The Scottish Philosophy [141]
remembered than such as are related in one respect only. Hence, by most people verse is more easily remembered than prose, because the words are related in measure as well as in sense; and rhyme, than blank verse, because the words are related not only in sense and measure, but also by similar sounds at the end of the lines." Some will think that the students who listened to such prelections ranging over all the faculties, {236} and touching on a great variety of topics, esthetical and moral, might be as much benefited as those who had to listen to the more scholastic discussions of the German universities. He says that " laughter is occasioned by an incongruity or unsuitableness of the parts that compose, or seem to compose, any complex idea or object."
The philosophical work by which Beattie was best known in his own day, and by which be is still known by students, is his " Essay on the Nature and Immutability of Truth, in Opposition to Sophistry and Scepticism." He quotes approvingly Reid's " Inquiry," and Campbell's " Philosophy of Rhetoric." In an edition published in 1776 he replies to some who had blamed him for borrowing some hints without acknowledgment from Dr. Price, Dr. Oswald, and Buffier. " I beg to say that I am to this hour totally unacquainted with that work of Dr. Price which is alluded to, and that when I published the first edition of the `Essay on Truth' I was totally unacquainted with the writings of Buffier and Dr. Oswald. I had heard, indeed, that the French philosopher used the term I common sense' in a way similar to that in which I use it; but this was only hearsay, and I have since found that, though between his fundamental opinions and mine there is a striking resemblance, his application of that term is not entirely the same." All I have to remark on this statement is, that if he had not read those well-known works on the subject of which he was treating he ought to have done so.
The work is pleasantly and pointedly written, and it had an immediate and wide circulation. It wants the depth and shrewdness of Reid's "Inquiry," but on that account was better relished by many readers, such as George III. The book is, throughout, a popular, rather than a scientific one. His somewhat appeals gained the ear of those who had never been troubled with doubts, but rather turned away those who wished to find the great sceptic met by an opponent worthy of him.
His object is, first, to trace the several kinds of evidence up to their first principles; second, to show that his sentiments are in accordance with true philosophy and the principles of the most eminent philosophers; and, third, to answer sceptical objections. He says it is difficult, perhaps impossible, to give a {237} definition of truth; but endeavors to give such a description of it as may make others understand what we mean by the word. He then tells us that he accounts " that to be truth which the constitution of human nature determines a man to believe, and that to be falsehood which the constitution of human nature determines man to disbelieve." This makes the ultimate appeal to lie to man's constitution; and does not meet those who say that man's constitution may be an accretion of fortuitous agencies gathered in the course of ages, and may lead us into partial or total falsehood. According to this definition, there might be events without a cause in the constellation Orion, or at a " reasonable distance beyond," provided the constitution of the inhabitants there had been determined by a different experience. He then distinguishes between truth perceived intuitively and truth perceived in consequence of a proof, and enters upon a discussion as to the most appropriate terms to employ to designate these two kinds of truth. " We might call the one `reason,' and the other reasoning; , but the similarity of the terms would frequently occasion both obscurity and harshness in the sound." Henceforward he seems to use the words " reason " and "reasoning" as synonymous, and uses "reason" in the sense of "reasoning."
The philosophical work by which Beattie was best known in his own day, and by which be is still known by students, is his " Essay on the Nature and Immutability of Truth, in Opposition to Sophistry and Scepticism." He quotes approvingly Reid's " Inquiry," and Campbell's " Philosophy of Rhetoric." In an edition published in 1776 he replies to some who had blamed him for borrowing some hints without acknowledgment from Dr. Price, Dr. Oswald, and Buffier. " I beg to say that I am to this hour totally unacquainted with that work of Dr. Price which is alluded to, and that when I published the first edition of the `Essay on Truth' I was totally unacquainted with the writings of Buffier and Dr. Oswald. I had heard, indeed, that the French philosopher used the term I common sense' in a way similar to that in which I use it; but this was only hearsay, and I have since found that, though between his fundamental opinions and mine there is a striking resemblance, his application of that term is not entirely the same." All I have to remark on this statement is, that if he had not read those well-known works on the subject of which he was treating he ought to have done so.
The work is pleasantly and pointedly written, and it had an immediate and wide circulation. It wants the depth and shrewdness of Reid's "Inquiry," but on that account was better relished by many readers, such as George III. The book is, throughout, a popular, rather than a scientific one. His somewhat
His object is, first, to trace the several kinds of evidence up to their first principles; second, to show that his sentiments are in accordance with true philosophy and the principles of the most eminent philosophers; and, third, to answer sceptical objections. He says it is difficult, perhaps impossible, to give a {237} definition of truth; but endeavors to give such a description of it as may make others understand what we mean by the word. He then tells us that he accounts " that to be truth which the constitution of human nature determines a man to believe, and that to be falsehood which the constitution of human nature determines man to disbelieve." This makes the ultimate appeal to lie to man's constitution; and does not meet those who say that man's constitution may be an accretion of fortuitous agencies gathered in the course of ages, and may lead us into partial or total falsehood. According to this definition, there might be events without a cause in the constellation Orion, or at a " reasonable distance beyond," provided the constitution of the inhabitants there had been determined by a different experience. He then distinguishes between truth perceived intuitively and truth perceived in consequence of a proof, and enters upon a discussion as to the most appropriate terms to employ to designate these two kinds of truth. " We might call the one `reason,' and the other reasoning; , but the similarity of the terms would frequently occasion both obscurity and harshness in the sound." Henceforward he seems to use the words " reason " and "reasoning" as synonymous, and uses "reason" in the sense of "reasoning."