Spirit, and Huxley's "ethical life" has practically the same meaning as
Eucken's "spiritual life" on its lower levels.

Numerous instances are to be found in the present-day philosophy of
Germany of the need of a Metaphysic of Life, and of the impossibility of
constructing such from the standpoint of the results of the natural
sciences either singly or combined.

Professor Rickert's investigations are having important effects in this
respect. In his works he has made abundantly clear the difference
between the methods and results of the sciences of Nature and the
sciences of Mind. And even amongst the mental sciences themselves,
all-important aspects of different subject-matters present themselves,
and render themselves as of different _values_.

Professor Münsterberg has worked on a similar path, and has insisted
once more on the nature of reality as this expresses itself in [p.23] a
meaning which is over-individual. Professor Windelband's writings (_cf.
Präludien, Die Philosophie im XX. Jahrhundert_, etc.) have emphasised
very clearly the need of the presence and acknowledgment of norms in
life, and of the meaning of life realising itself in the fulfilment of
these norms.[2]

When we turn to the great neo-Kantian movement, we find alongside of
discussions concerning psychological questions important ethical aspects
presenting themselves. The works of the late Professor Otto Liebmann of
Jena (_cf_ the last part of his _Analysis der Wirklichkeit_) and of the
late Professor Dilthey and Dr. G. Simmel point in the same direction.
Professors Husserl, Lipps, and Vaihinger, as their most recent important
books show, work on lines which insist on bringing life as it is and as