New-York tribune., 1882-04-18
NEW PUBLICATIONS.

NrTAPHYsICs: A STUDY OF FIRST PknS0,rh'iS PklnS'Ih, o.
by BORDEN p BOVINE Pro1ss1SSp aSSr 0' Of studies in
Thesm." New-York: Harper Bro'nerS' io0-
Tho annrebension which has been felt during the
last three or four decades Of years that the
tration of thought upon physical science woud ciNo
philosophy from the field, is proving grounoeSS'
Th;s very study of nature il is evident, carries MS
hack rresisibly to metaphy sica problems Not only
is there large admixture of philosophical ascump-
,,on and speculation in the writings of the cory
phai of natural sciences themselves. but IN the
.vstem of Spencer we have an elaborate attempt 10
proyde the modern interpreters of nature win
metaphysica creed. Sagacious observers nave
opined moreover. that the materiallstic "a'o
would he met by q counter from tue opPo
direction, and that the reaction woulu '"A0 W.
form of a more spiritual philosophy Inc ieno
interest in Berkeley, especially since Ir'iessui
Fraser's critical biography, an interest III "h'o"
the more speculative physicists nave sn'io'' 10 w
srm,tom of n philosophical revival OF the nature
described Professor Bowne's volume is a s,e"'n
cant sign of the same character. The authot ear
Gost work the Criticism of Spencer showed MIN
20 no q keen critic quick to detect the weak places
Z, nm adversary's armor and unsparlng IN the expo
snre of Them His later work. the "S'udeS III
Thesm" the fruit of more mature rehec'ioh' anu
written in more digni6ed tone, is vaiuaOie coh-
tributon to the metaphysics of theology. IN INC
volume before us we find still greater advance III
both the matter aud manner of the discnssioh' ino
style is lucid and animated. Few books OF the kihu
are so readable. The author Is not OH inc ""'O"
AGAINST dulness. Duness is so repelent 10 MS
notrre that he has little occasion to guard against
It, The sense OF humor which may occasionanS
dictate utterances not consonant with the sobriety
that od-iashioned readers look for III grave tre"
tise on so elevated subject. and which may III TACT
in passaqes transgress the Of good TASTE is
not without its use as q shield against heavlhess
and prolixity. the bescttng sins of metaphysical
writers II is surely venal fault If the eNupe-
rant vicor which pervades the book now ana 'neh
runs into a startling raciness; ana wri'el "no
evinces so remarkable powers OF reasoning may W
indulre If not approved. when here and there he
winds up compact argument with JEST
Professor Bovine avows himself olsciP'e VI
lotze, whose pupil he was ana 10 whom no "'u'-
cafes his book In fact, the division oi the con'e''
into three parts Ontology. Cosmology ana Isy
cholocy is precisely that of Lotzes" Metaphysics
Professor Bovine, however, Is far from oelhs nlo'o
borrower Whatever he may have iearheu mas
been thoroughly assimated. and it Is reproduced
with all the order and freshness OF a hvinS cohVlc-
ton. There is character in the style. There Is an
independence in the tone,-a positiveness even
which is nj times slightly Obtrusive. The author
handles his themes as one who feels at home Inc
treatise il NAV he said at the outset Is thoroughy
theistic 1t is obvious that the current materallsm
and agnosticism are never left out OF slght even "
the portions of the book where tier enets are o'
expressly combated. We know OF no WORK Oh Tue
same compass where the pOstulates ana arguments
ne s.iont,6c materialism are subjected to a more
searching and destructive criticism. Professor
Bowne's general theory can only be stated mere IN
its outlines Pure being is only an abstraction "
is nothing real The things which make up inc
world cannot be conceived OF as possessed either OF
substance or quality, i'll the ordinary sense OF 'he
terms. Matter and force, the dual elements o1
-, according to modern science. are both lrre-
ducible and incompatible if adopt the notion
oenerallv entertained of matter. We can have no
idea of what is meant by inert core or lump OF
matter destitute of force, nor of folce as hDeg i'll
it, The so-caled primary qualities OF mauler Ho'
ike .he secondary, relative to the pcrcipleht sun
iect Perception is of phenomena. lmpenetrapill'y
stands on the same footing, iii this regard as coor
and taste We knou through reason exercising lls
own function on the basis OF perceptioh' ou'
through its inherent laws which correspond 10 the
nature of things. We experience only the actNlties
exerted upon us by outward things. These aft
upon us aud interact among themselves. We know
things only as centres of activity. Activity takes
the place of attribute. These activities do not re-
main the same: they are subject to change In
ontward things there is hing identical aud perma
nent We are driven by rigid analysis to conceive
of things not only as mutually condltloned' put us
dependent in common on umtary word-grOuhu'
the conditioning source Of their being we are tnus
brought back necessarily TO the Infinite; and the
Infinite is an agent IN whom is The origin OIL the
flowing activities which constitute the objects OF
perception The infinite agent Is personal ana lree'
Unity in the Infinite is incompatible with necessity.
20 tbo "a N
dences OF mind in the world are as clear and un-
deniab,e AS the evidences of mind in our fellow
mon To whom we attribute intelligence and pur-
nose If things have in themselves no substitution
of being no substantially distinct from the Infinite
Author in whom they subsls the same Is not true VI
our own minds These known TO us as substantial
entities and not mere activities OF the INFINITE
One from whom they derive their existence
Every theory of consciousness which calls IN ques-
rion the unity and substantially OF the nte SPIRIT
whether that theory emanate from PantheiSm or
EmpricsIn from SpinOza or IRON Hume, Is Doth
self-contradictory and in conflict with irrefuta6e
evidence Every such theory must land in scep-
&icism and thus perish by suicide Activity is from
within As among things force Is not, strictly
speaking propagated transmitted this IS not
the meaning of conseI vation-but is simply evoked
on the condition of nscruabie lnteracton, solt is
with the operation of mind. Even in sensation,
more evidently in perception, still more plainly IN
reasoning and the higher exercises of intelligence,
the mind is the active producer of its own states.
We know the world outside of us because the world
is natural, and we can re-think the thoughts of
God which are presented to us as IN writing.
Frnpricsm is the direct antipode of The truth.
But if things, according to Professor BOVINE are
not substantial, what is space Space, we are
told as commonly conceived, has no objective
reality. Yet the author does not adopt Kani's
view that space is exclusively form or frame