An Introduction to PhilosophyFullerton, George Stuart
Philosophy
An Introduction to Philosophy
Fullerton, George Stuart
Philosophy
We find in Professor Cornelius's clear little book, "An Introduction to
Philosophy" (Leipzig, 1903; it has unhappily not yet been translated
into English), that metaphysics is repudiated altogether, and
epistemology is set in its place. But this rejection of metaphysics
does not necessarily imply the denial of the value of such an analysis
of our experience as I have in this work called metaphysical.
Metaphysics is taken to mean, not an analysis of experience, but a
groping behind the veil of phenomena for some reality not given in
experience. In other words, what Professor Cornelius condemns is what
many of the rest of us also condemn under another name. What he calls
metaphysics, we call bad metaphysics; and what he calls epistemology,
we call metaphysics. The dispute is really a dispute touching the
proper name to apply to reflective analysis of a certain kind.
As it is the fashion in certain quarters to abuse metaphysics, I set
the reader on his guard. Some kinds of metaphysics certainly ought to
be repudiated under whatever name they may be presented to us.
CHAPTER XX
THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION
76. RELIGION AND REFLECTION.--A man may be through and through ethical
in his thought and feeling, and yet know nothing of the science of
ethics. He may be possessed of the finest aesthetic taste, and yet may
know nothing of the science of aesthetics. It is one thing to be good,
and another to know clearly what goodness means; it is one thing to
love the beautiful, and another to know how to define it.
Just so a man may be thoroughly religious, and may, nevertheless, have
reflected very little upon his religious belief and the foundations
upon which it rests. This does not mean that his belief is without
foundation. It may have a firm basis or it may not. But whatever the
case may be, he is not in a position to say much about it. He _feels_
that he is right, but he cannot prove it. The man is, I think we must
admit, rather blind as to the full significance of his position, and he
is, in consequence, rather helpless.
Such a man is menaced by certain dangers. We have seen in the chapter
on ethics that men are by no means at one in their judgments as to the
rightness or wrongness of given actions. And it requires a very little
reflection to teach us that men are not at one in their religious
notions. God and His nature, the relation of God to man, what the
religious life should be, these things are the subject of much dispute;
and some men hold opinions regarded by others as not merely erroneous
but highly pernicious in their influence.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account