Those who persist in trying Carlyle as a philosopher and man of ideas
miss his purport. He had no philosophy, and laid claim to none, except
what he got from the German metaphysicians,--views which crop out here
and there in "Sartor." He was a preacher of righteousness to his
generation, and a rebuker of its shams and irreverences, and as such he
cut deep, cut to the bone, and to the marrow of the bone. That piercing,
agonized, prophetic, yet withal melodious and winsome voice, how it
rises through and above the multitudinous hum and clatter of
contemporary voices in England, and alone falls upon the ear as from out
the primal depths of moral conviction and power! He is the last man in
the world to be reduced to a system or tried by logical tests. You might
as well try to bind the sea with chains. His appeal is to the
intuitions, the imagination, the moral sense. His power of mental
abstraction was not great; he could not deal in abstract ideas. When he
attempted to state his philosophy, as in the fragment called "Spiritual
Optics," which Froude gives, he is far from satisfactory. His
mathematical proficiency seemed to avail him but little in the region of
pure ideality. His mind is precipitated at once upon the concrete, upon
actual persons and events. This makes him the artist he is, as
distinguished from the mystic and philosopher, and is perhaps the basis
of Emerson's remark, that there is "more character than intellect in
every sentence;" that is, more motive, more will-power, more stress of
conscience, more that appeals to one as a living personal identity,
wrestling with facts and events, than there is that appeals to him as a
contemplative philosopher.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account