Recent Spiritualist Philosophy in France [pp. 679-697]

\IN FRANCE.
which the author has given to his thoughts. The chief peculiarity of M. Foutille's talent is copiousness. Ideas spring to
existence under his pen with amazing fertility, nevertheless
this richness is not without its dangers. To develop is not alwvays to eclaircise. We have already given examples of the
tendency to drown all ideas, one in the other, which is the
stumbling block in the way of this brilliant talent. He has something of that obscurity which characterises the Qaietist writers,
wAhich arises from an excess of imagination, united to an excess
of analysis. It is to be greatly desired that an intellect so
noble, giving so great hope to solid and sound learning, may be
led to exercise self-denial in the midst of so great riches, to put
severe restrictions on his thoughts, and to renounce the attempt
to say too much-to say all.
Obscurity, subtility and refinement are the faults of the new
school; it redleems them by the power, the depth and the richness of its thought. We owe it thanks for having restored to
Philosophy a lhighly scientific character, and for not recoiling
before difficulties. It should not be too shy of simple ideas, nor
yield up received ideas too readily. Profundity is a good thing;
yet there may be such a degree of it that one no longer knows
what he is saying. One may contend in regard to the orthodoxy
of this or that formula, but we cannot question the moral and
religious elevation of the three philosophers whose ideas we
have been expounding. As philosophers they are to blame for
giving too much to synthesis, for putting the whole into everything. There are two problems in philosophy: to analyze and to
combine. The other spiritualism analyzed too much, and
ne,glected the intermediate links; the new spiritualism coinmbiDes too much, and suffers differences and oppositions to
escape it. It is the business of the critic always to contradict
and to require of you exactly the opposite of what you are doigt,. Analy-ze, I ask you to combine-combine, and I require
you to analyze. If it were not so, it would be because philosophy had uttered its last word. Alas! we have not yet
reached that.
i1874.1
697