The Scottish Philosophy [179]
his age, to diffuse throughout Scotland a taste for elegant literature, and enlarged and liberal opinions in politics.
As to England, Sir J. Mackintosh, writing to Stewart in 1802, speaks of the want of any thing which he could call purely philosophical thinking; and Horner, in 1804, declares, that the highest names in the estimation of those in the metropolis, who felt any interest in speculative pursuits, were Hobbes and Hartley. Such works as the " Moral Philosophy " of Paley, were fitted to lower still farther, rather than elevate, this taste. It was altogether, then, for the benefit of English thought, that Stewart did become gradually known in South Britain, where his elegant style, his crowning good sense, and the moderation of his opinions, recommended him to many who had imbibed as great an aversion to Scotch metaphysics as ever George III. had. There are still Englishmen who abhor the infidelity of Hume, and who despise the plainness of Reid, who suspect the rhetoric of Brown, and are frightened by the bristling nomenclature and logical distinctions of Hamilton, but who are attracted by the writings of Stewart, which are felt to be as pleasing and as regular as their own rich fields bounded by hedge- rows. In England he has so far been of use in creating a philosophical spirit, where none existed before, and in checking the utilitarianism of Paley. lie is also entitled to a share of the credit of the great measures of reform, which such pupils as Horner, Brougham, Lord John Russell, Palmerston, Jeffrey, and Lansdowne carried in Parliament. Perhaps these eminent men have never estimated the amount of wholesome impulse which they received in early life from the prelections and lofty character of the Edinburgh professor. {302}
In France the influence of Reid and Stewart has been considerable, and has been of the most beneficial character. In that country, Locke's philosophy, unfortunately introduced by Voltaire and accepted in its worst side, had wrought only mischief, partly by its drawing away the attention of thinkers from the more spiritual philosophy of Descartes, and partly by its tempting a set of speculators to derive all men's ideas from sensation, and to deny the existence of all ideas which could not be derived from this source, -- such as the idea of moral good, of infinity, and of God. This wretched philosophy -- if philosophy it can be called -- was one of the fatal powers which operated to give an evil issue to the Revolution, and prevented good from coming out of it. After sensationalism-which used, but only to abuse, the name of Locke -- had reigned for more than half a century, there appeared a reaction led on by M. Royer Collard, who began in 1811 to lecture at the Normal School. It is a most interesting circumstance, that, in conducting this war against the debasing systems which prevailed, he betook himself to the philosophy of Reid and Stewart. Exercising a considerable influence in himself, Royer Collard has had a more extended sway through his pupils, especially Victor Cousin and Theodore Jouffroy. In the course of years, the works of Reid were' translated into French, with an admirable historical and critical introduction, by Jouffroy. So early as 1808, the first volume of Stewart's " Elements " was translated into French by M. Prevost of Geneva; and, at a later date, M. Peisse, has translated the other two volumes of the same work. Stewart's " Outlines " were translated into the same tongue by Jouffroy, who has prefixed a preface of great judgment and acuteness. It thus appears, that the great reaction in favor of sound philosophy, commenced by Royer Collard and conducted by Cousin and Jouffroy, has made large and profitable use of the Scottish school, and rejoices to acknowledge its obligations to Scotland. No doubt, it has also called in aid from other quarters. Cousin has been indebted to the school of Kant, as well as to the school of Reid, and has derived some of his favorite principles immediately from the great metaphysician of his own country, Descartes; and he has
As to England, Sir J. Mackintosh, writing to Stewart in 1802, speaks of the want of any thing which he could call purely philosophical thinking; and Horner, in 1804, declares, that the highest names in the estimation of those in the metropolis, who felt any interest in speculative pursuits, were Hobbes and Hartley. Such works as the " Moral Philosophy " of Paley, were fitted to lower still farther, rather than elevate, this taste. It was altogether, then, for the benefit of English thought, that Stewart did become gradually known in South Britain, where his elegant style, his crowning good sense, and the moderation of his opinions, recommended him to many who had imbibed as great an aversion to Scotch metaphysics as ever George III. had. There are still Englishmen who abhor the infidelity of Hume, and who despise the plainness of Reid, who suspect the rhetoric of Brown, and are frightened by the bristling nomenclature and logical distinctions of Hamilton, but who are attracted by the writings of Stewart, which are felt to be as pleasing and as regular as their own rich fields bounded by hedge- rows. In England he has so far been of use in creating a philosophical spirit, where none existed before, and in checking the utilitarianism of Paley. lie is also entitled to a share of the credit of the great measures of reform, which such pupils as Horner, Brougham, Lord John Russell, Palmerston, Jeffrey, and Lansdowne carried in Parliament. Perhaps these eminent men have never estimated the amount of wholesome impulse which they received in early life from the prelections and lofty character of the Edinburgh professor. {302}
In France the influence of Reid and Stewart has been considerable, and has been of the most beneficial character. In that country, Locke's philosophy, unfortunately introduced by Voltaire and accepted in its worst side, had wrought only mischief, partly by its drawing away the attention of thinkers from the more spiritual philosophy of Descartes, and partly by its tempting a set of speculators to derive all men's ideas from sensation, and to deny the existence of all ideas which could not be derived from this source, -- such as the idea of moral good, of infinity, and of God. This wretched philosophy -- if philosophy it can be called -- was one of the fatal powers which operated to give an evil issue to the Revolution, and prevented good from coming out of it. After sensationalism-which used, but only to abuse, the name of Locke -- had reigned for more than half a century, there appeared a reaction led on by M. Royer Collard, who began in 1811 to lecture at the Normal School. It is a most interesting circumstance, that, in conducting this war against the debasing systems which prevailed, he betook himself to the philosophy of Reid and Stewart. Exercising a considerable influence in himself, Royer Collard has had a more extended sway through his pupils, especially Victor Cousin and Theodore Jouffroy. In the course of years, the works of Reid were' translated into French, with an admirable historical and critical introduction, by Jouffroy. So early as 1808, the first volume of Stewart's " Elements " was translated into French by M. Prevost of Geneva; and, at a later date, M. Peisse, has translated the other two volumes of the same work. Stewart's " Outlines " were translated into the same tongue by Jouffroy, who has prefixed a preface of great judgment and acuteness. It thus appears, that the great reaction in favor of sound philosophy, commenced by Royer Collard and conducted by Cousin and Jouffroy, has made large and profitable use of the Scottish school, and rejoices to acknowledge its obligations to Scotland. No doubt, it has also called in aid from other quarters. Cousin has been indebted to the school of Kant, as well as to the school of Reid, and has derived some of his favorite principles immediately from the great metaphysician of his own country, Descartes; and he has