which removed all fundamental distinction between right and wrong, justice and injustice.'

V. Sceptics of this Period.

352. Scepticism had been employed by Nicole and by Bossuet, and by several other writers, as the means of bringing back the Protestants to the pale of the Catholic Church; and of exalting its authority by setting forth the incertitude and fallibility of human reason. Two individuals, however, of a more comprehensive and liberal spirit of criticism, undertook still farther to defend the cause of Scepticism for its own own sake. The first was the prelate P. Dan. Huet, one of the most learned men of his day, and versed in almost every department of science. He had in his youth embraced the Cartesian system, but became dissatisfied with it on studying the works of Empiricus (see § 336); and renounced Gassendi's theory, because adverse

See his celebrated Fable of the Bees, which he published in 1706: The Grumbling Hive, or Knaves turned Honest. Eight years afterwards he published, with illustrations: The Fable of the Bees, or Private Vices made Public Benefits, Lond. 1714. To defend his doctrine, he composed six dialogues, which form the second volume of the entire work in the edit. of 1728, and in those which followed. To these he added: An Inquiry into the Origin of Moral Virtue, sixth edit. 1732, 2 vols. 8vo. It has been aiready remarked that the Alciphron of Berkeley is principally directed against this author. He was answered also by other writers, particularly by W. Law: Remarks upon a book: The Fable, etc., in a letter to the author, Lond. 1724; second edit. 1725. And [BLUET] Inquiry whether a general practice of Virtue tends to the Wealth or Poverty, Benefit or Disadvantage of a People, etc. Lond. 1725, 8vo.

MANDEVILLE, Free Thoughts on Religion, the Church, Government, etc. Lond. 1720.

2 Bishop of Meaux; born 1617; died 1704.

3 FRANC. TURRETINI, Pyrrhonismus Pontificius, Lugd. Bat. 1692. 4 Born at Caen 1630; died 1721.

PETRI DAN. HUETII Commentarius de Rebus ad eum pertinentibus, Hag. Com. 1718, 12mo. Demonstratio Evangelica, Amstel. 1679, 8vo. 1680, 8vo. Censura Philosophiæ Cartesianæ; and other works. Questiones Alnetanæ de Concordia Rationis et Fidei, Cadom. 1690; 4to.; Lips. 1693-1719, 4to.

Traité de la Faiblesse de l'Esprit Humain, Amst. 1723, 12mo. In answer to this: ANT. MURATORI, Trattato della Forza dell' Intendimento Umano, ossia il Pirronismo confutato, Venet. 1745; third edit. 1756, 8vo.

to a pious faith. In this manner he fell into philosophical Scepticism, which in his later writings he made public. He admits that truth must doubtless exist in Objects, but asserts that it can be known only to God. The Human Understanding has so many obstacles to encounter in its progress towards knowledge, that it cannot hope to attain it, nor can it be assured of the complete correspondence of its cognitions with their objects. Faith alone can impart certainty; but this is not attainable on Sceptical principles, because it does not spring from Reason, but from a supernatural working of God, and has reference to a Truth absolute in itself, and the offspring of a distinct revelation.

Pierre Bayle appears not to have been so intimately convinced as Glanville (§ 343) of the possibility of a true Philosophy, although he contributed more than the other had done to open a way to the discovery of it, by his ingenious attacks on the Dogmatic Systems, and by showing that Scepticism cannot be the ultimate end of Reason. This great scholar and honourable man possessed not so much a profound spirit of philosophical research, as a quick sagacity and critical judgment. These talents, improved by extensive reading (particularly of Plutarch and Montaigne) and the study of the various philosophical systems and religious tenets of his time, had the effect of forming in him a sceptical way of thinking, and encouraging a spirit of historical criticism, of which up to that time there had been no example. He was born at Carlat in the county of Foix, 1647, his father being a reformed minister; and after many vicissitudes which befel his party in the Church, held a professor's place at Sedan, and afterwards

1 PIERRE BAYLE, Pensées sur les Comètes, 1681, Amsterd. 17221726, vols. 8vo.

Dictionnaire Historique et Critique.

Réponses aux Questions d'un Provincial, Rotterd. 1704, 5 vols. 8vo. Lettres, Rotterd. 1712; Amst. 1729, 8vo. Œuvres Diverses, La Haye, 1725-1731, 4 vols. fol.

DES MAIZEAUX, La Vie de P. Bayle, Amst. 1730, 12mo.; La Haye, 1732, 2 vols. 12mo. : et en avant du Dictionn. edit. d'Amsterd. 1730 et 1740; et Bâle, 1741.

C. M. PFAFFII Dissertationes Anti-Bælianæ tres, Tubing. 1719, 4to. FEUERBACH, Pierre Bayle nach seinem für die Geschichte der Philosophie und Menschheit interessantesten Momenten, dargestellt und gewürdigt, 1838.

at Rotterdam (1681); became embroiled in many controversies, and died in a fortunate state of independence, A.D. 1706. He was a firm and sincere friend of Truth, and succeeded in combating the prejudices, the errors, the follies, and especially the superstitions of intolerance with the arms of reasoning, of erudition, and of a lively wit. At first he embraced the Cartesian system, but having compared it with others, and accustomed himself to Sceptical discussions, he ceased to confide even in the possibility of a positive rational knowledge, and brought himself to believe That Reason was clear-sighted enough to detect error, but not sufficiently so, without external aid, to attain to Truth. In short, that without a Revelation from above she only leads astray. With such views he applied himself constantly to detect the weak sides, contradictions, and imperfections of every sect and system, which nevertheless had had their supporters: particularly insisting on the difficulties which belong to the questions of the attributes of the Deity,-Creation-Providence-Evil, Moral and PhysicalImmateriality-Free-will, and the reality of our knowledge of an external world. At the same time that he opposed Reason to Revelation, and regarded the latter as a beacon in the discussion of such subjects, he did not fail to point out, on the other hand, whatever, in the Christian doctrine and theological morals, is at variance with Reason, and force men thereby to inquiries still more profound. In his discussions on Providence carried on with Jean Le Clerc1 (§ 346), with Isaac Jacquelot (§ 340), and with Leibnitz, on

1 LE CLERC wrote in answer to Bayle: Défense de la Providence contre les Manichéens; dont les Raisons ont été proposées par M. Bayle dans son Dictionnaire Critique (dans le t. I, des Parrhasiana, p. 303). This work is composed on the principles of Origen. Le Clerc also undertook the defence of Cudworth's System, especially of his hypothesis of Plastic Natures: the discussion produced a multitude of writings on both sides, and finally led Le Clerc to accuse Bayle of Atheism.

JACQUELOT attacked the theological opinions of Bayle in his work, Conformité de la Foi avec la Raison, ou Défense de la Religion contre les principales Difficultés répandues dans la Dictionnaire Historique et Critique de M. Bayle, Amst. 1705, 8vo. Bayle replied to him in his Réponses aux Questions d'un Provincial. Jacquelot then published an Examen de la Théologie de M. Bayle; and the latter rejoined by, Entretiens de Maxime et de Thémiste, ou Réponse à l'Examen de

the origin of Evil (§ 359), and others, he always preserved the calmness and dignity of a philosopher. His works have greatly contributed to the dissemination of knowledge, and on the other hand also, to the propagation of an untenable spirit of free-thinking. Jean-Baptiste de Boyer, Marquis d'Argens also appeared as a Sceptic of a narrow spirit. The Sceptical School was attacked, but not overcome, by P. de Villemandy, J. P. de Crouzaz,3 and Formey.

PROGRESS OF PHILOSOPHY IN GERMANY. Puffendorf.

354. About the middle of the seventeenth century Philosophy acquired in Germany renewed energies, though these were at first confined to a limited sphere. Samuel Fr. Baron von Puffendorf reduced Natural Law to the forms of a science. He was born 1632, at Flöke, near Chemnitz; and having studied the Cartesian philosophy at Jena, became in 1661 professor of the Law of Nature and Nations at Heidelberg, afterwards at Lund, and died historiographer of the House of Brandenburg, at Berlin, 1694. He attempted to reconcile the opinions of Hobbes and Grotius, and discussed Natural Law as a separate question, independent of the obligations of Revealed Religion or Positive Civil Law. The philosophers of the Theological school became in consequence, his enemies; particularly Valent Alberti and Joachim Zentgrave.

Puffendorf first gave a currency to the principle of Sociability, which Grotius had started; and maintained that

la Théologie de M. Bayle, par M. Jacquelot. This work appeared in Rotterdam in 1707, after the death of the author. Jacquelot replied to it by another.

1 Chamberlain of Frederick the Great; died at Aix, his native town, 1770. His principal works are: Histoire de l'Esprit humain, 14 vols. 12mo. (best edition), Berlin, 1765; Lettres Cabalistiques, 7 vols. 12mo. La Haye, 1769; Lettres Juives, 6 vols. 8vo. La Haye, 1738. translated Julian, Ocellus Lucanus, Timæus Locrus, &c.

He

2 PETRI DE VILLEMANDY, Scepticismus Debellatus, seu Humanæ Cognationis Ratio ab imis radicibus explicata, etc. Lugd. Bat. 1697, 4to. See § 139.

See the works mentioned § 124,

4 Ibid.

in virtue of this motive, which is allied to Self-love, man desires the society and co-operation of his fellow-men; but that, at the same time, through the corruption of his nature, (the state of Nature described by Hobbes), and in consequence of the multiplicity of his desires, and the impossibility of easily satisfying them, as well as the instability of his natural disposition, he is no less inclined to do injury to others, and is furnished with the means of doing so in his address and cunning. From these considerations he infers, on the principle of Self-love, the first law of society, that we should each individually labour to maintain the social compact, which derives its authority direct from God, as the Creator of mankind. From this origin Puffendorf deduces the laws of Morality and Jurisdiction. He does not, indeed, discriminate between Natural and Moral Right, and frequently recurs to Christianity for positive precepts; yet he may be said to have laid the foundations of an Universal philosophy of practice. The multifarious disputes in which he was engaged, particularly with Alberti (§ 336), were of little service to the cause of philosophy. He has, perhaps, been as much encumbered by his commentators as his adversaries.

SAM. PUFFENDORF, Elementa Jurisprudentiæ Universalis, Hag. Com. 1660; Jen. 8vo.

De Jure Naturæ et Gentium libb. VIII, Lund. 1672, Francof. 1684, 4to.; cum Notis HERTII, BARBEYRACI, et MASCOVII, Francof. et Lips. 1744, 1749, 2 vols. 4to., and other editions. Translated into English by KENNET, folio, 1729, and 1749. De Officio Hominis et Civis libb. II, Lund. 1673, 8vo. and other editions. Cum Notis Variorum, Ludg. Bat. 1769, 2 vols. 8vo. Eris Scandica, Francof. 1686. On the Natural Law of Puffendorf, see Leibnitz. (Cf. § 360, note.)

I. Leibnitz.

FONTENELLE, Eloge de M. de Leibnitz, dans l'Histoire de l'Acad. Roy. des Sciences de Paris, 1716. The biography it contains was founded on a Memoir communicated by J. G. VON ECCARD, which has been published by Von MURR, in the Journal of the History of the Arts, etc., part VII, Nürnb. 1779.

BAILLY, Eloge de M. de Leibnitz, qui a remporté le Prix de l'Académie de Berlin, 1769, 4to.

Leben und Verzeichniss der Schriften des Herrn v. Leibnitz, in LUDOVICI'S Ausführlichem Entwurf einer vollständigen Historie der Leibnitz'schen Philosophie, im ersten Bande, Leipz. 1737, 8vo.