Part 1

THE MONIST

A QUARTERLY MAGAZINE

VOL. III.

CHICAGO: THE OPEN COURT PUBLISHING CO. 1892-1893

COPYRIGHT, 1893, BY THE OPEN COURT PUBLISHING CO.

CONTENTS OF VOLUME III.

PAGE

ARTICLES.

Auta, The Doctrine of. By C. Lloyd Morgan 161

Cruelty and Pity in Woman. By Guillaume Ferrero 220

Doctrine of Auta, The. By C. Lloyd Morgan 161

Education, Nationalisation of, and the Universities. By H. von Holst 493

Evolutionary Love. By Charles S. Peirce 176

Foundations of Theism, The. By E. D. Cope 623

Founder of Tychism, The: His Methods, Philosophy, and Criticisms. Editor 571

Fourth Dimension, The By Hermann Schubert 402

Hindu Monism. By Richard Garbe 51

Insects, The Nervous Ganglia of. By Alfred Binet 35

Intuition and Reason. By Christine Ladd Franklin 211

Issues of “Synechism,” The. By G. M. McCrie 380

Love, Evolutionary. By Charles S. Peirce 176

Man’s Glassy Essence. By Charles S. Peirce 1

Meaning and Metaphor. By Lady Victoria Welby 510

Mental Mummies. By Felix L. Oswald 30

Modern Science, Religion and. By F. Jodl 329

Monism, Hindu. By Richard Garbe 51

Nationalisation of Education and the Universities. By H. von Holst 493

Necessitarians, Reply to the. By Charles S. Peirce 526

Necessity, The Idea of: Its Basis and Its Scope. Editor 68

Necessity, The Superstition of. By John Dewey 362

Panbiotism, Panpsychism and. Editor 234

Panpsychism and Panbiotism. Editor 234

Reason, Intuition and. By Christine Ladd Franklin 211

Religion and Modern Science. By F. Jodl 329

Religion of Science, The. Editor 352

Renan: A Discourse Given at South Place Chapel, London. By Moncure D. Conway 201

Reply to the Necessitarians. By Charles S. Peirce 526

Science, The Religion of. Editor 352

Superstition of Necessity, The. By John Dewey 362

“Synechism,” The Issues of. By G. M. McCrie 380

Theism, The Foundations of. By E. D. Cope 623

Thought in America, The Future of. By E. D. Cope 23

Tychism, The Founder of: His Methods, Philosophy, and Criticisms. Editor 571

Universities, Nationalisation of Education and the. By H. von Holst 493

Woman, Cruelty and Pity in. By Guillaume Ferrero 220

LITERARY CORRESPONDENCE.

France. By Lucien Arréat 111, 258

France, The Religious Outlook in. By Theodore Stanton 450

Germany. By Christian Ufer 264, 640

New French Books. By Lucien Arréat 456

Recent Evolutionary Studies in Germany. By Carus Sterne 97

CRITICISMS AND DISCUSSIONS.

A Letter from Mr. Herbert Spencer 272

Comte and Turgot. By Louis Belrose, Jr. 118

Is Monism Arbitrary? Editor 124

James’s Psychology, Observations on Some Points of. By W. L. Worcester 285

Logic as Relation Lore. By F. C. Russell 272

Mathematics a Description of Operations with Pure Forms. Editor 133

Reply to a Critic, A. By Edward T. Dixon 127

Sensation, Prof. Ernst Mach’s Term 298

Some Remarks Upon Professor James’s Discussion of Attention. By Hiram M. Stanley 122

BOOK REVIEWS.

_Acht Abhandlungen, Herrn Professor Dr. Karl Ludwig Michelet zum 90. Geburtstag_ 478

Arréat, Lucien. _Psychologie du Peintre_ 142

Baets, l’Abbé Maurice de. _L’école d’anthropologie criminelle_ 649

Becker, George F. _Finite Homogeneous Strain, Flow, and Rupture of Rocks_ 480

Berendt, M. and J. Friedländer. _Der Pessimismus im Lichte einer höheren Weltauffassung_ 477

Binet, Alfred. _Les Altérations de la Personnalité_ 145

Blackwell, Antoinette Brown. _The Philosophy of Individuality, or the One and the Many_ 649

Cattell, James McKeen, and George Stuart Fullerton. _On the Perception of Small Differences_ 141

Delbœuf, J. _L’Hypnotisme devant les Chambres Legislatives Belges_ 318

Dessoir, Max. _Ueber den Hautsinn_ 319

Dixon, Edward T. _An Essay on Reasoning_ 138

Dreher, Eugen. _Der Materialismus, eine Verirrung des menschlichen Geistes, widerlegt durch eine zeitgemässe Weltanschauung_ 479

Edinger, L. _Vergleichend-entwickelungsgeschichtliche und anatomische Studien im Bereiche der Hirnanatomie. 3. Riechapparat und Ammonshorn_ 648

Engel, Gustav. _Die Philosophie und die sociale Frage_ 478

Eucken, Rudolf. _Die Grundbegriffe der Gegenwart_ 650

Friedländer, J. and M. Berendt. _Der Pessimismus im Lichte einer höheren Weltauffassung_ 477

Fullerton, George Stuart, and James McKeen Cattel. _On the Perception of Small Differences_ 141

George, Henry. _A Perplexed Philosopher_ 482

Gutberlet, Constantin. _Die Willensfreiheit und ihre Gegner_ 646

Hiller, H. Croft. _Against Dogma and Free-Will_ 649

Hirth, Georges. _Physiologie de L’Art_ 143

Holtzmann, Heinrich Julius. _Hand-Commentar zum neuen Testament. IV. Evangelium, Briefe und Offenbarung des Johannes_ 643

Holtzmann, Heinrich Julius. _Lehrbuch der historisch-kritischen Einleitung in das neue Testament_ 150

Janet, Pierre. _État mental des hystériques les stigmates mentaux_ 648

Joël, Karl. _Der echte und der Xenophontische Sokrates_ 480

Jones, E. E. Constance. _An Introduction to General Logic_ 314

Lindemann, Ferdinand. _Vorlesungen über Geometrie_ 314

Lotze, Hermann. _Outlines of a Philosophy of Religion_ 140

Lubbock, John. _The Beauties of Nature_ 323

Meynert, Theodore. _Sammlung von populär-wissenschaftlichen Vorträgen über den Bau und die Leistungen des Gehirns_ 151

Mik, J. _Graber’s Leitfaden der Zoologie für die oberen Classen der Mittelschulen_ 322

Münsterberg, Hugo. _Beiträge zur experimentellen Psychologie_ 304

Oelzelt-Newin, Anton. _Ueber sittliche Dispositionen_ 323

Offner, Max. _Ueber die Grundformen der Vorstellungsverbindung_ 479

Paszkowski, Wilhelm. _Wie steht es jetzt mit der Philosophie, und was haben wir von ihr zu hoffen?_ 478

Paulsen, Friedrich. _Einleitung in die Philosophie_ 466

Rolfes, Eugen. _Die Aristotelische Auffassung vom Verhältnisse Gottes zur Welt und zum Menschen_ 311

Royce, Josiah. _The Spirit of Modern Philosophy_ 306

Royer, Clémence. _Recherches d’optique physiologique et physique_ 320

Salter, William M. _First Steps in Philosophy_ 470

Schellwien, Robert. _Max Stirner und Friedrich Nietzsche_ 311

Schmidt, Johannes. _Die Urheimath der Indogermanen und das europäische Zahlsystem_ 149

Schmidkunz, Hans. _Der Hypnotismus in gemeinfasslicher Darstellung_ 317

Sharp, Frank Chapman. _The Æsthetic Element in Morality_ 650

Sidgwick, Alfred. _Distinction and the Criticism of Beliefs_ 312

Spencer, Herbert. _Social Statics and Justice_ 136

Sterne, Carus. _Natur und Kunst_ 323

Topinard, Paul. _L’Homme dans la Nature_ 146

Topinard, Paul. _L’Anthropologie du Bengale_ 322

Tufts, James Hayden. _The Sources of Development of Kant’s Teleology_ 312

Verworn, Max. _Die Bewegung der lebendigen Substanz_ 321

Williams, C. M. _A Review of the Systems of Ethics Founded on the Theory of Evolution_ 474

Wundt, Wilhelm. _Vorlesungen über die Menschen- und Thierseele_ 300

Wundt, Wilhelm. _Hypnotismus und Suggestion_ 315

Wundt, Wilhelm. _Grundzüge der physiologischen Psychologie_ 648

PERIODICALS 153-160; 325-328; 488-492; 651-658.

APPENDIX.

Plates belonging to the article “The Nervous Ganglia of Insects.” (In No. 1 of this volume.)

VOL. III. OCTOBER, 1892. NO. 1.

THE MONIST.

MAN’S GLASSY ESSENCE.

In _The Monist_ for January, 1891, I tried to show what conceptions ought to form the brick and mortar of a philosophical system. Chief among these was that of absolute chance for which I argued again in last April’s number.[1] In July, I applied another fundamental idea, that of continuity, to the law of mind. Next in order, I have to elucidate, from the point of view chosen, the relation between the psychical and physical aspects of a substance.

The first step towards this ought, I think, to be the framing of a molecular theory of protoplasm. But before doing that, it seems indispensable to glance at the constitution of matter, in general. We shall, thus, unavoidably make a long detour; but, after all, our pains will not be wasted, for the problems of the papers that are to follow in the series will call for the consideration of the same question.

All physicists are rightly agreed the evidence is overwhelming which shows all sensible matter is composed of molecules in swift motion and exerting enormous mutual attractions, and perhaps repulsions, too. Even Sir William Thomson, Lord Kelvin, who wishes to explode action at a distance and return to the doctrine of a plenum, not only speaks of molecules, but undertakes to assign definite magnitudes to them. The brilliant Judge Stallo, a man who did not always rightly estimate his own qualities in accepting tasks for himself, declared war upon the atomic theory in a book well worth careful perusal. To the old arguments in favor of atoms which he found in Fechner’s monograph, he was able to make replies of considerable force, though they were not sufficient to destroy those arguments. But against modern proofs he made no headway at all. These set out from the mechanical theory of heat. Rumford’s experiments showed that heat is not a substance. Joule demonstrated that it was a form of energy. The heating of gases under constant volume, and other facts instanced by Rankine, proved that it could not be an energy of strain. This drove physicists to the conclusion that it was a mode of motion. Then it was remembered that John Bernoulli had shown that the pressure of gases could be accounted for by assuming their molecules to be moving uniformly in rectilinear paths. The same hypothesis was now seen to account for Avogadro’s law, that in equal volumes of different kinds of gases exposed to the same pressure and temperature are contained equal numbers of molecules. Shortly after, it was found to account for the laws of diffusion and viscosity of gases, and for the numerical relation between these properties. Finally, Crookes’s radiometer furnished the last link in the strongest chain of evidence which supports any physical hypothesis.

Such being the constitution of gases, liquids must clearly be bodies in which the molecules wander in curvilinear paths, while in solids they move in orbits or quasi-orbits. (See my definition _solid_ II, 1, in the “Century Dictionary.”)

We see that the resistance to compression and to interpenetration between sensible bodies is, by one of the prime propositions of the molecular theory, due in large measure to the kinetical energy of the particles, which must be supposed to be quite remote from one another, on the average, even in solids. This resistance is no doubt influenced by finite attractions and repulsions between the molecules. All the impenetrability of bodies which we can observe is, therefore, a limited impenetrability due to kinetic and positional energy. This being the case, we have no logical right to suppose that absolute impenetrability, or the exclusive occupancy of space, belongs to molecules or to atoms. It is an unwarranted hypothesis, not a _vera causa_.[2] Unless we are to give up the theory of energy, finite positional attractions and repulsions between molecules must be admitted. Absolute impenetrability would amount to an infinite repulsion at a certain distance. No analogy of known phenomena exists to excuse such a wanton violation of the principle of continuity as such a hypothesis is. In short, we are logically bound to adopt the Boscovichian idea that an atom is simply a distribution of component potential energy throughout space, (this distribution being absolutely rigid,) combined with inertia. The potential energy belongs to two molecules, and is to be conceived as different between molecules _A_ and _B_ from what it is between molecules _A_ and _C_. The distribution of energy is not necessarily spherical. Nay, a molecule may conceivably have more than one centre; it may even have a central curve, returning into itself. But I do not think there are any observed facts pointing to such multiple or linear centres. On the other hand, many facts relating to crystals, especially those observed by Voigt,[3] go to show that the distribution of energy is harmonical but not concentric. We can easily calculate the forces which such atoms must exert upon one another by considering[4] that they are equivalent to aggregations of pairs of electrically positive and negative points infinitely near to one another. About such an atom there would be regions of positive and of negative potential, and the number and distribution of such regions would determine the valency of the atom, a number which it is easy to see would in many cases be somewhat indeterminate. I must not dwell further upon this hypothesis, at present. In another paper, its consequences will be further considered.

I cannot assume that the students of philosophy who read this magazine are thoroughly versed in modern molecular physics, and therefore it is proper to mention that the governing principle in this branch of science is Clausius’s law of the virial. I will first state the law, and then explain the peculiar terms of the statement. This statement is that the total kinetic energy of the particles of a system in stationary motion is equal to the total virial. By a _system_ is here meant a number of particles acting upon one another.[5] Stationary motion is a quasi-orbital motion among a system of particles so that none of them are removed to indefinitely great distances nor acquire indefinitely great velocities. The kinetic energy of a particle is the work which would be required to bring it to rest, independently of any forces which may be acting upon it. The virial of a pair of particles is half the work which the force which actually operates between them would do if, being independent of the distance, it were to bring them together. The equation of the virial is

(Transcriber’s Note: Italics have been removed from the formulæ for readability.)

½Σmv² = ½ΣΣRr.

Here _m_ is the mass of a particle, _v_ its velocity, _R_ is the attraction between two particles, and _r_ is the distance between them. The sign Σ on the left hand side signifies that the values of _mv_² are to be summed for all the particles, and ΣΣ on the right hand side signifies that the values of _Rr_ are to be summed for all the pairs of particles. If there is an external pressure _P_ (as from the atmosphere) upon the system, and the volume of vacant space within the boundary of that pressure is _V_, then the virial must be understood as including ³⁄₂_PV_, so that the equation is

½Σmv² = ³⁄₂PV + ½ΣΣRr.

There is strong (if not demonstrative) reason for thinking that the temperature of any body above the absolute zero (-273° C.), is proportional to the average kinetic energy of its molecules, or say _aθ_, where _a_ is a constant and _θ_ is the absolute temperature. Hence, we may write the equation

aθ = ½m̅v̅²̅ = ³⁄₂PV̅ + ½ΣR̅r̅

where the heavy lines above the different expressions signify that the average values for single molecules are to be taken. In 1872, a student in the University of Leyden, Van der Waals, propounded in his thesis for the doctorate a specialisation of the equation of the virial which has since attracted great attention. Namely, he writes it

aθ = (P + (c⁄V²))(V-b).

The quantity _b_ is the volume of a molecule, which he supposes to be an impenetrable body, and all the virtue of the equation lies in this term which makes the equation a cubic in _V_, which is required to account for the shape of certain isothermal curves.[6] But if the idea of an impenetrable atom is illogical, that of an impenetrable molecule is almost absurd. For the kinetical theory of matter teaches us that a molecule is like a solar system or star-cluster in miniature. Unless we suppose that in all heating of gases and vapors internal work is performed upon the molecules, implying that their atoms are at considerable distances, the whole kinetical theory of gases falls to the ground. As for the term added to _P_, there is no more than a partial and roughly approximative justification for it. Namely, let us imagine two spheres described round a particle as their centre, the radius of the larger being so great as to include all the particles whose action upon the centre is sensible, while the radius of the smaller is so large that a good many molecules are included within it. The possibility of describing such a sphere as the outer one implies that the attraction of the particles varies at some distances inversely as some higher power of the distance than the cube, or, to speak more clearly, that the attraction multiplied by the cube of the distance diminishes as the distance increases; for the number of particles at a given distance from any one particle is proportionate to the square of that distance and each of these gives a term of the virial which is the product of the attraction into the distance. Consequently unless the attraction multiplied by the cube of the distance diminished so rapidly with the distance as soon to become insensible, no such outer sphere as is supposed could be described. However, ordinary experience shows that such a sphere is possible; and consequently there must be distances at which the attraction does thus rapidly diminish as the distance increases. The two spheres, then, being so drawn, consider the virial of the central particle due to the particles between them. Let the density of the substance be increased, say, _N_ times. Then, for every term, _Rr_, of the virial before the condensation, there will be _N_ terms of the same magnitude after the condensation. Hence, the virial of each particle will be proportional to the density, and the equation of the virial becomes

aθ = PV̅ + c⁄V̅.

This omits the virial within the inner sphere, the radius of which is so taken that within that distance the number of particles is not proportional to the number in a large sphere. For Van der Waals this radius is the diameter of his hard molecules, which assumption gives his equation. But it is plain that the attraction between the molecules must to a certain extent modify their distribution, unless some peculiar conditions are fulfilled. The equation of Van der Waals can be approximately true therefore only for a gas. In a solid or liquid condition, in which the removal of a small amount of pressure has little effect on the volume, and where consequently the virial must be much greater than _PV̅_, the virial must increase with the volume. For suppose we had a substance in a critical condition in which an increase of the volume would diminish the virial more than it would increase ³⁄₂_PV̅_. If we were forcibly to diminish the volume of such a substance, when the temperature became equalised, the pressure which it could withstand would be less than before, and it would be still further condensed, and this would go on indefinitely until a condition were reached in which an increase of volume would increase ³⁄₂_PV̅_ more than it would decrease the virial. In the case of solids, at least, _P_ may be zero; so that the state reached would be one in which the virial increases with the volume, or the attraction between the particles does not increase so fast with a diminution of their distance as it would if the attraction were inversely as the distance.

Almost contemporaneously with Van der Waals’s paper, another remarkable thesis for the doctorate was presented at Paris by Amagat. It related to the elasticity and expansion of gases, and to this subject the superb experimenter, its author, has devoted his whole subsequent life. Especially interesting are his observations of the volumes of ethylene and of carbonic acid at temperatures from 20° to 100° and at pressures ranging from an ounce to 5000 pounds to the square inch. As soon as Amagat had obtained these results, he remarked that the “coefficient of expansion at constant volume,” as it is absurdly called, that is, the rate of variation of the pressure with the temperature, was very nearly constant for each volume. This accords with the equation of the virial, which gives

dp⁄dθ = a⁄V̅ - dΣR̅r̅⁄dθ.