connection of things. In the Scholium to Prop. VIII. we have seen him maintaining that the correct definition of a thing expresses the nature of a thing, and nothing but its nature: which is true in one sense; for unless it express the nature of the thing, the definition must be incorrect: but false in another and more important sense; for every definition we can frame only expresses our conceptions of the nature of the thing: and thus we may define the nature of the inhabitants of the moon, and adhere to our definitions with the utmost logical rigor, yet all the while be utterly removed from any real knowledge of those inhabitants. The position is logically deducible from Spinoza's conception of the relation between Thought and Extension as the two Attributes of Substance; but it is a position which is emphatically contradicted by all sound psychology. Nevertheless, without it Metaphysics has no basis. Unless clear ideas are to be accepted as the truths of things, and unless every idea, which is distinctly conceived by the mind, has its ideate, or object,—metaphysicians are without plausible pretence.

Having thus signalized the fundamental position of Spinoza's doctrine, it is there, if anywhere, that we shall be able to show his fundamental error. On the truth or falsehood of this one assumption, must Spinozism stand or fall; and we have formerly endeavored to show that the assumption is false. Those who agree in the reasonings we adduced may escape Spinozism, but they escape it by denying the possibility of all Philosophy.

This consideration, that the mind is not a passive mirror reflecting the nature of things, but the partial creator of its own forms-that in perception there is nothing but certain changes in the percipient-this consideration, we say, is the destruction of the very basis of metaphysics, for it expressly teaches that the subjective idea is not the correlate of the objective fact and only upon the belief that our ideas are the perfect and adequate. images of external things can any metaphysical speculation rest. Misled by the nature of geometry, which draws its truths from the mind as the spider draws the web from its bosom, Descartes

210

assumed that metaphysical truths could be attained in the same way. This was a confusion of reasoning, yet Spinoza, Leibnitz, and their successors, followed him unhesitatingly. Spinoza, however, had read Bacon's denouncement of this à priori Method, though evidently unprepared to see the truth of the protest. It is curious to read his criticism of Bacon: he looks on it as that writer's great error to have mistaken the knowledge of the first cause and origin of things. "On the nature of mind," he says, "Bacon speaks very confusedly; and while he proves nothing, judges much. For in the first place he supposes that the human intellect, besides the deceptions of the senses, is subject to the deceptions of its own nature, and that it conceives every thing according to the analogies of its own nature, and not according to the analogies of the universe; so that it is like an unequal mirror to the rays of things, which mixes the conditions of its own nature with those of external things.”*

We look upon Spinoza's aberration as remarkable, however, because he had also seen that in some sense the subjective was not the absolute expression of the objective; as is proved by his celebrated argument for the destruction of final causes, wherein he showed that order was a thing of the imagination, as were also right and wrong, useful and hurtful-these being merely such in relation to us. Still more striking is his anticipation of Kant in this passage: "Ex quibus clarè videre est, mensuram, tempus, et numerum, nihil esse præter cogitandi, seu potiùs imaginandi modos;" which should have led him to suspect that the same law of mental forms was also applicable to all other subjects.

We have pointed out the initial error, let us now refer to the logical perfection of Spinoza's system. M. Damiron argues against the application of the geometric method, on the ground

* "Nam primò supponit quod intellectus humanus, præter fallaciam sensuum, suâ solâ naturâ fallitur, omniaque fingit ex analogià suæ naturæ, et non ex analogia universi; adeò ut sit instar speculi inæqualis ad radias rerum, qui suam naturam naturæ rerum immiscet."-Epist. ii., Opera, p. 398.

of the imperfect conceptions men form of metaphysical objects; but this, as already hinted, cannot be said of Spinoza's conceptions; they are as perfect and as clear as his conceptions of geometry; whether they are as accurate and comprehensive as they are clear, is another question. Spinoza would maintain them to be so; and he would be justified on his principles; justified, indeed, on all logical principles of metaphysics. Did we not see that the perfection of Mathematics was owing to its never transcending the sphere of its first assumption, never including other elements than those included in its definitions and axioms? Precisely this may also be said of Spinozism: its original assumption is, that every clear idea expresses the actual nature of the object; and hence whatever conclusions are logically evolved from clear ideas, will be found objectively represented in the external world. Whether the mathematician works a problem in his mind with ideal surfaces, or actually juxtaposes substances and points out their relations of surface, the truths deduced are equally valid; in the same way, whenever a Spinozist works out a problem with ideal elements, he is doing no more—on his assumption-than if he had the objective elements before him, and could visibly disclose their relations. Hence the full justification of Spinoza's employment of the geometrical method. And his employment of it, while exciting the admiration of all posterity for the gigantic power of thought disclosed, has had the further advantage of bringing within the narrowest possible field, the whole question of the possibility of Metaphysical certitude.

We must not, however, longer linger with this great and good man, and his works. A brave and simple man, earnestly meditating on the deepest subjects that can occupy the human race, he produced a system which will ever remain as one of the most astounding efforts of abstract speculation-a system that has been decried, for nearly two centuries, as the most iniquitous and blasphemous of human invention; and which has now, within the last sixty years, become the acknowledged parent of a whole nation's philosophy, ranking among its admirers some of the

most pious and illustrious intellects of the age. The ribald atheist turns out, on nearer acquaintance, to be a "God-intoxicated man." The blasphemous Jew becomes a pious, virtuous, and creative thinker. The dissolute heretic becomes a childlike, simple, self-denying, and heroic philosopher. We look into his works with calm earnestness, and read there another curious page of human history: the majestic struggle with the mysteries of existence has failed, as it always must fail; but the struggle demands our warmest approbation, and the man our ardent sympathy. Spinoza stands out from the dim past like a tall beacon, whose shadow is thrown athwart the sea, and whose light will serve to warn the wanderers from the shoals and rocks on which hundreds of their brethren have perished.*

* Spinoza's works have been ably edited by Prof. Paulus, and better, recently by Bruder, in three volumes, 12mo. The edition we use is the quarto, which appeared shortly after his death: B. D. S. Opera Posthuma, 1677. A very close and literal German translation in five small volumes, by Berthold Auerbach, was published in 1841. M. Emile Saisset published one more paraphrastic in French. We are aware of scarcely any thing in English, critical or explanatory, except the account given in Mr. Hallam's Introduction to the Literature of Europe, and the articles Spinoza and Spinozism in the Penny Cyclopædia, and Spinoza's Life and Works in the Westminster Review, May, 1843 (the three last by the present writer).

Since the first edition of this History, there have appeared two remarkable articles by Mr. Froude,-one on Spinoza's Life, in the Oxford and Cambridge Review, Oct., 1847, and one on his doctrine, Westminster Review, July, 1854. An analysis of the Tractatus appeared in the British Quarterly a few years ago; and a translation of the Tractatus Politicus by William Maccall, 1855. Besides historians of philosophy the following writers may be consulted: Sigwart, Der Spinozismus historisch und philosophisch erläutert; Herder, Gott, einige Gespräche über Spinoza's System; Damiron, Mémoire sur Spinoza et sa Doctrine (in the Mémoires de l'Académie).

CHAPTER III.

FIRST CRISIS IN MODERN PHILOSOPHY.

THE doctrine of Spinoza was of great importance, if only because it brought about the first crisis in modern Philosophy. His doctrine was so clearly stated, and so rigorously deduced from admitted premises, that he brought Philosophy into this dilemma:

Either my premises are correct, and we must admit that every clear and distinct idea is absolutely true; true, not only subjectively, but objectively;-If so, my system is true;

Or my premises are false; the voice of Consciousness is not the voice of truth; and if so, then is my system false, but all Philosophy is impossible: since the only ground of Certitudeour Consciousness-is pronounced unstable, our only means of knowing the truth is pronounced fallacious.

Spinozism or Skepticism? choose between them, for you have no other choice.

Mankind refused however to make a choice. If the principles which Descartes had established could have no other result than Spinozism, it was worth while inquiring whether those principles themselves might not be modified.

The ground of discussion was shifted: psychology took the place of ontology. It was Descartes' theory of knowledge which led to Spinozism; that theory therefore must be examined that theory henceforth becomes the great subject of discussion. Before deciding upon the merits of any system which embraced the great questions of Creation, the Deity, Immortality, etc., men saw that it was necessary to decide upon the competence of the human mind to solve such problems.