Showing 9 results

A copy of Henry Sidgwick: A Memoir was not sent to the editor of Mind 'on the day of publication, but he has now sent a copy 'to Dr. Stout at once.' The reviews are satisfactory, and they have sold over eight hundred copies of the book.

Woodend, Perth Road, Dundee - Thanks him for the Frazer Lectures volume; describes a dinner at St Andrews in commemoration of fifty years tenure of his chair; [Herbert] Turnbull proposed his health, [George] Stout came, but Principal Galloway was unable to be there, and [Sir James] Irvine was away, assessing the 'comparative values of American honorary doctorates'

Typewritten copy of letter dated 28 September 1893. Thanks her for sending him his postcards; explains that the latter 'belonged to a "case" in Psychical Research'. Returns an extract from the Pall Mall Gazette that she sent to him [not included]; calls it 'brightly written and instructive', and believes 'Miss Welby must have a decided talent for this sort of work'. Does not think that she has 'quite caught the salient points of Paulsen's work', but admits that this would be 'almost too much to expect in a brief notice of this kind.' Thanks her for her copies of Selections: will give one to Stout and distribute the others 'to persons who seem worthy of them'. Has read her paper and notes with much interest: thinks that he understands her view more clearly, but that the questions for which she seeks answers will really require a system of philosophy to answer them. Will have a clearer view when he learns the opinions of his 'logical friends' of the points urged 'in the other paper'.

From the Rector, Exeter College, Oxford - Is at St Andrews, completing the first series of Giffords lectures; is sorry to hear about J.G.'s eyes, is staying with Professor Stout whose eyes and ears are bad; Farnell owes his poor sight to a collision with a motor bicycle, but has finished his 3 vol. Pindar; saw Sir James Irvine about the honorary degree at St Andrews, and they could renew the offer, said it was suspended indefinitely because of J.G.'s brother-in-law's [John Steggall?] excessive delicacy.

Reports that he has seen both Dr Coit and Muirhead in the past few days. Writes to explain his understanding of the matter to Sidgwick. Reports that he has thought over the scheme a little since speaking to Coit, who proposes to raise a fund for supporting ethical missionaries and wants Muirhead, Stout, Stephens and Sidgwick 'to act as a kind of counselling board and especially as licensing the said lecturers.' Refers to the financial side of the question. Doubts the success of the scheme. Suggests that if Sidgwick is in agreement with him they should make their positions clear.

The editor of Mind [G. F. Stout] has asked him to write an obituary notice of Henry Sidgwick for the January 1901 number of the journal. If the article were to be essentially an estimate of Henry's philosophical work, he would prefer to leave it to someone else, and would prefer to write of him on a personal level: due to his [Stephen's] absence from Cambridge 'from a very early period', he knows very little at first hand of Henry's work as Professor [of Moral Science] or his work in relation to the promotion of women's education. Asks Nora if she would care to assist him by referring him to others who could be of use to him in this matter. Intends to be in Cambridge the following Tuesday. Has also written to Nora's brother [Arthur Balfour], and to Arthur Sidgwick.

Typewritten copy of letter dated 31 January 1896. Apologises for not having written to her sooner with reference to her article in Mind on ' Significs'; explains that he has been very busy. Adds that he has delayed to write partly because he does not have any useful suggestions on the question of 'a Paper for the International Congress of Psychology'. Declares that he believes that the question 'is mainly one for logicians rather than psychologists and that it will not be very easy to find a mode of treatment which will make it an altogether appropriate topic for a Psychological Congress'. Suggests ' Interpretation as a psychological process' or some similar phrase as the title of her paper. Observes that she does not include psychology 'on p.25 - among the list of studies that has a peculiar meaning term correlated with it', and remarks that he thinks that there would be 'some interest in working out the characteristics of Interpretation as a psychological process'.