To conclude, it is neither by abstract logical processes, nor yet by the dogmatic employment of scientific categories, that philosophy makes progress, but by an empirical process which unites criticism and experiment. In speaking of the development of modern idealism, Bosanquet says: "All difficulties about the general possibility--the possibility in principle--of apprehending reality in knowledge and preception were flung aside as antiquated lumber. What was undertaken was the direct adventure of knowing; of shaping a view of the universe which should include and express reality in its completeness. The test and criterion were not any speculative assumption of any kind whatever. They were the direct work of the function of knowledge in exhibiting what could and what could not maintain itself when all the facts were confronted and set in the order they themselves demanded. The method of inquiry was ideal experiment."[290] When all has been said, this method remains the natural and normal one. Dewey's 'psychological method,' by contrast, seems strained and far-fetched, an artificial and externally motived attempt to guide the intellect, which only by depending upon its own resources and its own increasing insight can hope to attain the distant and difficult, but never really foreign goal. FOOTNOTES: [281] _The Influence of Darwin on Philosophy_, p. 240. [282] _Op. cit._, Mind, Vol. XI, p. 8 f. [283] "The Experimental Method," _Influence of Darwin on Philosophy_, p. 228. [284] "The Experimental Method," _Influence of Darwin on Philosophy_, p. 240. [285] See the review of Dewey's essay, "The Experimental Method," in Chapter VII of this study, p. 91 ff. [286] _Studies in Logical Theory_, p. 4. [287] _Ibid._, p. 2. [288] "Beliefs and Existences," _The Influence of Darwin on Philosophy_, p. 172 f. [289] _The Philosophical Radicals_, p. 297. The essay in which it occurs, "Philosophy as a Criticism of Categories," was first published in 1883, in the volume _Essays on Philosophical Criticism_. [290] "Realism and Metaphysics," _Philosophical Review_, Vol. XXVI, 1917, p. 8.