Found here. A very good article.
------------
This is a reprint of a column from a few years ago, but which bears repeating. Once the Church is restored to primacy, philosophy and related arts and sciences will likewise be revived, and the shameful neglect of generations undone.
Philosophy traditionally was divided into seven major branches:
From these seven, several further branches spring:
Please note that, without theology, ethics and natural philosophy have no overlap, no common ground, no common purpose, and neither does epistemology and logic.
Indeed, one often hears bumbling modern philosophers uttering nonsense statements about the relation between the logical and empirical by saying whatever is certain is not true, and whatever is true is not certain.
This is more befitting a Zen koan of a mystic seeking to escape the illusion of self-awareness than a statement of a philosopher seeking to clarify an ambiguity.
But without theology, how can the modernist even open the question of the relation between rationality in creation and reason in man? For, without theology, creation is merely a sequence of chaotic events, not a work of a hand of surpassing craft, whose order and beauty is open to discovery.
Neither was the cosmos made to be investigated by man, for it was not made at all; nor was man made with faculties fit to investigate the cosmos, for he, like it, arise by blind happenstance.
Without theology, any perception of order in the motions of stars and planets, tides and seasons, ballistics and billiards, is a by-product of human brain motions, hence, at best, a happy accident.
Without theology, psychology, anthropology and ethics, the study of man and his works and the study of what man ought to do, have no necessary relation to each other, and to deduce from what man is to what he ought is a fallacy.
One cannot deduce an imperative conclusion from an observation in the major premise without an imperative in the minor premise. Without theology, statements of imperative express only human will, not a moral universal. Hence, from observations of human nature one can only deduce further observations, and say what man is or did, not what he ought do.
In such a case, there is no study of ethics, nor of politics, because there is no subject matter to study. Ethics is merely an observation that strong urges overpower weaker urges, politics that strong men overpower weaker men. Reason flatters rather than rules the soul. Justice plays harlot to despots.
Without theology, the only beauty in nature is in the mind of man, and the only beauty in art is in the eye of the beholder. Without theology, statements of aesthetics express only subjective human taste, not an objective aesthetic universal. Thus, without theology, there is no aesthetics, no study of beauty, because there is no subject matter to study. All is merely a matter of taste, or, rather, once toilets usurp museums, of tastelessness.
Without theology, truth is not a man and a god and a savior who lives in us and grants life and motion to the cosmos. Truth is merely what happens to be. And whatever happens to be, just so happens without any point or aim or purpose.
Logic is an arid study, merely a word-game without application or purpose. Reason cannot reach truth and truth cannot seek virtue.
Without theology, philosophy is rightly despised as mere ethical maxims on serving self-interest, or other sorts word-games without meaning.
Without theology, philosophy is an abortive form of physics, taking speculations about the principle of cause and effect and the persistence of unobserved objects as if these were theories confirmed by empirical observation, rather than axioms without which empiricism is nonexistent.
Without theology, philosophy is rightfully neglected.
Note that I do not restrict my comments to Christian theology. The classical philosophers, Plato and Aristotle and their epigones, Epictetus, Lucretius, Marcus Aurelius, and their disciples, most certainly speculated about divine things, and, in the absence of revealed truth, human reasoning rose admirably to the summit of unaided human effort: it ill behooves any student to mock to nobler precepts of Stoicism, Hedonism, Eudaemonism, or Neoplatonism, without which the triumphs of the medieval scholastics, led by Aquinas, could not have been achieved.
But the limits of pagan theology should likewise be clear to any student of the ancient world. The ethics of Cato of Utica led him both to proud defiance of Caesar’s populist despotism, and to the prideful sin of suicide. The ethics of Marcus Aurelius led him both to cultivate the virtue of the inner light within, as a personal divinity, while the outer world crumbled into chaos; and to persecute the innocent Church, which was the sole institution that would save and preserve his realm.
But the lack of theology cripples philosophy on topics which would seem only remotely related, if not unrelated.
It has long been known among the wise that evil is not a substance of its own self, but a shadow or perversion of some solid object or some healthy good gone wrong.
When, in the hierarchy of ideals, some derivative ideal elevates itself to supremacy above the ideals from which it is derived, chaos results. No evil is evil in itself; evil arises when, like Lucifer attempting the throne of God, some lesser good unseats a greater good.
For example, when Communism elevates compassion for the poor above justice, Communism condones and requires deceit, conspiracy, expropriation, gulags, assassination, show-trials, and genocide.
Compassion for the poor is indeed a good thing, but it is derived or deduced from a higher principle of justice for the poor, and of justice for all.
The usurpation placing the lesser in place of the greater is both illogical and impossible. Nothing but evil results because nothing but evil can result.
So, here. In the modern age, with the abandonment of philosophy as the study and source of truth, natural philosophy usurps its place. For the same reason Communism, by replacing justice with compassion for the poor, cannot produce anything but misery for the poor, likewise Science, by replacing love of wisdom with skeptical agnosticism, cannot produce anything but windy ignorance.
(...)
- Epistemology: the study of knowledge. What is truth?
- Logic: the study of formal reasoning. What follows truth? Wither leads it? What conclusion must be true if a given statement is true?
- Metaphysics: the study of first principles. What precedes truth? Whence come it? What premise must be true when a given statement is true?
- Ethics: the study of virtue. What ought men do to be true?
- Natural Philosophy: the study of the visible order of creation.
- Aesthetics: the study of beauty, both in creation and created by man.
- Theology: the study of the invisible order of creation.
From these seven, several further branches spring:
- Epistemology includes Empiricism, Rationalism, Revelation, and perhaps more.
- Semantics, which asks how words are used, is a handmaiden to Logic, as statements must be put in signs or words. Geometry is logic applied to figures and ratios; Arithmetic is geometry expressed as magnitudes.
- Metaphysics, the study of first principles, includes Ontology, the study of first substances.
- Ethics includes Politics, which is the art of how to live in civilization, which necessarily includes Economics, the study of the trades in goods and services.
- Natural Philosophy includes the study of the inanimate world, Astronomy and Ballistics, Geography and Geology and Meteorology, and the various elements and energies of which they are composed, and includes also naturalism, which studies the growth and decay in due season of flora and fauna, their origins and destiny, and includes the study of man, his nature and his works.
- Aesthetics, ironically, also informs Rhetoric, which is the study of the figures of pleasant and persuasive public speaking, since persuasiveness is a type of beauty.
Please note that, without theology, ethics and natural philosophy have no overlap, no common ground, no common purpose, and neither does epistemology and logic.
Indeed, one often hears bumbling modern philosophers uttering nonsense statements about the relation between the logical and empirical by saying whatever is certain is not true, and whatever is true is not certain.
This is more befitting a Zen koan of a mystic seeking to escape the illusion of self-awareness than a statement of a philosopher seeking to clarify an ambiguity.
But without theology, how can the modernist even open the question of the relation between rationality in creation and reason in man? For, without theology, creation is merely a sequence of chaotic events, not a work of a hand of surpassing craft, whose order and beauty is open to discovery.
Neither was the cosmos made to be investigated by man, for it was not made at all; nor was man made with faculties fit to investigate the cosmos, for he, like it, arise by blind happenstance.
Without theology, any perception of order in the motions of stars and planets, tides and seasons, ballistics and billiards, is a by-product of human brain motions, hence, at best, a happy accident.
Without theology, psychology, anthropology and ethics, the study of man and his works and the study of what man ought to do, have no necessary relation to each other, and to deduce from what man is to what he ought is a fallacy.
One cannot deduce an imperative conclusion from an observation in the major premise without an imperative in the minor premise. Without theology, statements of imperative express only human will, not a moral universal. Hence, from observations of human nature one can only deduce further observations, and say what man is or did, not what he ought do.
In such a case, there is no study of ethics, nor of politics, because there is no subject matter to study. Ethics is merely an observation that strong urges overpower weaker urges, politics that strong men overpower weaker men. Reason flatters rather than rules the soul. Justice plays harlot to despots.
Without theology, the only beauty in nature is in the mind of man, and the only beauty in art is in the eye of the beholder. Without theology, statements of aesthetics express only subjective human taste, not an objective aesthetic universal. Thus, without theology, there is no aesthetics, no study of beauty, because there is no subject matter to study. All is merely a matter of taste, or, rather, once toilets usurp museums, of tastelessness.
Without theology, truth is not a man and a god and a savior who lives in us and grants life and motion to the cosmos. Truth is merely what happens to be. And whatever happens to be, just so happens without any point or aim or purpose.
Logic is an arid study, merely a word-game without application or purpose. Reason cannot reach truth and truth cannot seek virtue.
Without theology, philosophy is rightly despised as mere ethical maxims on serving self-interest, or other sorts word-games without meaning.
Without theology, philosophy is an abortive form of physics, taking speculations about the principle of cause and effect and the persistence of unobserved objects as if these were theories confirmed by empirical observation, rather than axioms without which empiricism is nonexistent.
Without theology, philosophy is rightfully neglected.
Note that I do not restrict my comments to Christian theology. The classical philosophers, Plato and Aristotle and their epigones, Epictetus, Lucretius, Marcus Aurelius, and their disciples, most certainly speculated about divine things, and, in the absence of revealed truth, human reasoning rose admirably to the summit of unaided human effort: it ill behooves any student to mock to nobler precepts of Stoicism, Hedonism, Eudaemonism, or Neoplatonism, without which the triumphs of the medieval scholastics, led by Aquinas, could not have been achieved.
But the limits of pagan theology should likewise be clear to any student of the ancient world. The ethics of Cato of Utica led him both to proud defiance of Caesar’s populist despotism, and to the prideful sin of suicide. The ethics of Marcus Aurelius led him both to cultivate the virtue of the inner light within, as a personal divinity, while the outer world crumbled into chaos; and to persecute the innocent Church, which was the sole institution that would save and preserve his realm.
But the lack of theology cripples philosophy on topics which would seem only remotely related, if not unrelated.
It has long been known among the wise that evil is not a substance of its own self, but a shadow or perversion of some solid object or some healthy good gone wrong.
When, in the hierarchy of ideals, some derivative ideal elevates itself to supremacy above the ideals from which it is derived, chaos results. No evil is evil in itself; evil arises when, like Lucifer attempting the throne of God, some lesser good unseats a greater good.
For example, when Communism elevates compassion for the poor above justice, Communism condones and requires deceit, conspiracy, expropriation, gulags, assassination, show-trials, and genocide.
Compassion for the poor is indeed a good thing, but it is derived or deduced from a higher principle of justice for the poor, and of justice for all.
The usurpation placing the lesser in place of the greater is both illogical and impossible. Nothing but evil results because nothing but evil can result.
So, here. In the modern age, with the abandonment of philosophy as the study and source of truth, natural philosophy usurps its place. For the same reason Communism, by replacing justice with compassion for the poor, cannot produce anything but misery for the poor, likewise Science, by replacing love of wisdom with skeptical agnosticism, cannot produce anything but windy ignorance.
(...)
No comments:
Post a Comment