|
|
||
 |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
||
|
Adventures in Philosophy |
 |
|
||
|
|
||||
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
by George Henry Lewes
The nature of philosophy condemns its followers to wander forever in the same labyrinth, and in this circumscribed space many will necessarily fall into the track of their predecessors. In other words, coincidences of doctrine at epochs widely distant from each other are inevitable. Positive science is further distinguished from philosophy by the incontestable progress it everywhere makes. Its methods are stamped with certainty, because they are daily extending our certain knowledge; because the immense experience of years and of myriads of intelligences confirm their truth, without casting a shadow of suspicion on them. Science, then , progresses, and must continue to progress. Philosophy only moves in the same endless circle. Its first principles are as much a matter of dispute as they were two thousand years ago. It has made no progress, although in constant movement. Precisely the same questions are being agitated in Germany at this moment as were being discussed in ancient Greece, and with no better means of solving them, with no better hopes of success. The united force of thousands of intellects, some of them among the greatest that have made the past illustrious, has been steadily concentrated on problems, supposed to be of vital importance, and believed to be perfectly susceptible of solution, without the least result. All this meditation and discussion has not even established a few first principles. Centuries of labor have not produced any perceptible progress. In this constant movement of philosophy and constant linear progress of positive science, we see the condemnation of the former. It is in vain to argue that because no progress has yet been made, we are not therefore to conclude none will be made; it is in vain to argue that the difficulty of philosophy is much greater than that of any science, and therefore greater time is needed for its perfection. The difficulty is impossibility. No progress is made because no certainty is possible. To aspire to the knowledge of more than phenomena, their resemblances and successions, is to aspire to transcend the limitations of human faculties. To know more we must be more. This is our conviction. It is also the conviction of the majority of thinking men. Consciously or unconsciously, they condemn philosophy. They discredit or disregard it. The proof of this is in the general neglect into which philosophy has fallen, and the greater assiduity bestowed on positive science. Loud complains of this neglect are heard. Great contempt is expressed by the philosophers. They may rail, and they may sneer, but the world will go its way. The empire of positive science is established. We trust that no one will suppose we think slightingly of philosophy. Assuredly we do not, or else why this work? ... But we respect it as a great power that has been, and no longer is. It was the impulse to all early speculation: it was the parent of positive science. It nourished the infant mind of humanity; gave it aliment, and directed its faculties, rescued the nobler part of man from the dominion of brutish ignorance; stirred him with insatiable thirst for knowledge, to slake which he was content to undergo amazing toil. But its office has been fulfilled; it is no longer necessary to humanity, and should be set aside. The only interest it can have is a historical interest.
Excerpted from A Biographical History of Philosophy, by George Henry Lewes |
|
||||
|
Enrich Your Life With a Philosophy Book... Enrich Your Life With a Philosophy Magazine...
|
|||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
||
|
|
||
[Homepage] [Newsletter] [Search] [Support the Academy] [Link to Us] [Contact the Academy] [Citing Articles from Our Website] [Privacy Policy & Disclaimer]
Copyright 1998-99, 2000-01, 2002-03, & 2004-05 by The Radical Academy. All Rights Reserved.