Systematic Theology (Volume 1 of 3)Strong, Augustus Hopkins
Religion
Systematic Theology (Volume 1 of 3)
Strong, Augustus Hopkins
Baptists -- Doctrines; Theology, Doctrinal
Balfour, Foundations of Belief, 7—“Natural science has for its
subject matter things and events. Philosophy is the systematic
exhibition of the grounds of our knowledge. Metaphysics is our
knowledge respecting realities which are not phenomenal, _e. g._,
God and the soul.” Knight, Essays in Philosophy, 81—“The aim of
the sciences is increase of knowledge, by the discovery of laws
within which all phenomena may be embraced and by means of which
they may be explained. The aim of philosophy, on the other hand,
is to explain the sciences, by at once including and transcending
them. Its sphere is substance and essence.” Bowne, Theory of
Thought and Knowledge, 3-5—“Philosophy = _doctrine of knowledge_
(is mind passive or active in knowing?—Epistemology) + _doctrine
of being_ (is fundamental being mechanical and unintelligent, or
purposive and intelligent?—Metaphysics). The systems of Locke,
Hume, and Kant are preëminently theories of knowing; the systems
of Spinoza and Leibnitz are preëminently theories of being.
Historically theories of being come first, because the object is
the only determinant for reflective thought. But the instrument of
philosophy is thought itself. First then, we must study Logic, or
the theory of thought; secondly, Epistemology, or the theory of
knowledge; thirdly, Metaphysics, or the theory of being.”
Professor George M. Forbes on the New Psychology: “Locke and Kant
represent the two tendencies in philosophy—the empirical,
physical, scientific, on the one hand, and the rational,
metaphysical, logical, on the other. Locke furnishes the basis for
the associational schemes of Hartley, the Mills, and Bain; Kant
for the idealistic scheme of Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel. The two
are not contradictory, but complementary, and the Scotch Reid and
Hamilton combine them both, reacting against the extreme
empiricism and scepticism of Hume. Hickok, Porter, and McCosh
represented the Scotch school in America. It was exclusively
_analytical_; its psychology was the faculty-psychology; it
represented the mind as a bundle of faculties. The unitary
philosophy of T. H. Green, Edward Caird, in Great Britain, and in
America, of W. T. Harris, George S. Morris, and John Dewey, was a
reaction against this faculty-psychology, under the influence of
Hegel. A second reaction under the influence of the Herbartian
doctrine of apperception substituted function for faculty, making
all processes phases of apperception. G. F. Stout and J. Mark
Baldwin represent this psychology. A third reaction comes from the
influence of physical science. All attempts to unify are relegated
to a metaphysical Hades. There is nothing but states and
processes. The only unity is the laws of their coëxistence and
succession. There is nothing _a priori_. Wundt identifies
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