« AnteriorContinuar »
vol. vi., p. 83. Logische Untersuchungen, vol. i., p. 57–8.) In a word, the Hegelian Dialectic confounds the distinction in thought with the distinction in reality.
(3) It requires no profound thought to see that what the Dialectic claims to be the forward movement of thought is simply its backward movement, retracing our steps from abstraction to the actual world which we apprehended in perception. In this Trendelenburg finds the secret of the Dialectic Method. He says: “The Dialectic is nothing else than the art by which we retrace our original abstraction ” (p. 95).
This same criticism is brought against the Hegelian Dialectic by Haym in his book entitled, “ Hegel und Seine Zeit,” also by Prof. A. Seth, in his excellent recent work on “Hegelianism and Personality.”
Such in brief are, according to our judgment, the chief defects of the Hegelian Dialectic and we shall close the criticism of this method in the words of Trendelenburg: “The presuppositionless logic everywhere presupposes the principle and the general activity of intuition, and this in secret possesses a picture which in public it contemns; .. instead of developing from itself a closely-knit series, it smuggled in the despised intuitions of experience, diluted and weakened, and gave them out as products of its own soil.” (Journal of Spec. Philos., vol. vi., p. 354.)
III. The Noetic Method makes no pretence to start with the most abstract and highest concept of Being. It avows that experience is the one sole beginning of philosophical inquiry, and in this lies its chief merit. Another merit of this method is its cautious tone. It is strongly opposed to all forms of Dogmatism. It denies nothing without criticism. It asserts nothing without examination. Every statement must be carefully scrutinized, before it is accepted or denied, in the light of our knowledge concerning the cognitive powers. Thus far the Noetic Method commends itself to any candid mind. But there is a certain amount of truth in Hegel's criticism that the critical method is involved in the error of refusing to enter the water until you have learned to swim. True, indeed, the forms of thought should be subjected to a scrutiny before they are used; yet what is this scrutiny but ipso facto à cognition” (Logic, p.
71). Or in the words of Lotze, “there is an intrinsic unsoundness in the efforts made to found a metaphysics on a psychological analysis of our cognition. The numerous dissertations directed to this end may be compared to the tuning of instruments before a concert, only that they are not so necessary or useful.” “The constant whetting of the knife is tedious, if it is not proposed to cut anything with it” (p. 12, Metaphysics). The danger of this method is its strong tendency towards subjective Idealism and Solipsism. The conviction of the race is against the belief that the self is all in all. It is erroneous to regard man, as this method implicitly does, as if he were a mere knowing being and no more. Man is vastly more than an intellectual creature. He is a person endowed with feeling and will as well as with intellect.
(4) The fourth Method is that of Elaboration. The chief merit of this mode of philosophical inquiry is its making experience the starting point of investigation, and putting the proper emphasis upon the fact that we must not make the phenomena of consciousness alone the starting point, but the phenomena of Nature also must be duly considered and accepted as a begining. Nature and Mind—they are the two realities which we daily experience, and both together form the proper starting point of our inquiry.
This method thus avoids the onesided character of the Noetic and of the Cosmological method. It is also free from the arrogant pretension of the Absolute Method to deduce all realities from the most abstract concepts of thought. Lotze doubtless had this claim of the Dialectic Method before his mind, and felt the importance of clinging to experience, when he wrote as the closing words of his Logic: “I will close with the expression of my hope that German philosophy will arouse itself afresh, with more of moderation and reserve, yet with no less enthusiasm, to the endeavor, not merely to calculate the course of the world, but to understand it."
Thus far this Method of Elaboration is good and commends itself to us all. But its chief defect lies in its presupposition. It assumes that our daily conceptions of realities are necessarily inadequate and involve contradictions. Ueberweg says : “Whether the contradictions which Herbart regards as existing
in the formal conceptions forced upon us by experience,' are really contained in them, is at least doubtful. For the advance of science beyond the sphere of empiricism the stimulus of these contradictions is not needed; such stimulus is found, rather, in the fact that not only the existence of individual objects and things is manifest to us, but also the existence of relations, varieties of worth, ends, and laws, on which the formation of our logical norms, as also of our ethical notions, is founded” (History of Philosophy, vol. ii., p. 379).
For a fuller examination and criticism of the Herbartian Method the undersigned refers to the masterly essay of Trendelenburg on the subject contained in his Historische Beiträge zur Philosophie. In this essay he undertakes to demonstrate the following three theses: (1) the contradictions which Herbart regards as latent in the formal conceptions furnished by experience are not contradictions. (2) If there were such contradictions as Herbart declares, they are not solved by the Method of Elaboration. (3) If they were contradictions and were thus removed, yet others and greater ones would remain unsolved (see vol. ii., p. 334, and Ueberweg's History of Philosophy, vol. ii., p. 380).
Even if we grant for the sake of argument that there are such contradictions latent in our every-day conceptions as Herbart claims, the question is, how do we find out that they are inadequate and contradictory?
What discloses to us this fact? The only answer is that we become conscious of this fact by means of a critical study of our powers of knowledge and by means of a careful study of the phenomena of Nature. Without these investigations, we shall never become conscious of the crude character of our conceptions. If this is the case, then the Method of Elaboration is dependent for its success upon the Cosmological and the Noetic Methods. And if it is thus dependent upon the other methods for its successful application, it can hardly claim to be independent and absolute. And if the method is not independent and absolute, Herbart's definition of philosophy, founded on his method, as the elaboration of concepts, is hardly justifiable.
CLASSICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF YALE
FEB. 5, '89. Professor Seymour presented two papers.
I. A discussion of the Homeric tripod, with the thesis that the tripods which Hephaestus was making in the Eighteenth Book of the Iliad were three-legged tables or stands.
II. An investigation of the office of Adrastea or Nemesis, with the conclusion that this divinity never became a common Fury, in Greek literature. Her office was always to humble the proud.
YALE UNIVERSITY BULLETIN.
No. 75.-WEEK ENDING FEBRUARY 2, 1889. Sunday, January 27.—Public Worship-Battell Chapel, 10.30 A. M. Rev. Newman Smyth, D.D., of the Center Church. General Religious Meeting.–Dwight Hall, 6.30 P. M. To be addressed by the Rev. W. G. Puddefoot, on Home Missions.
Monday, January 28.-Dwight Hall Lecture Course—Rt. Rev. Henry C. Potter, D.D., of New York, on Some Suggestions of the Life of David Livingstone. Dwight Hall, 6.45 P. M.
Tuesday, January 29.—The Spanish School of Painting (Lecture in the Art School)-Professor Hoppin. Art School, 3 P. M. The Minister and his Bible (Lecture in the Divinity School)— Rev. Dr. Broadus, Marquand Chapel, 3 P. M. Greek Readings (Eighteenth Book of the Iliad) -Professor Seymour. 195 Old Chapel, 7–7.45 P. M. German Readings (Goethe's Hermann und Dorothea)—Mr. Goodrich. Room C, Cabinet, 7
Wednesday, January 30.--Evolution—Professor J. D. Dana. Peabody Museum Lecture Room, 2 P. M. The Minister's Private Life (Lecture in the Divinity School)—Rev. Dr. Broadus. Marquand Chapel, 3 P. M. Metaphysics (University Lecture)—Professor Ladd. 194 Old Chapel, 4 P. M. History of Old Testament Prophecy (University Lec
ture) - Professor Harper. Room B, Cabinet, 5 P. M. Yale AssemblyDiscussion on the Piece-Work System in the State Prison. Linonia, 7.30 P. M.
Thursday, January 31.-Annual Day of Prayer for Colleges—General Meeting, Dwight Hall, 3 P. M. Address by the Rev. C. H. Parkhurst, D.D., of New York City. (Meetings of the several College classes, in Dwight Hall, at 11 A. M.)
Friday, February 1.-College Faculty Meeting—7 Treasury Building, 4 P. M. Berkeley Association–(Evening Prayer)-Room 89. Dwight Hall, 6.45 P. M. Lecture Preparatory to Communion Service-Dwight Hall, 7.30 P. M.
Subjects for the John A. Porter Prize Essay for 1890.–1. History of the Scotch branch of English Literature. 2. St. Simonism. 3. Relation of Spanish Literature to the Elizabethan Drama. 4. Historic con. sequences of the conversion of the Franks. 5. Baron Hirsch and the Jewish question. 6. Is the doctrine of Will (Schopenhauer) necessarily pessimistic? 7. Philo Judaeus and the Alexandrian philosophy. 8. Chief Justice Marshall and the Federal Constitution of the U. S. 9. Necessity for a uniform divorce law throughout the U. S. 10. Recent colonization movement in Germany. 11. History of Wages and Prices in the U. S. during the last thirty years. 12. Relations, past, present, and prospective, between the Dominion of Canada and the U. S. The essays will be due on the first Wednesday in May, 1890.
No. 76.-WEEK ENDING FEBRUARY 9, 1889. Sunday, Feburary 3.-Public Worship, followed by Communion Service-Battell Chapel, 10.30 A. M. Rev. President Dwight. Yale Young Men's Christian Association Monthly Meeting-Dwight Hall, 6.30 P. M. To be addressed by Mr. McLaughlin.
Monday, February 4.-Dwight Hall Lecture Course—Professor William M. Sloane, of Princeton College, on Christian Tolerance. Dwight Hall, 6.45 P. M. University Reception-Dwight Hall, 8 to 11 P. M.
Tuesday, February 5.—The French School of Painting (Lecture in the Art School Professor Hoppin. Art School, 3 P. M. Greek Readings (Eighteenth Book of the Iliad)-Professor Seymour. 195 Old Chapel, 7–7.45 p. m. German Readings (Goethe's Hermann und Dorothea Mr. Goodrich. Room C, Cabinet, 7 P. M. Philosophical Club-Address by Professor Hastings, on the Four Realities of Physical Science. Room B, East Divinity Hall, 8 P. M. Classical and Philological Society -Papers by Professor Knapp, on Ancient Geographical Names, and by Professor Seymour, on the Tripods of Hephaestus in the Iliad. Room D, East Divinity Hall, 8 P. M.
Wednesday, February 6.- Evolution-Professor J. D. Dana. Peabody Museum Lecture Room, 2 P. M. Metaphysics (University Lecture), Professor Ladd. 194 Old Chapel, 4 P. M. History of Old Testament Prophecy (University Lecture)—Professor Harper. Room B, Cabinet, 5 P. M. Yale Assembly-Discussion on the Piece-Work System in State Prisons. Linonia Hall, 7.30 P. M. University Chamber ConcertKniesel Quartette of Boston. North Sheffield Hall, 8.15 p. m.