"The following pages pretend neither to establish a system nor to be exhaustive. They are merely scattered, though necessarily connected, thoughts and observations, which, on account of the difficulty of mastering all the facts of empirical and natural science, may perhaps meet with some indulgence on the part of the scientific critic. If we may, at the outset, claim any credit, it is for our determination to speak the truth, regardless of the unavoidable consequences of our mode of viewing nature. Things cannot be represented different from what they are; and nothing appears to us more perverse than the efforts of respectable naturalists to introduce orthodoxy in the natural sciences. We do not boast of having produced anything new. Similar ideas have been promulgated at all times, partly by old Greek and Indian philosophers; but the necessary empirical basis furnished by modern science was then wanting. Hence the present views are, in respect to their clearness, a conquest of modern empirical science. The scholastic philosophy, still riding upon its high, though terribly emaciated horse, conceives that it has long ago done with such theories, and has consigned them, ticketed "materialism", "sensualism", "determinism", to the scientific lumber-room, or, as the phrase goes, has assigned them their "historical value". But this philosophy sinks daily in the estimation of the public, and loses its ground opposed to natural science, which gradually establishes the fact that macrocosmic and microcosmic existence obeys in its origin, life, and decay, mechanical laws inherent in the things themselves"--Preface. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved).
Electronic reproduction. Washington, D.C. : American Psychological Association, 2010. Available via World Wide Web. Access limited by licensing agreement. s2010 dcunns