Transcriber's Notes
The cover image was created by the transcriber and is placed in the public domain.
In addition to a few minor typographical errorswhich have been silently corrected, the following changeswere made:
"assymetrical" changed to "asymmetrical" on Page 25.
"destro" changed to "destra" on Page 226.
It is a necessity of the human mind to giveeverything a name, thus recognising a differencebetween one thing and another, andrecording it. Science, which is the highestdevelopment of this necessity, recognises, andrecords systematically, all the facts of experience,distinguishing one from another, by themost minute analysis. The Maoris even goso far as bestow on their greenstone clubs, ontheir tikis, and on almost every separatearticle, a distinct name, as if recognising anindividuality, much as the old myth-makersspoke of the sword Excalibur; but the averageman is usually very loose in his application ofterms. Renan in his preface to "DialoguesPhilosophiques" writes: "La grande majoritédes hommes ... se divise en deux catégories,à égale distance desquelles il nous semble qu'viest la vérité. 'Ce que vous cherchez esttrouvé depuis longtemps,' disent les orthodoxesde toutes les nuances. 'Ce que vouscherchez n'est pas trouvable,' disent les positivistespratiques (les seuls dangereux), lespolitiques railleurs, les athées." Having thusdifferentiated his own position, from that ofeither school, one is a little surprised to findMatthew Arnold saying of him, that "thegreatest intellect in France has declared formaterialism." One recognises how perniciousthe loose application of terms may be, and isa little irritated to discover a fine Englishcritic lapsing into the vice, even in an unguardedmoment. Really, thought, or atleast any thought that justifies its existence,is too subtile and fluid a thing to be settledin this off-hand way; and the apparentlychildish custom of the Maoris is more scientific,since, at least, it recognises individuality.
Turn away from Renan to Euripides, andconsider for a moment the present conflictas to whether "The Bacchae" is a recantationby Euripides of his supposed rationalisticviiopinions, or a more aggravated expression ofthem. It seems impossible that there shouldbe two suppositions, so far removed fromeach other, about an existing book, in aknown language, by an author whose styleis singularly lucid. "La chicane s'allonge," asMontaigne said. We must seek for thetruth at an equal distance from both parties.Those who sustain either of the extremetheories are equally clear and convincing intheir arguments. As each party seems tohave a personal