ECLECTIC (from ∈κλeγω, I select), a term of which the most important application is in philosophy, denotes a thinker whose views are borrowed partly from one, partly from another, of his predecessors. It perhaps requires to be noted that, where the characteristic doctrines of a philosophy are not thus merely adopted, but are the modified products of a blending of the systems from which it takes its rise, the philosophy is not properly eclectic.
The history both of ancient and of modern eclecticism shows that eclecticism naturally springs up when, while literary culture makes the doctrines of the chief philosophies familiar and preserves an interest in philosophy, the first pursuit of thinkers is not purely speculative truth.
In the 2d century b.c., a remarkable tendency toward eclecticism began to manifest itself. The longing to arrive at the one explanation of all things which had inspired the older philosophers became less earnest; the belief, indeed, that any such explanation was attainable began to fail; and thus men, not feeling the need of one complete logical system, came to adopt from all systems the doctrines which best pleased them. In Panaetius we find one of the earliest examples of the modification of Stoicism by the eclectic spirit; and about the same time the same spirit displayed itself among the Peripatetics....
The philosophy that took root in Rome, where philosophy never became other than a secondary pursuit, was naturally for the most part eclectic; of this Cicero is the most striking illustration,—his philosophical works consisting of a mixture, with little or no blending, of doctrines borrowed from Stoicism, Peripateticism, and the scepticism of the Middle Academy. And, not to mention numerous names of minor importance, eclecticism had another representative at Rome in the school of Sextius and Sotion, who were half Stoic, half Pythagorean.
In the last stage of Greek philosophy the eclectic spirit produced remarkable results outside the philosophies of those properly called eclectics. Thinkers chose their doctrines from many sources—from the venerated teaching of Aristotle and Plato, from that of the Pythagoreans and of the Stoics, from the old Greek mythology, and from the Jewish and other Oriental systems. Yet, it must be observed that neo-Platonism, Gnosticism, and the other systems which are grouped under the name Alexandrian, were not truly eclectic, consisting, as they did, not of a mere syncretism of Greek and Oriental thought, but of a mutual modification of the two. It is true that several of the neo-Platonists professed to accept all the teaching both of Plato and of Aristotle, but, in fact, they arbitrarily interpreted Aristotle so as to make him agree with Plato, and Plato so as to make his teachings consistent with the Oriental doctrines which they had adopted, in the same manner as the schoolmen attempted to reconcile Aristotle with the doctrines of the church. Among the early Christians, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Sinesius were eclectics in philosophy.
The eclectics of modern philosophy are too numerous to name. Of Italian philosophers the eclectics form a large proportion. Among the German we may mention (though details cannot here be given) Wolf and his followers, as well as Mendelssohn, Eberhard, Platner, and to some extent Schelling, whom, however, it would be incorrect to describe as merely an eclectic. In the first place he cannot be denied the praise of originality; and, in the second place, it is not so much that his views of anytime were borrowed from a number of philosophers, as that his thinking was influenced first by one philosopher then by another.
But, during the present century, the term eclectic has come to be specially applied to a number of French philosophers who-differ considerably from one another. Of these the earliest were Royer-Collard, who was mainly a follower of Reid, and Maine de Biran; but the name is still more appropriately given to the school of which the most distinguished members are Victor Cousin, Théodore Jouffroy, Damircn, St Hilaire, Rémusat, Garnier, and Ravaisson. Cousin, whose views varied considerably at different periods of his life, not only adopted freely what pleased him in the doctrines of Laromiguière, Royer-Collard, and Maine de Biran, of Kant, Schelling, and Hegel, and of the ancient philosophies, but expressly maintained that the eclectic is the only method now open to the philosopher, whose function thus resolves itself into critical selection and nothing more. “Each system,” he asserted, “is not false, but incomplete, and in reuniting all incomplete systems, we should have a complete philosophy, adequate to the totality of consciousness.” But this assumes that every philosophical truth is contained somewhere in the various philosophies; and if, as it would be surely rash to deny, there still remains philosophical truth undiscovered, but discoverable by human intelligence, it is evident that eclecticism is not yet the only philosophy. For a discussion of tho question how far the above dicta of Cousin represent his own method of philosophizing we must refer the reader to the article Cousin. Eclecticism gained great popularity, and, partly owing to Cousin’s position as minister of public instruction, became the authorized system in the chief seats of learning in France, where it has given a most remarkable impulse to the study of the history of philosophy.
[882 words — estimated reading time: 6 minutes]
a sect of ancient philosophers, who professed to select whatever was good and true from all the other philosophical sects. The Eclectic philosophy was in a flourishing state at Alexandria when our Saviour was upon earth. Its founders formed the design of selecting from the doctrines of all former philosophers such opinions as seemed to approach nearest the truth, and of combining them into one system. They held Plato in the highest esteem; but did not scruple to join with his doctrines whatever they thought conformable to reason in the tenets of other philosophers. Potamon, a Platonist, appears to have been the projector of this plan. The Eclectic system was brought to perfection by Ammonius Saccas, who blended Christianity with his philosophy, and founded the sect of the Ammonians, or New Platonists, in the second century. The moral doctrine of the Alexandrian school was as follows:--The mind of man, originally a portion of the Divine Being, having fallen into a state of darkness and defilement, by its union with the body, is to be gradually emancipated from the chains of matter, and rise by contemplation to the knowledge and vision of God. The end of philosophy, therefore, is the liberation of the soul from its corporeal imprisonment. For this purpose, the Eclectic philosophy recommends abstinence, with other voluntary mortifications, and religious exercises. In the infancy of the Alexandrian school, not a few of the professors of Christianity were led, by the pretensions of the Eclectic sect, to imagine that a coalition might, with great advantage, be formed between its system and that of Christianity. This union appeared the more desirable, when several philosophers of this sect became converts to the Christian faith. The consequence was, that Pagan ideas and ...opinions were by degrees mixed with the pure and simple doctrines of the Gospel. See PLATONISM.
[305 words — estimated reading time: 2 minutes]