Color MS 460

ReadAboutContentsVersionsHelp
460 13 16 thumb

13-16

13

trary, quite conclusively, that science has always been at heart Realistic, and always must be so; and upon comparing his writings with mine, one it is easily seen that these features of nominalism which I pointed out in science are merely superficial and transient.

The heart of the dispute lies in this. All The modern philosophers , --one and all, unless Schelling be an exception,- recognize but one mode of being, the being of an individual thing or fact, the being which consists in the object's force crowding its way into out a place for itself in the universe, so to speak, and reacting by brute force of fact, against all other things. I call that

Last edit 9 months ago by jeffdown1
460 13 105 thumb

13

12

all modern philosophy of every sect has been nominalistic. In a long notice of Frazer's Berkeley, in the North American Review of October 1871, I declared for realism. I have since very carefully and thoroughly revised my philosophical opinions more than half a dozen times, and have modified them more or less on most topics; but I have never been able to think differently on that question of nominalism and realism. In that paper I acknowledged that the tendency of science has been toward nominalism; but the late Dr. Francis Ellingwood Abbot in the very remarkable introduction to his book entitled 'Scientific Theism', showed on the con-

Last edit about 1 year ago by Jon Alan Schmidt
460 14 105 thumb

14

13

trary, quite conclusively, that science has always been at heart Realistic, and always must be so; and upon comparing his writings with mine, it is easily seen that these features of nominalism which I pointed out in science are merely superficial and transient.

The heart of the dispute lies in this. The modern philosophers , --one and all, unless Schelling be an exception,--recognize but one mode of being, the being of an individual thing or fact, the being which consists in the objects crowding out a place for itself in the universe, so to speak, and reacting by brute force of fact, against all other things. I call that

Last edit almost 2 years ago by jeffdown1
460 15 105 thumb

15

14

Existence. Aristotle, on the other hand, whose system, like all the greatest systems, was evolutionary, recognized besides an embryonic kind of being, like the being of a tree in its seed, or Like the being of a future contingent event, depending on how a man shall decide to act. In a few passages Aristotle seems to have a dim apercu of a third mode of being in the entelechy. The embryonic being for Aristotle was the being he called Matter, which is alike in all things, and which in the course of its development took on Form. Form is an element having a different mode of being. The whole philosophy of the scholastic doctors is an attempt

Last edit over 1 year ago by jeffdown1
460 16 105 thumb

16

15

to mould this doctrine of Aristotle into harmony with christian truth. This harmony the different doctors attempted to bring about in different ways. But all the realists agree in reversing the order of Aristotle's evolution by making the Form come first, and the Individuation of that form come later. Thus, they too recognized two modes of being; but they were not the two modes of being of Aristotle.

My view is that there are three modes of being. I hold that we can directly observe them in elements of whatever is at anytime before the mind in any way. They are the being

Last edit almost 2 years ago by jeffdown1
Records 1 – 5 of 14