essays and lectures-第9章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



in　the　process　called　Analysis　or　the　Interpretation　of　Facts；

which　has　been　defined　as　the　application　to　facts　of　such　general

conceptions　as　may　fix　the　important　characteristics　of　the

phenomena；　and　present　them　permanently　in　their　true　relations。

He　too　was　the　first　to　point　out；　what　even　in　our　own　day　is

incompletely　appreciated；　that　nature；　including　the　development　of

man；　is　not　full　of　incoherent　episodes　like　a　bad　tragedy；　that

inconsistency　and　anomaly　are　as　impossible　in　the　moral　as　they

are　in　the　physical　world；　and　that　where　the　superficial　observer

thinks　he　sees　a　revolution　the　philosophical　critic　discerns

merely　the　gradual　and　rational　evolution　of　the　inevitable　results

of　certain　antecedents。



And　while　admitting　the　necessity　of　a　psychological　basis　for　the

philosophy　of　history；　he　added　to　it　the　important　truth　that　man；

to　be　apprehended　in　his　proper　position　in　the　universe　as　well　as

in　his　natural　powers；　must　be　studied　from　below　in　the

hierarchical　progression　of　higher　function　from　the　lower　forms　of

life。　　The　important　maxim；　that　to　obtain　a　clear　conception　of

anything　we　must　'study　it　in　its　growth　from　the　very　beginning；'

is　formally　set　down　in　the　opening　of　the　POLITICS；　where；　indeed；

we　shall　find　the　other　characteristic　features　of　the　modern

Evolutionary　theory；　such　as　the　'Differentiation　of　Function'　and

the　'Survival　of　the　Fittest'　explicitly　set　forth。



What　a　valuable　step　this　was　in　the　improvement　of　the　method　of

historical　criticism　it　is　needless　to　point　out。　　By　it；　one　may

say；　the　true　thread　was　given　to　guide　one's　steps　through　the

bewildering　labyrinth　of　facts。　　For　history　（to　use　terms　with

which　Aristotle　has　made　us　familiar）　may　be　looked　at　from　two

essentially　different　standpoints；　either　as　a　work　of　art　whose

＇Greek　text　which　cannot　be　reproduced＇　or　final　cause　is　external

to　it　and　imposed　on　it　from　without；　or　as　an　organism　containing

the　law　of　its　own　development　in　itself；　and　working　out　its

perfection　merely　by　the　fact　of　being　what　it　is。　　Now；　if　we

adopt　the　former；　which　we　may　style　the　theological　view；　we　shall

be　in　continual　danger　of　tripping　into　the　pitfall　of　some　A

PRIORI　conclusion　…　that　bourne　from　which；　it　has　been　truly　said；

no　traveller　ever　returns。



The　latter　is　the　only　scientific　theory　and　was　apprehended　in　its

fulness　by　Aristotle；　whose　application　of　the　inductive　method　to

history；　and　whose　employment　of　the　evolutionary　theory　of

humanity；　show　that　he　was　conscious　that　the　philosophy　of　history

is　nothing　separate　from　the　facts　of　history　but　is　contained　in

them；　and　that　the　rational　law　of　the　complex　phenomena　of　life；

like　the　ideal　in　the　world　of　thought；　is　to　be　reached　through

the　facts；　not　superimposed　on　them　…　＇Greek　text　which　cannot　be

reproduced＇。



And　finally；　in　estimating　the　enormous　debt　which　the　science　of

historical　criticism　owes　to　Aristotle；　we　must　not　pass　over　his

attitude　towards　those　two　great　difficulties　in　the　formation　of　a

philosophy　of　history　on　which　I　have　touched　above。　　I　mean　the

assertion　of　extra…natural　interference　with　the　normal　development

of　the　world　and　of　the　incalculable　influence　exercised　by　the

power　of　free　will。



Now；　as　regards　the　former；　he　may　be　said　to　have　neglected　it

entirely。　　The　special　acts　of　providence　proceeding　from　God's

immediate　government　of　the　world；　which　Herodotus　saw　as　mighty

landmarks　in　history；　would　have　been　to　him　essentially　disturbing

elements　in　that　universal　reign　of　law；　the　extent　of　whose

limitless　empire　he　of　all　the　great　thinkers　of　antiquity　was　the

first　explicitly　to　recognise。



Standing　aloof　from　the　popular　religion　as　well　as　from　the　deeper

conceptions　of　Herodotus　and　the　Tragic　School；　he　no　longer

thought　of　God　as　of　one　with　fair　limbs　and　treacherous　face

haunting　wood　and　glade；　nor　would　he　see　in　him　a　jealous　judge

continually　interfering　in　the　world's　history　to　bring　the　wicked

to　punishment　and　the　proud　to　a　fall。　　God　to　him　was　the

incarnation　of　the　pure　Intellect；　a　being　whose　activity　was　the

contemplation　of　his　own　perfection；　one　whom　Philosophy　might

imitate　but　whom　prayers　could　never　move；　to　the　sublime

indifference　of　whose　passionless　wisdom　what　were　the　sons　of　men；

their　desires　or　their　sins？　　While；　as　regards　the　other

difficulty　and　the　formation　of　a　philosophy　of　history；　the

conflict　of　free　will　with　general　laws　appears　first　in　Greek

thought　in　the　usual　theological　form　in　which　all　great　ideas　seem

to　be　cradled　at　their　birth。



It　was　such　legends　as　those　of　OEdipus　and　Adrastus；　exemplifying

the　struggles　of　individual　humanity　against　the　overpowering　force

of　circumstances　and　necessity；　which　gave　to　the　early　Greeks

those　same　lessons　which　we　of　modern　days　draw；　in　somewhat　less

artistic　fashion；　from　the　study　of　statistics　and　the　laws　of

physiology。



In　Aristotle；　of　course；　there　is　no　trace　of　supernatural

influence。　　The　Furies；　which　drive　their　victim　into　sin　first　and

then　punishment；　are　no　longer　'viper…tressed　goddesses　with　eyes

and　mouth　aflame；'　but　those　evil　thoughts　which　harbour　within　the

impure　soul。　　In　this；　as　in　all　other　points；　to　arrive　at

Aristotle　is　to　reach　the　pure　atmosphere　of　scientific　and　modern

thought。



But　while　he　rejected　pure　necessitarianism　in　its　crude　form　as

essentially　a　REDUCTIO　AD　ABSURDUM　of　life；　he　was　fully　conscious

of　the　fact　that　the　will　is　not　a　mysterious　and　ultimate　unit　of

force　beyond　which　we　cannot　go　and　whose　special　characteristic　is

inconsistency；　but　a　certain　creative　attitude　of　the　mind　which

is；　from　the　first；　continually　influenced　by　habits；　education　and

circumstance；　so　absolutely　modifiable；　in　a　word；　that　the　good

and　the　bad　man　alike　seem　to　lose　the　power　of　free　will；　for　the

one　is　morally　unable　to　sin；　the　other　physically　incapacitated

for　reformation。



And　of　the　influence　of　climate　and　temperature　in　forming　the

nature　of　man　（a　conception　perhaps　pressed　too　far　in　modern　days

when　the　'race　theory'　is　supposed　to　be　a　sufficient　explanation

of　the　Hindoo；　and　the　latitude　and　longitude　of　a　country　the　best

guide　to　its　morals（6））　Aristotle　is　completely　unaware。　　I　do　not

allude　to　such　smaller　points　as　the　oligarchical　tendencies　of　a

horse…breeding　country　and　the　democratic　influence　of　the

proximity　of　the　sea　（important　though　they　are　for　the

consideration　of　Greek　history）；　but　rather　to　those　wider　views　in

the　seventh　book　of　his　POLITICS；　where　he　attributes　the　happy

union　in　the　Greek　character　of　intellectual　attainments　with　the

spirit　of　progress　to　the　temperate　climate　they　enjoyed；　and

points　out　how　the　extreme　cold　of　the　north　dulls　the　mental

faculties　of　its　inhabitants　and　renders　them　incapable　of　social

organisation　or　extended　empire；　while　to　the　enervating　heat　of

eastern　countries　was　due　that　want　of　spirit　and　bravery　which

then；　as　now；　was　the　characteristic　of　the　population　in　that

quarter　of　the　globe。



Thucydides　has　shown　the　causal　connection　between　political

revolutions　and　the　fertility　of　the　soil；　but　goes　a　step　farther

and　points　out　the　psychological　influences　on　a　people's　character

exercised　by　the　various　extremes　of　climate　…　in　both　cases　the

first　appearance　of　a　most　valuable　form　of　historical　criticism。



To　the　development　of　Dialectic；　as　to　God；　intervals　of　time　are

of　no　account。　　From　Plato　and　Aristotle　we　pass　direct　to

Polybius。



The　progress　of　thought　from　the　philosopher　of　the　Academe　to　the

Arcadian　historian　may　be　best　illustrated　by　a　comparison　of　the

method　by　which　each　of　the　three　writers；　whom　I　have　selected　as

the　highest　expression　of　the　rationalism　of　his　respective　age；

attained　to　his　ideal　state：　　for　the　latter　concep