For the rest, Brentano, in regard to metaphysics, is a decided theist. He is an adherent of the theory of evolution, while denying that accidental variations and natural selection in the struggle for existence render explicable the phenomena of evolution and the teleological character of the organism, basing his objections, among other things, upon the fact that this attempt at a solution not only leaves unexplained the first beginnings of an organism, but also takes too little account of the fact that with the increasing perfection and complication of the organism it becomes more and more improbable that an accidental variation will lead to an improvement upon that which already exists. And yet if there is to be progress, the organisms which, in the struggle for existence, survive must not only be more perfect than those which perish, but also more perfect than the organisms through which they themselves are descended.
Brentano’s views on the historical development of philosophical inquiry and the causes determining that development, the present state of philosophy and its views regarding the future, he has set forth in various publications: Die Geschichte der Philosophie im Mittelalter (Möhler’s Kirchengeschichte, vol. ii. 1868); Über die Gründe der Entmutigung auf philosophischem Gebiete (Vienna, 1874), delivered as an inaugural address on entering upon his work at Vienna University; Was für ein Philosoph manchmal Epoche macht (Vienna, 1876); Über die Zukunft der Philosophie (Vienna, 1893); and Die vier Phasen der Philosophie und ihr augenblicklicher Stand (Stuttgart, 1895).
In the last work a concise survey is made of the entire course of the History of Philosophy, and it is there shown how in the three periods, rightly regarded as distinct (Greek Philosophy, the Philosophy of the Middle Ages, and Modern Philosophy), there is each time an analogous change, a rising or blossoming period, and three periods of decadence, of which those which succeed are always the psychologically necessary result of the preceding. That in so doing Brentano has characterized the latest phase of German philosophy, the so-called idealistic direction from Kant to Hegel as the third or mystic period of decadence (howbeit with all due recognition of the talents of these writers) has naturally aroused violent opposition, though it has not found any real refutation.
It has been already said that Brentano’s earliest efforts were directed to historical inquiries and especially to a presentation of the Aristotelian psychology and to important sections of his Metaphysics. The results of these researches, diverging as they did in many respects from the traditional view, did not fail to awaken the attention of other investigators. Their attitude, however (with a few exceptions like Trendelenburg, and in part also Grote), was, on the whole, hostile and polemic. This was especially so in the case of E. Zeller, in the later edition of his Greek Philosophy, and in view of the reputation which this work enjoys, Brentano thought it necessary to offer, as against Zeller’s attacks, at least with regard to one point, an apology for his own view, a point where the threads of metaphysics and psychology become most intimately related, and where at the same time, the contrast between the opposing views of these two writers in the psychological and metaphysical spheres alike culminate. And so there appeared in the Report of the Proceedings of the Imperial Academy of Sciences in Vienna (1882) Brentano’s article: “Über den Creatianismus des Aristoteles, in regard to which E. Zeller in the same year, in the Report of the Proceedings of the Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences in Berlin, (vol. 49), published a detailed reply under the title: “Über die Lehre des Aristoteles von der Ewigkeit des Geistes.” The charge which is there made by Zeller against Brentano of interpreting Aristotle without sufficient confirmation and with over-confidence, Brentano has sufficiently repelled in his Offener Brief an Herrn Prof. Dr. E. Zeller (Leipzig, 1883), and the proofs which are here offered of the way in which Zeller, on his part, bases his own attempts at explanation and his charges against Brentano show distinctly that, if here one of the two opponents is really open to the charge of over-confidence, it is at any rate not Brentano.
Butler & Tanner, The Selwood Pringing Works, Frome, and London.
Dante and Giovanni del Vergilio
By PHILIP H. WICKSTEED, M.A., and
EDMUND G. GARDNER, M.A.
Demy 8vo. 12s.
The Mind of Tennyson
HIS THOUGHTS ON GOD, FREEDOM, and IMMORTALITY
By E. HERSHEY SNEATH, Ph.D.
Professor of Philosophy in Yale University.
Crown 8vo. 5s. net. Third Edition.
“Admirably sums up for us Tennyson’s philosophic ideas and the creed he had ultimately arrived at. Since Mr. Stopford Brooke’s comprehensive survey of Tennyson, nothing so excellent has been written on the poet’s ideas.”—Spectator.
The Teachings of Dante
By CHARLES ALLEN DINSMORE
With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo. 5s. net.