Page:History of Modern Philosophy (Falckenberg).djvu/558

53*5 HERBARTIAN SCHOOL. Drobisch, from whom we have valuable discussions oi Logic (1836, 5th ed., 1887) ^^^^ Empirical Psychology (1842), and an interesting essay on Moral Statistics and the Frcedoju of the Will (1867), L. Strumpell (born 1812; TJic Principal Poi?its in Hcrbart's Metaphysics Critically Examined, 1840), is a professor in Leipsic. The organ of the school, the ZeitscJirift fur exakte Philosophic, now edited by Fliigel (the first volume, i860, contained a survey of the literature of the school), was at first issued by T, Ziller, the pedagogical thinker, and Allihn. The ZeitscJirift fur Volkerpsychologie und SpracJiwissenschaft, from 1859, edited by M. Lazarus (born 1824; The Life of the Soul, 3 vols., 1856 i-^^., 3d ed., 1883 seq^ and H. Steinthal (born 1823; The Origin of Language, 4th ed., 1888; Sketch of the Science of Language, parti. 2d ed., 1881 ; General Ethics, 1885) of Berlin, also belongs to the Herbartian movement. Distinguished service has been done in psychology by Nahlowsky {The Life of Feeling, 1862, 2d. ed., 1884), Theodor Waitz in Marburg (1821-84; Foundation of Psychology, 1846; Text-book of Psychology, 1849), ^"^ Volk- mann in Prague (1822-77; Text-book of Psychology, i^. ^d^., by Cornelius, 1884 and 1885); while Friedrich Exner (died 1853) was formerly much spoken of as an opponent of the Hegelian psychology (1843-44). Robert Zimmermann in Vienna (born 1824) represents an extreme formalistic ten- dency in aesthetics {History of ^Esthetics, 1858 ; General Esthetics as Science of Form, 1865 ; further, a series of thorough essays on subjects in the history of philosophy). Among historians of philosophy Thilo has given a rather one-sided representation of the Herbartian standpoint. The school's philosophers of religion have been mentioned above (p. 532). Beneke, whom we have joined with Fries on account of his anthropological standpoint, stands about midway between Herbart and Schopenhauer. He shares in the former's interest in psychology, in the latter's foundation of metaphysical knowledge on inner experience, and in the dislike felt by both for Hegel ; while, on the other hand, he differs from Herbart in his empirical method, and from Schopenhauer in the priority ascribed to representation over effort.