Page:Mind (New Series) Volume 8.djvu/219

AKBUCKLE AND THE MOLESWORTH-SHAFTESBURY SCHOOL. 205 view, the beauty of a Benevolent action consists partly in the peculiar manner in which it appeals to the imagination ; and partly also in its being an instance of " order, symmetry, and perfection". In fact, in Arbuckle's frequent refer- ences to Benevolence, he merely reproduces Shaftesbury unconsciously, and while Benevolence is not essential to Shaftesbury, 1 it is still less so to Arbuckle, since, if morality be no more than the lovely or " comely life," the exact position of Benevolence is of comparatively little importance. If Arbuckle had continued his philosophical work, one might hazard the guess that Benevolence would have soon lost much of the apparent philosophic importance it pos- sessed for him as a young man of five and twenty ; and, as he concentrated his attention more and more upon the beautiful life, he would have been forced to choose whether to make Beauty " natural " and primary and to have estab- lished Benevolence, as choiceworthy, because beautiful, or, on the contrary, if he had followed out some of the ad- missions he makes, when dealing with practical needs, he might have adopted Hutcheson's position in representing (moral) Beauty as joy-giving, because arising out of Benevo- lence. The portions of his Letters, where Benevolence is introduced, seem to lack cohesion, as if he were repeating what he had learned, but not digested, unconscious of the logical incongruity of thought. 3. Tranquillity. Naturally Arbuckle dissents from the Stoic theory of " apathy," which, he contends, is not tranquil- lity, but the extinction of all desire " a tranquillity which stocks and stones enjoy to the highest perfection ". 2 It is strange that, in this connexion, he is quite silent with regard to the Epicurean tranquillity, which, though it differs from his own use of the term, is, at least, much nearer to it than the stoic aTrddeta, possibly, remembering the popular audience he supposed himself to address, he was deterred by the reproach attached to the term " Epicurean," even so late as the early portion of the last century. Since the Beauty of objects, human beings and their lives presupposes external objects, Arbuckle strongly condemns the self-sufficingness of the Stoic " wise man," and, after again analysing the temporary nature of " short and unruly gusts of passion " 3 which end in satiety and disgust, and showing the unsatisfying character of certain typical in- 1 Martineau, Types of Ethical Theory, ii., p. 509. - Ilibernicus's Letters, ut supra, i., p. 216. 3 Ibid., p. 221.