of time; for of philosophy there is no end. of theoretical inquiry, but also in government, social
This constant disappointment and continual renewal organization, manners, habits of thought, arts, and in
of effort are strange phenomena, and have often proved utterly disheartening. Hence has pr «ded the objec- tion so frequently urged that philosophy is ever in restless and fretful activity, but does not advance. The allegation of an entire failure of progress is unjust : but the same questions constantly reappear with changed
everything which concerns the daily life of the people. The condition of Athenian polities and morals directly engendered the Socratic inquiries and the Socratic schools. The personal degradation and servilitj ofthe Romans under the empire provoked the revival and ardent advocacy of stoicism. The repugnance to [slam-
aspects, and the same solutions are offered under altered ism, and the dialectical needs of Christendom, gave
forms. But the change in the aspects and the altera- birth to mediaeval scholasticism. The antagonism which
tion in the forms are themselves an advancement. The issued in the English commonwealth furnished the hoi-
true source of encouragement is, however, to be derived bed in which germinated the philosophy of Hobbes.
less iv, ,m the progress which can never pass the boun- Locke and the encyclopaedists were the prophets and
daries imposed by the same old questions than from guides of the French revolutionary spirit ; and the ma-
the knowledge that the pursuit is more than the im- terialism ofthe current years has received form ;i- well
practicable attainment- the race more important than the arrival at the goal could he— at least in this finite life, with our finite powers. From this habitual disap- pointment, and tin* apparent failures which bring the disappointment, have arisen, too, this variety of solu- tions which have been proposed for the numerous rid- dles that philosophy propounds to man. Varro enu- merated two hundred and eighty-eight possible sects, apparently on the basis of ethics alone i August Di ' 'iv. Dei, xix. ] i : and the number of distinguishable schemes of philosophy, to say nothing of diversities of opinion in regard to details, is countless. Vet each ofthese has contributed something to our knowledge : in the more precise statement ofthe problems to be solved, in the clearer determination of their conditions, in the refuta- tion of former errors, in the exposure of previous mis- apprehensions, in presenting the inquiries under new and brighter lights, or in adding to our positive infor- mation in regard to these dark and difficult subjects. The gratitude which Aristotle expresses, in a remark- able passage [Met, i), towards his predecessors, who had gone astray, or who had failed to see the truth, is due to all philosophical inquirers. They have contrib- uted s imething towards the result, however incomplete that result may remain (Kat yip OVTOt ovvifiakovTO ti ' -•/;• ydp siftv Trpor\OK7\oaV t]fuav\ and see Alexan- der Aphrodis. Sckol. ArUtot. ad loc. // y&p rutv ifara-
>->\o\V////:i'e,r SoZtoV EVTTOpia EVpETIXlDTfpOVQ ////or -f/c
aXrjBtiac irapaaKtvaou I.
History ofthe Subject. The hopelessness of satisfac- tory attainment, with the inevitable persistency ofthe search, and the gradual approximation, or appearance of approximation, to a goal which i- never reached, hut is ever receding, eventuate in changes, expansions. fluctuations, and revolutions in opinion, which are re- corded and appreciated in the history of philosophy. This history chronicles the origins and original phases of philosophical inquiry, its mutations, progresses, and recessions, and the causes of them ; it notes the intro- duction of new doctrines, new methods of procedure. new modes of exposition ; the dissensions and control er- nes which spring up and minister I iw developments ;
the reduction of kindred views to a coherent body, and
the constitution of sects and schools; the fortunes of
as vitality from the predominance and achievements of the physical sciences, and the enormous fascinations of
material interests and gratifications. Thus the alter- nations of philosophy explain and are explained by the concurrent, modifications of society.
The history id' philosophy admits of two distinct principles of division, both of which are simultaneously employed. It may be divided either with reference to its special subject-matter, as a part of the general do- main of philosophy, or with reference to its chronolog- ical successions. Each ofthese distributions of course permits further subdivision.
Plato practically, though not expressly, divided phi- losophy into dialectics, physics, and ethics, including theologj and much of metaphysics, along with natural philosophy, under the head of physics. See Piatonh Philosophy. The division of Aristotle is indistinct and apparently variable. But he did not complete his system. His metaphysics, which corresponds nearly with his tirsl philosophy, or with philosophy in its strictest sens,., uas an incomplete collection of unfinished papers, gathered and arranged after his death. Science, or knowledge, he distributes l» tween practice production, and theory (Metaph. vi, 1. Frag. 137, p. 94, ed. Didot). [Jcberweg mistakes this for a formal division of phi- losophy, but the third head is the only one to which Wist,, Mr would have assigned the name of philosophy. lie elsewhere distinguishes theory into physical, mathe- matical, and theological the last corresponding with philosophy proper (Metaph.xi,7). In one of his frag- ments, philosophical problems arc declared to be of five kinds: political, dialectical, physical. <i Ideal, and rhetorical I Aristot Frag. 137, p. 108). This division
excludes tii,. greater part of philosophy. The uncer- tainty and contusion which these Several di\ isions are calculated to produce may be accounted tor and excused