ditor,--had he been a clearer and closer thinker, Sir William
Hamilton's vigorous logic and speculative acuteness, would probably have
found a narrower field for their display. On the whole, we cannot wish
that Reid had been either more erudite or more perspicacious, so pointed
and felicitous is the style in which his errors are corrected, his
thoughts reduced to greater precision, his ambiguities pointed out and
cleared up, and his whole system set in its most advantageous light, by
his admiring, though by no means idolatrous editor.
Besides being a model of editorship, this single volume is, in so far as
philosophy and the history of philosophical opinion are concerned, of
itself a literature. We must add, however, that Sir William Hamilton's
dissertations, though abundant, are not yet completed. Yet, in spite of
this drawback, the work is one which ought to wipe away effectually from
our country the reproach of imperfect learning and shallow speculation;
for in depth of thought, and extent and accuracy of knowledge, the
editor's own contributions are of themselves sufficient to bring up our
national philosophy (which had fallen somewhat into arrear) to a level
with that of the most scientific countries in Europe.
In the remarks that are to follow, we shall confine ourselves to a
critique of the philosophy of Dr Reid, and of its collateral topics. Sir
William Hamilton's dissertations are too elaborate and important to be
discussed, unless in an article, or series of articles, devoted
exclusively to themselves. Should we appear in aught to press the
philosophy of common sense too hard, we conceive that our strictures
are, to a considerable extent, borne out by the admissions of Sir
William Hamilton himself, in regard to the tenets of the founder of the
school. And should some of our shafts glance off against the editor's
own opinions, he has only himself to blame for it. If we see a fatal
flaw in the constitution of all, and consequently of his, psychology, it
was his writings that first opened our eyes to it. So lucidly has he
explained certain philosophical doctrines, that they cannot stop at the
point to which he has carried them. They must be rolled forward into a
new development which perhaps may be at variance with the old one, where
he tarries. But his powerful arm first set the stone in motion, and he
must be content to let it travel whithersoever it may. He has taught
those who study him _to think_--and he m
|