true satisfaction but the one truth which can be neither of to-day nor of to-morrow because it is eternal." With Descartes, Solov'ev considers that scepticism can serve only as a methodological instrument, through the use of which the absoluteness of true knowledge is all the more brilliantly displayed. Solov'ev does not condemn the temporary and honest unbelief of a Thomas.
It was Solov'ev's aim to complete his ethic and his philosophy of religion by a systematic exposition of "theoretical philosophy," but he published no more than a few essays contributory to this work (1897–1899). It is interesting to read in one of these that Solov'ev does not admit the force of Descartes' cogito ergo sum. The "sum" is unwarranted. Of him who contends, I think (i.e., I have consciousness), therefore I am, we may ask, Whose consciousness have you? The answer might run, No one knows, for it might be the consciousness of Peter or of Paul; it might be a pathological consciousness; and so on.
Solov'ev believes, on the other hand, that in his History of Ethics he has provided an absolutely secure foundation for knowledge and activity, that he has furnished the basis for normal society, free unity in spiritual love. Free theosophy ensures truth, absolute truth; this truth is characterised by absolute reality and absolute rationality.
In contradistinction to the sceptical relativism of the antedecent empirical and rationalistic philosophy, Solov'ev anchors his free philosophy to the all-in-one being. This absolute (this absolute absolute, we might say after the manner of Solov'ev) is given us directly by the mystical or religious apprehension. Through this immediate apprehension, experience and thought are verified, thought acquires its absolute rationality, experience acquires its absolute reality, the mystically conceived "truth" becomes natural truth. Absolute truth is "introduced" into the forms of logical thought and is realised in experience.
In this unification of mystical cognition with experience by means of logical, rational thought, Solov'ev believes he has furnished a harmonious synthesis of theology, rationalistic philosophy, and positive science.
A synthesis of theology, Kant, and Comte?
In his endeavour to evade scepticism, in the last resort Solov'ev can discover no other expedient than to make an
