Page:Mind (New Series) Volume 9.djvu/550

536 CRITICAL NOTICES: What is Thought ? or The Problem of Philosophy by Way of a General Conclusion so Far. By JAMES HUTCHISON STIRLING, LL.D. Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark, 1900. Pp. ix., 423. THIS latest production of Dr. Stirling contains much that is good, but not the most blinded admirer could describe it as a good book. It is not, indeed, in any rational, coherent sense a book at all, though as a quarry in which to dig it would furnish material for many books. The main object, as described in the title, occupies, possibly, as many as twenty-three pages, the remaining four hun- dred discourse of other things, some of them more or less directly connected with the main thesis, others arising as side issues from some chance phrase, but the majority having as much connexion with the problem under discussion as the gossip of a Frau Pro- fessor in her salon has with the treatise her husband is writing in his study on the other side of the wall. Only that Dr. Stirling's gossip is always interesting. A more fitting title would run somewhat as follows : The Uni- verse is Ego, with a demonstration that this (unknown to the authors) is the doctrine of all German philosophy, with some chit- chat (mainly biographical) about the social bickerings of certain German philosophers, and passing remarks (as they disconnectedly occur) on misunderstood passages in their writings. Of this four- fold subject-matter the first portion occupies, as above said, about twenty-three pages, the " demonstration " about two hundred, the " chit-chat " and " remarks " the remaining half of the book no one portion being in any way marked off from the others but all inextricably intermingled. The last point want of coherence is the most obvious feature to a general reader, and suggests, first of all, to the critic that the style of writing throughout exhibits in extreme form Dr. Stirling's most characteristic features German affectations, obscure allusions, gratuitous irrelevancies, jerks, ex- clamations, aposiopeses, involved parentheses, unintelligible ana- colutha. What, for example, is the plain prosaic meaning of the following ? Asked why Hegel said never Ego. always Begriff? I say this : / m 111'- griff suggests at once the Begriff as of the Begriffe (Categories), and the beginning not that he meant to mislead ; but lie died suddenly of the cholera. [The italics are Dr. Stirling's.] Occasionally, it is true, a dim sense of his lack of logical arrange- ment seems to dawn upon the author. On page 383, for instance, after some remarks upon the varying degrees of difficulty presented by Hegel's writings, he adds : " There is some temptation, indeed, to go farther here, and to sketch out a plan of arranging the works of Hegel in such wise that ability to read them would be best attained. But for that this is not the place." Unfortunately, this feeling of inappropriateness is absent from the greater part of the book. As it is impossible to criticise without at least reading some