Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T23:29:07.422Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

George Combe and common sense

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 December 2014

SEAN DYDE
SEAN DYDE*
Affiliation:
Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Boltzmannstrasse 22, 14195 Berlin, Germany. Email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article examines the history of two fields of enquiry in late eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century Scotland: the rise and fall of the common sense school of philosophy and phrenology as presented in the works of George Combe. Although many previous historians have construed these histories as separate, indeed sometimes incommensurate, I propose that their paths were intertwined to a greater extent than has previously been given credit. The philosophy of common sense was a response to problems raised by Enlightenment thinkers, particularly David Hume, and spurred a theory of the mind and its mode of study. In order to succeed, or even to be considered a rival of these established understandings, phrenologists adapted their arguments for the sake of engaging in philosophical dispute. I argue that this debate contributed to the relative success of these groups: phrenology as a well-known historical subject, common sense now largely forgotten. Moreover, this history seeks to question the place of phrenology within the sciences of mind in nineteenth-century Britain.

Type
Research Article
Information
The British Journal for the History of Science , Volume 48 , Issue 2 , June 2015 , pp. 233 - 259
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © British Society for the History of Science 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Young, Robert, Mind, Brain and Adaptation in the Nineteenth Century, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1970Google Scholar; Parssinen, T.M., ‘Popular science and society: the phrenology movement in early Victorian Britain’, Journal of Social History (1974) 8, pp. 1–20Google Scholar; de Giustino, David, Conquest of Mind: Phrenology and Victorian Social Thought, London: Croom Helm, 1975Google Scholar.

2 Shapin, Steven, ‘The politics of observation: cerebral anatomy and social interests in the Edinburgh phrenology disputes’, in Wallis, Roy (ed.), On the Margins of Science: The Social Construction of Rejected Knowledge, Keele: University of Keele Press, 1979, pp. 139–178Google Scholar.

3 Cooter, Roger, The Cultural Meaning of Popular Science: Phrenology and the Organization of Consent in Nineteenth-Century Britain, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984Google Scholar; Cooter, , Phrenology in the British Isles: An Annotated, Historical Biobibliography and Index, London: Scarecrow Press, 1998Google Scholar; Gieryn, Thomas, ‘Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: strains and interests in the professional ideologies of scientists’, Amercian Sociological Review (1983) 48, pp. 781–795CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Cantor, G.M., ‘The Edinburgh phrenology debate: 1803–1828’, Annals of Science (1975) 32, pp. 195–218Google Scholar; Cantor, , ‘A critique of Shapin's social interpretation of the Edinburgh phrenology debate’, Annals of Science (1975) 32, pp. 245–256Google Scholar.

5 van Wyhe, John, Phrenology and the Origins of Victorian Scientific Naturalism, Aldershot: Ashgate, 2004Google Scholar.

6 Stack, David, Queen Victoria's Skull: George Combe and the Mid-Victorian Mind, London: Hambledon Continuum, 2008Google Scholar.

7 Young, op. cit. (1), p. 3.

8 Vidal, Fernando, ‘Brainhood: anthropological figure of modernity’, History of the Human Sciences (2009) 22(1), pp. 5–36Google Scholar.

9 Cantor, ‘The Edinburgh phrenology debate’, op. cit. (4), p. 196; Cantor, ‘A critique of Shapin's social interpretation’, op. cit. (4), pp. 204–208.

10 Stack, op. cit. (6), pp. 33–46.

11 See Outram, Dorinda, The Enlightenment, 2nd edn, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005Google Scholar.

12 Other works which stress this point include Smith, Roger, Between Mind and Nature: A History of Psychology, London: Reaktion Books, 2012Google Scholar; Vidal, Fernando, The Sciences of the Soul: The Early Modern Origins of Psychology (trans. Brown, Saskia), Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2011CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Smith, Roger, The Fontana History of the Human Sciences, London: Fontana, 1997Google Scholar; Hatfield, Gary, ‘The workings of the intellect: mind and psychology’, in Easton, Patricia (ed.), Logic and Workings of the Mind: The Logic of Ideas and Faculty Psychology in Early Modern Philosophy, Atascadero, CA: Ridgeview, 1997, pp. 21–45Google Scholar; Hatfield, , ‘Remaking the science of mind: psychology as natural science’, in Fox, Christopher, , RoyPorter, and Wokler, Robert (eds.), Inventing Human Science: Eighteenth-Century Domains, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995, pp. 184–231Google Scholar.

13 Vidal, op. cit. (12), pp. 243–282.

14 Gaukroger, Steven, The Collapse of Mechanism and the Rise of Sensibility: Science and the Shaping of Modernity, 1680–1760, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011, pp. 389–420, 393Google Scholar.

15 Broadie, Alexander, ‘The human mind and its powers’, in Broadie, (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to the Scottish Enlightenment, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003, pp. 60–78Google Scholar, 61–62.

16 Indeed, Paul Wood has suggested that the notion of the Enlightenment itself was invented by Dugald Stewart. See Wood, Paul, ‘Dugald Stewart and the invention of “the Scottish Enlightenment”’, in Wood, (ed.), The Scottish Enlightenment: Essays in Reinterpretation, Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press, 2000, pp. 1–35Google Scholar.

17 John Robertson, ‘The Scottish contribution to the Enlightenment’, in Wood, The Scottish Enlightenment, op. cit. (16), pp. 37–62.

18 Dixon, Thomas, From Passions to Emotions: The Creation of a Secular Psychological Category, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003, p. 118Google Scholar; Emerson, Roger, ‘Science and the origins and concerns of the Scottish Enlightenment’, History of Science (1988) 26, pp. 333–366Google Scholar; Wood, Paul, ‘Science and the pursuit of virtue in the Aberdeen Enlightenment’, in Stewart, M.A. (ed.), Studies in the Philosophy of the Scottish Enlightenment, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991, pp. 127–150Google Scholar; Wood, , ‘The natural history of man in the Scottish Enlightenment’, History of Science (1989) 27, pp. 89–123Google Scholar.

19 Richard Sher, ‘Science and medicine in the Scottish Enlightenment: the lessons of book history’, in Wood, The Scottish Enlightenment, op. cit. (16), pp. 99–156.

20 Phillipson, Nicholas, ‘The Scottish Enlightenment’, in Porter, Roy and Teich, Mikuláš (eds.), The Enlightenment in National Context, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981, pp. 19–40Google Scholar.

21 See Emerson, Roger, Academic Patronage in the Scottish Enlightenment: Glasgow, Edinburgh and St. Andrews, Edinburgh University Press, 2008CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Emerson, , ‘Politics and the Glasgow professors, 1690–1800’, in Hook, Andrew and Sher, Richard (eds.), The Glasgow Enlightenment, East Linton: Tuckwell Press, 1995, pp. 21–39Google Scholar; Withrington, Donald, ‘Education and society in the eighteenth century’, in Phillipson, Nicholas and Mitchison, Rosalind (eds.), Scotland in the Age of Improvement: Essays in Scottish History in the Eighteenth Century, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1970, pp. 169–199Google Scholar. For a sympathetic account of Henry Dundas see Fry, Michael, The Dundas Despotism, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1992Google Scholar.

22 Morrell, J.B., ‘The University of Edinburgh in the late eighteenth century: its scientific eminence and academic structure’, Isis (1971) 62(2), pp. 158–171Google Scholar.

23 Reid, Thomas, An Inquiry into the Human Mind on the Principles of Common Sense, 5th edn, Edinburgh: Bell & Bradfute, and William Creech, 1801, pp. 6–7Google Scholar.

24 Reid, op. cit. (23), p. 28.

25 Reid, op. cit. (23), p. 49.

26 Reid, op. cit. (23), p. 52.

27 Reid, op. cit. (23), p. 42.

28 Reid, op. cit. (23), pp. 44–45.

29 On the sensorium commune see Figlio, Karl, ‘Theories of perception and the physiology of mind in the late eighteenth century’, History of Science (1975) 12, pp. 177–212Google Scholar.

30 Reid, op. cit. (23), p. 472. The phrase ‘furniture of the mind’ originated with George Turnbull. See Wood, op. cit. (18), p. 132.

31 On Reid's appointment to the Glasgow chair, see Wood, Paul, ‘“The fittest man in the kingdom”: Thomas Reid and the Glasgow Chair of Moral Philosophy’, Hume Studies (1997) 23, pp. 277–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

32 As many historians have attested, Reid took an interest in the mathematical problems of his day. See, for example, Wood, Paul, ‘Thomas Reid and the culture of science’, in Cuneo, Terence and van Woudenberg, René (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Thomas Reid, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004, pp. 53–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Guicciardini, Niccolò, ‘Thomas Reid's mathematical manuscripts: a survey’, Reid Studies (2001) 4(2), pp. 71–86Google Scholar.

33 Reid, Thomas, Essays on the Intellectual Powers of Man, Edinburgh: John Bell, 1785, p. 9Google Scholar.

34 Reid, op. cit. (33), p. 37.

35 Larry Laudan has suggested that Reid began a tradition that continues to describe Newton as a methodological, as well as scientific, genius. See Laudan, L.L., ‘Thomas Reid and the Newtonian turn of British methodological thought’, in Butts, Robert and Davis, John (eds.), The Methodological Heritage of Newton, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1970, pp. 101–131Google Scholar. See also Fara, Patricia, Newton: The Making of Genius, London: Macmillan, 2002Google Scholar; Yeo, Richard, ‘Genius, method, and morality: images of Newton in Britain, 1760–1860’, Science in Context (1988) 2, pp. 257–284Google Scholar.

36 Reid, op. cit. (33), p. 23. On Jakob Brucker's 1732 work Philosophical History of the Theory of Ideas and other eighteenth-century histories of association see Vidal, op. cit. (12), pp. 171–176.

37 Reid, op. cit. (33), p. 56. Reid's target here was Francis Hutcheson's Inquiry into the Original of Our Ideas of Beauty and Virtue, London: J. Darby, 1725.

38 Reid, op. cit. (33), p. 13.

39 Reid, op. cit. (33), p. 306.

40 Reid, op. cit. (33), p. 719.

41 Reid, Thomas, Essays on the Active Powers of Man, Edinburgh: John Bell, 1788Google Scholar.

42 One notable exception was Joseph Priestley, who detected not only loose thinking but a slight against his own materialist theory of the mind. Priestley, Joseph, An Examination of Reid, Beattie and Oswald, 2nd edn, London: J. Johnson, 1775Google Scholar.

43 Anon, ‘An enquiry into the human mind, on principles of common sense’, Monthly Review (1764) 30, pp. 358–378Google Scholar, 359.

44 Anon, ‘Essays on the intellectual powers of man’, Scots’ Magazine (1786) 48, pp. 638–642Google Scholar, 642.

45 See, for example, Beattie, James, Elements of Moral Science, Edinburgh: T. Cadell, 1790–1793Google Scholar; Oswald, James, Appeal to Common Sense in Behalf of Religion, 2 vols., London: J. Hughes, 1766–1772Google Scholar.

46 Stewart, Dugald, The Philosophy of the Active and Moral Powers of Man, Edinburgh: Adam Black, 1828, p. viGoogle Scholar.

47 Stewart, Dugald, Elements of the Philosophy of the Human Mind, 3 vols., Edinburgh: W. Creech, 1792–1827Google Scholar, vol. 1, p. 23.

48 Stewart, op. cit. (47), p. 27.

49 Stewart, op. cit. (47), p. 257.

50 This endorsement of Condorcet led two Lords of Session to call on Stewart to retract these statements and to reaffirm that his students were bring taught ‘a love and a veneration for the British constitution’. Hamilton, William, The Collected Works of Dugald Stewart, 11 vols., Edinburgh: Thomas Constable & Co, 1858, vol. 10, pp. lxx–lxxvGoogle Scholar. On Stewart's politics and political theory see Collini, Stefan, Winch, Donald and Burrow, John, That Noble Science of Politics: A Study in Nineteenth-Century Intellectual History, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983, pp. 23–62Google Scholar.

51 Stewart, op. cit. (47), p. 226. Humanity, as Steven Shapin and Barry Barnes have pointed out, was not regarded as a universal whole during this period but as a number of different ‘types’ which guided pedagogical discussion. See Shapin, Steven and Barnes, Barry, ‘Head and hand: rhetorical resources in British pedagogical writing 1770–1850’, Oxford Review of Education (1976) 2, pp. 231–254Google Scholar.

52 Stewart, op. cit. (47), p. 282, italics in original.

53 Stewart, op. cit. (47), p. 291.

54 See Olson, Richard, Scottish Philosophy and British Physics, 1750–1880, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1975, pp. 55–93Google Scholar.

55 Stewart, op. cit. (47), p. 176.

56 Stewart, op. cit. (47), p. 7.

57 Stewart, op. cit. (47), pp. 11–12.

58 Stewart, op. cit. (47), p. 13.

59 Stewart, op. cit. (47), p. 32.

60 See Cantor, G.N., ‘The Academy of Physics at Edinburgh, 1797–1800’, Social Studies of Science (1975) 5, pp. 109–134Google Scholar.

61 On Robison's natural philosophy see Wilson, David B., Seeking Nature's Logic: Natural Philosophy in the Scottish Enlightenment, University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2009, pp. 201–271Google Scholar.

62 Wood, Paul, ‘The hagiography of common sense: Dugald Stewart's account of the life and writings’, in Holland, Alan (ed.), Philosophy, Its History and Historiography, Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 1985, pp. 305–322Google Scholar.

63 [Francis Jeffrey], ‘Account of the life and writings of Thomas Reid’, Edinburgh Review (1804) 3(6), pp. 269–287, 273. On Francis Jeffrey's life and work see Cockburn, Henry, Life of Francis Jeffrey, Edinburgh: Adam and Charles Black, 1872Google Scholar.

64 [Jeffrey], op. cit. (63), p. 275.

65 [Jeffrey], op. cit. (63), p. 276.

66 Davie, G.E., The Social Significance of the Scottish Philosophy of Common Sense, Dundee: University of Dundee Press, 1973, p. 16Google Scholar. See also Paoletti, Cristina, ‘Common sense in the public sphere: Dugald Stewart and the Edinburgh Review’, History of European Ideas (2012) 38(1), pp. 162–78Google Scholar. [Francis Jeffrey], ‘Stewart's philosophical essays’, Edinburgh Review (1810) 17(33), pp. 167–211.

67 On the Leslie affair see Morrell, J.B., ‘The Leslie affair: careers, kirk and politics in Edinburgh in 1805’, Scottish History Review (1975) 54(157), pp. 63–82Google Scholar; Burke, John G., ‘Kirk and causality in Edinburgh, 1805’, Isis (1970) 61(3), pp. 340–354Google Scholar.

68 On this transition see Dixon, Thomas, Thomas Brown: Selected Philosophical Writings, Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2010, p. 16Google Scholar.

69 Brown, Thomas, Sketch of a System of the Philosophy of the Human Mind, Edinburgh: Bell & Bradfute, Manners & Miller, and Waugh & Innes, 1820, p. xGoogle Scholar.

70 Anon., ‘Elements of the philosophy of the human mind’, British Review (1815) 6, pp. 170–200Google Scholar, 189.

71 Brown, Thomas, Observations on the Zoonomia of Erasmus Darwin, M.D., Edinburgh: Mundell & Son, 1798, pp. ix–xGoogle Scholar

72 Brown, op. cit. (69), p. 187.

73 Brown, op. cit. (69), pp. 185–230. Indeed, Brown's lectures were littered with verse, and he published numerous volumes of poetry. See Rands, Alma, ‘Thomas Brown's theories of association and perception as they relate to his theories of poetry’, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism (1970) 28, pp. 473–483Google Scholar.

74 Brown, op. cit. (69), pp. 19–20.

75 Brown, op. cit. (69), p. 22.

76 Brown, Thomas, Lectures on the Philosophy of the Human Mind, 4 vols., Edinburgh: W. & C. Tait, 1820, vol. 1, p. 20Google Scholar.

77 Brown, op. cit. (76), p. 19.

78 Brown, op. cit. (76), pp. 13–14.

79 Brown, op. cit. (76), p. 10, italics in original.

80 See [Thomas Brown], ‘Lettre de Charles Villers à Georges Cuvier’, Edinburgh Review (1803) 1, pp. 147–160; [John Gordon], ‘The doctrines of Gall and Spurzheim’, Edinburgh Review (1815) 25(49), pp. 227–268.

81 See Barclay, John, An Inquiry into Opinions Concerning Life and Organization, Edinburgh: Bell & Bradfute, Waugh & Innes, 1822, pp. 372–381Google Scholar; Roget, Peter, Treatises on Physiology and Phrenology, Edinburgh: Adam & Charles Black, 1838Google Scholar; [William Benjamin Carpenter], ‘Mr. Noble on the brain and its physiology’, British and Foreign Medical Review (1846) 22, pp. 488–544.

82 Combe, George, ‘Explanation of the physiognomical system of Drs. Gall and Spurzheim’, Scots Magazine & Edinburgh Literary Miscellany (1817) 79, pp. 242–250Google Scholar, 244–245. On the implications of the two cerebral hemispheres for later nineteenth-century neuroscience see Harrington, Anne, Medicine, Mind and the Double Brain: A Study in Nineteenth-century Thought, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987Google Scholar.

83 Combe, op. cit. (82), pp. 247–248.

84 Roger Cooter puts the number at over 233 public lecturers of phrenology up to 1860. See Cooter, The Cultural Meaning of Popular Science, op. cit. (3), pp. 272–300. See van Wyhe, John, ‘The diffusion of phrenology through public lecturing’, in Fyfe, Aileen and Lightman, Bernard (eds.), Science in the Marketplace: Nineteenth-Century Sites and Experiences, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2007, pp. 60–96Google Scholar. On Combe's phrenological lectures see Stack, op. cit. (6), pp. 50–53.

85 Combe, George, Essays on Phrenology, Edinburgh: Bell & Bradfute, 1819, p. 34Google Scholar.

86 Combe, op. cit. (85), pp. 38–39.

87 Combe, op. cit. (85), pp. 16–17.

88 Combe, op. cit. (85), p. 19.

89 Combe, op. cit. (85), p. 21.

90 Combe, op. cit. (85), p. 48, italics in original.

91 Combe, op. cit. (85), p. 2.

92 Combe, George, ‘Letter from the author of Essays on Phrenology’, Edinburgh Magazine and Literary Miscellany (1820) 7, pp. 43–46Google Scholar, 46, italics in original. The original letter to which Combe responded was published as anon., ‘An attempt to reconcile metaphysics and phrenology’, Edinburgh Magazine and Literary Miscellany (1820) 6, pp. 395–405.

93 Stewart had suffered a stroke earlier in the year and had developed rheumatism in his writing hand. This correspondence was published after Stewart's death: anon., ‘Correspondence between Sir G. S. Mackenzie, BART. and the late Dugald Stewart, Esq.’ Phrenological Journal and Miscellany (1831–1832) 7, pp. 303–309.

94 Welsh, David, Account of the Life and Writings of Thomas Brown, Edinburgh: W. & C. Tait, 1825, p. 521Google Scholar.

95 Welsh, op. cit. (94), p. 520; [Brown], op. cit. (80), pp. 147–160.

96 Combe, George, A System of Phrenology, Edinburgh: John Anderson, 1825, p. 251Google Scholar.

97 Brown was pointedly left out of Stewart's Dissertation, a conjectural history which created a vision of the Scottish Enlightenment. In 1827 Stewart admitted that Brown was ‘a person of rare and admirable talents’, but that he was also ‘too confident in his rapid judgements, too ready to conclude that there were no difficulties in his way when he was unable to see them; and not sufficiently aware, that … the success of our inquiries depends on that capacity of patient thinking’. Stewart, Dugald, Elements of the Philosophy of the Human Mind, 3 vols., London: John Murray, 1792–1827, pp. 501–502Google Scholar.

98 Combe, op. cit. (96), pp. vi–vii.

99 [William Pulteney Alison], ‘Comparative merits of the mental philosophy of the school of Reid and Stewart, and of the phrenologists’, Phrenological Journal and Miscellany (1836–1837) 10, pp. 301–336, 313. As phrenologists were wont to do, Neill passed this correspondence on to Combe and had it published against Alison's wishes. Combe at least did the courtesy of assigning him the penname ‘Academicus’ and Neill ‘Consiliarius’.

100 [Francis Jeffrey], ‘A System of Phrenology’, Edinburgh Review (1826) 44(88), pp. 253–318, 253.

101 [Jeffrey], op. cit. (100), pp. 256–257.

102 [Jeffrey], op. cit. (100), p. 260.

103 [Jeffrey], op. cit. (100), pp. 283–284.

104 [Jeffrey], op. cit. (100), p. 268.

105 [Jeffrey], op. cit. (100), p. 269.

106 [Jeffrey], op. cit. (100), p. 263.

107 [Jeffrey], op. cit. (100), p. 265.

108 [Jeffrey], op. cit. (100), pp. 265–266.

109 [Jeffrey], op. cit. (100), p. 267.

110 A Metaphysico-Phrenologist [William Ritchie], ‘Phrenology – Edinburgh Review’, The Scotsman, 25 October 1826, pp. 673–674.

111 Combe, George, ‘Letter from George Combe to Francis Jeffrey, Esq.’, Phrenological Journal and Miscellany (1826–1827) 4, pp. 1–82Google Scholar , 3.

112 Combe, op. cit. (111), p. 37.

113 Combe, op. cit. (111), p. 36.

114 Combe, op. cit. (111), p. 35, italics in original.

115 Combe, op. cit. (111), p. 46.

116 Combe, op. cit. (111), p. 15.

117 Combe, op. cit. (111), p. 41.

118 Combe, op. cit. (111), p. 54.

119 On Pinel and monomania see Goldstein, Jan, Console and Classify: The French Psychiatric Profession in the Nineteenth Century, London: The University of Chicago Press, 1985Google Scholar.

120 Combe, op. cit. (111), p. 25.

121 [Francis Jeffrey], ‘Note to the article on phrenology in no. 88’, Edinburgh Review (1826) 45, pp. 248–253, 252.

122 Combe, op. cit. (111), p. 248.

123 Van Wyhe, op. cit. (5), pp. 96–126.

124 Dixon, op. cit. (68), pp. 4–6.

125 Phillipson, Nicholas, ‘The pursuit of virtue in Scottish University Education: Dugald Stewart and Scottish moral philosophy in the Enlightenment’, in Phillipson, (ed.), Universities, Society, and the Future, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1983, pp. 82–101Google Scholar, 100.

126 Mortera, Emanuele, ‘Stewart, Kant, and the reworking of common sense’, History of European Ideas (2012) 38(1), pp. 122–142Google Scholar; Friday, Jonathan, ‘Dugald Stewart on Reid, Kant and the refutation of Idealism’, British Journal for the History of Philosophy (2005) 13, pp. 263–286Google Scholar.

127 For Hamilton, phrenology could be refuted using its own shaky foundations without the need for metaphysical discussion. See Van Wyhe, op. cit. (5), pp. 85–92.

128 [William Hamilton], ‘Philosophy of perception. Reid and Brown’, Edinburgh Review (1830) 52(103), pp. 158–207, 165. On Hamilton's philosophy and its relation to Kant see Ralph Jessop, ‘The logic of Sir William Hamilton: tunnelling through sand to place the keystone in the aristotelic arch’, in Gabbay, Dov M. and Woods, John (eds.), British Logic in the Nineteenth Century, Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2008, pp. 93–163Google Scholar; Attis, David, ‘Hamilton, William (1788–1856)’, in Mander, W.J. and Sell, Alan (eds.), Dictionary of Nineteenth-Century British Philosophers, 2 vols., Bristol: Thoemmes Press, 2002, vol. 1, pp. 483–489Google Scholar; Veitch, John, Memoir of Sir William Hamilton, Bart., Edinburgh: William Blackwood & Sons, 1869Google Scholar.

129 On Ferrier and his philosophy see Keefe, Jennifer, ‘Ferrier, common sense and consciousness’, Journal of Scottish Philosophy (2007) 5(2), pp. 169–185Google Scholar; Mayo, Bernard, ‘The moral and physical order: a reappraisal of Jame Frederick Ferrier’, Journal of Scottish Philosophy (2007) 5(2), pp. 159–167Google Scholar.

130 [James Frederick Ferrier], ‘An introduction to the philosophy of consciousness’, Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine (1838–1839) 43(268), pp. 187–201, 192; 43(270), pp. 437–452; 43(272), pp. 784–791; 44(274), pp. 234–244; 44(276), pp. 539–552; 45(280), pp. 201–211; 45(281), pp. 419–430.

131 [Ferrier], op. cit. (130), 43 (270), p. 440.

132 As quoted in Davie, G.E., The Democratic Intellect: Scotland and Her Universities in the Nineteenth Century, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1982, p. 282Google Scholar.

133 [Alexander Smith], ‘Moral philosophy’, Edinburgh Review (1842) 74(150), pp. 376–414, 376. See also Combe, George, Moral Philosophy: or, The Duties of Man considered in His Individual, Social or Domestic Capacities, Edinburgh: Maclachlan, Stewart & Co, 1840Google Scholar.

134 [Smith], op. cit. (133), p. 382, italics in original.