Chinese Spirit-Medium Cults in Singapore . By Alan J. A. Elliott. Monographs on Social Anthropology, No. 14 (New Series), Department of Anthropology, The London School of Economics and Political Science. London, 1955. 179.

of potential philosophic interest. He in fact appears not to sense what a presentation of his subject would have to be like in order "to claim for it a place in world philosophy," as he hopes. There is no attempt to treat the ideas even of one man in such a way as to show their interconnections or inconsistencies. Instead of analysis, the author prefers a simple combination of quotation and paraphrase: the fascinating argument between Mencius and Kao Tzu as to the identity of "life" and "nature," for example, is given to us without comment, as if the structure of the argument, its point, the meanings of the essential terms, and the lightness of Mencius' position, were all self-evident. If this is, unfortunately, a fairly conventional procedure, we find Mr. Liu conventional also in his larger omissions. Confucian thought after Wang Yang-ming he finds to be "centuries of dreary scholarship," and largely skips it. One hears little or nothing of Confucian views of history or of the arts. It would be a mistake to suppose from the foregoing that the author's attitude toward his subject is one of indifference, however. He shows a strong loyalty to Confucius and Confucianism, and ordinarily uses "orthodox" as a term of praise. On a recent (though now defunct) controversial issue, he takes a firm stand, opposing K'ang Yu-wei and his party's attempt to make Confucianism a religion; and throughout the book, his sympathies and interpretations are generally of the ku-wen variety. Considered simply as history, again the book leaves much to be desired. Some initial attention is given to the non-philosophical substance of history, but this is not continued in any adequate way. In supplying detail of a certain kind, Mr. Liu does better, for he appears frequently to be using Chinese sources. One is apt, therefore, at times to run across a piece of information not previously encountered (thus his account of K'ang Yu-wei's Ta t'ung shu contains some items which are not found in Fung Yu-lan's and Professor Bodde's much longer History of Chinese Philosophy). If one should chance on something new, however, there are ample indications that one would do well not to cite this work. (Consider the acceptance without qualification of the Confucian authorship of the Ch'un ch'iu; or the assumption of the genuineness of the K'ung An-kuo Book of History; or the mysterious remarks about Yen Yuan). This reviewer feels that the time is past when a book on Chinese philosophy as casual, unreflective, and uncritical as this can be justified. In view of its inexpensive mode of publication, which will enable it to reach many thousands of readers, it is particularly unfortunate that it could not have been more satisfactory.