B.C.753, Foundation of Rome.B.C.510, Expulsion of the Tarquins.B.C.27, Octavius assumes title Augustus.A.D.476, End of Western Empire.A.D.962, Holy Roman Empire.A.D.1453, Fall of Constantinople.
B.C.753, Foundation of Rome.B.C.510, Expulsion of the Tarquins.B.C.27, Octavius assumes title Augustus.A.D.476, End of Western Empire.A.D.962, Holy Roman Empire.A.D.1453, Fall of Constantinople.
B.C.753, Foundation of Rome.B.C.510, Expulsion of the Tarquins.B.C.27, Octavius assumes title Augustus.A.D.476, End of Western Empire.A.D.962, Holy Roman Empire.A.D.1453, Fall of Constantinople.
B.C.753, Foundation of Rome.
B.C.510, Expulsion of the Tarquins.
B.C.27, Octavius assumes title Augustus.
A.D.476, End of Western Empire.
A.D.962, Holy Roman Empire.
A.D.1453, Fall of Constantinople.
The last event was one of the most significant in history, especially for Italy. The intervals are 243, 483, 502, 486, 491 years. All are rather curiously near equal, except the first which is half the others. Successive reigns of kings would not commonly be so near equal. Let us set down a few dates in the history of thought.
B.C.585, Eclipse of Thales. Beginning of Greek philosophy.A.D.30, The crucifixion.A.D.529, Closing of Athenian schools. End of Greek philosophy.A.D.1125, (Approximate) Rise of the Universities of Bologna and Paris.A.D.1543, Publication of the “De Revolutionibus” of Copernicus. Beginning of Modern Science.
B.C.585, Eclipse of Thales. Beginning of Greek philosophy.A.D.30, The crucifixion.A.D.529, Closing of Athenian schools. End of Greek philosophy.A.D.1125, (Approximate) Rise of the Universities of Bologna and Paris.A.D.1543, Publication of the “De Revolutionibus” of Copernicus. Beginning of Modern Science.
B.C.585, Eclipse of Thales. Beginning of Greek philosophy.A.D.30, The crucifixion.A.D.529, Closing of Athenian schools. End of Greek philosophy.A.D.1125, (Approximate) Rise of the Universities of Bologna and Paris.A.D.1543, Publication of the “De Revolutionibus” of Copernicus. Beginning of Modern Science.
B.C.585, Eclipse of Thales. Beginning of Greek philosophy.
A.D.30, The crucifixion.
A.D.529, Closing of Athenian schools. End of Greek philosophy.
A.D.1125, (Approximate) Rise of the Universities of Bologna and Paris.
A.D.1543, Publication of the “De Revolutionibus” of Copernicus. Beginning of Modern Science.
The intervals are 615, 499, 596, 418, years. In the history of metaphysics, we may take the following:
B.C.322, Death of Aristotle.A.D.1274, Death of Aquinas.A.D.1804, Death of Kant.
B.C.322, Death of Aristotle.A.D.1274, Death of Aquinas.A.D.1804, Death of Kant.
B.C.322, Death of Aristotle.A.D.1274, Death of Aquinas.A.D.1804, Death of Kant.
B.C.322, Death of Aristotle.
A.D.1274, Death of Aquinas.
A.D.1804, Death of Kant.
The intervals are 1595 and 530 years. The former is about thrice the latter.
From these figures, no conclusion can fairly be drawn. At the same time, they suggest that perhaps there may be a rough natural era of about 500 years. Should there be any independent evidence of this, the intervals noticed may gain some significance.
The agapastic development of thought should, if it exists, be distinguished by its purposive character, this purpose being the development of an idea. We should have a direct agapic or sympathetic comprehension and recognition of it, by virtue of the continuity of thought. I here take it for granted that such continuity of thought has been sufficiently proved by the arguments used in my paper on the “Law of Mind” inThe Monistof last July. Even if those arguments are not quite convincing in themselves, yet if theyare reënforced by an apparent agapasm in the history of thought, the two propositions will lend one another mutual aid. The reader will, I trust, be too well grounded in logic to mistake such mutual support for a vicious circle in reasoning. If it could be shown directly that there is such an entity as the “spirit of an age” or of a people, and that mere individual intelligence will not account for all the phenomena, this would be proof enough at once of agapasticism and of synechism. I must acknowledge that I am unable to produce a cogent demonstration of this; but I am, I believe, able to adduce such arguments as will serve to confirm those which have been drawn from other facts. I believe that all the greatest achievements of mind have been beyond the powers of unaided individuals; and I find, apart from the support this opinion receives from synechistic considerations, and from the purposive character of many great movements, direct reason for so thinking in the sublimity of the ideas and in their occurring simultaneously and independently to a number of individuals of no extraordinary general powers. The pointed Gothic architecture in several of its developments appears to me to be of such a character. All attempts to imitate it by modern architects of the greatest learning and genius appear flat and tame, and are felt by their authors to be so. Yet at the time the style was living, there was quite an abundance of men capable of producing works of this kind of gigantic sublimity and power. In more than one case, extant documents show that the cathedral chapters, in the selection of architects, treated high artistic genius as a secondary consideration, as if there were no lack of persons able to supplythat; and the results justify their confidence. Were individuals in general, then, in those ages possessed of such lofty natures and high intellect? Such an opinion would break down under the first examination.
How many times have men now in middle life seen great discoveries made independently and almost simultaneously! The first instance I remember was the prediction of a planet exterior to Uranus by Leverrier and Adams. One hardly knows to whom the principle of the conservation of energy ought to be attributed, although it may reasonably be considered as the greatest discovery science has ever made. The mechanical theory of heat was set forth by Rankine and by Clausius during the same month of February, 1850; and there are eminent men who attribute this great step to Thomson.[76]The kinetical theory of gases, after being started by John Bernoulli and long buried in oblivion, was reinvented and applied to the explanation not merely of the laws of Boyle, Charles, and Avogadro, but also of diffusion and viscosity, by at least three modern physicists separately. It is well known that the doctrine of natural selection was presented by Wallace and by Darwin at the same meeting of the British Association; and Darwin in his “Historical Sketch” prefixed to the later editions of his book shows that both were anticipated by obscure forerunners. The method of spectrum analysis was claimed for Swan as well as for Kirchhoff, and there were others who perhaps had still better claims. The authorship of the Periodical Law of the Chemical Elements is disputed between a Russian,a German, and an Englishman; although there is no room for doubt that the principal merit belongs to the first. These are nearly all the greatest discoveries of our times. It is the same with the inventions. It may not be surprising that the telegraph should have been independently made by several inventors, because it was an easy corollary from scientific facts well made out before. But it was not so with the telephone and other inventions. Ether, the first anæsthetic, was introduced independently by three different New England physicians. Now ether had been a common article for a century. It had been in one of the pharmacopœias three centuries before. It is quite incredible that its anæsthetic property should not have been known; it was known. It had probably passed from mouth to ear as a secret from the days of Basil Valentine; but for long it had been a secret of the Punchinello kind. In New England, for many years, boys had used it for amusement. Why then had it not been put to its serious use? No reason can be given, except that the motive to do so was not strong enough. The motives to doing so could only have been desire for gain and philanthropy. About 1846, the date of the introduction, philanthropy was undoubtedly in an unusually active condition. That sensibility, or sentimentalism, which had been introduced in the previous century, had undergone a ripening process, in consequence of which, though now less intense than it had previously been, it was more likely to influence unreflecting people than it had ever been. All three of the ether-claimants had probably been influenced by the desire for gain; but nevertheless they were certainly not insensible to the agapic influences.
I doubt if any of the great discoveries ought, properly, to be considered as altogether individual achievements; and I think many will share this doubt. Yet, if not, what an argument for the continuity of mind, and for agapasticism is here! I do not wish to be very strenuous. If thinkers will only be persuaded to lay aside their prejudices and apply themselves to studying the evidences of this doctrine, I shall be fully content to await the final decision.