Sidgwick's Ethics and Victorian Moral Philosophy (review)

266 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY what I take to be the true Hegelian position when he writes that "in Jesus the divine substance 'empties' itself (the Pauline r~vtoo't~).... It is thus that Jesus reveals that God is Spirit--not merely substance or 'supreme being' " (p. I00). God empties Himself of lordship. This is the principle of Altizer's Christian atheism. God cannot be a "supreme being" in any sense which restricts Him to transcendent lordship over nature. God is ultimately the infinite spiritual community of the faithful (p. 101). This construction is reflected in the last essay in the collection, where Lauer disputes the enlightened despotic view of authority in the Church. Ultimate authority resides not in God above, but in the community of believers (pp. 204-8). Priestly authority is essentially delegated by the consenting faith community. And faith in Lauer's Hegelian perspective is understood as compatible with rational comprehension of the divine. It is significant that it is a Jesuit priest who is speaking. The serious questions raised in the essay on social change as to the relevance of "eternal natural law" in the Aristotelean tradition to such issues as divorce, birth control and even abortion are noteworthy in this regard. The essay on Husserl and Hegel is notable because Lauer himself is a distinguished Husserl scholar (Phenomenology: Its Genesis and Prospect, 1958). He concludes that Husserl is methodologically more meticulous than Hegel, but that Hegel's grasp is greater. Breadth and depth of comprehension, he suggests, are ultimately more fruitful than methodological meticulousness, but it would be better to have both, which is presumably why contemporary Hegelians need not despair that the master has done it all. CLARK BUTLER IU-PU, Fort Wayne J. B. Schneewind. Sidgwick's Ethics and Victorian Moral Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977. Pp. xvi + 465. $45.00. Is it possible for a moral philosopher to be widely read and highly respected, yet not understood in some fundamental sense? I do not mean to imply by this question that the text is, at bottom, simply obscure or that it permits of differing and equally legitimate interpretations. I rather raise the possibility that the philosopher's overall plan is so comprehensive and his procedure of communicating it so complex that even well meaning readers tend to concentrate on one or more of its parts and overlook its systematic unity. A good case can be made for the view that this is exactly what has happened to Henry Sidgwick, and it is therefore fortunate that J. B. Schneewind has remedied the situation in this meticulous and comprehensive study. It should be taken as the definitive exposition of Sidgwick's moral philosophy and hence sets a standard which all further criticism and analysis must take into account. Schneewind limits himself to sympathetic and constructive exposition, or, as he puts it, "historical" rather than "critical" study, and thereby avoids the temptation to criticize without adequate understanding---an error which it is fair to say that Bradley, Broad, and other contemporary critics have made. As he puts it, It seemed necessary, before criticizing Sidgwick, to have a sound historical grasp of the problems he was trying to solve as well as a clear understanding of the solutions he offered.... The interpretation of the Methods to which I have been led differs in many respects from that which seems to prevail in the literature. In particular, I find running through it a far more closely unified line of argument than is usually, supposed.... What has been ignored is the originality, profundity, and comprehensive scope of the underlying argument of the book. (Pp. vii, viii, 422) BOOK REVIEWS 267 If Schneewind is correct, as I believe he is, he has accomplished no small feat in setting the stage for a more adequate critical analysis of Sidgeick's conclusions. The book is divided into three parts. The first relates Sidgwick's early development and gives an account of the views of the Common Sense school, the Cambridge moralists, and the utilitarians who constituted the philosophical setting that Sidgwick took seriously. The second is a detailed analysis of the argument of The Methods of Ethics, and the third is a...