What do you think?
Rate this book
روح الفلسفة الحديثة
This scarce antiquarian book is a facsimile reprint of the original. Due to its age, it may contain imperfections such as marks, notations, marginalia and flawed pages. Because we believe this work is culturally important, we have made it available as part of our commitment for protecting, preserving, and promoting the world's literature in affordable, high quality, modern editions that are true to the original work.
- GenresPhilosophy
532 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1892
8 people are currently reading
130 people want to read
About the author
Josiah Royce
439 books39 followersLife
Royce, born in Grass Valley, California on November 20, 1855. He was the son of Josiah and Sarah Eleanor (Bayliss) Royce, whose families were recent English emigrants, and who sought their fortune in the westward movement of the American pioneers in 1849. He received the B.A. from the University of California, Berkeley (which moved from Oakland to Berkeley during his matriculation) in 1875 where he later accepted an instructorship teaching English composition, literature, and rhetoric. After some time in Germany, where he studied with Hermann Lotze, the new Johns Hopkins University awarded him in 1878 one of its first four doctorates, in philosophy. At Johns Hopkins he taught a course on the history of German thought, which was “one of his chief interests” because he was able to give consideration to the philosophy of history.[1] After four years at the University of California, Berkeley, he went to Harvard in 1882 as a sabbatical replacement for William James, who was at once Royce's friend and philosophical antagonist. Royce's position at Harvard was made permanent in 1884 and he remained there until his death, September 14, 1916.
Historiography
Royce stands out starkly in the philosophical crowd because he was the only major American philosopher who spent a significant period of his life studying and writing history, specifically of the American West. “As one of the four giants in American philosophy of his time […] Royce overshadowed himself as historian, in both reputation and output” (Pomeroy, 2). During his first three years at Harvard, Royce taught many different subjects such as English composition, forensics, psychology and philosophy for other professors. Although he eventually settled into writing philosophy, his early adulthood was characterized by wide-ranging interests, during which he wrote a novel, investigated paranormal phenomena (as a skeptic), and published a significant body of literary criticism. Only as historian and philosopher did he distinguish himself. Royce spread himself too thin, however, and in 1888 suffered a nervous breakdown which required him to take a leave of absence from his duties.
Royce, born in Grass Valley, California on November 20, 1855. He was the son of Josiah and Sarah Eleanor (Bayliss) Royce, whose families were recent English emigrants, and who sought their fortune in the westward movement of the American pioneers in 1849. He received the B.A. from the University of California, Berkeley (which moved from Oakland to Berkeley during his matriculation) in 1875 where he later accepted an instructorship teaching English composition, literature, and rhetoric. After some time in Germany, where he studied with Hermann Lotze, the new Johns Hopkins University awarded him in 1878 one of its first four doctorates, in philosophy. At Johns Hopkins he taught a course on the history of German thought, which was “one of his chief interests” because he was able to give consideration to the philosophy of history.[1] After four years at the University of California, Berkeley, he went to Harvard in 1882 as a sabbatical replacement for William James, who was at once Royce's friend and philosophical antagonist. Royce's position at Harvard was made permanent in 1884 and he remained there until his death, September 14, 1916.
Historiography
Royce stands out starkly in the philosophical crowd because he was the only major American philosopher who spent a significant period of his life studying and writing history, specifically of the American West. “As one of the four giants in American philosophy of his time […] Royce overshadowed himself as historian, in both reputation and output” (Pomeroy, 2). During his first three years at Harvard, Royce taught many different subjects such as English composition, forensics, psychology and philosophy for other professors. Although he eventually settled into writing philosophy, his early adulthood was characterized by wide-ranging interests, during which he wrote a novel, investigated paranormal phenomena (as a skeptic), and published a significant body of literary criticism. Only as historian and philosopher did he distinguish himself. Royce spread himself too thin, however, and in 1888 suffered a nervous breakdown which required him to take a leave of absence from his duties.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
July 29, 2022
Royce's Spirit Of Modern Philosophy
Josiah Royce (1855 -- 1916) was a California-born American philosopher who taught at Harvard as a friend and colleague of William James. He is an idealist philosopher which helps to explain the neglect his writings have suffered until recently. I have been reading Royce for some years and recently returned to read his 1892 book, "The Spirit of Modern Philosophy: An Essay in the Form of Lectures" because I will be speaking about the book at an upcoming conference. I wanted to write a brief review here based on the rereading. I have written an earlier review posted under a different edition of the book.
"The Spirit of Modern Philosophy" (Spirit) was Royce's second book of philosophy, following his book,"The Religious Aspect of Philosophy" (1885) by seven years. Royce had delivered a well-received series of lectures to non-specialists on the nature of philosophy and its history and expanded his lectures into the Spirit. Royce did several important things in the book. Most importantly, he stressed that philosophy was not a mere dry academic subject for specialist but was instead a reflective discipline which individuals of all backgrounds could use to deepen their understanding of their lives and of what they found important. Next, Royce stressed the importance of thinking about philosophy historically -- understanding what the great philosophers have thought and said -- to reflection of philosophical matters. Finally, Royce developed the outline of his own idealistic philosophy.
The book is substantially expanded from its origins in lectures. The work remains accessible to lay readers even though it is often surprisingly detailed. The book is written in a hortatory late-Victorian style with many literary, historical, and musical allusions. It is inspiring and a pleasure to read though long-winded in places. Royce was never one to be stingy in his use of words.
The book consists of an important Preface followed by thirteen essays in two broad parts. In the Preface and first lecture, Royce explains his conception of philosophy, a matter to which he returns repeatedly in the remainder of the book. Part I of the book, "Studies of Thinkers and Problems" offers an overview of the history of modern philosophy beginning, surprisingly enough, with Spinoza rather than Descartes. Royce's exposition is unusual in the focus he gives to biographical information in addition to the explanation of philosophical teachings. The focus on the book is on Kant and on his German absolute idealist successors, including Hegel, Schopenhauer, Fichte, and Schelling. Royce is heavily influenced by all these thinkers as well as by Spinoza. The historical section of the book concludes with a discussion of the theory of evolution and with the need Royce saw to synthesize evolution and science with the spiritual life.
In Part II of the book, "Suggestions of Doctrine" Royce develops his own philosophical position. He argues that the position of naïve realism
is internally inconsistent and develops instead, based on a purportedly logical argument, a philosophy of absolute idealism, centering on the existence of what Royce calls at various places the all-inclusive Absolute, the Deep Self, or the Logos. But the most interesting part of the discussion is distinction Royce develops between appreciation and description. He argues that the descriptive world of scientific necessity and of everyday life is based on a broader appreciative world of feeling and subjectivity. He finds the descriptive/scientific outlook is part of a broader appreciative outlook based on logos and feeling. Scientific teachings do not conflict with spirituality because these teachings form a particular part of the spiritual life. In the final section of his book, Royce discusses how an idealistic philosophy can bring meaning and purpose to life, and he considers and assesses different approaches to the problem of evil that need to be addressed by all idealistic or theological philosophies.
Most readers will remain unconvinced by Royce's Absolute and by some of the longer wanderings in the book. There still is much to be learned from the Spirit, and I have found that the work bears repeated readings. Royce's broad conception of philosophy and the manner in which he explains the personal and historical bases of different philosophies remains insightful, as do his historical studies. The distinction between appreciative and descriptive approaches to reality also seems to me mirrored, in approach if not in name, to much current writing. It offers promise of a holistic, unifying view of life independent from the form of Absolute Idealism in which Royce himself propounded it.
Royce's philosophy may have moved in a different direction in the early 20th Century in the years following the Spirit. This book is still rewarding and worth knowing by lovers of philosophy.
Robin Friedman
Josiah Royce (1855 -- 1916) was a California-born American philosopher who taught at Harvard as a friend and colleague of William James. He is an idealist philosopher which helps to explain the neglect his writings have suffered until recently. I have been reading Royce for some years and recently returned to read his 1892 book, "The Spirit of Modern Philosophy: An Essay in the Form of Lectures" because I will be speaking about the book at an upcoming conference. I wanted to write a brief review here based on the rereading. I have written an earlier review posted under a different edition of the book.
"The Spirit of Modern Philosophy" (Spirit) was Royce's second book of philosophy, following his book,"The Religious Aspect of Philosophy" (1885) by seven years. Royce had delivered a well-received series of lectures to non-specialists on the nature of philosophy and its history and expanded his lectures into the Spirit. Royce did several important things in the book. Most importantly, he stressed that philosophy was not a mere dry academic subject for specialist but was instead a reflective discipline which individuals of all backgrounds could use to deepen their understanding of their lives and of what they found important. Next, Royce stressed the importance of thinking about philosophy historically -- understanding what the great philosophers have thought and said -- to reflection of philosophical matters. Finally, Royce developed the outline of his own idealistic philosophy.
The book is substantially expanded from its origins in lectures. The work remains accessible to lay readers even though it is often surprisingly detailed. The book is written in a hortatory late-Victorian style with many literary, historical, and musical allusions. It is inspiring and a pleasure to read though long-winded in places. Royce was never one to be stingy in his use of words.
The book consists of an important Preface followed by thirteen essays in two broad parts. In the Preface and first lecture, Royce explains his conception of philosophy, a matter to which he returns repeatedly in the remainder of the book. Part I of the book, "Studies of Thinkers and Problems" offers an overview of the history of modern philosophy beginning, surprisingly enough, with Spinoza rather than Descartes. Royce's exposition is unusual in the focus he gives to biographical information in addition to the explanation of philosophical teachings. The focus on the book is on Kant and on his German absolute idealist successors, including Hegel, Schopenhauer, Fichte, and Schelling. Royce is heavily influenced by all these thinkers as well as by Spinoza. The historical section of the book concludes with a discussion of the theory of evolution and with the need Royce saw to synthesize evolution and science with the spiritual life.
In Part II of the book, "Suggestions of Doctrine" Royce develops his own philosophical position. He argues that the position of naïve realism
is internally inconsistent and develops instead, based on a purportedly logical argument, a philosophy of absolute idealism, centering on the existence of what Royce calls at various places the all-inclusive Absolute, the Deep Self, or the Logos. But the most interesting part of the discussion is distinction Royce develops between appreciation and description. He argues that the descriptive world of scientific necessity and of everyday life is based on a broader appreciative world of feeling and subjectivity. He finds the descriptive/scientific outlook is part of a broader appreciative outlook based on logos and feeling. Scientific teachings do not conflict with spirituality because these teachings form a particular part of the spiritual life. In the final section of his book, Royce discusses how an idealistic philosophy can bring meaning and purpose to life, and he considers and assesses different approaches to the problem of evil that need to be addressed by all idealistic or theological philosophies.
Most readers will remain unconvinced by Royce's Absolute and by some of the longer wanderings in the book. There still is much to be learned from the Spirit, and I have found that the work bears repeated readings. Royce's broad conception of philosophy and the manner in which he explains the personal and historical bases of different philosophies remains insightful, as do his historical studies. The distinction between appreciative and descriptive approaches to reality also seems to me mirrored, in approach if not in name, to much current writing. It offers promise of a holistic, unifying view of life independent from the form of Absolute Idealism in which Royce himself propounded it.
Royce's philosophy may have moved in a different direction in the early 20th Century in the years following the Spirit. This book is still rewarding and worth knowing by lovers of philosophy.
Robin Friedman
August 31, 2020
Josiah Royce And The Spirit Of Philosophy
Josiah Royce (1855 -- 1916)is a philosopher from the "golden age" of American philosophy, which also includes William James, Charles Peirce, and John Dewey. These four thinkers mutually influenced one another. Royce has been the least-known of the four due to the idealistic character of much of his work. I have been reading and learning from Royce for several years. In anticipation of the upcoming 100th anniversary of Royce's death, I decided to read this early book of Royce's, "The Spirit of Modern Philosophy: An Essay in the Form of Lectures", published in 1892. I also wanted to read this book for Royce's consideration of Spinoza, a philosopher he discusses at some length in the volume.
The book originated as a series of lectures Royce gave over several years in different places to non-specialist audiences. Royce aimed to describe in a non-technical way the nature and origins of different important strands of philosophical thinking. The book is written for the mythical "general reader" in Royce's day and our own. It is a delight to read, in a late 19th century style, with many telling anecdotes of the author and of the philosophers he discusses, and extensive and effective use of literary and musical allusions. The book still is daunting to read and an important work in its own right. "Modern" philosophy, for Royce in 1892 was the philosophy between Kant and Schopenhauer, extending to the theory of evolution and its philosophical treatment which was then only beginning. Thus, the book does not treat the rise of "modern" analytic philosophy in the works of, say Russell and Moore including, specifically, their critiques of idealism. Royce would gain some familiarity with these works late in his life. This early book also does not reflect the influence the different pragmatisms of Royce's friends, James and Peirce, would soon exert on Royce.
The book is both an admittedly selective history of modern philosophy and a development of a philosophical position. Royce at the outset states his commitment to the position of philosophical idealism; and he presents his history and his own philosophical views from that perspective. He writes:
"What I am really pleading for, as you will see in the sequel, is a form of philosophic reflection that leads to a very definite and positive theory of the universe itself, the theory, namely, which I have just suggested, a theory not at all mystical in its methods, nor yet, in its results, really opposed to the postulates of science, or to the deeper meaning at the heart of common sense. This theory is that the whole universe, including the physical world, also, is essentially one live thing, a mind, one great Spirit, infinitely wealthier in his experiences than we are, but for that very reason to be comprehended by us only in terms of our own wealthiest experience."
The book is in two large parts. In the first part, "Studies of Thinkers and Problems", Royce examines the history of modern philosophy. In the second part, "Suggestions of Doctrine", Royce uses what he takes to be the best lessons of the philosophical history to develop his own position. Royce tries to be a synthesizer. His goal is to show the harmony between science and the theory of evolution on the one hand and a spiritual, religious view of life on the other hand. Royce was certainly not the last philosopher to be worried about this relationship and to attempt a harmonization.
There are many wonderful insights in this book. For me, the most penetrating discussions occur in Royce's "General Introduction" and in his opening chapter on Spinoza. In the introduction, Royce offers his views on the nature and importance of philosophical, critical and reflective thinking. He stresses at the outset the importance of temperament. He stresses that no single philosophical system will win the adherence of all persons and that systems change with time although some basic contours remain constant. Royce thus is aware of the value of difference and seeming conflict in different philosophies, including both idealism and naturalism. He is fully aware as well of the importance of passion and the search for meaning in philosophy and in life -- this in contrast to many critics of Royce from his own day forward. The opening introduction is worth pondering and re-reading as one works through the rest of the book.
I was intrigued that Royce begins his historical study with Spinoza rather than with Descartes, as is almost universally done. Royce states that the emphasis of the cogito in Descartes obscures the naturalistic character of the first period of modern philosophy, including Descartes himself. Royce finds this naturalistic strand, with it combined religious form best expressed in the philosophy of Spinoza. In his short treatment, Royce offers an insightful portrait of Spinoza and a non-technical description of his thought which considers both its scientific and its mystical aspects. Royce tends to be more interested in religion. He sees Spinoza as attempting his own form of union with God or nature rather than as seeing religion as a source of divine commands or challenges. Royce also points out how in his doctrine of "substance", Spinoza saw reality under two aspects, body and mind. As I read through the book, I thought Spinoza's own double aspect theory had many similarities, and perhaps some advantages over, the "double-aspect" theory of philosophical idealism that Royce himself develops in the second part of his work.
Royce proceeds to consider the British empiricists, followed by a lengthy discussion of Kant and his German idealistic successors, Fichte, Hegel, and Schopenhauer. Royce's expositions of these difficult thinkers are clear and informative and they are enhanced by his brief biographical observations. The period between Kant and Hegel was not much studied in American philosophy departments when I was in college. The exposition of these thinkers, Hegel in particular, taught me a great deal. The discussion of Hegel still could be read as an introduction to his aims and his thinking.
In the second part of the book, Royce, deeply influenced by Kant, argues for a form of philosophical idealism that avoids the romantic excesses of Kant's successors. As mentioned above, he argues for a form of objective idealism in which every person and thing is part of an all-inclusive world soul or logos. He draws a distinction between what he calls the world of description and the world of appreciation -- the former the world of science, the latter the world of spirits each part of the world-spirit. This discussion will not be persuasive to most contemporary readers. As Royce suggests in the introduction to the book, it is more important to understand what Royce was trying to do and why than to agree with the specific idealistic formulation of the book. It offers many insights. The book brought me back to Spinoza's formulation of issues and the way it agrees with and differs from Royce. Other readers will find other possible approaches to the questions. In the final chapter of the book, Royce addresses the religious problem of evil in the context of his idealism. This is a question Royce would explore several times during his career.
Royce and this book are not often studied today but there has been some recent resurgence of interest in the great American idealist thinker. The book is worth reading for its history, for its issues, and as an introduction to Royce. Although Royce wrote the book for a non-specialist audience, the book today will appeal more to readers with a strong background and interest in philosophy who are willing to explore a now somewhat obscure and undervalued American thinker. I was fortunate to read this book in a hardback edition published in 1955.
Robin Friedman
Josiah Royce (1855 -- 1916)is a philosopher from the "golden age" of American philosophy, which also includes William James, Charles Peirce, and John Dewey. These four thinkers mutually influenced one another. Royce has been the least-known of the four due to the idealistic character of much of his work. I have been reading and learning from Royce for several years. In anticipation of the upcoming 100th anniversary of Royce's death, I decided to read this early book of Royce's, "The Spirit of Modern Philosophy: An Essay in the Form of Lectures", published in 1892. I also wanted to read this book for Royce's consideration of Spinoza, a philosopher he discusses at some length in the volume.
The book originated as a series of lectures Royce gave over several years in different places to non-specialist audiences. Royce aimed to describe in a non-technical way the nature and origins of different important strands of philosophical thinking. The book is written for the mythical "general reader" in Royce's day and our own. It is a delight to read, in a late 19th century style, with many telling anecdotes of the author and of the philosophers he discusses, and extensive and effective use of literary and musical allusions. The book still is daunting to read and an important work in its own right. "Modern" philosophy, for Royce in 1892 was the philosophy between Kant and Schopenhauer, extending to the theory of evolution and its philosophical treatment which was then only beginning. Thus, the book does not treat the rise of "modern" analytic philosophy in the works of, say Russell and Moore including, specifically, their critiques of idealism. Royce would gain some familiarity with these works late in his life. This early book also does not reflect the influence the different pragmatisms of Royce's friends, James and Peirce, would soon exert on Royce.
The book is both an admittedly selective history of modern philosophy and a development of a philosophical position. Royce at the outset states his commitment to the position of philosophical idealism; and he presents his history and his own philosophical views from that perspective. He writes:
"What I am really pleading for, as you will see in the sequel, is a form of philosophic reflection that leads to a very definite and positive theory of the universe itself, the theory, namely, which I have just suggested, a theory not at all mystical in its methods, nor yet, in its results, really opposed to the postulates of science, or to the deeper meaning at the heart of common sense. This theory is that the whole universe, including the physical world, also, is essentially one live thing, a mind, one great Spirit, infinitely wealthier in his experiences than we are, but for that very reason to be comprehended by us only in terms of our own wealthiest experience."
The book is in two large parts. In the first part, "Studies of Thinkers and Problems", Royce examines the history of modern philosophy. In the second part, "Suggestions of Doctrine", Royce uses what he takes to be the best lessons of the philosophical history to develop his own position. Royce tries to be a synthesizer. His goal is to show the harmony between science and the theory of evolution on the one hand and a spiritual, religious view of life on the other hand. Royce was certainly not the last philosopher to be worried about this relationship and to attempt a harmonization.
There are many wonderful insights in this book. For me, the most penetrating discussions occur in Royce's "General Introduction" and in his opening chapter on Spinoza. In the introduction, Royce offers his views on the nature and importance of philosophical, critical and reflective thinking. He stresses at the outset the importance of temperament. He stresses that no single philosophical system will win the adherence of all persons and that systems change with time although some basic contours remain constant. Royce thus is aware of the value of difference and seeming conflict in different philosophies, including both idealism and naturalism. He is fully aware as well of the importance of passion and the search for meaning in philosophy and in life -- this in contrast to many critics of Royce from his own day forward. The opening introduction is worth pondering and re-reading as one works through the rest of the book.
I was intrigued that Royce begins his historical study with Spinoza rather than with Descartes, as is almost universally done. Royce states that the emphasis of the cogito in Descartes obscures the naturalistic character of the first period of modern philosophy, including Descartes himself. Royce finds this naturalistic strand, with it combined religious form best expressed in the philosophy of Spinoza. In his short treatment, Royce offers an insightful portrait of Spinoza and a non-technical description of his thought which considers both its scientific and its mystical aspects. Royce tends to be more interested in religion. He sees Spinoza as attempting his own form of union with God or nature rather than as seeing religion as a source of divine commands or challenges. Royce also points out how in his doctrine of "substance", Spinoza saw reality under two aspects, body and mind. As I read through the book, I thought Spinoza's own double aspect theory had many similarities, and perhaps some advantages over, the "double-aspect" theory of philosophical idealism that Royce himself develops in the second part of his work.
Royce proceeds to consider the British empiricists, followed by a lengthy discussion of Kant and his German idealistic successors, Fichte, Hegel, and Schopenhauer. Royce's expositions of these difficult thinkers are clear and informative and they are enhanced by his brief biographical observations. The period between Kant and Hegel was not much studied in American philosophy departments when I was in college. The exposition of these thinkers, Hegel in particular, taught me a great deal. The discussion of Hegel still could be read as an introduction to his aims and his thinking.
In the second part of the book, Royce, deeply influenced by Kant, argues for a form of philosophical idealism that avoids the romantic excesses of Kant's successors. As mentioned above, he argues for a form of objective idealism in which every person and thing is part of an all-inclusive world soul or logos. He draws a distinction between what he calls the world of description and the world of appreciation -- the former the world of science, the latter the world of spirits each part of the world-spirit. This discussion will not be persuasive to most contemporary readers. As Royce suggests in the introduction to the book, it is more important to understand what Royce was trying to do and why than to agree with the specific idealistic formulation of the book. It offers many insights. The book brought me back to Spinoza's formulation of issues and the way it agrees with and differs from Royce. Other readers will find other possible approaches to the questions. In the final chapter of the book, Royce addresses the religious problem of evil in the context of his idealism. This is a question Royce would explore several times during his career.
Royce and this book are not often studied today but there has been some recent resurgence of interest in the great American idealist thinker. The book is worth reading for its history, for its issues, and as an introduction to Royce. Although Royce wrote the book for a non-specialist audience, the book today will appeal more to readers with a strong background and interest in philosophy who are willing to explore a now somewhat obscure and undervalued American thinker. I was fortunate to read this book in a hardback edition published in 1955.
Robin Friedman
January 9, 2022
يبدو من اسم الكتاب انه محاولة لوصف الروح العامة والسائدة للفلسفة الحديثة والتى تتحرك نحو غايتها بدءا من ديكارت ووصولا الى سبنسر . فيعطى الكاتب وصفا خاصا لرؤيته لهذه الفلسفات الحديثة أى مبنية على قرائته وفهمه الشخصى لهم والذى بالتأكيد - بالنظر الى الاختصار الذى أقر به وله أسبابه - له قيمته الفلسفيه وله مدى كبير من الصحة وعمق الفهم وهو ما أعطاه قدرته على التعبير عما فهمه بطريقة بسيطة وتكاد تكون شعبيه فى الولايات المتحدة على زمنه مع نهايات القرن التاسع عشر .
وعند الوصول الى سبنسر يبدأ رويس فى وصف فلسفته الخاصة ويقر بضرورة أن تكون الفلسفة تطورية فى أعمق أسسها وبالتالى أن تكون إمتدادا لما سبق فكانت فلسفته تركيبا وتحديثا للبنيات الفلسفية السابقة مع محاولة أكبر لربطها بالمنهج العلمى والإكتشافات العلمية والتمسك بالنقد والشك الفلسفى فى كل خطوة . ولولا ذلك وما يعطيه من متعة ناتجة عن جدل الذهن المستمر والتوصل ذاتيا الى رؤى خاصة وتع��يل وجهات النظر الشخصية لما غامرت واستمريت فى قراءة الكتاب الذى يقر كاتبه فى كل حين بأنه آخذ بيد القارئ الى عالم المثالية المطلقة والروح المطلق وإنا لكثيرا ما نجد من العبارات الصوفية البعيدة الغور فى الروحانية والرؤى المثالية الواحدية للوجود وهى لا تخلو من متعة عقلية على كل حال .
وبالتالى فإنى لا أود الإطالة فى محتوى الكتاب إلا أنه يجب الإقرار بقيمة العصف الذهنى الذى ينتج عن قرائته لما يحتويه من منهج شكى صارم فى أغلب صفحاته ، وللمدقق أن يجد فى نهاية الكتاب أنه استطاع أن يجد سقطات التشكك واغفاله فى بعض أهم أراء الكاتب الشخصية اثناء عرضها . أما عن المحتوى الفلسفى فهو من جانب قد يعيد صياغة قرائتك لبعض الفلاسفة ومن جانب آخر يعرض رؤية جديدة فى محاولة ضم المناهج الفلسفية على مر العصور الحديثة وصولا اليه وبالتالى بيان وجود روح تحكم حركة هذا الفكر اى روح كليه وهذه الروح تعتبر من أهم ظواهر الفلسفة الحديثة فى رأيه .
نهايةً فقد كانت قرائتى لرويس تجربة فلسفية جديدة وفريدة ومفيدة .
وعند الوصول الى سبنسر يبدأ رويس فى وصف فلسفته الخاصة ويقر بضرورة أن تكون الفلسفة تطورية فى أعمق أسسها وبالتالى أن تكون إمتدادا لما سبق فكانت فلسفته تركيبا وتحديثا للبنيات الفلسفية السابقة مع محاولة أكبر لربطها بالمنهج العلمى والإكتشافات العلمية والتمسك بالنقد والشك الفلسفى فى كل خطوة . ولولا ذلك وما يعطيه من متعة ناتجة عن جدل الذهن المستمر والتوصل ذاتيا الى رؤى خاصة وتع��يل وجهات النظر الشخصية لما غامرت واستمريت فى قراءة الكتاب الذى يقر كاتبه فى كل حين بأنه آخذ بيد القارئ الى عالم المثالية المطلقة والروح المطلق وإنا لكثيرا ما نجد من العبارات الصوفية البعيدة الغور فى الروحانية والرؤى المثالية الواحدية للوجود وهى لا تخلو من متعة عقلية على كل حال .
وبالتالى فإنى لا أود الإطالة فى محتوى الكتاب إلا أنه يجب الإقرار بقيمة العصف الذهنى الذى ينتج عن قرائته لما يحتويه من منهج شكى صارم فى أغلب صفحاته ، وللمدقق أن يجد فى نهاية الكتاب أنه استطاع أن يجد سقطات التشكك واغفاله فى بعض أهم أراء الكاتب الشخصية اثناء عرضها . أما عن المحتوى الفلسفى فهو من جانب قد يعيد صياغة قرائتك لبعض الفلاسفة ومن جانب آخر يعرض رؤية جديدة فى محاولة ضم المناهج الفلسفية على مر العصور الحديثة وصولا اليه وبالتالى بيان وجود روح تحكم حركة هذا الفكر اى روح كليه وهذه الروح تعتبر من أهم ظواهر الفلسفة الحديثة فى رأيه .
نهايةً فقد كانت قرائتى لرويس تجربة فلسفية جديدة وفريدة ومفيدة .
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews