THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
and explained mental processes in a purely mechanical manner. According to Descartes matter consists of corpuscles — not the absolutely indivisible atoms of Democritus, but parts indivisible by us. The mass of matter and motion originally established by God is as a whole incapable of increase or diminution. Equally with Hobbes, Descartes explained mental processes, e.g., the association of ideas, in a purely mechanical way by particular material changes in the brain arising from affection through the senses, and by the generation of new concepts as a result of these changes. Descartes is thus one of the founders of the mechanical-materialistic school as far as anthropology is concerned. It was only necessary to leave out the thinking soul to reach the view of Lamettrie, who believed that the thing to do was not, with Leibnitz (q.v.), to spiritualize matter, but to materialize the soul. For him the soul is the material consciousness; he finds the principle of life not in it but in all the separate parts, since each smallest particle of the organized body is forced to move by an innate principle. Similar views are held by most physiologists and biologists of the present day.
The most obvious justification of materialism lies in the fact that the basis of our knowledge is senseperception, which shows us the real as having three
dimensions; and this leads us to con-
6. Weakness sider these three dimensions as exist-
of the ing outside ourselves and constituting
Theory, the objects of the intuitive world.
There is also the experience that mental processes do not occur without a material base. While it may be admitted that as far as our experience goes the material (especially the nerves, and in higher animals the brain) is a sine qua non for mental phenomena, no one has ever succeeded in deducing the latter from the former or explaining them by it. In spite of the progress recently made in cerebral anatomy and the success attained in the localization of mental activities, the question is still unanswered, how out of what is visible and tangible, cognizable by the external senses, that which is invisible and intangible, cognizable only by the inner sense, can originate. Moreover, the whole conception of matter is a vague and indeterminate one, resisting exact analysis. What we first get is not matter — that is secondary — but sensations or perceptions. If we try to find external causes for these, we still do not reach matter, as is usually assumed, but forces that work upon us. We are thus driven into a sort of dynamism, according to which matter is a generally operative force, its whole essence being found in operation. This extreme dynamism is represented by Leibnitz and many of his adherents. Another objection to the ordinary materialism is that as far as our perceptions go they present themselves to us as something immanent and spiritual, which is to us the datum, the known, from which we must proceed in all our philosophizing, even to the acceptance of an external world; and it is a complete inversion for materialism to set before us first the external world which is unknown to us and explain what is known to us from that. These and other objections are so conclusive that thoroughgoing materialism may
now be considered as philosophically untenable, in spite of the number of physicists who still accept it because it harmonizes with their tendencies or preconceptions.
Theoretical materialism is not, however, inconsistent with strict moral views, and does not necessarily lead to absorption in purely material, i.e., sensual, things. Not only the Stoics but also Democritus and Epicurus may be cited to prove this, as may also Tertullian on the Christian side. And in the most decided materialists of modern times, such as Lamettrie, Holbach, and others, a by no means despicable inculcation is to be found of a virtue which is, indeed, primarily self-love but gives the public interests the preference over the individual. Even Hackel acknowledges as a golden rule " Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." Altruism is so deeply implanted in the mind of humanity that the most extreme theoretical tendencies, even those which assert the most extreme egoism in the region of morals, are forced to give it a predominant place in their practical counsels; and there is scarcely an absolutely egoistic work to be cited, except Max Stirner's Der Einzige und sein Eigentum (Leipsic, 1845) ; but he is not to be classed as a theoretical materialist. (M. HEiNZEf.)
Bibliography: An extensive list of works on the subject, including periodical literature, is given in J. M. Baldwin, Dictionary of Philosophy and Psychology, iii. 620-626, New York, 1905. The best history of Materialism is still F. A. Lange, Geschichte ties Materialismus und Kritik seiner Bedeutung in der Gegenwart, 6th ed., Leipsic, 1896, Eng. transl. of earlier ed., London, 1877. Consult further: T. Hobbes, Works, ed. W. Molesworth, 11 vols., London, 1839-45; N. S. Bergier, Examen du materialisme, V&r'is, 1854; Herbert Spencer, System of Synthetic Philosophy, London, 1860-97; P. Janet, Le Materialisme contemporain, Paris, 1864, Eng. transl., London, 1865; F. Westhoff, Stoff, Kraft und Gedanke, Miinster, 1865; E. Caro, Le Materialisme et la science, Paris, 1868; H. B. Jones, Croonian Lectures on Matter and Force, London, 1868; W. Maccall, The Newest Materialism, ib. 1873; J. A. Picton, The Mystery of Matter, ib. 1873; J. Martineau, Modern Materialism, ib. 1876; P. Zimmermann, Das Rathsel des Lebens und die Rathlosigkeit des Materialismus, Leipsic, 1877; E. Syffert, Le Materialisme, Paris, 1878; R. Flint, Antitheistic Theories, lectures ii.-iv., London, 1879-80; L. Weis, Idealrealismus und Materialismus, Berlin, 1879; A. Lefevre, La Renaissance du materialisme, Paris, 1881; J. Dourif, Le Materialisme et I'atheisme, ib. 1882; G. A. Hirn, Reflexions critiques sur la theorie cinematique de I'univers, ib. 1882; M. Bcrger, Der Materialismus im Kampfe mit dem Spiritual ismus und Idealismus, Triest, 1883; A. Stadler, Kant's Theorie der Materie, Leipsic, 1883; W. F. Wilkinson, Modern Materialism, London, 1883; H. Stfiven, Darstellung und Kritik der Grundsatze des Materialismus, Hamburg, 1885; J. A. Kilb, Plato's Lehre von der Materie, Marburg, 1SS7; P. Ribot, Spiritualisme et materialisme, Paris, 18S7; R. Abendroth, Das Problem der Materie, 2 vols., Leipsic, 1889-90; W. Strecker, Welt und Menschheit vom Standpunkte des Materialismus, ib. 1891; L. Stephen, An Agnostic's Apology, London, 1893; G. Plechanow, Beitrage zur Geschichte des Materialismus, Stuttgart, 1896; T. Menzi, Der Materialismus vor dem Richterstuhl der Wissenschaft, Zurich, 1897; R. C. Shettle, The Origin of Matter and Force, London, 1897; L. Biichner, Kraft und Stoff, Frankfort, 1898, Eng. transl. of earlier ed., London, 1870; E. Du Bois-Reymond, Ueber die Grenzen der .Vuturerkenntnis, Leipsic, 1898; C. Barbagallo, Del Materialismo storico, Rome, 1899; E. Gaynor, The New Materialism, Dublin, 1899; W. A. Preuss, Geist und Stoff, Oldenburg, 1900; J. Royce, The World and the Individual, New York, 1900-01; I. W Riley, American Philosophy; the early Schools, New York, 1 907 ; the works on the history of philosophy; and the literature under Idealism.