In the matter of clarity he is very variable; occasional sentences are brilliantly clear, others present considerable difficulty to the practised student.
His more popular works, however, are much clearer and easier to understand than the two standard treatises on _The Truth of Religion_ and _Life's Basis and Life's Ideal_.

His tendency to repetition is by no means an unmixed evil, for even when he appears to be repeating himself, he is very often in reality expressing new shades of meaning, which help towards the better understanding of the first statements.
The slight looseness in the use of terms, and a certain inexactness of expression that is sometimes apparent, must of course not be exaggerated; it is by no means serious enough to invalidate his main argument.

It gives an opportunity for a great deal of superficial criticism on the part of unsympathetic writers, which, however, can do little harm to Eucken's position.

One has to remember that it is difficult to combine the fervour of a prophet with pedantic exactness, and that an inspired and profound philosopher cannot be expected to spend much time over verbal niceties.
Of course one would prefer absolute clarity and exactness, but we must guard against allowing the absence of these things to prejudice us against the profound truths of a philosophical position, which are not vitally affected by that absence.
Frequent criticism is directed towards the incompleteness of Eucken's philosophy.

He does not introduce his philosophy with a systematic discussion of the great epistemological and ontological problems.
Philosophers have often introduced their work in this way, and it has been customary to expect an introduction of the kind.