In the notes, individual points are more sharply defined, a very detailed examination of which would have been too prolix in the lecture. Many an objection already urged has been met, many an expected rejoinder anticipated. I also hope that some will be interested in the several historical contributions, especially in the inquiries concerning Descartes, where I trace back the doctrine of evidence to its causes and point out two further thoughts, one of which has been misunderstood, the other scarcely noticed, neither treated with the consideration they deserve. I refer to his fundamental classification of mental states and to his doctrine of the relation of love to joy, and of hate to sadness. With several highly honoured investigators of the present--assuredly not least honoured by myself--I have entered into a polemical debate, and indeed most vigorously with those whose previous attack has compelled me to a defence. I hope that they do not regard it as a violation of _their_ claims, when I seek, to the utmost of my power, to help the truth, which we in common serve, to her rights, and I assure them in turn, that as I myself speak frankly, so also none the less do I welcome with all my heart every sincere word of my opponent. FRANZ BRENTANO. CONTENTS THE ORIGIN OF THE KNOWLEDGE OF RIGHT AND WRONG A LECTURE PAGE 1. Value of History and Philosophy for Jurisprudence; the new proposals for the reform of legal studies in Austria 1 2. Our theme; Relation to Ihering’s lecture before the Vienna Law Society 2 3. Twofold meaning of the expression “natural right” 2 4. Points of agreement with Ihering; rejection of the “jus naturae” and “jus gentium”; pre-ethical political statutes 3 5. Opposition to Ihering; There exists a universally valid naturally recognizable moral law. Relative independence of the question 4 6. The notion “natural sanction” 4 7. Manifold misconception of the same by philosophers 6 8. Habitually developed feeling of compulsion as such is no sanction 6 9. Motives of hope and fear as such not yet sanction 6 10. The thought of the arbitrary command of a higher power is not the natural sanction 7 11. The ethical sanction is a command similar to the logical rule 8 12. The aesthetic point of view; as little in ethics as in logic the right one 9 13. Kant’s Categorical Imperative an impracticable fiction 10 14. Necessity for preliminary psychological inquiries 10 15. No willing without a final end 10