Scribd Logo
Importer

Bienvenue sur Scribd !

  • G.P. Klubertanz - Metaphysics & Theistic Convictions

    Transféré par

    daPiperno
    27 vues20 pages
    Klubertanz on teaching metaphysics.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Formats disponibles

    PDF ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd

    Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

    Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

    Signaler ce document
    Klubertanz on teaching metaphysics.

    Droits d'auteur :

    © All Rights Reserved
    Téléchargez comme PDF ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd
    Signaler comme contenu inapproprié
    27 vues20 pages

    G.P. Klubertanz - Metaphysics & Theistic Convictions

    Transféré par

    daPiperno
    Klubertanz on teaching metaphysics.

    Droits d'auteur :

    © All Rights Reserved
    Téléchargez comme PDF ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd
    Signaler comme contenu inapproprié
    sur 20
    PHILOSOPHY WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS poblished by ‘THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA PRESS (620 Michigan Aveaue, NE. Washington 17,D:C. 1961. Workshop Philosophy and the lnepration of Cooremporary Catholic cation ui \ Rey. George F Malas, O.M.1, Bato. DATE DUE nan calle credence. But it can also be found form Ge of real apprehension and real assent ad Only sages it reac the perfection of which itis capable. In rae eset state, numaniatc krowlodge is purified from at thie Pope grous errors of common sense by reflecion. It se eee eral Eoowledge: in regard tothe object kaows, umaniers knowledge pracps «thing according cts manl- eae of baowability in regard to the knowing eubject, {ole tac knowledge 1.4 harmonious cooperation of al Tan's owing powero. AB 8 comeqience, humanistic kiowl- a owen purely speculative; Ie aways involves some cae eer response, Bur this Feeponee is not to the object see Genaible material wily or pleasure~giving quality. JP. onniotcy or eeathetiy response 1s directed 0 the con ‘Thing Gomemplation of the ebject, Humanitic knowledge METAPHYSICS 293 est divided io Aina, cme noe ip, tas fone undivided object, and this isthe ive of human Sigoiticance. {rviewe the world asa human world-vs Lebens- ‘eel as we might say. And of couree this fa what our World Techneretely as we experience it. Our aclence-orlested cul- ture may lead us to think that the world “really” 1s some ind of abstraction, and tat our experience ofthe world is a mnerely subjective fleeing ow ofthe stark and neutral resl- ity of qualty-less pericles, Humantetic knowledge knows better though it dacs noc know why. Thus, whes humanistic Fnowlcige is reached in its perfection, ite apprehensions In- lade living images, and 20 Ite agsente are Teal assem, “Thus, metaphysics ls not posnible except after a fully human experience of concrete reality.48 ‘This experience {snot primarily sclemific, and it is hot necessarily purely personal, Rather, it ls personal experience as enlarged Gnd enlightened eopectally through great erature. is xperience which hae absorbed an ineegraly vali human Gdlure. Most Ideally, this would be « Christian culture In the sense which we bave explained above. Summary "Ke a kind of summary of the considerations advanced in this paper, I would like to ask and answer a few questions. Ui}'s a Thomistic metaphysics necessarily a Christian philosophy? It is necessarily a “negatively Christian” phi- Tosophy, that ia, st cannot be Thomistic and be in opposition to any revealed truth. It will usually be a positively Chris- tian philosophy, in that it takes ite inspiration from the Christian Revelation. But it is just barely possible that a fhon-Christian could come to at least many conclusions characteristic of a Thomistic metaphysict ‘@) In other words, can an atheist be a Thomist? If the atheist is one who has positively known and rejected the existence of God, it seems entirely impossible that he be a ‘Thomist in metaphysics, Ifthe atheist is a man who ba hot yet reached a knowledge of the existence of God, he could perhaps, after much experience in life, accept Thomism. (@) Does this connection between Thomism and the Ch tan faith make Thomism a part of ‘sacred or “‘revealed theology? No, for a revealed theology has as one of its prin- ciples & Revelation given directly from God, and its own proper method of proceeding from God ro things. But Revela- ‘on is not a principle of proof for a Thomistic metaphysics. 294 ‘TEACHING THOMISM TODAY (4) Does theology help a Thomistic metaphysics? ‘The~ ‘ology is the human attempt to understand Revelation and all elated things in the light of that Revelation, Insofar as ‘Thomistic metaphysics is a Christian philosophy, the Thom- {st will certainly proceed more safely, more clearly, and further, if he personally knows theology. (@) Should we therefore in practice teach only theology, bringing the metaphyaics along a8 occasion rises? In the abstract, and purely from the viewpoint of the integration Of the student's knowledge, we could do ts. Concretely, this seems an unsatisfactory solution for two reasons. First, our students will have to deal with many persons di rectly or through writing who are not Christians; they should ‘therefore be able to make use of the only level‘which all ‘men have in common, that of naturally knowable truths, Secondly, if we wish to engender a philosophical habit of ‘ind, avd noe merely impart some opinions which are ma~ terlally philosophical, we must teach some philosophy acx ording to & properly philosophical mode of reasoning. Be~ fining students are not yet capable of actualizing the virtual Philosophy contained in a theology. (©) Doss metaphysics depend on other, prior knowledge? ‘We must distinguish the modes of dependence. In the path Of discovery, metaphysica depends on antecedent probabili- ties which serve a8 guiding hypotheses, and thus Thomistic metaphysics depends on the Christian faith, on history, on the writings of St. Thomas, and so on. In the path of proof, ‘Thomistie metaphysica would be destroyed as a philosophy if it depended on anything supposed from outside itself—- from common sense, or physics, or philosophy of nature, ‘or Faith. In the path of proof, metaphyaics depends on ex perience which can be elevated into its own level of scienti- fie understanding; this experience is not only direct per~ Sonal experience, but eich experience as purified, elaborated, ‘and enlarged. (i.e mexphysice isnt formally depen pes ‘the philosophy of nature, is there an advantage in putting ste epee lat Inthe curriculum? Te must be grand that {the more knowledge @ person has before he begins meta physics, the better he will leara it in the same amount of fime. Bur there are several counter considerations. First, {for metaphysics itself there 1s a danger that it mighe be pushed out of the curriculum altogether. Second, a student METAPHYSICS 295 tends to keep the meanings of terms which he learns first; the use of natural philosophy meanings for terms which are also metaphysical changes metaphysics into « kind of exten~ ‘sion of philosophy of nature. Thirdly, when philosophy of nature is known better than metaphysics, or is the preferred tool of analysis, a certain narrowness of view results that ‘seems to be at variance with a broadly philosophical out~ look. In summary thea, not only is metaphysics formally independent of the other branches of philosophy (at least for ite baste principles and initial arguments), but it ie most ‘advantageously placed before the philosophy of nature, both general nd special, before natural theology, and before FOOTNOTES INicomachean Ethics, VI, c. 8, 142 @ 15-21. The trans lation is by John Henry Cardisal Newman, in An Essay in Ald ota Grammar of Assent, ed. Charles Frederick Harrold (New, York: Longmans, 1947), chap. x, p. 315. "in ViEthicorum, tect. 7'(ed. Pirotta), ni 1209-1211. Other passages in which St. Thomas explicitly zefera to this sequence are: In Librum de Causis, lect. 1, Summa theologiae, I-l, . 9, a.2; IJeaiam, cap. 3; Gentiles, I, . 4; tn LMetaphyaic,, lect. 2 (ed. Cethala), 46; In Vil Phys, lect. 6. ‘On this, compare St. Albert the Great, In VI Ethic., tact.2, c. 25. “‘Sapientiaiia et physica bene discunt juvenes sed non eredunt plena fide, eo quod sunt inexperta. +. Juvenis propter aetatis puritatem intellectum habet ‘optime dispositum... ea quae intellectut hominis propor Llonata non sunt, 20 quod quae ante Speum sung, ab intellecea hominis non aceipluntur nisi per posteriora, scilicet per effectus et signa, quae etiam in particularibus et singulari- bus experiri oportet, ideo sapientialia a puero vel adulto certitudinaliver non accipiuntur’” (Opera omnia, ed. Borgnet, Vil, p. 443 a); and Gordon W. Allport, To feel oneselt meaningfully linked to the whole of Being ia not possible before puberty.”* Becoming (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1955), p94. in Librum Boethii de Trinitate, q 5, a. 1 (ed. Wyser), p. 31, For some further comments, se Below, note 39. ‘igur ace Joseph Ovens, C.SS,R., The Doctrine of Being In the Aristotelian “Metaphysics"” (Toronto: Pontifical In- stitute of Mediaeval Studies, 1951), pp. 46-47, for the argue 296 ‘TEACHING THOMISM TODAY ‘ment that he meant his works ro be learned in the sequence ‘which we actually have, quite independently ofthe time of their composition, which took place at “widely differing dates!” (p. 46). “Ssce my article, ‘The Teaching of Thomistic Meta~ physies,”” Gregorianum, XXXV (1954), 13-17, and also Supa Theologiae, FT, 9, 82 a. 7, a4 2. pAverroes, Epitome Metaphysices, tract, 1, in Opera, 1574), Vol. VI, fol. SS6M, 3566; 5B. inthe Aristotelian Gilson, God and Philosophy (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1941). ‘dis position has been presented ina series of works, with what seems to be increasing insistence, See Christian= ‘and Philosophy, trang. R. MacDonald, C.5.B. (New York Sheed and Ward, 1939); God and Philosophy (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1941); Le Thomiame (1945), translated 43 The Christian Philosophy of Se. Thomas Aquinas, by L. C.S.B, (New York: Random House, 1956), esp. “Intro-

    Vous aimerez peut-être aussi