In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

528 BOOK REVIEWS Michelson experiment which his contemporaries did not, that St. Thomas' doctrine of the agent intellect impinges with the greatest force." (p. 93) Now, apparently unknown to Kiley, in a long article published in the same year as his study, Gerald Holton examines all of the evidence for the influence of the Michelson-Morley experiment on the discovery of special relativity and comes to the conclusion that such an inuence is largely illusory and may even be "the stuff of which fairy tales are made" (see G. Holton, "Einstein, Michelson, and the 'Crucial' Experiment," Isis, 60 [1969], pp. 133-197) . And Einstein's own statements are as of little help here as they are in resolving the debate over whether he subscribed to a " positivist " or to a "metaphysical " philosophy of science (see Robert Neidorf, "Is Einstein a Positivist? " Philosophy of Science, 30 [1963], pp. 173-188, an article crucial to Kiley's thesis but which is not even listed in his bibliography). For, as Holton observes, "Einstein himself made different statements about the influence of the Michelson experiments, ranging from 'there is no doubt that Michelson's experiment was of considerable influence on my work .. .' to ' the Michelson-Morley experiment had a negligible effect on the discovery of relativity.'" (art. cit., p. 134) Kiley's thesis may not be completely demolished by Holton's article, but whether it is or not, it is difficult to see how this book advances one's understanding of either Einstein or Aquinas or succeeds in establishing any meaningful relationship between the two. The Catholic University of America Washington, D. C. WILLIAM A. WALLACE, 0. P. Lotze's System of Philosophy. By GEORGE SANTAYANA. Edited, introduced and enriched with a Bloomington/London: $11.95. Lotze Bibliography by Paul Grimley Kuntz. Indiana University Press, 1971. Pp. fl74. Santayana's doctoral dissertation, written about 1889 under the direction of Josiah Royce at Harvard, is one of the long-shelved intellectual preserves bf American Philosophy. In editing and introducing Santayana's work on Lotze and providing a valuable Lotze-Bibliography Professor Paul G. Kuntz offers English-speaking scholars a missing link between the nineteenth - and the twentieth-century trends in philosophy. Lotze's System of Philosophy by George Santayana was not written out of inclination. The young Santayana would rather have done a detailed study on Arthur Schopenhauer. However, Josiah Royce, Santayana's doctoral mentor, and Professor William James were for a Lotze-disserta- BOOK REVIEWS 529 tion: Josiah Royce because he had studied under Rudolph Hermann Lotze at Goettigen, and William James because of a real aversion toward Schopenhauer's philosophy. Consequently George Santayana had to abide by his mentor's suggestion and was certainly neither the first nor the last of doctoral candidates to conform to the advisor's intellectual predilection. But the Lotze-topic was timely too. Lotze at that time was considered "the most pillaged source" (p. 49) and his influence in the United States was "stronger in academic philosophy, perhaps, than that of any other author," (p. 48) even so much so that P. G. Kuntz does not hesitate to call the decades from 1880 to 1920 "the Lotzean period." (p. 49) The Santayana dissertation takes up about 121 of the 274 pages of the book. Santayana deals first with "Lotze's Problem" (pp. 109-129): "to join the separate fields of our certain knowledge into a theory of the world capable of completeness " (p. 128) which Santayana interprets " as natural science constructed on moral postulates," or even as " a moral idealism." Via excursus into the last period of the history of philosophythat of Kant, Fichte, Hegel, Fechner, Herbart-Santayana finds Lotze rather " on the side of common sense and humane feelings," on the side of the empiricists, and even of the positivists. "Half-heartedly though," Santayana remarks, Lotze " is an apologist for the idealists rather than their opponent." (p. 142) The attentive reader of Santayana's Lotze-study encounters there the Lotzean nucleus of process philosophy which aroused Santayana's fervent defense of the traditional concepts and definitions of the pre-Lotzean meaning of substance, soul, atom, etc. Santayana criticizes Lotze's stress on and explanation of process, series...

pdf

Share