New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-07-11

ress But now the desire for unity Is beginning
TO show renewed power. The appearance OF the
term "mon!sm' in the works OF men specially ue-
voted to the study OF nature is evidence OF THIS
renewal. The tendency is shown in rash syn
theses especially in the passage from theories OF
biological transformism TO the assertion or the
doctrine Of evolution a complete explanation
If the universe The renascence OF the philo-
sophie spirit says the author in another place IS
often manifested to-day under the form OF mate
rialisn a reaction from the crude standard set up
by the Positivists. The example Of these ieads
NJ Naville 10 the point that the opponents OF
philosophical research are sure to create uncon-
sciously a system Of their own. The very effort
to interpret ones own experience for others ne
cessitates harmony between the individual
thought and the common thought. To seek THIS
harmony is the first step toward speculation The
individual reason in itself can make no progress
Its laws are always the same. 1t Is the "raison
humane" the recognition OF the fundamental
data of the laws Of intelligence. that advances.
As men come 10 understand each other more
clearly, philosophical systems must give place to
philosophy Itself. but the union hoped for Is far
in the future AS one important preliminary NJ.
Naville emphasizes the need of universal Ian
guage a need which, he says, becomes every day
urgent
The test to which Professor Ormonds doctrine
of being is most likely to be put from the
outset is the solution which 1t offers for the
problem Of evil lie condemns Schopenhauer;
yet evil for him. IS for the great pessimist lies in
the very nature of things. In Dr. Deussens
work which is a systematic attempt to elucidate
the teachings of Schopenhauer by means OF ex
haustive Oriental learning. the will to live Is
Itself the sin of sins Evil is egoism, 1t IS The
nd 1lr 1laliC
will admit only that evil in the individual varies
az the assertion Of the will to life varies in We
hemence The intensity of this affirmation" he
adds. admits Of an infinite number Of degrees
which together form a graduated scale Of moral
worth or worthlessness from the freezing point
OF absolute egoism to the boiling point at which
our ego evaporates IN self-denying love OF
others" For him the turning away OF the Will
from life Is the ultimate goal or humanity
for life is wicked Illusion, and good Is, to use
Professor Ormonds word. only negative. For
such idealism Professor Ormond has no syInpa-
thy. But he no longer has Leibnitz's fancy or the
best possible world TO fall back upon. The world
as II is in all its processes Of becoming. IS the
only world that the Creator could make. IL IL
clear in his opinion that If the Deity had the OPP
ton of making the world perfect or imperfect lie
could not escape moral responsibility. But lie
did have the option under the HYPOTHESIS P'"-
posed by Professor Ormond OF resting In His own
completeness or OF making world. mutabe ana
relative and hence imperfect. with the coniin-
gency-certainty would be the better word since
perfection was impossble-that evil would arse
1t is mere speculation to say that this imperfect
world is better than the pure neSation out oil
which II has arisen. But even II that were true'
1t would only prove one OF two thinGs-eltheT
that evil was an eternal potency In an everlast-
ing negation likely to manifest Itself in the hrst
universe that came TO hand. or that It was Gre
ated by Him who called the universe into being.
In the one case. We have the very dualism when
Professor Ormond aims % destroy. and in the
other divine responsibility for evil. Surely the
"unsolvable riddle of tie ages is stu as far
from solution as ever. But Professor Ormonds
book Is one to awaken deep interest in the prob
lens Of PHILOSOPHY II shows that they are ms
real and as worthy Of attention as the more
obvious questions Of natural science.