9911

ing of his mind. He was not only an intuitionist, but in his own guarded and reserved way, a mystic. He did not have to struggle with doubt, or to win his faith by a slow and painful process, as did Professor Morris. "He could remember very clearly, he said, the moment of his illumination. To him walking in the woods in spring, alone and brooding, there came, suddenly and definitely, a clear shining, in the light of which the things of the spirit came into harmonious and vital relation, and that light grew and did not pass. It was this reasoned reliance upon intuition, coupled with his judicial mental reserve, which held him back from that degree of consent to Hegelianism which so distinctly colored American philosophy in the later nineteenth century. He was a firm upholder of the testimony of consciousness. Nor would he assent to Kant's skepticism concerning the validity of our rational faculties, even in the interest of moral reason-as the writer well remembers when as a pupil of Professor Torrey, in the callowness of youth, he sought to win his approval of the Kantian agnosticism. He was as deaf to this as to the siren persuasions of Hegelian unity at the expense of the duality to which he could not blind himself. With intelligent tenacity he held fast to what he regarded as the fundamental principles of consciousness, refusing to be swept away from these moorings. Yet he was no mere frigid and impassioned arbitrator between conflicting systems. Like Morris, he was a great truth-lover, burning with quiet ardor for the truth-yet never with a hectic or superficial flame. He was a fine example of the apostle's saying, "The spirits of the prophets are subject unto the prophets."

To Professor Torrey as to so many other American idealists the realities of personality were the major factors

10 Andover Review, Vol. IV, pp. 509-510.

"In Memoriam, Henry A. P. Torrey, LL.D., p. 26.

of reality. It was with great pertinence that his life-long friend, Dean Edward H. Griffin of Johns Hopkins University, said of him:

If you were to seek to indicate in a single word the predominant thought in Professor Torrey's mind as a teacher and thinker, it may perhaps be expressed in the word personality. So thoroughly was he persuaded that the self-determination of a rational and ethical being is the highest and noblest thing in the universe, that he could not look with tolerance upon any view, in respect to man, or in respect to God, which seemed to him to invalidate or to obscure this concept.1

13

III.

A fine aroma of student admiration and gratitude lingers about the name of Amherst's beloved teacher of philosophy, Charles Edward Garman, who, like his predecessor, Julius Seelye, enriched the lives of the students of that well-known college by his personality as well as by his teaching. 13 As a teacher he was so filled with idealism, so absorbed in the love of philosophy, and above all so engrossed in the life of his students, that his life was consumed in unreserved self-sacrifice. The result reveals, in the words of William James, how "a life modestly consecrated to what nowadays seems the less fashionable half of a professor's functions, may yet reap its meed of fame, and burst, in spite of itself, into the wider publicity.' This appears in the letter written by him to President G.

"Memoir cited, p. 12.

9914

"Professor Garman was born December 18, 1850, in Limington, Maine, when his father was pastor of the Congregational Church. He entered Amherst College in 1872, graduating in 1876, and after a period of teaching, studied at Yale Divinity School under Samuel Harris and George P. Fisher. In 1880 he became instructor in Mathematics in Amherst College, in 1882 Associate Professor of Mental and Moral Philosophy, and in 1889 full professor, continuing in this position until his death in 1907.

"Letters, Lectures and Addresses of Charles Edward Garman, p. 598.

Stanley Hall of Clark University, which is prefixed to the volume, "Studies in Philosophy and Psychology," commemorative of the twenty-five years of service of Professor Garman as teacher of philosophy in Amherst College. It is a revealing letter. From it I take the following:

It is my conviction that a young man can obtain inspiration, enthusiasm, absence of self-consciousness only by the steady contemplation of great truths. The young man who philosophizes, who really understands himself and appreciates the truth, is no longer a slave of form, but is filled with admiration that is genuine and lasting.

9915

Mr. Garman's early predilection was for the philosophy of intuition. "His graduating speech ("The Spiritual Philosophy") was an earnest plea for the main point of Hickok's psychology-the supremacy of the 'reason' over the understanding and the absolute need of the intuitive faculty.' From Intuitionism he passed into Monism. The publication of the memorial volume, "Letters, Lectures and Addresses of Charles Edward Garman" (1909) revealed his final point of view as that of an intensely spiritual Monism which is at the same time thoroughly rational and scientific. "God or Spirit," he writes "is the only independent reality, and any other being or event is but a dependent 'phase' or 'state' or 'product' of His activity. He is 'the all in all'." 16

Spirit is the only substance in the universe, and material force is one mode of its manifestation and constant activity. How can we know more of this spirit? We answer, that since the entire universe is dependent upon it, we who are part of the universe, like it, live and move and have our being in it (Him). If we try to study its (His) mode of action outside ourselves we can only use the senses and obtain phenomena. But if we look within, we have the real

noumenal spirit revealed in our own consciousness. Both thought and things must be phases of one and the same Universal Spirit."

This interpretation of the material world as a phase of the Universal Spirit is an evidence of the spiritualizing quality of Professor Garman's mind, but it exhibits a certain lack of discrimination.

The material world, while it serves as a marvelous medium and instrument of the Spirit, has a certain nature of its own and is by no means in perfect harmony with Spirit. It seems to have had its source from Spirit, to be striving toward Spirit and to find its highest end in serving Spirit. But to make it a phase of Spirit is to drag Spirit down to a lower level and to confuse moral and spiritual values.

IV.

Less contemplative and reflective, more forceful and assertive and much more widely known than the men whom we have been considering was that vigorous and wellfurnished champion of Idealism, Professor Bowne.

Borden Parker Bowne was a native of New Jersey, where he was born at Leonardville, Jan. 14, 1847. He graduated at the University of New York and studied philosophy from 1873 to 1875 at the universities of Halle, Paris and Göttingen. He was for a year on the staff of the New York Independent and from 1876 until his death in 1910, he was professor of Philosophy at Boston University and Dean of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. He was also Chairman of the Philosophical Conference at the St. Louis Congress of Arts and Sciences.

18

A true Kantian, Bowne owed much also to Lotze, but was in no sense a mere follower of either. As a Kantian he was independent and critical. Not only did he do his

"Ibid., p. 258.

own thinking, but in presenting his views he had all the fervor and effectiveness of a Methodist preacher directed toward the intelligent propagation of a spiritualizing philosophy. He had a firm faith in the mission of philosophy, clearly set forth in the first chapter of his "Personalism." He possessed also a complete command of his subject. To his students, his audiences and his readers, in a time of great intellectual uncertainty and confusion, he brought what was hardly less than a saving philosophical faith.

His main doctrines were; idealism, developmentalism and personalism. His idealism,-defined in his "Metaphysics" (1882) and "Theory of Thought and Knowledge" (1898)—accompanied Kant as far as the constructive power of the mind in knowledge is concerned, but parted with him when the latter denied that such knowledge is genuine and valid. His own definition of reality as "that which acts or is acted upon" is as satisfying as it is simple, provided there is due recognition of the fact that a lower order of reality is involved in being acted upon than manifests itself in action.

As a philosophical interpreter of Evolution, he belongs with that forceful group of American thinkers including Asa Gray, E. D. Cope, Charles Woodruff Shields, John Fiske and Joseph Le Conte who rescued the doctrine from the materialistic evolutionism of Herbert Spencer and Huxley and gave it its true spiritual significance. In this respect Professor Bowne-representing and speaking, as he did, to a great body of Christians-accomplished a notable service. The distinction which he drew between Naturalism as a scientific method and Naturalism as a philosophic doctrine (in the chapter on God and Nature of the volume "The Immanence of God" (1905) and also in "Personalism"1o was most timely and luminous and helped

"For a study of Bowne's philosophy see Ralph T. Flewelling: Personalism and the Problems of Philosophy.

"Pp. 219-.