“Modern psychologists are so soaked with sensationalism that they cannot understand anything that does not mean that. How can I, to whom nothing seems so thoroughly real as generals, and who regards Truth and Justice as _literally_ the most powerful powers in the world, expect to be understood by the thoroughgoing Wundtian? But the curious thing is to see absolute idealists tainted with this disease,—or men who, like John Dewey, hover between Absolute Idealism and Sensationalism. Royce’s opinions as developed in his _World and Individualism_ are extremely near to mine. His insistence on the elements of purpose in intellectual concepts is essentially the pragmatic position.” Footnote 16: Baldwin’s _Dictionary_, art. Method. Footnote 17: “Peirce anticipated the most important procedures of his successors even when he did not work them out himself. Again and again one finds the clue to the most recent developments in the writings of Peirce,” Lewis’ _Survey of Symbolic Logic_, p. 79. Footnote 18: Hans Breitmann is symbolic of those who “solved the infinite as one eternal sphere.” Footnote 19: See _Journal of Speculative Philosophy_, Vol. 2, pp. 155-157, article on A New List of Categories in the Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Vol. 7, 287-298 and article on _Sign_, in Baldwin’s _Dictionary_. Footnote 20: _Studies in Logic_, p. 181. Footnote 21: _Monist_, Vol. 7, p. 27. _Cf._ _Journal of Speculative Philosophy_, Vol. 2, p. 207; _Popular Science Monthly_, Vol. 58, pp. 305-306. Footnote 22: This vol., p. 15. Footnote 23: Suggestive for a theory of the metaphysics of fictions is the suggestion (p. 46) “that the question of what would occur under circumstances which do not actually arise, is not a question of fact, but only of the most perspicuous arrangement of them.” This arrangement is, of course, not merely subjective. Footnote 24: Pp. 128-129, _cf._ _Monist_, Vol. 7, p. 206, and _Logical Studies_, pp. 175 ff. PROEM THE RULES OF PHILOSOPHY[25] Descartes is the father of modern philosophy, and the spirit of Cartesianism—that which principally distinguishes it from the scholasticism which it displaced—may be compendiously stated as follows: 1. It teaches that philosophy must begin with universal doubt; whereas scholasticism had never questioned fundamentals. 2. It teaches that the ultimate test of certainty is to be found in the individual consciousness; whereas scholasticism had rested on the testimony of sages and of the Catholic Church. 3. The multiform argumentation of the middle ages is replaced by a single thread of inference depending often upon inconspicuous premises.