establishment  of  a  mechanical  conception 
of  the  universe.  More  sober  than  Boyle  in  his  theology, 
and,  in  fact,  suspected  by  the  orthodox  of  Socinianism,  New- 
ton only  showed  in  advanced  life,  and  with  failing  powers, 
that  leaning  to  mystical  speculations  on  the  Eevelation 
of  John,^5  which  forms  so  marked  a  contrast  to  his  great 
scientific  achievements.  His  life,  until  the  completion  of 
all  the  important  results  of  his  inquiry,  was  the  quiet  exist- 
ence of  a  scholar,  with  full  leisure  for  the  development  of 
his  wonderful  mathematical  powers,  and  the  quiet  comple- 
tion of  his  magnificent  and  extensive  undertakings ;  then 
suddenly  rewarded  for  his  services  by  a  brilliant  position,^ 
he  continued  to  live  for  a  long  series  of  years  without 
making  any  essential  addition  to  the  results  of  his  scien- 
tific labours.  As  a  boy,  he  is  said  to  have  been  remarkable 
only  for  mechanical  skill.  Quiet  and  delicate,  he  neither 
made  progress  in  the  school,  nor  developed  any  capacity 
for  the  business  of  his  father ;  yet  when,  in  his  eighteenth 
year  (1660),  he  proceeded  to  Trinity  College,  Cambridge, 
he  speedily  astonished  his  tutor  by  the  facility  and  inde- 

55  Newton's  "  Annotationes  in  Va-  manuscripts  is  said  to  have  brought 
ticioia  Danielis,  Habacuci  et  Apoca-  on  an  illness  which  acted  deleteri- 
lypseo's,"  appeared  at  London  in  ously  on  his  intellect.  Comp,  the 
1713.  biographical  sketch  given  by  Littrow 

56  Newton  was  in  1696  made  Master  in  his  translation  of  Whe well's  His- 
of  the  Eoyal  Mint,  with  a  salary  of  toryof  the  Inductive  Sciences,  Stuttg., 
£1500  sterling.  As  early  as  the  1840,  ii.  163,  note.  [But  see  Brewster, 
year  1693,  the  loss  of  a  portion  of  his  Memoirs  of  Newton,  ii.  139  foil.  Tb.] 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIALISM.  307 

pendence  with  which  he  appropriated  the  doctrines  of 
geometry.  He  belongs  to  the  number  of  those  special 
mathematical  geniuses  which  the  seventeenth  century— as 
though  a  universal  development  of  European  humanity 
had  pressed  in  that  direction — produced  in  such  surprising 
wealth.  A  nearer  view  of  his  achievements  shows  that 
almost  everywhere  mathematical  work,  marked  alike  by 
genius  and  application,  is  the  active  spirit  that  inspires 
everything.  As  early  as  1664,  Newton  discovered  his 
theory  of  fluxions,  which  he  published  twenty  years  later, 
when  Leibniz  was  threatening  to  rob  him  of  the  honour 
of  the  discovery.  Almost  as  long  a  time  he  carried  with 
him  the  idea  of  gravitation ;  but  while  fluxions  were  imme- 
diately turned  to  brilliant  account  in  his  calculations,  the 
proof  of  the  unity  between  the  falling  motion  of  bodies 
and  the  attraction  of  the  heavenly  bodies  still  needed  a 
mathematical  process  of  which  the  premisses  were  for  some 
time  unattainable.  The  calmness,  however,  with  which 
ISTewton  so  long  kept  both  great  discoveries  to  himself, 
that  he  might  make  quiet  use  of  the  one,  and  that  the 
other  might  ripen,  deserves  our  admiration,  and  strikingly 
reminds  us  of  the  similar  patience  and  fortitude  of  his 
great  predecessor  Copernicus.  But  in  this  also  can  we 
discern  a  great  trait  of  Newton's  character,  that  even  after 
he  was  quite  satisfied  as  to  his  discovery  of  the  connection 
between  the  law  of  falling  bodies  and' the  elliptic  orbits  of 
the  planets,  and  had  the  full  calculations  before  him,  he 
did  not  make  a  separate  announcement  of  it,  but  incor- 
porated it  in  his  great  work  the  "  Prineipia"  (1687),  which 
treated  so  comprehensively  all  the  mathematical  and  physi- 
cal questions  connected  with  gravitation,  that  Newton  could 
justly  give  it  the  proud  title  of  "  The  Mathematical  Prin- 
ciples of  Natural  Philosophy." 

Yet  more  important  was  another  trait  of  a  similar 
nature.  We  have  already  pointed  out  that  Newton  was 
very  far  indeed  from  perceiving  in  attraction,  that  '  fun- 
damental force  of  all  matter/  as  the  discoverer  of  which 


3o8  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY, 

he  is  now  so  much  praised.  Yet  it  is  true  that  he  had 
made  the  theory  of  some  such  universal  attractive  force 
necessary,  by  laying  completely  aside  his  unripe  and 
vague  conjectures  as  to  the  material  cause  of  attraction, 
and  kept  strictly  to  what  he  could  prove — the  mathema- 
tical causes  of  the  phenomena,  supposing  that  there  was 
some  principle  of  approximation  operating  inversely  as 
the  square  of  the  distance,  let  its  physical  nature  be  what 
it  may. 

We  here  reach  one  of  the  most  important  turning-points 
in  the  whole  history  of  Materialism ;  and  in  order  to  set 
it  in  its  true  light,  we  must  interject  a  few  remarks  on  the 
real  service  rendered  by  Newton. 

We  have  in  our  own  days  so  accustomed  ourselves 
to  the  abstract  notion  of  forces,  or  rather  to  a  notion 
hovering  in  a  mystic  obscurity  between  abstraction  and 
concrete  comprehension,  that  we  no  longer  find  any 
difficulty  in  making  one  particle  of  matter  act  upon 
another  without  immediate  contact.  We  may,  indeed, 
imagine  that  in  the  proposition,  '  No  force  without  matter/ 
we  have  uttered  something  very  Materialistic,  while  all 
the  time  we  calmly  allow  particles  of  matter  to  act  upon 
each  other  through  void  space  without  any  material 
link.  From  such  ideas  the  great  mathematicians  and 
physicists  of  the  seventeenth  century  were  far  removed. 
They  were  all  in  so  far  still  genuine  Materialists  in  the 
sense  of  ancient  Materialism,  that  they  made  immediate 
contact  a  condition  of  influence.  The  collision  of  atoms 
or  the  attraction  by  hook-shaped  particles,  a  mere  mo- 
dification of  collision,  were  the  type  of  all  Mechanism 
and  the  whole  movement  of  science  tended  towards 
Mechanism. 

In  two  important  points  the  mathematical  formula  of 
the  laws  had  been  reached  before  the  physical  explana- 
tion— the  laws  of  Kepler,  and  the  law  of  fall,  discovered 
by  Galilei;  and  thus  these  laws  troubled  the  whole 
scientific  world  with  the  question  of  the  cause — naturally 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIALISM.  309 

the  physical,  the  mechanical  cause — the  cause  to  be 
explained  from  the  collision  of  small  particles — of  the 
movement  of  falling  and  the  motion  of  the  heavenly- 
bodies.  In  particular,  for  a  long  time  before  and  after 
Newton,  the  cause  of  gravitation  was  a  favourite  subject 
of  theoretical  physics.  In  this  universal  sphere  of  physi- 
cal speculation,  the  thought  of  the  essential  identity  of 
both  forces  naturally  lay  very  near;  there  was  indeed,  in 
the  axioms  of  the  Atomism  of  that  time,  but  one  single 
fundamental  force  in  all  the  phenomena  of  nature !  But 
this  force  operated  under  very  various  circumstances  and 
shapes,  and  even  then  men  had  begun  to  be  content  no 
more  with  the  bare  possibilities  of  the  Epikurean  physics. 
They  demanded  the  construction,  the  demonstration,  the 
mathematical  formula.  In  the  consequent  working  out  of 
this  demand  lies  Galilei's  superiority  to  Descartes,  that  of 
Newton  and  Huyghens  to  Hobbes  and  Boyle,  who  still 
found  satisfaction  in  long-spun  explanations  of  how  the 
thing  might  be  possible.  In  consequence  of  this  effort  on 
the  part  of  Newton,  it  now  again  happened,  and  for  the 
third  time,  that  the  mathematical  construction  went  ahead 
of  the  physical  explanation,  and  on  this  occasion  the  cir- 
cumstance was  to  attain  a  significance  unsuspected  by 
Newton  himself. 

And  thus  that  great  generalisation,  celebrated  by  its  con- 
nection with  the  story  of  the  fall  of  the  apple,5?  was  by 
no  means  the  most  important  feature  in  Newton's  dis- 
covery. Apart  from  the  influence  of  the  theory  we  have 
just  mentioned,  we  have  here  again  sufficient  traces  to 
show  that  the  idea  of  an  extension  of  gravity  into  space 
was  not  far  away.     Nay,  the  thought  had  already  occurred 

57  Comp.  Whe well's  Hist,  of  the  as  he  sat  alone  in  a  garden,  he  re- 
Induct.  Sei.,  ii.  166  foil.  From  this  fleeted  upon  gravity,  and  inferred 
it  appears  that  so  much  maybe  taken  that  as  gravity  still  operates  at  the 
from  Newton's  own  communications,  greatest  distances  from  the  centre  of 
according  to  a  tolerably  credible  tra-  the  earth  of  which  we  have  any 
dition  coming  through  Pemberton  knowledge,  it  must  therefore  influ- 
and  Voltaire— that  so  early  as  the  ence  the  motion  of  the  moon, 
year  1666,  in  his  twenty-fourth  year, 


3i o  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

to  the  ancients  that  the  moon  would  fall  to  the  earth  it 
it  were  not  kept  suspended  by  the  force  of  its  revolu- 
tion.58 Newton  was  acquainted  with  the  composition  of 
forces,59  and  so  it  lay  directly  in  his  path  to  carry  that 
idea  further  into  the  theory — that  the  moon  does  actually 
fall  towards  the  earth.  From  this  falling  motion  and  a 
forward  motion  in  the  direction  of  the  tangent  results 
the  orbit  of  the  moon.  Eegarded  as  the  personal  achieve- 
ment of  a  great  scientific  power,  the  thought  here  was  less 
important  in  itself  than  the  criticism  brought  to  bear 
upon  the  thought.  Newton,  as  is  well  known,  laid  his 
calculations  aside,  because  the  result  gave  no  exact  agree- 
ment with  the  motion  of  the  moon.60  Without  wholly 
giving  up  his  main  notions,  Newton  seems  to  have  sought 
an  explanation  of  the  difference  in  the  operation  of  some 
other  influence  to  him  unknown ;  but  as  he  could  not  com- 
plete his  demonstration  without  an  exact  knowledge  of 
this  disturbing  force,  the  whole  matter  remained  for  a 
time  in  abeyance.  Later,  as  all  the  world  knows,  Picard's 
measurement  of  the  degree  (1670),  proved  that  the  earth 
was  greater  than  had  hitherto  been  supposed,  and  the 
correction  of  this  factor  supplied  the  desired  accuracy 
to  Newton's  calculations. 

58  Comp.  Dühring,  Krit.  Gesch.  thesis,  and  we  have  shown  in  the 
der  allg.  Principien  der  Mechanik,  text  how  Atomism  must  have  fur- 
Berlin,  1873,  p.  175.  lb.  p.  180  foil.,  thered  this  synthesis.  But  Newton's 
are  noteworthy  expressions  of  Coper-  merit  lay  in  this,  that  he  turned  the 
nicus  and  Kepler.  See  moreover  in  universal  thought  into  a  mathema- 
Whewell,  Hisfc.  Induct.  Sei.,  ii.  150,  tical  problem,  and,  above  all,  that  he 
the  views  of  Borelli.  It  must  also  effected  a  brilliant  solution  of  the 
be   observed  that   Descartes  in    his  problem. 

Vortical  Theory  found  also  the  me-  50  In  this  respect  Huyghens  espe- 

chanical  cause  of  gravity  ;  so  that  the  cially  had  done  very  much  by  way  of 

idea  of  the  unity  of  both  phenomena  preparation,    while  the   first    begin- 

was  at  that  time  commonly  taught,  nings  of  the  correct  theory  are  here 

Dühring    justly    observes  that    the  again  to  be  traced  to  Galilei.     Comp, 

true  problem  was  to  bring  the  vague  Whewell,   Hist.  Induct.    Sei.,  ii.  80 

idea  of  an  approximation  or  '  fall '  of  foil.  ;  Dühring,  p.  163  foil.  188. 

the  heavenly  bodies  into  agreement  60  Whewell,  Hist.  Induct.  Sei.,  ii. 

with    Galilei's    mathematically  defi-  168,   with  which,  however,  must  be 

nite  notion  of  the  fall  of  terrestrial  compared,  as  to  the  story  of  the  be- 

bodies.    These  forerunners  constantly  ginning  of  the  calculation,  Hettner, 

tshow  how  near  was  the  actual  syn-  Literaturg.  d.  18  Jahrh.,  i.  123. 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIALISM.  3 1 1 

Of  great  importance,  not  only  for  this  demonstration, 
but  also  especially  for  its  far-reaching  consequences,  was 
Newton's  assumption  that  the  gravitation  of  a  planet  is 
only  the  sum  of  the  gravitation  of  all  its  individual  por- 
tions. From  this  immediately  flowed  the  inference  that 
the  terrestrial  bodies  gravitate  towards  each  other;  and 
further,  that  even  the  smallest  particles  of  these  masses 
attract  each  other.  So  arose  the  first  foundation  of  mole- 
cular physics.  But  here  the  generalisation  itself  lay  so 
near  that  it  was  within  immediate  reach  of  every  supporter 
of  the  Atomistic  or  corpuscular  theory.  The  effect  of  the 
whole  could  not  be  other  than  the  sum  of  the  effects  of  its 
constituent  portions.  If  we  suppose,  however,  that  even 
Atomism  must  have  made  this  doctrine  impossible,  because 
it  bases  everything  upon  the  collision  of  the  atoms  while 
it  is  here  a  question  of  attraction,  we  only  confound  once 
more  what,  since  Kant  and  Voltaire,  has  been  currently 
called  the  doctrine  of  Newton  with  Newton's  real  view  of 
these  things. 

We  must  here  recollect  the  modification  of  Atomism 
made  by  Hobbes.  The  'relativity'  of  the  conception  of  an 
atom  bore  its  physical  fruits  in  the  more  decided  distinc- 
tion between  the  ether  and  ' ponderable'  matter.  There 
can  be  bodies,  according  to  Hobbes,  which  are  so  small  as 
to  be  incognisable  by  our  senses,  and  which  in  a  certain 
relation  may  justly  be  termed  f  atoms.'  At  the  same  time, 
others  may  be  supposed  to  exist  by  the  side  of  these, 
which,  compared  with  them,  are  microscopically  small,  and 
by  the  side  of  these  again  others  still  smaller,  and  so  on  to 
infinity.  Physics  employed  once  only  the  first  member  of 
this  chain,  in  order  to  resolve  the  original  constituents  of 
all  bodies  into  heavy  atoms;  that  is,  atoms  subject  to 
gravitation ;  and  besides  these  other  particles,  infinitely 
finer  atoms,  without  weight,  and  yet  material,  subject  to 
the  same  laws  of  collision,  of  motion,  and  so  on.  In  these 
was  sought  the  cause  of  gravity,  and  no  prominent 
physicist    at   that   time   thought   of  any   other   kind   of 


3 1 2  THE  SE  VENTEENTH  CENTUR  Y. 

cause  than  the  mechanism  of  the  motions  resulting  from 
impact. 

Descartes,  then,  was  by  no  means  alone  in  deducing,  as 
he  did,  gravity  from  the  collision  of  ethereal  particles.61  It 
has  in  our  time  become  a  custom  to  condemn  severely  his 
daring  hypotheses  as  compared  with  the  demonstrations  of 
a  Huyghens  or  a  Newton.  We  do  not  remember  that 
these  men  undoubtedly  all  most  thoroughly  agreed  with 
Descartes,  through  whose  school  they  had  passed,  in  the 
unitary  and  mechanical,  in  short,  the  picturably  mecha- 
nical conception  of  phenomena. 

The  now  prevailing  theory  of  actio  in  distans  was  re- 
garded simply  as  absurd ;  and  Newton  was  no  exception. 
He  repeatedly  declares  in  the  course  of  his  great  work  that, 
for  methodological  reasons,  he  disregards  the  unknown 
physical  causes  of  gravity,  but  does  not  doubt  their  exist- 
ence. So  he  observes,  for  example,  that  he  regards  the 
centripetal  forces  as  attractions,  although,  perhaps,  if  we 
will  employ  the  language  of  physics,  they  might  more  accu- 
rately be  called  impulses  (impidsics).62     Indeed,  when  the 

61  Princip.  iv.  the  whole  of  the  last  paragraph : — 

62  Phil.  Nat.  Princ.  Math.,  i.  n  ad  "  Adjicere  jam  liceret  nonnulla  de 
init.  :  a  passage  of  quite  the  same  spiritu  quodam  subtilissimo  corpora 
tendency  may  be  found  towards  the  crassa  pervadente  et  in  iisdem  latente, 
conclusion  of  this  section.  (In  the  cuius  vi  et  actionibus  particulae  cor- 
jdition  Amstelodami,  1714,  pp.  147  porum  ad  minim  as  distantias  se  mu- 
and  172 ;  orig.  ed.  1687,  pp.  162  and  tuo  attrahunt,  et  contiguae  factae 
191.)  In  the  latter  passage  Newton  cohaerent;  et  corpora  electrica  agunt 
calls  the  hypothetical  matter,  which,  ad  distantias  majores,  tam  repellendo, 
by  its  impulsion,  produces  gravita-  quam  attrahendo  corpuscula  vicina  ; 
tion,  '  spiritus.'  There  are  here,  of  et  lux  emittitur,  reflectitur,  refrin- 
course,very  different  possibilities  men-  gitur,  inflectitur  et  corpora  calefacit; 
tioned,  amongst  them  the  actual  ten-  et  sensatio  omnis  excitatur,  et  mem- 
dency  of  bodies  towards  each  other,  bra  animalium  ad  voluntatem  moven- 
and  even  the  action  of  an  incorporeal  tur,  vibrationibus  scilicit  huius  spiri- 
medium ;  but  the  special  object  of  tus  per  solida  nervorum  capillamenta 
the  passage  is  to  show  the  uncondi-  ab  externis  sensuum  organis  ad  cere- 
tional  and  universal  validity  of  the  brum  et  a  cerebro  in  musculos  propa- 
mathematical  developments,  be  the  gatis.  Sed  haec  paucis  exponi  non 
physical  cause  what  it  may.  Where  possunt ;  neque  adest  sufnciens  copia 
Newton's  favourite  idea  lies  betrays  experimentorum,  quibus  leges  actio- 
itself  clearly  enough  at  the  conclusion  num.  huius  spiritus  accurate  deter- 
of  the  whole  work.   We  will  here  add  minari  et  monstrari  debent." 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIALISM.  3 1 3 

zeal  of  his  followers  went  so  far  as  to  declare  gravity  to  be 
a  fundamental  force  of  matter  (by  which  all  further 
mechanical  explanation  from  the  collision  of  imponderable 
particles  was  excluded),  Newton  felt  himself  obliged,  in 
the  year  17 17,  in  the  preface  to  the  second  edition  of  his 
"  Optics,"  to  protest  expressly  against  this  view.63 

Even  before  the  appearance  of  this  last  declaration 
of  Newton's,  his  great  predecessor  and  contemporary, 
Huyghens,  declared  he  could  not  believe  that  Newton 
regarded  gravity  as  an  essential  property  of  matter.  Huy- 
ghens, however,  in  the  first  chapter  of  his  Essay  on  Light, 
roundly  declared  that  in  the  true  philosophy  the  cause  of 
all  natural  effects  must  be  explained  e  per  rationes  median- 
icas!  We  see  now  how  these  views  hang  together,  and 
can  understand  how  even  men  like  Leibniz  and  Johann 
Bernouilli  were  offended  by  the  new  principle ;  nay,  that 
the  latter  did  not  desist  from  an  attempt  to  see  whether  a 
mathematical  construction  could  not  be  deduced  from  the 
principles  of  Descartes  which  should  be  also  sufficient  for 
the  facts.64 

All  these  men  are  unwilling  to  separate  mathematics 
from  physics,  and  they  were  unable  to  comprehend  the 
theory  of  Newton  as  a  physical  theory. 

The  same  difficulty  occurred  here  which  had  opposed 
the  doctrine  of  Copernicus,  and  yet  the  cases  were  in  a 
very  essential  point  unlike.  In  each  case  a  prejudice  of 
the  senses  was  to  be  overcome;  but  in  the  case  of  the 
earth's  revolution,  we  could,  at  least  in  the  last  resort, 
bring  the  laws  themselves  to  our  aid,  in  order  to  be  con- 
vinced that  what  we  feel  is  only  relative  and  not  absolute 
motion.     But  in  the  other  case  it  was  a  question  of  making 

63  Comp.  Ueberweg,  Hist.  Phil. ,  iii.  achievements  of  Newton,  and  espe- 
3  Aufl.  p.  102,  E.  T.  ii.  89,  90.  dally  in  mathematics.    Compare  Lit- 

64  Whewell,  Hist.  Ind.  Sei.,  ii.  149.  trow's  interesting  note  in  his  transla- 
And  yet  men  like  Huyghens,  Ber-  tion  (ii.  S.  141,  ff.),  especially  with 
nouilli,  and  Leibniz  were  then  almost  regard  to  the  opposition  with  which 
the  only  men  on  the  Continent  who  Newton's  theory  of  gravitation  was 
could  estimate  at  their  full  value  the  at  first  received  in  England. 


H4 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 


one's  own  a  physical  conception,  which  contradicted,  and 
still  contradicts  to-day,  the  picturable  principle  of  all 
physics.65  Newton  himself,  as  we  have  seen,  shared  this 
view,  but  he  clearly  separated  the  mathematical  construc- 
tion which  he  could  supply  from  the  physical  which  he 
could  not  find,  and  so  he  became,  against  his  will,  the 
founder  of  a  new  cosmical  theory,  containing  obvious  in- 
consistency in  its  first  elements.  His  'hypotheses  non 
jingo'  threw  down  the  old  foundation  of  theoretical  Mate- 
rialism, in  the  same  instant  in  which  it  appeared  predes- 
tined to  celebrate  its  loftiest  triumphs.66 

We  have  already  pointed  out  that  Newton's  peculiar 
service  is,  above  all,  to  be  sought  in  his  completion  of  the 
mathematical  proof.  The  thought,  indeed,  that  the  laws  of 
Kepler  are  to  be  explained  by  central  force,  which  is  in- 
versely proportional  to  the  square  of  the  distance,  had 
occurred  simultaneously  to  several  English  mathemati- 
cians.6?    Newton,  however,  was  not  only  the  first  to  reach 

65  We  can,  therefore,  very  well  un- 
derstand that  the  attempts  to  explain 
gravity  from  picturable  physical  prin- 
ciples constantly  recur,  as,  for  in- 
stance, in  Lesage,  for  whose  attempt 


at  a  solution  (1764)  see  Ueberweg  s 
Hist.  Phil.,  iii.,  3  Aufl.,  S.  102,  E. 
T.   ii.   89,   90.  Eecently  a 

similar  attempt  has  been  made  by  H. 
Schramm,  Die  Allg.  Bewegung  der 
Materie  als  Grundursache  aller  Na- 
turerscheinungen, Wien,  1872.  It  is 
an  illustration  of  the  force  of  habit, 
that  such  attempts  are  now-a-days 
very  coldly  received  by  specialists. 
They  have  once  for  all  accepted  the 
theory  of  actio  in  distans,  and  feel  no 
further  need  to  substitute  anything 
for  it.  The  remark  of  Hagenbach, 
Zielpunkte  der  Physik.  Wissensch., 
S.  21,  that  similar  attempts  are  still 
ever  being  made  to  explain  attraction 
by  what  are  supposed  to  be  "sim- 
pler "  principles,  is  a  characteristic 
misunderstanding.  It  is  a  question, 
in  such  attempts,  not  of  simplicity, 
but  of  picturableness  as  an  element 
of  intelligibility. 


66  The  expression  '  hypotheses  non 
fingo'  is  found  at  the  conclusion  of 
the  work,  a  few  lines  before  the  pas- 
sage quoted  above  (Note  62),  together 
with  the  explanation :  ' '  Quidquid  ex 
phaenomenis  non  deducitur,  hypo- 
thesis vocanda  est ;  et  hypotheses  seu 
metaphysicae,  seu  physicae  seu  qua- 
litatum  occultarum,  seu  mechanicae, 
in  philosophia  experimental!  locum 
non  habent."  The  true  method  of 
experimental  science  Newton  declares 
to  be — that  the  principles  ("  proposi- 
tiones  ")  are  gathered  from  phenomena 
and  generalised  by  means  of  induc- 
tion. In  these  far  from  correct  state- 
ments, as  well  as  in  the  four  '  Rules 
for  the  Investigation  of  Nature,'  laid 
down  at  the  beginning  of  the  third 
book,  there  is  expressed  conscious 
opposition  to  Descartes,  against  whom 
Newton  was  very  strongly  prejudiced. 
Compare  the  story  told  by  Voltaire 
in  Whewell,  Hist.  Ind.  Sei. ,  ii.  148. 

67  Newton  himself  recognised  that 
Christopher  Wren  and  Hooke  (of 
whom  the  latter  indeed  would  claim 
the  priority  in  the  whole  proof  of 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIALISM.  3 1 5 

the  goal,  but  lie  accomplished  the  task  with  such  masterly 
comprehensiveness  and  certainty,  and  shed  in  its  accom- 
plishment such  a  fulness  of  light  over  all  parts  of  mechanics 
and  physics,  that  the  "  Principia  "  would  still  be  an  admir- 
able book,  even  though  the  main  principle  of  the  new  doc- 
trine had  not  so  brilliantly  established  itself.  His  example 
appears  to  have  so  dazzled  the  English  mathematicians  and 
physicists,  that  they  lost  their  independence,  and  for  a 
long  time  left  the  lead  in  the  mechanical  sciences  to  the 
Germans  and  the  French.68 

From  the  triumph  of  this  purely  mathematical  achieve- 
ment there  was  curiously  developed  a  new  physics. 
Let  us  carefully  observe  that  a  purely  mathematical  con- 
nection between  two  phenomena,  such  as  the  fall  of  bodies 
and  the  motion  of  the  moon,  could  only  lead  to  that  great 
generalisation  in  so  far  as  there  was  presupposed  a  com- 
mon and  everywhere  operative  material  cause  of  the  phe- 
nomena. The  course  of  history  has  eliminated  this  un- 
known material  cause,  and  has  placed  the  mathematical 
law  itself  in  the  rank  of  physical  causes.  The  collision  of 
the  atoms  shifted  into  an  idea  of  unity,  which  as  such 
rules  the  world  without  any  material  mediation.  What 
Newton  held  to  be  so  great  an  absurdity  that  no  philo- 
sophic thinker  could  light  upon  it,69  is  prized  by  posterity 
as  Newton's  great  discovery  of  the  harmony  of  the  uni- 
verse !  and,  rightly  understood,  it  is  his  discovery,  for 
this  harmony  is  one  and  the  same,  whether  it  is  brought 
about  by  a  subtle  matter,  penetrating  everywhere  and 
obeying  the  laws  of  collision,  or  whether  the  particles  of 

gravitation)  had  discovered  the  rela-  greater.     Comp.  Whewell,  Hist.  In- 

tion  of  the  inverse  square  of  the  dis-  duct.  Sei.,  ii.  156-158. 

tance  independently  of  him.     Halley,  G8  Comp.    Snell,  Newton   und  die 

who,  in  contrast  toHooke,  was  one  of  Mechan.  Naturwissenschaft,  Leipzig, 

the  most  unenvious  of  Newton's  ad-  1858,  p.  65. 

mirers,  had  even  conceived  the  happy  G9  So  Newton  expressed  himself  in 

thought  that    the    attraction   must  a  letter  to  Bentley  of  the  year  1693. 

necessarily  lessen  in  that  proportion,  Comp.    Hagenbach,    Zielpunkte    der 

because  the   spherical  surface  over  Physikal.  Wissensch.    Leipzig,  i87it 

which  the  radiating  force  spread  itself  p.  21. 

became  in  the  same  proportion  ever 


3i6  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

matter  regulate  their  movements  in  accordance  with  the 
mathematical  law  without  any  material  intervention.  If 
in  this  later  case  we  wish  to  get  rid  of  the  absurdity,  we 
must  get  rid  of  the  idea  that  everything  acts  where  it  is  not ; 
that  is,  the  whole  conception  of  the  mutual  influence  of  the 
atoms  falls  away  as  an  anthropomorphism,  and  even  the 
conception  of  causality  must  assume  an  abstracter  shape. 

The  English  mathematician  Cotes,  who,  in  the  preface 
to  the  second  edition  of  the  "  Principia,"  which  he  edited 
in  171 3,  made  gravity  an  essential  property  of  all  matter, 
accompanied  this  idea,  which  has  since  dominated  science, 
with  a  philippic  against  the  Materialists  who  make 
everything  arise  of  necessity  and  not  through  the  will  of 
the  Creator.  He  regards  it  as  an  especial  merit  of  the 
Newtonian  system  that  it  makes  everything  arise  out  of 
the  most  unfettered  purpose  of  God.  The  laws  of  nature, 
in  the  opinion  of  Cotes,  exhibit  many  traces  of  the  wisest 
purpose,  but  none  of  necessity. 

Half  a  century  had  not  passed  away  when  Kant  in  his 
"  Allgemeine  Naturgeschichte  u.  Theorie  des  Himmels " 
(175  5),  combined  with  the  popularisation  of  the  Newtonian 
theory  that  bold  extension  of  it  which  we  now  commonly 
designate  the  Kant-Laplace  hypothesis.  In  the  preface 
to  this  work,  Kant  admits  that  his  theory  bears  a  consider- 
able likeness  to  those  of  Epikuros,  Leukippos,  and  Demo- 
kritos.?0  No  one  thought  any  longer  of  seeing  in  the 
universal  attraction  of  material  particles  anything  but  a 
mechanical  principle,  and  in  our  day  the  Materialists 
prefer  to  assign  to  the  Newtonian  cosmology  of  the  uni- 
verse the  role  that,  until  the  eighteenth  century,  was 
always  assigned  to  the  Atomism  of  the  ancients.  It  is  the 
theory  of  the  necessary  origin  of  all  things  in  virtue  of  a 
property  that  is  inherent  in  all  matter  as  such. 

In  their  influence  upon  the  general  movement  of  thought, 
the  religious  tendency  of  Newton  and  Boyle  soon  and 
easily  separated  itself  from  the  scientific  significance  of 

70  Kant's  Werke,  Hg.  v.  Hartenstein,  Leipzig,  1S67,  i.  216. 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIALISM.  3 1 7 

their  achievements.  Yet  upon  England  itself  it  appears 
to  have  exercised  some  effect;  indeed,  this  unique  mix- 
ture of  Materialism  and  religiosity  may  he  regarded  as 
a  peculiar  product  of  English  soil.  Similarly  the  conser- 
vative feature  in  their  character  may  in  some  measure  be 
connected  with  the  time  and  the  circumstances  in  which 
they  lived  and  had  their  influence.  Buckle  has  made  the 
interesting  remark,  that  the  revolutionary  period,  and 
especially  the  great  political  and  social  storms  of  the  first 
revolution  in  England,  exercised  a  great  and  penetrating 
influence  upon  the  sentiments  of  the  literary  class,  chiefly 
through  the  shattering  of  authorities  and  the  awakening 
of  the  sceptical  spirit.?1  He  considers  also  Boyle's  scep- 
ticism in  chemistry  to  be  a  fruit  of  the  spirit  of  the  age. 
Under  Charles  the  Second  especially  the  progress  of  the 
revolution,  at  least  in  one  respect,  went  uninterruptedly 
forward — the  spreading  of  the  spirit  of  experimental  in- 
quiry. On  the  other  hand,  we  must,  of  course,  also 
remark,  that  the  flower  of  Boyle's  and  Newton's  inquiries 
falls  in  the  comparatively  quiet  and  reactionary  period 
between  the  two  revolutionary  storms,  and  that  they  per- 
sonally concerned  themselves  little  with  politics.?2  The 
political  struggles  exercised  a  very  different  influence  on 
the  life  of  the  man  who,  after  Bacon  and  Hobbes,  must  be 
regarded  as  the  most  prominent  continuator  of  the  philo- 
sophical movement  in  England,  and  whose  influence  on 
the  Continent  was  more  important  than  that  of  both  his 
predecessors. 

71  Hist,  of  Civil.,  ii.  70  foil.     As  to        ™  In  Whewell,  Hist.  Induct.  Sei., 

the  case  of  the    conversion  of    Sir  ii.  153  foil.,  there  is  a  sketch  of  the 

Thomas  Browne  (loc.  cit.,  72  foil),  we  disturbance  esercjsed  by  the  revolu- 

may  adduce  the  rumour  mentioned  tionary  storms  in  the  life  and  activity 

in  Morhof 's  Polyhistor,  that  he  wrote  of  the  chief  English  mathematicians 

the  "  Eeligio   Medici "  in  order  to  and  scientific  men.     Several  of  these 

free  himself  from  the  suspicion  of  joined  with  Boyle  in  1645  to  form 

atheism.      But  if  this  instance  was  the  '  Invisible  College,'  the  first  germ 

not  so  much  in  point  as  Buckle  seems  of  the  Boyal  Society  founded  later  by 

to  think,  yet  the  general  view  which  Charles  the  Second, 
it  is  adduced  to  illustrate  is  undoubt- 
edly correct. 


3i8  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

John  Locke  (born  in  1632),  the  head  of  the  English  Sen- 
sationalists, stands  also  in  manifold  relation  to  the  history 
of  Materialism.  Standing  in  point  of  age  between  Boyle 
and  Newton,  his  chief  activity  only  appeared  after  New- 
ton's had  closed  in  the  principal  objects,  and  his  literary  ac- 
tivity was  strongly  and  decisively  influenced  by  the  events 
which  introduced  and  accompanied  the  second  English 
revolution.  In  the  case  of  Locke,  as  in  that  of  Hobbes, 
his  entrance  into  one  of  the  first  English  families  be- 
came the  foundation  of  his  later  worldly  position.  Like 
Hobbes,  he  was  initiated  into  philosophy  at  the  Univer- 
sity of  Oxford,  but  the  contempt  of  Scholastic  training, 
which  was  only  late  established  in  the  case  of  Hobbes, 
was  with  him  already  in  the  student  period.  Descartes, 
whose  acquaintance  he  made  at  this  time,  exercised  some 
influence  on  him,  but  he  speedily  turned  to  medicine,  and 
so  his  first  position  was  that  of  medical  adviser  in  the 
house  of  Lord  Ashley,  afterwards  Lord  Shaftesbury.  In 
his  ideas  of  medicine,  he  agreed  admirably  with  the  cele- 
brated physician  Sydenham,  who  at  that  time  was  from 
England  paving  the  way  for  a  reform  of  the  degenerate 
art  of  healing  similar  to  that  attempted  later  by  Boerhave 
from  the  Netherlands ;  and  thus  early  he  proves  himself 
to  be  a  man  of  healthy  common  sense,  equally  averse 
from  superstition  and  metaphysics.  Locke  was  also  an 
enthusiastic  student  of  natural  science.  And  so  we  find 
in  Boyle's  works  a  diary  kept  by  Locke  for  many  years 
of  atmospheric  observations  with  the  barometer,  thermo- 
meter, and  hygrometer.  But  Lord  Ashley  turned  his 
attention  to  political  and  religious  questions,  to  which  he 
then  devoted  an  interest  as  lasting  as  it  was  intense. 

While  Hobbes  stood  on  the  side  of  absolutism,  Locke  be- 
longed to  the  liberal  movement — nay,  he  was,  and  perhaps 
not  unjustly,  regarded  as  the  father  of  modern  constitu- 
tionalism. The  axiom  of  the  separation  of  the  legislative 
and  administrative  power,  which  in  the  time  of  Locke 
was  actually  accomplished  in  England,  he  was  the  first 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIALISM.  3 1 9 

to  develop  as  a  definite  theory .73  With  his  friend  and 
protector  Lord  Shaftesbury,  Locke,  after  occupying  for  a 
short  time  a  post  at  the  Board  of  Trade,  was  driven  into 
the  vortex  of  opposition.  For  years  he  lived  on  the  Con- 
tinent, partly  in  voluntary  banishment,  partly  from  the 
actual  persecution  of  the  Government.  In  this  school 
was  hardened  his  zeal  for  toleration  and  civil  freedom. 
The  offer  of  powerful  friends  who  would  have  procured 
him  pardon  from  the  court,  he  declined  with  an  appeal 
to  his  innocence,  and  it  was  only  the  Revolution  of  1688 
that  restored  him  to  his  fatherland. 

At  the  very  outset  of  his  political  activity,  Locke 
marked  out  in  1669  a  constitution  for  the  State  of 
Carolina  in  North  America,  which  turned  out  badly, 
however,  and  has  little  agreement  with  his  later  and 
ripened  Liberalism.  The  more  important,  however,  on 
the  other  hand,  were  his  Essays  on  the  Coinage,  which 
contained  but  a  defective  recognition  of  the  interests  of 
the  national  creditors;  but  in  the  discussion  developed 
so  many  luminous  observations,  that  he  must  be  regarded 
as  an  important  forerunner  of  English  political  economy .74 

73  Comp.  Mohl,  Gesell,  u.  Liter,  der  ously  refuted  by  Locke,  with  a  pre- 
Staatswissench.,  i.  231  foil.  eise  indication  of  the  latter's  relation 

74  On  the  controversy  between  to  the  different  parties.  Marx  says  : 
Locke  and  the  finance  minister  "John  Locke,  who  represented  the 
Lowndes,  comp.  Karl  Marx,  Zur  new  '  bourgeoisie '  in  all  its  forms, 
Kritik  der  Polit.  Oekonomie,  Berlin,  the  industrial  interest  against  the 
1859,  1  Heft,  p.  53  foil.  Lowndes,  working-class  and  the  paupers,  the 
on  occasion  of  recoinage  of  the  bad  commercial  interest  against  the  old- 
and  depreciated  pieces,  wished  to  fashioned  lending  class,  the  monied 
make  the  shilling  lighter  than  the  aristocracy  against  the  national  debt- 
earlier  legal  requirement.  Locke  ors  ;  and,  in  fact,  in  one  of  his  books 
insisted  that  the  coinage  should  be  proved  the  common  sense  of  the  bour- 
in  accordance  with  the  legal  standard,  geois  to  be  the  norm  of  human  intel- 
which  had,  however,  long  ceased  to  ligence,  took  up  the  gauntlet  also 
be  observed  in  practice.  The  result  against  Lowndes.  Locke  conquered, 
followed  that  debts  (and  among  and  money  borrowed  at  ten  or  four- 
them  notably  the  national  obliga-  teen  shillings  the  guinea  was  repaid 
tions)    which    had    been    contracted  in  guineas  of  twenty  shillings." 

in  light   shillings  had  to  be  repaid  For  the  rest  it  is  further  asserted 

in  heavy  ones.      Lowndes  based  his  by  Marx  (well  known  to  be  the  most 

substantially  more  correct  view  upon  learned  living  historian   of  political 

bad  arguments  which  were  victori-  economy),  that  Locke's  most  valuable 


320  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

We  have  here,  then,  yet  another  of  those  English  philo- 
sophers who,  in  the  midst  of  active  life,  and  furnished 
with  great  knowledge  of  the  world,  devoted  themselves 
to  the  solution  of  abstract  questions.  Locke  projected 
his  famous  work,  "  Essay  concerning  Human  Understand- 
ing," so  early  as  1670,  hut  it  was  not  till  twenty  years 
later  that  it  was  published  in  its  complete  form.  Al- 
though the  absence  of  the  author  from  his  native  country 
may  have  had  something  to  do  with  this,  there  is  no 
doubt  that  Locke  was  constantly  busied  with  the  ideas 
once  conceived,  and  that  he  sought  to  give  more  and  more 
completeness  to  his  work. 

Just  as  it  was  a  very  ordinary  circumstance — an  aimless 
controversy  between  some  friends — that  led  him  to  enter- 
tain the  question  of  the  origin  and  limits  of  human  know- 
ledge,^ so  he  employs  everywhere  in  his  investigations 
ordinary  and  yet  forcible  points  of  view.  We  have  still  in 
these  days  in  Germany  so  called  philosophers  who,  with  a 
kind  of  metaphysical  bungling,  write  huge  treatises  on  the 
formation  of  ideas,  with  no  pretension  whatever,  of  course, 
to  "  exact  observation  by  means  of  the  inner  sense,"  with- 
out also  the  thought  ever  occurring  to  them  that  there 
are  nurseries — it  may  be  in  their  own  houses — in  which 
we  may  observe  at  least  the  outward  indications  of  the 
formation  of  concepts  with  our  own  eyes  and  ears.  This  sort 
of  weed  does  not  grow  in  England.  Locke  betakes  him- 
self in  his  polemic  against  innate  ideas  to  children  and 
idiots.  All  the  uneducated  have  no  suspicion  of  our  ab- 
stract propositions,  and  can  they  nevertheless  be  innate  ? 
The  objection  that  these  ideas  are  actually  in  the  mind, 
although  it  is  not  conscious  of  it,  he  characterises  as  irra- 
tional.    For  what  we  know  is  exactly  that  which  is  in  the 

contributions  to  tlie  theory  of  money         75  See  the  account  in  the  '  Epistle 

are  but  a  beating  out  pf  what  had  to  the  Reader,' prefixed  to  the  'Essay 

been  already  developed  by  Petty  in  concerning  Human  Understanding ; ' 

a  treatise  of  the  date  of  1682.    Comp,  see  for  this  also  Hettner,  Literaturg. 

Marx,  Das  Kapital,  Kritik  der  Polit.  d.  18  Jahrb.,  i.  S.  150. 
Oekon.,  Hamburg,  1867,  i.  S.  60. 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIA  LISM.  32 1 

mind.  Nor  can  we  say  that  the  general  propositions  are 
first  known  to  consciousness  when  we  begin  to  use  our 
understanding.  On  the  contrary,  the  knowledge  of  the 
particular  is  prior.  Long  before  the  child  recognises  the 
logical  law  of  contradiction  it  knows  that  sweet  is  not 
bitter. 

Locke  shows  that  the  converse  is  the  true  way  in  which 
the  understanding  is  formed.  We  do  not  first  have  certain 
general  propositions  in  our  consciousness,  which  receive 
their  special  content  later  through  our  experience ;  but  ex- 
perience, sensible  experience,  is  the  first  source  of  our 
knowledge.  The  senses  first  give  us  certain  simple  ideas, 
an  expression  which  is  very  common  in  Locke,  and  means 
very  much  what  the  Herbartians  call  '  Vorstellungen.' 
Such  simple  ideas  are  sounds,  colours,  the  sense  of  resist- 
ance to  touch,  the  ideas  of  extension  and  of  motion.  If 
the  senses  have  frequently  given  us  such  simple  ideas, 
there  results  a  combination  of  what  is  like  amongst  them, 
and  this  is  the  way  in  which  abstract  ideas  are  formed.  To 
sensation  comes  the  internal  sense  of  reflection,  and  these 
are  "  the  only  windows "  by  which  the  darkness  of  the 
uneducated  understanding  is  illuminated.  The  ideas  of 
substances,  of  changing  properties,  and  of  relations,  are 
compound  ideas.  We  know  at  bottom  nothing  of  sub- 
stances except  their  attributes,  which  are  taken  from  simple 
sense-impressions,  such  as  sounds,  colours,  and  so  on.  Only 
through  these  attributes  showing  themselves  frequently  in 
a  certain  connection  do  we  succeed  in  forming  the  com- 
pound idea  of  a  substance  which  underlies  the  changing 
phenomena.  Even  feelings  and  emotions  spring  from  the 
repetition  and  manifold  combination  of  the  simple  sensa- 
tions which  the  senses  convey  to  us. 

It  was  only  then  that  the  old  Aristotelian,  or  presumably 
Aristotelian,  propositions  that  the  soul  is  originally  a 
'  tabula  rasa'  and  that  nothing  can  be  in  the  mind  which 
was  not  previously  in  the  senses,  attained  that  importance 

vol.  1.  x 


322  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY.  '- 

which  we  now  commonly  assign  to  them :  in  this  sense 
they  may  be  attributed  to  Locked 

Whenever  the  human  mind,  which  occupies  a  merely  re- 
ceptive attitude  towards  sense-impressions,  and  even  the 
formation  of  complex  ideas,  proceeds  to  fix  by  means  of 
words  the  abstract  ideas  it  has  acquired,  and  to  connect 
these  words  arbitrarily  with  thoughts,  it  enters  upon  the 
path  where  there  is  no  longer  the  certainty  of  natural 
experience.  The  further  man  gets  from  the  sensible,  the 
more  liable  is  he  to  error ;  and  it  is  nowhere  so  common  as 
in  language.  So  soon  as  the  words  are  treated  as  adequate 
pictures  of  things,  or  are  confounded  with  real  picturable 
things,  while  they  are  really  only  arbitrary  signs  for  cer- 
tain ideas  which  must  be  used  with  great  care,  the  field 
is  opened  to  innumerable  errors.  Locke's  criticism  of  the 
understanding  turns  into  a  criticism  of  language,  which  in 
its  main  idea  is  probably  of  higher  value  than  any  other 
portion  of  the  system.  In  fact,  the  way  was  paved  by  Locke 
to  the  important  distinction  of  the  purely  logical  from  the 
psychologico-historical  element  of  speech ;  but,  apart  from 

7(J  The  image  of  the  "  tabula,  in  qua  liarities  that  constitute  the  nature 
nihil  est  actu  scriptum "  occurs  in  Ar-  of  human  ideas.  This  point,  the 
istotle,  De  Anima,  iii.  c.  4.  In  Locke,  subjective  antecedent  conditions  of 
book  ii.  c.  i.  §  2,  the  mind  is  regarded  ideation  as  foundation  of  our  whole 
simply  as  "white  paper,"  but  with-  phenomenal  world,  Locke  did  not 
out  any  reference  to  the  Aristotelian  sufficiently  notice.  With  re- 
antithesis  of  potentiality  and  actu-  gard  to  the  proposition,  "Nihil  est  in 
ality.  This  antithesis  is,  however,  intellectu,  quod  non  fuerit  in  sensu" 
just  iu  this  case  of  great  importance,  (to  which  Liebniz,  in  his  polemic 
since  the  Aristotelian  '  potentiality '  against  Locke,  made  the  addition 
of  receiving  all  kinds  of  characters  is  "nisi  ipse  intellectus  ; "  comp.  Ue- 
conceived  as  a  real  property  of  the  berweg,  Hist.  Phil.,  iii.  3  Aufl.  S.  127, 
tablet,  not  as  mere  conceivability  or  E.  T.  ii.  112),  we  should  bear  in  mind 
absence  of  hindering  circumstances,  what  Aristotle  says,  De  Anima,  iii. 
Aristotle  therefore  stands  closer  to  c.  vii.  viii.  Even  Thomas  Aquinas 
those  who,  like  Liebniz,  and,  in  a  taught  that  actual  thinking  in  man, 
deeper  sense,  Kant,  do  not,  indeed,  is  first  brought  about  by  the  co-opera- 
suppose  that  these  are  complete  ideas  tion  of  the  intellectus  with  a  sensuous 
in  the  soul,  but  that  the  conditions  phantasma.  Eut  potentially  the 
are  present  from  which,  upon  contact  mind  already  includes  within  itself 
with  the  external  world,  exactly  that  all  that  can  be  thought.  This  impor- 
phcnomenon  will  result  which  we  call  tant  point  loses  all  its  significance  in 
to  have  ideas,  and  with  those  pecu-  Locke. 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIALISM.  323 

tlie  previous  labours  of  the  philologists,  had  as  yet  scarcely 
been  demanded  as  essential.  And  yet  by  far  the  majority  of 
the  conclusions  which  are  generally  applied  in  the  philo- 
sophical sciences  are  logical  fallacies,  because  of  the  con- 
stant confusion  of  notion  and  word.  And  so  the  old 
Materialistic  view  of  the  merely  conventional  force  of  words 
turned  with  Locke  into  the  effort  to  make  words  merely 
conventional,  because  only  when  thus  limited  have  they  a 
fixed  sense.  In  the  last  book  Locke  examines  the  nature 
of  truth  and  of  our  cognitive  faculties.  Truth  is  the  cor- 
rect combination  of  signs  (words,  e.g.)  forming  a  judgment. 
Truth  in  mere  words  can  be  nothing  but  a  chimera.  The 
syllogism  has  little  use,  for  our  thought  always  mediately 
or  immediately  directs  itself  to  particulars.  "Kevelation" 
can  give  us  no  simple  idea,  and  therefore  cannot  really 
extend  our  knowledge.  Belief  and  thought  are  so  related 
that  the  latter  alone  is  decisive,  so  far  as  it  goes ;  yet  there 
are  certain  things  which  Locke  finally  admits  transcend  the 
reason,  and  are  therefore  objects  of  belief.  Strength  of 
conviction,  however,  is  no  sign  of  truth ;  even  of  revelation 
the  reason  must  judge,  and  enthusiasm  is  no  evidence  of 
the  divine  origin  of  a  doctrine. 

Great  influence  was,  moreover,  exercised  by  Locke's 
"Letter  on  Toleration"  (1685-92),  "Thoughts  on  Educa- 
tion" (1693),  the  "Essay  on  Government"  (1689),  and  the 
" [Reasonableness  of  Christianity"  (1695);  but  only  a  por- 
tion of  these  writings  belong  to  the  history  of  Materialism. 
With  certain  glance  Locke  had  discovered  the  point  in 
which  the  hereditary  medieval  institutions  were  rotten — 
the  confusion  of  politics  and  of  religion,  and  the  diversion 
of  political  force  to  the  maintenance  or  suppression  of  doc- 
trines and  opinions. 77     It  is  obvious  that  if  the  object  at 

77  Also  as  regards  the  idea  that  the  ally  mentioned.    Here  again,  then,  his 

State   should  afford    the   liberty  of .  importance  (comp.  Note  74)  is  not  so 

expression  in  religious  opinion,  Locke,  much   due   to   originality   as  to  the 

had  been  forestalled  by  others,  aniong  timely  and  fruitful  carrying  out  of 

whom  Thomas  More  (in  the  Utopia,  ideas  which  corresponded  to  the  al- 

1516)  and  Spinoza   must    be  speci-  tered  conditions  of   society.    As  to 


324  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

which  Locke  aimed  were  once  attained — if  Church  and 
State  were  separated  and  universal  toleration  in  matters 
of  doctrine  introduced — that  the  position  of  Materialism 
would  be  also  necessarily  changed.  The  earlier  hide-and- 
seek  fashion  in  which  its  doctrines  were  expounded,  and 
which  lasted  till  late  in  the  eighteenth  century,  had 
gradually  to  disappear.  The  simple  cloak  of  anonymous- 
ness  was  longest  retained ;  but  even  this  was  discarded,  as 
at  first  the  Netherlands,  and  later  the  country  of  Frederick 
the  Great,  offered  a  safe  asylum  to  the  freethinkers,  until 
at  length  the  French  Revolution  gave  the  death-blow  to 
the  old  system. 

Among  the  English  freethinkers  who  took  up  and  car- 
ried further  the  ideas  of  Locke,  none  stands  nearer  to  Ma- 
terialism than  John  Toland,  who  was  perhaps  the  first  to 
conceive  the  notion  of  basing  a  new  religious  cultus  upon 
a  purely  Naturalistic,  if  not  Materialistic,  doctrine.  In 
his  treatise,  "  Clidophorus,"  that  is,  the  '  key-bearer/  he  re- 
fers to  the  practice  of  the  ancient  philosophers  to  set  forth 
an  exoteric  and  an  esoteric  teaching,  of  which  the  former 
was  intended  for  the  general  public,  but  the  latter  only  for 
the  circle  of  initiated  disciples.  Eef erring  to  this,  he  in- 
terjects, in  the  thirteenth  chapter  of  the  treatise,  the  fol- 
lowing remarks : — 

"  I  have  more  than  once  hinted  that  the  External  and 
Internal  Doctrine  are  as  much  now  in  use  as  ever ;  tho' 
the  distinction  is  not  so  openly  and  professedly  approv'd 
as  among  the  Antients.  This  puts  me  in  mind  of  what  I 
was  told  by  a  near  relation  to  the  old  Lord  Shaftesbury. 
The  latter,  conferring  one  day  with  Major  Wildman  about 
the  many  sects  of  Eeligion  in  the  world,  they  came  to  this 
conclusion  at  last:  that  notwithstanding  those  infinite 
divisions  caus'd  by  the  interest  of  the  priests  and  the  igno- 
rance of  the  people,  all  wise  men  aee  of  the  same 
religion  ;  whereupon  a  Lady  in  the  room,  who  seem'd  to 

the  exceptions  he  makes  to  the  rule  ists  and  Catholics,  comp.  Hettner, 
of  toleration  with  reference  to  Athe-     i.  159  ff. 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIALISM.  325 

mind  her  needle  more  than  their  discourse,  demanded  with 
some  concern  what  that  Eeligion  was?  To  whom  the 
Lord  Shaftesbury  strait  reply'd,  Madam,  wise  men  never 
tell."  Toland  approves  this  proceeding,  hut  thinks  that 
he  can  suggest  a  way  in  which  universal  truth-speaking 
maybe  made  possible: — "Let  all  men  freely  speak  what 
they  think,  without  being  ever  branded  or  punish' d  but  for 
wicked  practises,  and  leaving  their  speculative  opinions  to  be 
confuted  or  approved  by  whoever  pleases ;  then  you  are  sure 
to  hear  the  whole  truth,  and  till  then  but  very  scantily,  or 
obscurely,  if  at  all" 

Toland  himself  has  frankly  enough  expressed  his  esoteric 
doctrine  in  the  anonymous  "  Pantheistikon  "  (Cosmopolis, 
1720).  He  demands  in  this  treatise  the  entire  laying 
aside  of  revelations  and  of  popular  beliefs,  and  the  con- 
struction of  a  new  religion  which  agrees  with  philosophy. 
His  God  is  the  universe;  everything  is  born  from  the 
all,  and  returns  into  the  all.  His  cultus  is  that  of  truth, 
liberty,  and  health,  the  three  things  most  highly  prized  by 
the  wise  man.  His  saints  and  fathers  are  the  master- 
spirits and  most  excellent  authors  of  all  times,  especially 
of  classical  antiquity ;  but  even  they  form  no  authority  to 
chain  ( the  free  spirit  of  mankind.'  The  president  cries 
in  the  Sokratic  liturgy,  '  Swear  by  no  master's  word ! '  and 
the  answer  comes  back  to  him  from  the  congregation,  'Not 
even  by  the  word  of  Sokrates ! '  78 

78  For  fuller  information  as  to  To-  of  the  esoteric  doctrine  of  philosophy,, 
land,  especially  as  to  his  first  work,  as  the  cultus  of  a  secret  society  of 
which  connects  itself  closely  with  illuminati.  The  initiated  may  at  the 
Locke,  "Christianity  not  Mysteri-  same  time  give  way  to  a  certain  ex- 
ous,"  1696,  see  in  Hettner,  Litera-  tent  to  the  crude  ideas  of  the  people, 
turg.  d.  18  Jahrh.,  i.  S.  170  ff.  which,  as  contrasted  with  them,  con- 
'  The  most  striking  features '  of  the  sists  of  children  who  have  not  yet 
'  Sokratic  Liturgy '  are  given  by  Hett-  attained  the  years  of  discretion,  if 
ner  in  the  same  place,  S.  180  ff.  only  they  succeed,  through  their  in- 
Hettner  has  also  quite  rightly  re-  fiuence  in  the  State  and  in  society, 
ferred  to  the  connection  of  English  in  rendering  fanaticism  harmless. 
Deism  with  Freemasonry.  Here,  too,  These  thoughts  are  expressed  chiefly 
may  be  indicated  the  special  point,  in  the  appendix,  "De  Duplici  Pan- 
that  Toland  treats  his  cultus  of  the  theistarum  Philosophia."  The  fol- 
'  Pantheists '  distinctly  in  the  sense  lowing    striking    passage    from    tho 


'326  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY, 

In  the  u  Pantheistikon,"  however,  Toland  expresses  his 
views  with  so  much  generality,  that  his  Materialism  does 
not  appear  decided.  What  he  takes  from  Cicero  (Acad. 
Quaest.,  i.  c.  6,  7)  as  to  the  being  of  nature,  the  unity  of 
force  and  matter  (vis  and  materia),  is,  in  fact,  rather  Pan- 
theistic than  Materialistic ;  on  the  other  hand,  we  find  a 
Materialistic  theory  of  nature  laid  down  in  two  letters  to 
a  Spinozist,  which  are  appended  to  the  "  Letters  to  Serena  " 
(London,  1704).  The  lady  who  thus  gives  her  name  to 
the  letters  is  Sophie  Charlotte,  Queen  of  Prussia,  whose 
friendship  with  Leibniz  is  well  known,  and  who  had  also 
graciously  received  Toland  (who  spent  many  years  in  Ger- 
many), and  listened  with  interest  to  his  views.  The  three 
first  letters  of  the  collection,  which  were  actually  addressed 
to  Serena,  are  general  in  their  nature;  yet  Toland  ex- 
pressly observes  in  the  preface  that  he  has  corresponded 
with  the  noble  lady  on  other  and  much  more  interesting 
subjects,  but  that  he  possesses  no  fair  copy  of  these  letters, 
and  therefore  adds  the  two  other  letters.  The  first  of  these 
contains  a  refutation  of  Spinoza,  based  on  the  impossibility 
of  explaining  from  the  Spinozistic  system  the  motion  and  in- 
ternal variety  of  the  w-orld  and  its  constituent  parts.  The 
second  letter  handles  the  kernel  of  the  whole  question  of 
Materialism.  It  might  be  called  ■ Kraft  and  Stoff,'  if  it 
were  not  that  we  must  consider  the  title  it  actually  bears, 
'  Motion  Essential  to  Matter,'  to  be  even  clearer. 

We  have  repeatedly  seen  how-  deeply  the  old  notion  of 

second  chapter  of  this  appendix  simum  ac  perniciosissimum.  Viris 
("Pantheistikon,"  Cosmopolis,  1720}  principibus  et  politicis,  hac  animi 
p.  79  ff. )  may  here  find  a  place : —  dispositione  irnbutis,  acceptum  re- 
"At  cum  superstitio  semper  eadem  ferri  debet,  quidquid  est  ubivis  ho- 
sit  vigore,  etsi  rigore  aliquando  di-  die  religiosae  libertatis,  in  maximum 
versa;  cumque  nemo  sapiens  earn  literarum,  commerciorum  et  civilis 
penitus  ex  omnium  animis  evellere,  concordiae  emolumentum.  Super- 
quod  nullo  facto. fieri  potest,  incas-  stitiosis  aut  simulatis  superum  cul- 
sum  tentaverit :  faciet  tarnen  pro  toribus,  larvatis  dico  hominibus  aut 
viribus,  quod  unice  faciendum  restat ;  meticulose  piis,  debentur  dissidia, 
ut  dentibus  evulsis  et  resectis  uugui-  secessiones,  mulctae,  rapinae,  stig- 
bus,  non  ad  lubitum  quaquaversum  mata,  incarcerationes,  exilia  et 
noceat  hoc  monstrorum  omnium  pes-  mortes." 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIALISM.  327 

matter  as  a  dead,  stark,  and  passive  substance  enters  into 
all  metaphysical  questions.  In  the  face  of  this  notion 
Materialism  is  simply  true.  We  are  here  concerned  not 
with  different  equally  well-founded  standpoints,  but  with 
different  degrees  of  scientific  knowledge.  Although  the 
Materialistic  view  of  the  world  may  need  a  further  expla- 
nation, it  will,  at  all  events,  never  lead  us  backwards. 
When  Toland  wrote  his  letters,  men's  minds  had  for 
more  than  half  a  century  been  used  to  the  atomism  of  Gas- 
sendi ;  the  undulation  theory  of  Huyghens  had  afforded  a 
deep  insight  into  the  life  of  the  smallest  particles ;  and  if  it 
was  only  seventy  years  later,  through  Priestley's  discovery 
of  oxygen,  that  the  first  link  was  fashioned  in  the  infinite 
chain  of  chemical  action,  nevertheless  the  life  of  matter 
down  to  its  smallest  particles  was  definitely  determined 
from  experience.  Newton,  who  is  always  mentioned  by 
Toland  with  the  utmost  respect,  had,  of  course,  by  his 
theory  of  the  primitive  collision,  and  the  weakness  with 
which  he  demanded  the  occasional  interference  of  the 
Creator  in  the  course  of  his  world-machine,  left  matter  in 
possession  of  its  passivity ;  but  the  thought  of  attraction 
as  a  property  of  all  matter  speedily  freed  itself  from  the 
idle  patchwork  which  the  theologically  narrow  ideas  of 
Newton  had  connected  with  it.  The  world  of  gravitation 
lived  in  itself;  and  it  is  no  wonder  that  the  freethinkers  of 
the  eighteenth  century,  with  Voltaire  at  their  head,  re- 
garded themselves  as  the  Newtonian  natural  philosophers. 
Toland  goes  on,  relying  upon  indications  of  Newton's, 
to  maintain  that  no  body  is  in  absolute  rest ; 79  nay,  with 
an  ingenious  application  of  the  old  English  Nominalism, 
which  helped  this  people  to  make  so  great  an  advance  in 
the  philosophy  of  nature,  he  explains  activity  and  pas- 

79  Letters  to  Serena,  London,  1704,  first  book:  "Fieri  etenim  potest  ut 

p.  201.     The  passages  of  the  "  Prin-  nullum  revera  quiescat  corpus,"  and 

cipia "  there  cited  (p.  7  and  p.  162  of  p.    162:    "  Hactenus   exposui  motus 

the  ist  ed.),  are  to  be  found  in  the  corporum    attractorum    ad  centrum 

note  to  the  preliminary  explanations,  immobile,  quale  tarnen  vix  extat  in 

and  at  the  beginning  of  §  11  of  the  rerum  natura." 


328  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

sivity,  rest  and  motion,  to  be  purely  relative  notions, 
while  the  eternal  internal  activity  of  matter  operates  with 
equal  force  when,  in  counteraction  to  other  forces,  it  main- 
tains a  body  in  comparative  rest,  and  when  it  lends  it  an 
accelerated  motion. 

"  Every  motion  is  as  well  a  passion  in  respect  of  the 
body  that  gave  it  the  last  determination,  as  it  is  an  action 
compared  to  the  body  that  it  determines  next;  but  the 
turning  of  these  and  such  words  from  a  relative  to  an 
absolute  signification  has  occasioned  most  of  the  errors 
and  disputes  on  this  subject."80  Unhistorical,  like  the 
majority  of  his  contemporaries,  Toland  does  not  observe 
that  the  absolute  notions  are  naturally  developed,  while 
the  relative  notions,  on  the  contrary,  are  a  product  of  cul- 
ture and  of  science.  "  These  determinations  of  motion  in 
the  parts  of  solid  extended  matter  are  what  we  call  the 
phenomena  of  nature,  and  to  which  we  give  names  or 
ascribe  uses,  perfection  or  imperfection,  according  as  they 
affect  our  senses,  and  cause  pain  or  pleasure  to  our  bodies, 
contribute  to  our  preservation  or  destruction ;  but  we  do 
not  always  denominate  them  from  their  real  causes  or 
ways  of  producing  one  another,  as  the  elasticity,  hardness, 
softness,  fluidity,  quantity,  figures,  and  relations  of  parti- 
cular bodies.  On  the  contrary,  we  frequently  attribute 
many  determinations  of  motion  to  no  cause  at  all,  as  the 
spontaneous  motion  of  animals ;  for,  however  these  mo- 
tions may  be  accompanied  by  thought,  yet,  considered  as 
motions,  they  have  their  physical  causes,  such  as  a  dog's 
running  after  a  hare,  the  bulk  of  the  external  object  acting 
by  its  whole  force  of  impulse  or  attraction  on  the  nerves, 
which  are  so  disposed  with  the  muscles,  joints,  and  other 
parts  as  to  produce  various  motions  in  the  animal  machine. 
And  whoever  understands  in  any  measure  the  action  of 
bodies  on  one  another  by  their  immediate  contact,  or  by 
the  imperceptible  particles  that  continually  flow  from 
them,  and  to  this  knowledge  joins  that   of  mechanics, 

80  Letters  to  Serena,  p.  200  [not  100,  as  in  the  German  edition. — Tk.] 


LA  TER  ENGLISH  MA  TERIALISM.  329 

hydrostatics,  and  anatomy,  will  be  convinced  that  all  the 
motions  of  sitting,  standing,  lying,  rising,  running,  walk- 
ing, and  such  others,  have  their  proper,  external,  material, 
and  proportionable  determinations."81  Greater  clearness 
cannot  be  desired.  Toland  obviously  regards  thought  as 
a  phenomenon  which  is  an  inherent  accompaniment  of 
the  material  movements  in  the  nervous  system,  much  as 
the  light  which  results  from  a  galvanic  current.  The 
voluntary  motions  are  motions  of  matter,  which  arise  in 
accordance  with  the  same  laws  that  govern  all  other 
motions,  only  in  a  more  complicated  apparatus. 

When  Toland  accordingly  goes  on  to  intrench  himself 
behind  a  much  more  general  expression  of  Newton's,  and 
at  length  expressly  guards  against  the  idea  that  his 
system  makes  the  theory  of  a  controlling  reason  super- 
fluous, we  cannot  help  remembering  his  distinction  be- 
tween the  exoteric  and  esoteric  teaching.  The  anony- 
mously published  "  Pantheistikon,"  which  may  on  that 
account  be  very  well  regarded  as  esoteric,  reverences 
no  transcendental  world-spirit  of  any  kind,  but  only 
the  universe  in  immutable  unity  of  spirit  and  matter. 
Yet  so  much  we  may,  at  any  rate,  collect  from  the  con- 
clusion of  the  remarkable  letter — that  Toland  does  not, 
like  the  ancient  Materialists,  consider  this  present  world 
as  a  merely  casual  result  preceded  by  innumerable  im- 
perfect experiments,  but  assumes  a  magnificent  purpose- 
fulness  immutably  inherent  in  the  universe.82 

81  Letters  to  Serena,  pp.  231-233.  false,  but  plausible  ;  it  belongs  to  the 

82  Compare  Letters  to  Serena,  pp.  same  point  of  the  calculation  of  pro- 
234-237.  Toland  here  employs,  with  babilities  on  the  total  misunder- 
regard  to  the  Empedoklean  principle  standing  of  which  von  Hartmann  has 
of  evolution,  and  as  far  as  we  can  see  based  his  '  Philosophy  of  the  Uncon- 
quite  seriously,  the  illustration  that  scious.'  Toland,  however,  in 
we  can  just  as  little  explain  the  de-  other  respects,  by  no  means  sub- 
velopment  of  a  flower  or  a  fly  out  of  scribes  to  the  Epilmrean  theory,  even 
the  in  itself  objectless  concurrence  in  the  most  important  points.  Ho 
of  atoms,  as  the  development  of  an  rejected  the  atoms  and  void  space, 
"Aeneid"oran  "Iliad"  out  of  the  and  with  it  also  the  notion  of  any 
myriad  combinations  of  the  single  space  at  all  existing  independently  of 
letters.                        The  argument  is  matter. 


330  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY. 

Toland  is  one  of  those  benevolent  beings  who  exhibit 
to  us  a  great  character  in  the  complete  harmony  of  all 
the  sides  of  human  existence.  After  an  eventful  life  he 
enjoyed  in  cheerful  calmness  of  soul  the  secluded  stillness 
of  country  life.  When  scarcely  over  fifty  years  of  age  he 
was  attacked  by  a  disease,  which  he  endured  with  the 
calmness  of  a  philosopher.  A  few  days  before  his  death 
he  prepared  his  epitaph ;  he  took  leave  of  his  friends,  and 
fell  asleep  in  untroubled  peace  of  spirit* 

*  [The  English  reader  maybe  re-  1876,  2  vols.),  where  indeed  Toland 

ferred  also  to  Mr.  Leslie  Stephen's  seems  to  be  somewhat  Tinder-rated, 

recent  "History  of  English  Thought  —  Te.] 
in  the  Eighteenth  Century"  (Lond., 


END  OF  VOL.  I. 


Return  on 
or  before 


MAR     6*44 


1413:1 


CLAPP 


3  5002  00229  0216 

Lange,  Friedrich  Albert 

The  history  of  materialism  and  criticism 


825 
1413