In that country, Locke's philosophy, unfortunately introduced by Voltaire and accepted in its worst side, had wrought only mischief, partly by its drawing away the attention of thinkers from the more spiritual philosophy of Descartes, and partly by its tempting a set of speculators to derive all men's ideas from sensation, and to deny the existence of all ideas which could not be derived from this source, -- such as the idea of moral good, of infinity, and of God.This wretched philosophy -- if philosophy it can be called -- was one of the fatal powers which operated to give an evil issue to the Revolution, and prevented good from coming out of it.After sensationalism-which used, but only to abuse, the name of Locke -- had reigned for more than half a century, there appeared a reaction led on by M.Royer Collard, who began in 1811 to lecture at the Normal School.
It is a most interesting circumstance, that, in conducting this war against the debasing systems which prevailed, he betook himself to the philosophy of Reid and Stewart.
Exercising a considerable influence in himself, Royer Collard has had a more extended sway through his pupils, especially Victor Cousin and Theodore Jouffroy.In the course of years, the works of Reid were' translated into French, with an admirable historical and critical introduction, by Jouffroy.So early as 1808, the first volume of Stewart's " Elements " was translated into French by M.Prevost of Geneva; and, at a later date, M.Peisse, has translated the other two volumes of the same work.
Stewart's " Outlines " were translated into the same tongue by Jouffroy, who has prefixed a preface of great judgment and acuteness.It thus appears, that the great reaction in favor of sound philosophy, commenced by Royer Collard and conducted by Cousin and Jouffroy, has made large and profitable use of the Scottish school, and rejoices to acknowledge its obligations to Scotland.No doubt, it has also called in aid from other quarters.Cousin has been indebted to the school of Kant, as well as to the school of Reid, and has derived some of his favorite principles immediately from the great metaphysician of his own country, Descartes; and he has besides carefully examined the human mind, in an inductive manner, and he has been able to give a unity to these {303} materials, because he is possessed of great original genius, acuteness, and comprehensiveness of mind.I am sometimes inclined to think, however, that he has got the most precious element in his eclectic system from the school of Scotland.I have been greatly gratified to observe, that, after he had been drawn aside for a time from his attachment to the Scottish philosophy, by a later affection for German transcendentalism (this is very visible in his course of lectures delivered in 1828 and 1829), he returned in his later years to his first love, and this at a time when Scotland was rather forsaking the inductive method, and turning its regards towards the a.priori method of Germany.
I feel proud, I confess, of the eulogiums which have been pronounced on Scotland, not only by Cousin, but by Jouffroy and Remusat.But these philosophers have scarcely seen, after all, wherein lies the peculiar strength of the Scottish nation.This is not to be found in its systems of moral philosophy, but in its religion, of which the high moral tone of its philosophy is but a reflection, which would soon wax dim and vanish were the original light extinguished; -- nay, in remembering that Kant was descended from Scottish parentage, I have sometimes thought that his high moral precepts may be also a reflection from the same light.Often, I should think, when M.Cousin looked around him on these scenes of revolution through which France has passed, must he have seen that his country needs something deeper and more influential than any system of moral science, even though it should be as pure and elevated as that which he inculcated.
In Germany Stewart has been little known, and has exercised no power for good or for evil.The only English philosopher familiarly referred to in that country is Locke, and even he is known, I suspect, more through his French consequences than from the study of his work.The German professors speak of him, under the name of Locke, as the representative of sensationalism, overlooking the constant reference which he makes to reflection as a separate source of ideas, and to the lengthened account which he gives of intuition, -- a much juster account, in some respects, of its function than that given by Kant or Schelling.The great English ethical writer, Butler, who has established for ever the great truth of the supremacy {304} of conscience in the human constitution, is either altogether unknown in Germany, or referred to by such writers as Tholuck only to show that he is not understood or appreciated.The only Scottish metaphysician thoroughly known in Germany is David Hume.
Reid is occasionally spoken of, only to be disparaged in his system and its results.Stewart is scarcely ever named.Imust be allowed to regret this.Such a body of carefully inducted fundamental truth as we have in the philosophy of Reid and Stewart is precisely what was and is needed to preserve thought from the extravagances of the transcendental schools in the last age, and now, in the natural recoil which has taken place, since 1848, from the tide of materialism which is setting in so strongly, and with no means or method of meeting it.The philosophy of Germany must ever go by oscillations, by actions and reactions, till the critical method of Kant is abandoned, and the inductive method is used to determine the rule and law of those <a priori> principles of which so much use is made, while there has been so little careful inquiry into their precise nature and mode of operation.
