Organic Unity in Diderot: Vertumnis, quotquot sunt, natus iniquis

Author(s): Ira O. Wade

Source: L'Esprit Créateur , Spring 1968, Vol. 8, No. 1, Denis Diderot (Spring 1968), pp. 3-
14
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26277462

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to L'Esprit Créateur

This content downloaded from

145.40.215.184 on Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:10:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Organic Unity in Diderot
Vertumnis, quotquot sunt, natus iniquis

Ira Ο. Wade

HE PROBLEM of Diderot's unity is not new. Diderot himse

ί y in his correspondence with Sophie Volland often reverted to
his almost endless attempts to explain himself to his mistress but
above all to himself. The explanation was based more upon his tem
ment (see H. Dieckmann, "Zur Diderots Interpretation," Rom. F
1938, pp. 46-84), than upon the nature of his intellectual preoccupat
or the central focus of his interests, or the relative importance of
varied works. Diderot did see himself in that correspondence as
director of the Encyclopédie and the author of a number of unpubli
works. He acknowledged that his contemporaries would have to ju
him as encyclopedist, whereas his successors would want to judge
in terms of his unpublished work. There is no doubt, I suppose, th
the thing, in his opinion, which welds the two Diderots together —
Diderot of the Encyclopédie, and the Diderot of the unpublished wor
is thought. In the opening page of the Neveu, where the author is
obviously struggling to find a logical justification for his inner reality,
he places it squarely upon his thought ("mes pensées, ce sont mes
catins"). He even characterizes very neatly the nature of that thought and
the way it is brought by him into some organic unity: "Je m'entretiens
avec moi-même de politique, d'amour, de goût, ou de philosophie." If
one may trust the authenticity of an author's self-portrait, it is obvious
that Diderot saw himself as a kind of dialectician pursuing the rhythm
of his ideas as they eluded him, or as they varied in almost incessantly
paradoxical contradictions, or as they shifted like the weather vanes
in Langres of which he spoke when he sought an appropriate metaphor
for his inner personality.
There is much analogy between the way he saw himself and
Montaigne's discovery that man is "vain, divers, et ondoyant." One
might even extend the comparison and note that Diderot, like Montaigne,

Vol. Vin, No. 1

This content downloaded from

145.40.215.184 on Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:10:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 L'Esprit Créateur

is constantly "essaying" an extraordinarily nimble wit upon the phen

ena of the universe. He, like Montaigne, is constantly trying to dep
the rhythm of becoming rather than the nature of being. Like Montaigne
also, he has some deep apprehension of the vitalism in that becomin
Finally, like his predecessor, he regards the ultimate goal of this in
lectual becoming as esthetic. However, if one examines carefully the
statement which we have just quoted from the Neveu, he would hav
to conclude that while the esthetic goal is readily apparent, the ultim
goal, even for Diderot, is philosophical. He saw himself, just as
contemporaries saw him, as "the Philosophe." That should induce
to give more attention to what he added to Dumarsais' article "Philo
phe" in the Encyclopédie.
Diderot's portrait of his inner self has been attempted often by tho
who have struggled with the problem of his unity. Sainte-Beuve, one
the first to take up the problem anew in the Portraits littéraires, I,
264, rather contradicts himself at every moment in his effort to get
the crux of the matter. Without much evidence, he declares that the
eighteenth-century writer was both "philosopher and artist," adds th
he was little interested in politics, although in philosophy, he was,
to speak, "the sould and the organ of the century." Sainte-Veuve insi
that Diderot is fundamentally encyclopedist, a kind of journalist, an
recalls Grimm's estimate of his colleague when he compared him
nature as Diderot always thought of nature — "riche, fertile, douce
sauvage, simple et majestueuse, bonne et sublime, mais sans aucu
principe dominant, sans maître et sans Dieu." Before he reaches the e
of his sprightly portrait, Diderot has become the atheistic philosop
who is so little atheistic that he is hardly more than a deist, the biologica
vitalistic, materialistic, natural philosopher whose naturalism tends
that inevitable deism. As artist and critic, he is, insists Sainte-Beuv
"eminent," while in the correspondence, he is "moraliste, peintre, c
que." It must be confessed that the portrait is excellent in rendering
intellectual dispersal of the eighteenth-century encyclopedist, in wh
the nineteenth-century critic could apparently find, to quote Grim
remark, "no dominating principle."
One of those in the early part of the twentieth century who did much
to attribute to Diderot the importance which he deserved was Profes
Jean Thomas whose Humanisme de Diderot (1932) has always b
considered one of the fine critical analyses of the eighteenth-centu
author. Thomas sees in Diderot a rather diminished replica of the hum

4 Spring 1968

This content downloaded from

145.40.215.184 on Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:10:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Wadb

ist Montaigne, much overshadowed by Goethe. The sources

humanism, Thomas finds in the scientific training which Dider
himself and which preserved him from utopianism. His sen
has given him a sense of the beauty of the human body and the
awakened in him an enthusiasm for all the arts. His contact with artisans
and artists has made him respectful of the technical arts. Thus by
temperament, by his scientific training, by his artistic taste, and his
curiosity in the technical arts, Diderot's "humanism" has become the
most authentic, the richest, the most concrete of all the philosophies
of the century (p. 160). Thomas' presentation has received very general
commendation. Vernière approves his seeing in Diderot two important
principles: one a principle of unity dealing with the permanent proce
dures of his intellectual method, the other a principle of evolution,
responsible for the progress of his wisdom. He adds, though, that "dans
ce champ immense qui épuise les visées humaines, la clarté des approches
demeure diffuse" (P. Vernière, Diderot·. Œuvres philosophiques, Paris,
1956, p. xviii).
Professor Mornet also commended the Humanisme de Diderot·.
"M. Jean Thomas a eu raison de dire, dans un livre pénétrant, que le
Diderot de 1770 est assez différent du Diderot de 1746-1760, et que, de
la confusion de ses premières aspirations, il a peu à peu dégagé celles
qui lui étaient essentielles." However, not for that does Mornet approve
either the notions of unity or of evolution in Diderot. In his introduction
to Diderot, l'homme et l'œuvre (Paris, 1941), one of his most penetrating
eighteenth-century studies, Mornet calls the editor of the Encyclopédie a
"homo duplex," one of the most changeable and contradictory of men,
and adds that "there has not been any real evolution in Diderot" (p. 10).
Mornet grants that Diderot himself wanted to be a thinker, a "Philo
sophe," and a writer, an "artist." To achieve these two ambitions he was
forced to utilize two faculties utterly distinct: a lucid intelligence, cold,
logical, and conducted by experience, and sudden inspiration which
wells up from the heart, from enthusiasm, from genius. These two sources
of his thought are often in opposition, which accounts for the contra
dictions in his principles, in his methods, and in his conclusions. Mornet
notes that Diderot's conception of nature, his materialism, forms a unity,
but finds itself in conflict with the doctrine of human freedom, one of
Diderot's strongest assertions. There is a similar conflict between the
simple life of the savage and the necessity of a belief in progress. Mornet
concludes that always the author finds himself in disaccord with himself

Vol. VIII, No. 1 5

This content downloaded from

145.40.215.184 on Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:10:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 L'Esprit Créateur

and that his thought and his work are directed often in two opposi
directions.
Since there is so much difficulty in establishing a unity in Didero
there has been a general tendency in Diderot criticism to seek out t
area in which he was most active and of most consequence. Beginnin
with Hermand's Morale de Diderot (1923) and continuing down
Proust's Diderot et l'Encyclopédie (1962) there have been numer
attempts to make Diderot a moralist, an esthetician, an Encyclopedi
a political and economic theorist, and a formal philosopher. Th
presentations are not always exclusive ; the critic may, on occasion, of
for study two aspects of his life as in the case of Professor L. Crocke
Two Diderot Studies: Ethics and Esthetics (Baltimore, 1952).
Crocker confesses in a foreword his inability to "bend Didero
thought to a mythical unity, rational or psychological." For him Di
rot's struggle "is his real personality, his real unity." Yet, elsewher
(p. 4), he declares it an error to analyze Diderot's ethics "without re
ence to the evolution of his thought in general," and he does not hesi
to characterize the structure of Diderot's thought as an interplay betw
morals and nature. He divides me etnicai tnougnt mto periods : a period
of "formalistic ethics," the moralistic type of thinking, a subsequent
period dominated by "scientific inquiry and positivistic naturalism,"
a period of "evolutionary" morality, etc. We must note, further, that this
ethical thought is said to have progressed dialectically and yet that
Diderot left "this synthesis in an undeveloped form that has concealed
its true worth and significance."
In the second essay, Crocker attempts a réévaluation of Diderot's
esthetic ideas. After quoting G. Boas to the effect that there is no need
for unity in eighteenth-century esthetic theory, L. Venturi's remark that
Diderot "has no original esthetic ideas," and F. O. Nolte's opinion
that Diderot was "primarily interested in social and moral, rather than in
esthetic values" (p. 51), Crocker sets out to discuss Diderot's treatment
of subjectivism and objectivism as a means of getting a clearer under
standing of the character of this esthetic thinking, through an analysis
of his attitudes toward basic problems which concern 1. the nature of
beauty, 2. the relationship between the artist and outside reality, 3.
whether the artist is merely an imitator of the beauty of the outside
world or whether he creates that beauty? 4. what is the role of the
imagination? and 5. the moral effect of the artist's work. Crocker finds
that, as in the case of the ethics, there is some sort of dialectical move

6 Spring 1968

This content downloaded from

145.40.215.184 on Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:10:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Wade

ment in Diderot's concept of art which fluctuates (or hesitate

the objective and the subjective, and renders difficult the esta
of Diderot's ideas on taste and the role of the imagination
These hesitations Crocker attributes "to conflicting tendenc
himself" (p. 106). He notes that "his esthetics are not an inde
growth," that there is little "systematic theory," only "fragment
ments" which we have to piece together without imposing u
a "unity which Diderot never gave them" (p. 109). Nonetheless
tends to emphasize "a certain unity that underlies the divergen
and which our discussion has tried to make apparent. This u
in the nature of his [Diderot's] approach to art, in his consta
cupation with the artist's function of selecting and combinin
according to the triple standard of beauty, truth, and moralit
He concludes that "the simple fact is that Diderot has no defin
ent, esthetic philosophy, but a multiplicity of theories, flyin
the spokes of a wheel" (p. 114). Finally, he expresses a wel
impatience with those who treat Diderot's philosophy in par
And he concludes, in agreement with Dieckmann (op. cit., p.
"we must consider Diderot's work in its totality [italics Croc
else falsify him."
I want now to consider three other of our distinguishe
scholars who have turned from a Diderot "moraliste," a
rot "esthéticien" to espouse a Diderot "politique." The first o
Mr. Franco Venturi. Contrary to Mornet's belief that there is no
in Diderot's thought, Venturi (La Jeunesse de Diderot, Paris,
the preface of his work (p. 10) has distinguished three p
a period of preparation for the Encyclopédie, when Diderot
together his energy, his forces, and his ideas. This first phas
an end with the Penseés sur l'interprétation de la nature (1753
was followed by the period of the Encyclopédie and the thea
aspects, said Venturi, of the same movement. This second ph
1—4.4.1— J xl- - -ect
vi viijymiujuii, UUU1VJ, UJUU LAJLV^ OJL AA1 Hid LIV7JUL fl iUtad

(1750-65). 3. The Encyclopédie completed, Diderot withdr

public, writes for himself, and puts his experiences in a se
works, which he refuses to publish. He thus enters upon a
in which he attempts to refine and deepen the ideas
became the leader of his time. Of more consequence is V
tence that Diderot is too new to his ideas and too violent
to be considered a "littérateur," that he is neither a phil

Vol. Vin, No. 1 7

This content downloaded from

145.40.215.184 on Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:10:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 L'Esprit Créateur

véritable sens du mot" nor a poet "au sens profond." His masterp
says Venturi, is the Encyclopédie. His great contribution consiste
giving a political meaning to Enlightenment philosophy (p. 9). Ve
calls it the new force of the Enlightenment coming after the lit
force and the religious force of the first half of the century, an
transformed France into the core of European Enlightenme
inserting the ideas and the aspirations of the philosophes int
history of France and of Europe. Diderot is largely responsible for
new political force.
Professor J. Proust (Diderot et L'Encyclopédie, Paris, 1962) con
ses in his preface that he has tried to seize Diderot's thought
becoming. The dominant nature of that thought being political,
admits that he has centered his study upon politics. He has giv
miciCMiiig ucumiiuu υι .l/iuciui s uuiiucpuuii ui puiiuus. îuui «tiixuic

de Diderot," he writes, "quelque soit son contenu, a d'abor

modifier l'opinion du lecteur pour en faire un citoyen
plus utile, et faire avancer par là une 'Révolution' néce
That is to say, it is first and foremost a political article.
that Venturi was of the same opinion. Nonetheless, h
parently feel that politics constitutes, even with the bro
he proposed, a unifying element in Diderot's thought, sin
himself for not treating Diderot's scientific contribution
pédie on the grounds that it has been fully treated in J. M
Curiously, he assures that this exclusion will not falsify o
of Diderot. On the other hand, he finds that, even with t
there is a coherence in Diderot's ideas for the period 1750
was writing for the Encyclopédie, although he fails to br
what this coherence amounts to. And his inference that there is a
difference between this period 1750-65 and the later period 1765-84
which proves that "son évolution n'est achevée en 1765," certainly
indicates that Diderot's unity consists of at least two things.
Professor Vernière has also returned to the importance of politics
in Diderot's thought. In the four volumes of Diderot texts with their
very important introductions, Vernière has undertaken to present a
philosophical, an esthetic, a political Diderot and the author of the
novels. He has not attempted, however, a synthesis of the four aspects
of the editor of the Encyclopédie. On the contrary, in the introduction
to the Œuvres philosophiques, he notes how risky it would be to give
off-hand an interpretation of the man and reduce his doctrines artificially

8 Spring 1968

This content downloaded from

145.40.215.184 on Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:10:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Wade

to a unity (p. iii). Vernière admits that he has no ready expl

Diderot. He sees among contemporary critics two schools o
those who temper Diderot's prudences and judge him an id
humanist whose theses are fine paradoxes, and those who en
under their banner as a pretext for advancing a particular i
It is as a philosopher interested in politics that Vernière s
present-day importance of the eighteenth-century philosoph
notes that Diderot never passed for a political thinker, and quot
"Dans l'ordre politique, son influence est nulle." Howeve
states that in recent years, the rediscovery of Diderot's pape
ea a numoer or new worxs poriucany orienrea. verniere notes mat one
idea dominates the political essays of 1770-74: enlightened despotism
is not the true politics of the Enlightenment. Contrary to Proust wh
sees in the whole political development of Diderot in the Encyclopédie
a general tendency toward reform (see Proust, op. cit., chapters on
"Principes d'une politique" and "Diderot réformateur"), Vernière sees
in his conclusion a Diderot with a double vocation: "révolutionnaire et
réformiste, l'une qui pousse à reconstruire le monde, l'autre à l'amé
nager."
I have tried to present the considered opinions of these Diderot
scholars not with any desire to combat them. As a matter of fact, I find
them extremely interesting and, for the most part, well substantiated
opinions. It is true that they are at times self-contradictory and often the
judgments of one contradict the opinion of others. Since they are dealing
with a strong character who has these same characteristics, it is only
reasonable that their analyses should partake of this quality. Their error,
if error there is, consists not in misinterpreting Diderot's ideas, but in
failing to analyze the structure of his thinking until they attain the form
of his thought.

It should be noted that Diderot certainly did not pass through the
same sort of intellectual development which we have seen in Voltaire.1
Of the seven forces which combined to form ultimately Voltaire (free
thinking, Horatian poetry, seventeenth-century classical literature, utopie
novelists, England, deism, seventeenth-century philosophers), not one
was really essential to the formation of Diderot save the last one. Voltaire

See Professor Wade's article on "Organic Unity in Voltaire," in the winter

1967 issue of L'Esprit Créateur (Ed. note).

Vol. VIII, No. 1

This content downloaded from

145.40.215.184 on Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:10:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 L'Esprit Créateur

had come into a world which was making a changeover from arts
letters to science, history, and philosophy with the result that he h
reorient himself totally to that changeover. Diderot, due to the fac
he appeared on the scene some twenty years after the debut of Vol
was not confronted with any necessity to readapt himself ; he could pr
by the change which had already been wrought. He had in reality
heir to all these changes chiefly through Voltaire's Lettres philos
ques, the Traité de métaphysique, the Eléments de la philosoph
Newton, and the histories. If it makes sense to divide the Enlighten
into a period of preparation and a period of philosophical express
Diderot only appeared with Rousseau at the beginning of the p
of philosophical expression.
He made his debut very modestly by adapting Shaftesbury's es
to his needs. His Pensées philosophiques tackled some of the deist
blems, but only at second hand. More effort was directed to the pr
of final causes in the Essai sur les aveugles, and problems of psyc
ical impact in the Essai sur les sourds et muets. With the Pensées
l'interprétation de la nature, whatever preparation Diderot had to
had been completed. These fragmentary attempts at structuring
always be characteristic of his work. Always the foundation of h
vities will be his thoughts. Always the range of these thoughts w
encyclopedic in character, that is, they will fluctuate in some sor
dialectical way over a wide area of content. They seem to express a
an open-ended dialectic which is incomplete. If they have any nuc
it will be in the realm of science, chiefly physiological science, but alw
with a philosophical conclusion. Diderot's interests in philosoph
both broad and deep. In a curious way, he pursues his ideas with
consistency, but he always attributes to them analogies which are
startling. The two essays on the blind and the deaf and dumb hav
their nature, biological connotations, but by analogy they carry metaph
ical as well as esthetic implications, since they concern the apprehe
of nature, the expression of nature, and the communication of n
Diderot does not, like Voltaire, reduce all science to morality. But
does try to equate the good, the true, and the beautiful, that is, he
that esthetic values enhance moral values, and moral values augm
metaphysical values. He has to be very concerned not only with t
analogies, but with their coherent integration.
The problem is very definitely a problem in methodology: inv
in it is 1. how to pass from the fact to the idea to the theory to

10 Spring 1968

This content downloaded from

145.40.215.184 on Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:10:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Wade

doctrine to integrated action. Voltaire faced the same problem

too, had pretensions to being both encyclopedist and philosop
the fundamental problem of passing from thought to action
also the necessity of having to organize completely the catego
(religion, art, ethics, science, politics and economics, etc.) an
ities of the structured categories into the full life. And it en
the coherent, consistent, continuous expression of this full li
a way that it constantly changed not only the thought but, a
has noted in his Philosophy of the Enlightenment, the accept
thinking. Diderot's thought at first glance appears fragmentary,
contradictory, and above all, paradoxical. We readily concur
ambiguous, eclectic, self-assertive in an explosive way, and s
dictory in its facile conclusions. This is so because life is
v^juv^jwiwpc-vjioiii ίο uiLimaitiy a way υι uiiiuviiig, aiiu. aj_iww nig,

and philosophy, which is not a subject, but a way of life, draw

energy from the freedom of the human to wander among all th
subjects of life and to constitute thereby ways of thinking and being
All of this is clearly stated by Diderot himself in the article "é
me" in the Encyclopédie. There he defines the eclectic as a philo
who crushes out prejudices, tradition, antiquity, universal co
authority, everything which enslaves the mind, dares think by h
work back to the clearest general principles, examine them,
them, accept nothing except on the evidence of his experience or
son, and of all the philosophies he has examined impartially cre
private philosophy of his own. For the ambition of the eclectic is
be preceptor of humankind than to be its disciple, less to reform
than to reform himself, less to know the truth than to make it know
others. He is not one to plant, but rather one to harvest, and to s
wheat from the chaff. Diderot contrasts him with the sectarian. While
the latter has embraced the doctrine of another philosopher, the eclectic
recoenizes no master.

Diderot denies that there could exist an eclectic sect, unless one
designates a sect a group of people who have one principle in common.
For the eclectic, this principle is to submit his thoughts to no one, to
judge only by his own experience, and to doubt a truth, rather than risk,
by failing to examine things carefully, admitting a falsity. Diderot likens
them to sceptics, but he points out that they are not sceptics, because
they choose those things they believe true. They do not doubt every
thing. They are also more jealous of freedom of thought.

Vol. ΥΙΠ, No. 1 11

This content downloaded from

145.40.215.184 on Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:10:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 L'Esprit Créateur

Eclecticism is thus not a new philosophy. Diderot argues that p

tically all heads of philosophical schools (Plato, Pythagoras, etc.) h
been eclectics. He finds it very difficult for a man of judgment acquain
with several schools of philosophy not to fall either into sceptici
eclecticism. However, eclecticism is not syncretism which is a sect
syncretist strengthens his sect by modifying the opinions of his maste
Diderot calls Luther, Cardano, Bruno syncretists; Francis Bacon is
eclectic — indeed, he established modern eclecticism. Finally, sync
are very numerous, eclectics are rare.
Diderot carefully describes the way the eclectic operates with
He does not gather truths in helter-skelter fashion; he does not
them isolated; he does not make them fit other truths according
definite plan. If a newly-discovered truth fits with a preceding pr
tion, he considers it true, if it does not fit, he suspends his judgm
if it opposes a previous proposition, he rejects it as false.
In spite of his obvious enthusiasm for eclecticism, Diderot has
tempt for the eclectic school which flourished at Alexandria from
fourth to the eighth century, calling it "le système d'extravagan
plus monstrueux qu'on puisse imaginer." He nonetheless in discussin
group (V, 273) was led to examine the relationship between their th
and poetic genius, enthusiasm, metaphysics, and the systematic s
This digression is important, since Diderot approved of this relatio
between poetry and philosophy.
He experienced some difficulty in bringing out these relations
however, all the more since he approved of modern eclectics as f
as he disapproved of ancient, alexandrian eclectics. He consequ
confused the eclectic's qualities which he admired with the exagger
of those qualities at Alexandria which he deplored. For him the t
eclectic is not an Alexandrian like Plotinus, it is Enlightened man
Descartes or Leibniz, or Diderot himself. Consequently, there are
analogies between an eclectic of this kind, and the poet, the enthu
the metaphysician, and the systematic philosopher. For, says Did
what is the genius of the poet except the talent of finding imag
causes for real effects, or imaginary effects for real causes? What
effect of enthusiasm in an inspired man, except the capacity to per
relationships in far-distant objects which no one has ever seen or
imagined? Where can not a metaphysician attain, who, aband
himself to meditation, turns his thoughts to God, Nature, space

12 Spring 1968

This content downloaded from

145.40.215.184 on Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:10:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Wade

time? What result will a systematic philosopher not achiev

pursue the explanation of a phenomenon through a long ch
jectures? The conclusion to which this leads is the convictio
eclectic is the poetic genius, the enthusiast, the metaphy
the systematic philosopher. He is, above all, Diderot.
Diderot attributed the movement of thought from the Re
to the activities of the eclectics. In a magnificent passage w
miniature philosophy of history, a personal confession, and
for the future, the editor of the Encyclopédie sums up the
of thought from the Renaissance to his day, tries to find
the continuation of thought, and proclaims the remaking of
by the eclectic (V, 283 ; regrettably, the passage is too long
in its entirety). Fundamental with Diderot is the conviction that
of human knowledge is a predestined road, from which it is
impossible for the human mind to stray. Every century h
and its great figures, and requires its special talents. He wh
with special talents no longer desirable in the age must eith
that age or consent to die. In the renewal of letters in the R
«rTiof «roc παργ!pH of fi-rcf «roc r»r\t fii=»«r nmrlnpfintic Knt o-r» pxrolnofirvr» rvF

the previous creations. And so, the intelligent turned toward

of grammar, erudition, criticism of literature and the objects of a
When finally the works of the past were understood, one proc
imitate them, and thereby appeared "discours oratoires," "vers
espèce," and a flowering of philosophical works. "On argumen
bâtit des systèmes, dont la dispute découvrit bientôt le fort et
It was at that moment that it became clear that no system co
cepted or rejected in entirety. The efforts made to establish
one gave rise to syncretism. But syncretism brought out the w
in all philosophies:

La nécessité d'abandonner la place qui tombait en ruine de tout c

jetter dans une autre qui ne tardait pas à éprouver le même sort, et
ensuite de celle-ci dans une troisième, que le temps détruisait encore
enfin d'autres entrepreneurs... à se transporter en rase campagne, afi
truire des matériaux de tant de places ruinées, auxquels on reconnaîtr
solidité, une cité durable, éternelle, et capable de résister aux efforts
détruit toutes les autres: ces nouveaux entrepreneurs s'appellèrent éc

In gathering the solid pieces from the ruins of the past, t

covered that some pieces were lacking for the new structure

Vol. VIII, No. 1 13

This content downloaded from

145.40.215.184 on Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:10:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 L'Esprit Créateur

universe. In fact, there was lacking "une infinité de matériaux." Con

vinced these materials are in nature, they set to work to discover them
That is what we now call "cultiver la philosophie expérimentale." It w
not enough, however, to select from the stones of the past those whic
are still valid and to add to them the newly-discovered materials
nature. "Il fallût s'assurer par la combinaison, qu'il était absolume
impossible d'en former un édifice solide et régulier, sur le modèle de
l'univers qu'ils avaient devant les yeux." Because, said Diderot, the
eclectics proposed nothing less than to rediscover the portfolio of th
"Grand Architecte" and the lost blueprints of the universe. But the m
terials are infinite, and the ways of putting them together are infini
also. Many of these ways, in fact, have been tried, but with little succe
Nonetheless, the eclectics continue the quest. These are the systemat
eclectics. Those who are convinced that nothing satisfactory can be ma
out of the present materials, seek new materials, while those who thin
that the moment of reconstruction of the old and the new material h
come, try to rebuild some part of the future edifice. That is the sta
we have now reached:

D'où l'on voit qu'il y a deux sortes d'eclectisme, l'un expérimental, qui consiste
à rassembler les vérités connues et les faits donnés, et à en augmenter le nombre
par l'étude de la nature; l'autre systématique qui s'occupe à comparer entr'elles
les vérités connues et à combiner les faits donnés, pour en tirer ou l'explication
d'un phénomène, ou l'idée d'une expérience. L'eclectisme expérimental est le
partage des hommes laborieux, l'eclectisme systématique est celui des hommes
de génie; celui qui les réunira, verra son nom placé entre les noms de Démocrite,
d'Aristote, et de Bacon.

Thus the human mind must always structure the inner human reality.
Revision is always a new form of vision ; reform, another kind of form ;
evolution, a different sort of revolution. Always change, not chance, is
king. The blueprints of the universe, though, have not been lost, as
Diderot assumed, they just have never been discovered. It could be that
they have not yet been made; it could even be that it is our task to
make them.

Princeton University

j4 Spring 1968

This content downloaded from

145.40.215.184 on Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:10:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms