The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1914-10-18

process than in the product: What
Kant thought does not mean quite so
much to him as how he thought II:
how he saw and interpreted means more
than what he believed and the form in
which he passed his Interpretation
along. Intellectual aptitudes and atti-
tudes are more meaty than the res ult-
ant doctrines. BY comparing these proc
esses In various great examples he
hopes to get at the nature and govern
ing laws of the human reason, under
standing Of which is a condition prece-
dent to the successful operation of that
reason against the fortified mysteries
of the universe.
In Goethe, Leonardo Bruno. Des-
cartes and Plato Mr.. Chamberlain has
selected out of innumerable possibili-
ties five thinkers who serve not only
in giving the desired individual critical
perspective but In leading up by an
easy, natural, logical progression to the
final establishment OF the Justice Of the
claim to supremacy for Kant in the
agelong siege of the unknown. Such
"A process Is constructive, and better
than the intellectual iconoclasm without
replacement to which some philoso-
piers and most Philosophers incline.
True wisdom Is that which harmonizes
instead Of alternating, which seeks COM
mon ground instead of divergences and
does not lose men in IMAM"
Goethe's inclination to mysticism, TO
monism, contrasts with Rants sturdy
duahsm, giving to mind and matter
each its place In sensible scheme.
Goethe as a scientist philosopher dealt
with experience, observation: Kant was
moro thinker than seer. ia Ninci was
artist and mathematician both, a genius
i'm schematization: he emphasizes the
q ference between mathematical nat
urol science and the artistic intuition
OF nature. Dcscartes and Bruno are
dramatically opposed minds" Mathe-
mates Is tho "husk" OF philosophical
nothol. Describes himself not the
Cartesian School" demonstrates the
imprrtanc" OF the dualstic method OF
observation for all criticism Of the
human intellect; Bruno helps to bring
out the difference between doCmatism
and constructive criticism.
Plato and Kant are alike in practical
purpose, neither is the mere manufac-
turcr Of theories nor the empty dialect.
c!an. But whore Plato loves affirmation
Kant uclnes 90 denial; the Greek is
poetic. tho German brilliant withou;
COZ =. To Plato criticism is a soaring
bird; 20 kant-savc the mark "a po-
licemon. Plato saw the Idea" Of the
thing Kant went after the Ding ar
sidA' In the ancient thinker moral
pressure $ the handspring Of knowledge
eye perception It's method. inward turn
ing round" it's condition. The an
timonv Of the elements 81 reason, the
visihl" and the Invisible, induces the
impression Of plurality. c'mpleNi;v
when attention is concentrate upon tAe
visible; Il unity, simplicity, when tn
Invisible is AT the core of thought
Plato. considering space ana idea tn
minds image of yelled reality, as coa-
nected in and by time. evolved an ex'
planaNon OF N" universal organization
nased upon unity Z constitution, exist
ence and purpose. Rants ultimate
sNnthesis' IS not ~ be got at by p!uns'
ing into the "tritique Of Pure Reason.
most difficult Of his works, but b'
following the sequence Of his own step:
OF development
out Of his study Of the philosophie!
he has selected Mr.. Chamberlain evolves
scheme whereby seers and thinker!
are classified and gagged as to useful
. ness by means OF various combination
Of inward and outward tendencies
Of sight and thought. Thinking in
ward" gives monism. domination OF th'
soul, outward tfour7-t leads 10 pin