Page:Mind (New Series) Volume 9.djvu/556

542 NEW BOOKS. faculties, and thus a mediating principle between the animal and the rational soul, is an interesting attempt to close up the fissures which Zeller and others have found in the Aristotelian account of human reason. The translation leaves much to be desired. It does not read like English : in particular, barbarisms like ' antipode,' ' artifact,' ' inhar- rnony,' ' dieretic ' (does ' fullblooded Athenian ' mean an Athenian alder- man or merely a full Athenian citizen ?) call for protest. It sometimes obscures the sense where clearness is most important, as in the condensed account of the atomic vortex on page 164, of <ppovrj<ns on page 284. The translator adds a bibliography of English books on ancient philosophy, for which we are grateful so far as it goes. But are Mill's Essa/ys and Discussions, Green's Works, sufficient reference under the heads of Plato and Aristotle, and why are Nettleship's Lectures and Remains omitted under the former, and the names of Grant, Stewart and Newman under the latter ? J. H. MUIRHBAD. Evolution. By FRANK B. JEVONS, M.A., D. Litt. [" The Churchman's Library."] London : Methuen & Co., 1900. Pp. 301. Mr. Jevons tractate on Evolution is as spirited and crisp as anything that has come from the pen of that ready writer. To follow him, how- ever, in describing it as an ' essay in philosophy ' (Preface) is no easy matter, if the word ' philosophy ' is to retain its time-honoured associa- tions. Such relative depth and comprehensiveness as are compatible with a merely popular handling of his theme are perhaps to be recog- nised in his work ; and undoubtedly " The Churchman's Library " is the richer by a most handy instrument for certain purposes of defensive criticism. On the other hand the serious student of philosophy is likely to find himself out of patience with the book, if he insist on trying it by his own rigorous standard of Thorough. For one thing, its literary horizon, so to speak, is foggy to a degree. A certain evolutionary philosophy as distinct from evolutionary science is designated by the help of some bold and drastic touches as the object of attack a philosophy that by the very form of its presentation at the hands of Mr. Jevons is convicted of being self-contradictory, in that it is shown to fluctuate between the opposite poles of (? Spencerian) optimism and Huxleian pessimism. Now I do not wish to suggest that the presenta- tion is in any important respect unfair. It were sounder method, how- ever, to have kept the processes of catching and of cooking the hare more rigidly apart. In the next place the attack is conducted on lines that are primarily dialectical (in the Aristotelian sense). The argument consists in a series of ad homiiu'in retorts upon the positivist and agnostic. Mechanism is confronted with Teleology, Determinism with the fact of our consciousness of Freedom, the faith of the man of science in his assumptions with the faith of the religious man in his. But throughout the false elenchus seems to prevail ' On your principles half the universe is left unexplained, argal mine explain it all ' ; unless the inconsistent account given of Free Will, wherein it is represented as at once a combination of conditions and a condition by the side of the rest be taken as providing the cosmic solvent needed. Not that philosophy may not under certain circumstances adopt a purely critical and negative attitude. The attitude of Mr. Jevons, however, as gauged by his literary manner, is positive to a degree. Yet this tone of dogmatic assurance is not in keeping with the sketchiness of his constructive