all the evil consequences that he can foresee will happen to himself there is too a chance of escaping these evil consequences and as by this system he is not bound to take anything else into consideration he will enter without hesitation upon bis desired course of action thus much will not have been said in vain if it serve to show the need of some work upon that shall take higher and more spiritual views than are presented in the popular it seems to us that m could not have taken a better method to communicate his views to the world than the one he has actually taken he begins by the false systems and showing wherein they are he would thus prepare the way for the true system we shall be obliged to be very brief in our analysis of the book our object in making the analysis is � to recommend the book to our readers and show them what a rich treasure it is � and to afford an opportunity for sundry remarks of our own upon the same topics in his first lecture m speaks of the different relations which a man his relation to god his relation to himself his relation to things his relation to his kind a knowledge of what b implied in and required by these four relations the whole of his philosophy the volumes before us are only an introduction to the great subject they consist mainly in a review of the systems of philosophy which make a system of impossible and a criticism of the and systems of that have been taught i the first system that m is that of necessity by denying that we can choose what we will do it the possibility of a law which shall to us what we ought to do one might as well speak of a moral law for the the great s translation of july ment for the doctrine of necessity is the of god to a thing that that thing is tain else it could not be but freedom of will that he thing about which the freedom is to be exercised is then requires that all things be certain and necessary � freedom of will on the other hand requires that they be the problem is to reconcile the two if god events then he has made them certain or there is a fate behind him that has made them so and they are no longer upon the election of the will it seems impossible to solve this problem without greatly our view of god many do not feel its difficulty but of those that do feel it some adopt the doctrine of and necessity others get what they consider a solution while others like m say that they prefer to give up the of god if either must be given up they think they feel more sure of the freedom of their will than of the of god our only hope of a solution to this problem is by the foreign and contradictory element philosophy has now recognised the fact that time and space are only forms or modes of understanding things and not qualities of things themselves hence things only appear to us to sustain a relation to time and space the time element must therefore be from this problem as foreign and to it we should not then say that god but simply that he knows then there will appear to be no contradiction between god s knowledge and man s freedom ii the next false system which m takes up is the objection to is that it one from all his obligations to men and things and leaves only the relation of man to god and himself and not even these he says that rests upon two facts with all our efforts we cannot attain to more than a very small part of the good which our nature or accomplish except in an imperfect degree our destiny we cannot in this life secure even that measure of good which is actually within our reach except on condition of for the natural action of our faculties another mode of action whose characteristic is s of and whose consequence is fatigue we do not believe that the will acknowledge that these facts are the basis of their system actions like the walls of our houses have two faces which are totally unlike an outside face seen by the observer and an inside one seen by the of the actions only m not being himself a mystic and of course not having seen the inside of cannot represent it to their satisfaction he like everybody else must interpret others by himself it is very likely that a perception of these two facts would make m a mystic if anything would therefore he that it is the cause of wherever it appears we suspect that there must be some facts in the consciousness of a mystic which owing to a constitutional difference are not to be found or at least have not been found in s m however aims at nothing farther than to give an account of in so far as it influences in so far as it proceeds from the facts to which he its origin and leads to the consequences that he points out his remarks are quite satisfactory we should give another account of we should say that it originated in a great of the reason the faculty of insight over the understanding the faculty for explaining and things this constitution of mind is also usually accompanied with a large development of the imagination the mystic up so high as though to god face to face that his feet cannot touch the ground by so doing he sees truths or what he calls truths which his feeble understanding cannot and state he can only his impressions his imagination immediately presents image or series of 