The complete works of Gassendi were collected and published in 1658, in 6 vols, fol., by his friends Louis de Montmor and Francois Henry, with a biography by 8orbiere prefixed. The most important of these works have been already mentioned, but they were accompanied by numerous essays on various topics of mathematics, astronom}', natural history, etc. These it is unnecessarj' to notice, though all branches of con- temporaneous investigation engaged the attention of Gassendi, and his reputation was higher and less as- sailable in science than in philosophy. The range of his inquiries in the latter department is illustrated by his early refutation of the mystical doctrines of Robert Fludd, in the Examen Philosophice Fluddame, bj' his Disquisitio Metaphi/sica, in opposition to Des Cartes, and by his life-long labors in resuscitating the Epicu- rean doctrine, especiallj' in its physical developments. His zealous attachment to the daring imaginations of Epicurus, and his ardent rehabilitation of the charac- tL'r of the " Grains homo" who first forced the barriers of nature —
" pt extra J'roceosit longe flammantia iiiceiiia miauli" —
invited misapprehension, and were obnoxious to grave criticism. To repel misconception, he appended to the Syntagma Phitosophlm Epicurem a series of elaborate cssaj's, in which he repudiated and refuted the infidel tenets ascribed to Epicurus. This late defence, how- ever consonant with the whole tenor of his own life, was inadequate to preclude unfavorable presumptions, particularly' on the part of those predisposed to wel- come them. Nor was his intimate association with
Hobbes, La Mothe le Vayer, and other notable scep- tics of the time, calculated to inspire confidence in li.s orthodox}'. But there is no reason to suppose thi.t the piety of Gassendi was less sincere than it was ha- bitual, or that he ever questioned the validity of the religion which he professed. It was an age of para- dox, and of promiscuous and vague, but earnest in- quiry. His earlj' resistance to the Aristotelians may have attracted his favor to the ethical as well as tht physical scheme which was most strongly contrasted with the positions of the peripatetic school. The tem- per of the period, too, after long theological contro- versy and a century of religious war, desired the con- ciliation or the relegation of polemical asperities, and cherished a careless scepticism or an uninquiring faith The morals of Epicurus were contemplated by Gas- sendi in their original innocence and luirity, divested of the corruptions which vitiated them in their later and more familiar applications, and adorned witli that chaste simplicity which won the earnest and repeated commendations of the Stoic Seneca.
Philosophij of Gassendi. — Neither tlie desire nor the design of founding a sect was entertained b}- Gassendi. He left no school, though he made his mark on the scientific and speculative development of Europe. He was distinguished by quick perception, accurate obser- vation, remarkable ])enetration and discrimination, va- rious research, and manifold accomplishment. He was enthusiastic in the discovery of new facts, eager in the exposure of inveterate error, but he had no taste for system-mongering, and was free from the weaknesses of personal ambition. He aimed rather at rejuvenating ancient knowledge than at inaugurat- ing new fancies. The cardinal principle of Epicurus was accepted and expounded bj- Gassendi in such a manner as to harmonize with the simplicity, temper- ance, and purity of his life. Pleasure is the suminum bonum— the final object, the highest motive of human action, the crown of human aspirations ; but this pleasure is the pleasure of the good man; the perfect state of the pagan ; the present and eternal bliss of the Christian. It is neither to be attained nor sought by personal indulgences, nor by concession to ajipctites ; but only b}' the punctilious discharge of every dut}', in expectation of that serenity of a conscience at ease, which is the most abiding and the most assuring re- ward of virtue. Such Ji theorj' is liable to great abuses, and is certain to be ultimately abused. An easy conscience is easily mistaken for a conscience at ease, and happiness is identified with pleasure when pleasure ceases to be identical with happiness. Pleas- ure, in its vulgar sense, thus becomes at once the aim of life and the means of securing that aim ; and pleas- ure, in its philosophic sense, which implies the concord of desire with duty, is totally forgotten or ignored. Thus all the vices of the Epicurean stye are intro- duced. But it is as uncritical as it is uncharitable to stigmatize the philosopher instead of the philosophy for the perverseness or the perverse tendency of his doctrine. In the most defecated Epicureanism there is assuredly an intricate confusion which eventuates in grievous error. Violence is habitually done to words, and a greater violence is done to thoughts. There is a contimuil paronomasia and paragnomesia — a play upon terms and upon conceptions — which daz- zles, bewilders, and misleads; but the perilous thesis may be held in conjunction with the purest intentions and the most rigorous observance of moral rectitude. So it was held by Gassendi. It must l)e admitted that the Iledonic theory is not more inconipdible with Christianity than the utilitarianism of William Pale}', Jeremy Bentham, or John Stuart Mill. The mental philosophy of Gassendi corresponded with his ethical assumptions. He espoused sensationalism, though in no rigid or consistent form. He was the legitimate precursor of Locke in both the statement and the vacil- lation of his views. "While recognising sensation and