Page images
PDF
EPUB

rate article on Dr. Whately's treatise in the Edinburg Review, a paper which, as he has himself declared, contains the germs of all his subsequent discoveries. Besides what Hamilton has accomplished, the publications within this period of Professor Mansel, Dr. Thomson, Mr. De Morgan, Mr. Boole, Mr. J. S. Mill, and a host of others, have given an entirely new aspect to the science. Among recent American works upon Logic, honorable mention ought to be made of those by Mr. Tappan, and by Dr. W. D. Wilson of Geneva.

The only hope that this volume may be found to be of some use consists in the fact, that, as I was the last to enter the field, I have been able to profit by the labors of my predecessors. Certainly it could not have been written without their aid, and one of the chief objects held in view in the preparation of it has been to gather together, and digest into system, their several improvements and elucidations of the science. At the same time, the work would not have been carried on in the same spirit in which they began it, if I had not ventured respectfully to dissent from some of their doctrines, and even to present some opinions which will very likely be found to have no other merit than that of originality. As Le Clerc remarks, in introducing his own lucid and thoughtful compendium of the science to the reader's notice, "si, in hacce Logica, nihil esse novi, aut pleraque nova dixerim, lectorem perinde fefellero."

When Dr. Whately wrote, it was not so frequent a practice as it has since become for English scholars to profit by the labors of their German brethren, and hence some of the greatest deficiencies of his book. It cannot be said that the study of Logic ever declined in the schools of Germany, as

it did in those of France, England, and this country. Upheld for a time by the genius of Leibnitz and the indefatigable industry of Wolff, it was at last reduced to rigorous system, its boundaries were fixed, and its relations to Psychology and Metaphysics accurately determined, by the master mind of Kant. Though this great Metaphysician prepared no distinct work upon the subject, the volume relating to it which passes under his name being a mere compilation from his loose notes by Jasche, the science has profited more by his labors than by those of any other Continental writer of modern times. Indeed, the publication of his "Criticism of Pure Reason" formed hardly less an era in the history of Logic than in that of Metaphysics. In one respect, it is true, it had an injurious influence, as it established the practice, which has since become wellnigh universal in Germany, of modifying the doctrines of this science in order to furnish a basis on which might be erected any peculiar scheme of speculative Philosophy. Since Kant's time, a multitude of treatises upon Logic have been published by German writers, about half of them having no other purpose than that of preparing the way, and furnishing the materials, for some extravagant speculations in Metaphysics. This mode of treatment was carried to an outrageous extent by Hegel, who labored to break down altogether the boundary that had been established by Kant, and whose elaborate work, bearing the name of Logic, is a mere perversion and caricature of that science, as it is metaphysical from beginning to end. Even Trendelenburg, who has contributed more than any other person to the rapid decline of Hegelianism in Germany, is not free from blame in this respect, his very able work, Logische Untersuchungen,

being devoted in great part to building up a philosophical system of his own.

[ocr errors]

But the very prevalence of this abuse in Germany furnishes an additional motive for the study of the subject. A key to German Metaphysics can be obtained only by a thorough mastery of the principles and the terminology of Logic. To some persons, perhaps, this consideration may not have much weight, as they will object, that it is of little use to be able to open the door, if the room contains little more than rubbish. Still I cannot but believe-and the opinion is founded on considerable experience as an instructor in both departments that a fair knowledge of Logic is a natural, and even an indispensable, preparation for the successful pursuit of Psychology and Metaphysics; -may I not add, of any philosoph ical speculations whatever? It appears certain, that the University lectures of Kant, Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel could not have been made even intelligible, much less instructive, to hearers who had not previously acquired at least the elements of Logical science. Hence the multitude of manuals and text-books upon this subject, which have appeared in Germany during the last three quarters of a century, many of them having passed through numerous editions, and each betraying very plainly the particular system of Philosophy to which it was intended to serve as an introduction. Some familiarity with the principles of Logic appears essential for a thorough comprehension even of the metaphysical doctrines of Sir William Hamilton, which, both in their philosophical and theological bearings, seem likely to exert a considerable influence over English and American minds for many years to come.

Hamilton's "Lectures on Logic" are marked with the inevitable defects of a posthumous publication, the larger portion of which was probably never intended by the author to be given to the public; and though very ably edited by Professor Mansel and Mr. Veitch, they present a mass of crude material from which a knowledge of the peculiar doctrines of the writer cannot be extracted but with considerable difficulty. Indeed, the "Lectures," which form the body of the book, were evidently prepared in great haste, when the author's appointment to the Professorship in this department, in 1836, obliged him to collect at short notice the materials for an extended course of instruction. He appears to have met this sudden call by hurriedly translating a series of extracts from the most approved German text-books, especially those of Krug, Esser, and Bachmann, merely interpolating here and there some of the comments, corrections, and additions which could not fail to occur to so rich a mind as his, while traversing so broad and familiar a field. These Lectures, containing only a glimpse of one feature of the peculiar system which has since become identified with his name, he seems to have repeated from year to year, during his whole period of office, with no material enlargement or alteration of the manuscript, though doubtless inserting, from year to year, many extemporaneous expositions of his corrections of the leading doctrines of Logical science, as these occurred to him at successive periods. The whole transaction seems to me to afford an instructive comment on the futility of what is called the Professorial mode of teaching, which has always prevailed in the University of Edinburgh, and which consists in getting up very

hastily a course of lectures during the teacher's first year of office, and repeating them, parrot-like, from year to year, without any regular use of a text-book or manual of instruction. If such lectures contain anything really valuable, in addition to what is already before the world, they are apt very soon to find their way to the press; if they are of little worth, they are almost sure to be repeated, with little alteration, to one class after another, and with as little profit to the hearer as exercise to the reader. It may be doubted whether the most fertile and best-trained minds, at least in the speculative sciences, are capable of preparing every year an entirely new course of lectures, without either filling them with crudities and truisms, or lapsing into paradox and extravagance, such as have too frequently characterized the productions of German Professors.

With all his amazing activity of mind and prodigious erudition, Hamilton appears to have been either too indolent, or too critical of his own labors, to be able, without great delays, to digest his materials into a shape fit for publication. He was not an adept in the very low, but very necessary, art of book-making. But for his controversy with Mr. De Morgan, I doubt whether he would ever have worked up into form as much as he did of his "New Analytic of Logical Forms," the publication of which was promised as far back as 1846. Stimulated by opposition, however, though impeded by ill-health during the later years of his life, he appears to have labored strenuously, after the lastmentioned date, to fulfil this promise. Death surprised him long before he had completed his preparations; and out of the mass of fragmentary materials which were found among his papers, with

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »