The Need for Philosophy

In the first place Dr. Duggan tried to cover far too much ground in the time at his disposal, with the result that what might have otherwise been, an excellent statement of the modern scholastic position was marred by the too frequent use of dogmatic assertions for which he did not give himself sufficient time to bring forward adequate supporting argument. In the second place he appeared to be so anxious to castigate modern idealists In general, and those who teach philosophy at Victoria College in particular, that he devoted to this aspect more time than he could really afford.

One can sympathise with him in his criticism of a Philosphy Department which uses as a text book Lewis Mumford's "Condition of Men," but to describe it as "piffle" was to lay himself open to the charge of coming down almost to the level of argument used in the book itself.

Nevertheless, Dr. Duggan did make some very good points. He demonstrated clearly the contrast between modern idealism and the realism of the scholastics. His treatment of this aspect of the subject should have been sufficient to indicate clearly to any dialectical materialist present that be is hardly justified, in identifying the two philosophies. He drew a clear distinction between the nature and function of philosophy and theology, a distinction which is particularly necessary in a talk on scholastic philosophy in view of the tendency of many writers to identify it with Catholic theology. He also made effective use of quotations from the French philosophers Gilson and Maritain, but he somehow failed to capture the spirit which animates all their writing. While both these writers maintain a very definite standpoint, the reader always has the feeling that when they examine any modern doctrine, whether it be Communism, Psychoanalysis, or Existentialism, they are doing so not with the sole idea of showing how mistaken are its main teachings, but rather with the idea of finding whether it contains any truth which may help them to solve some of the problems with which they realise, philosophy and mankind are still confronted. This is probably one of the reasons why they command, in modern intellectual circles, a respect Which is not enjoyed by some of their fellow scholastics of comparable ability. The latter seem at times reluctant to acknowledge that any valuable contributions have been made in philosophy, since the time of Aquinas. This attitude may account for the comparative lack of attention given by modern scholastics to the study of epistemology, as the problem of knowledge was not one with which Aristotle and Aquinas were concerned.

If, as Dr. Duggan claimed, the modern philosophers are "stuck in their epistemological bog," surely the most appropriate action is first to help them out so that they can give their attention to more fruitful fields of philosophy, and then to drain the bog so that in the future others will not suffer the same fate. If the bog is to be drained satisfactorily, it must be thoroughly surveyed in order to discover whether there are not other sources of seepage than those which stem from a Cartesian origin.

Epistemology is today regarded by most philosophers as being of major importance, and there are indications that scholastic philosophers of the Louvain School, at least, are in general agreement with this viewpoint. Van Steenberghen's recently translated book, "Epistemology" (1) should help to stimulate further inquiry in the English speaking world.

The discussion following the talk was somewhat disappointing, being characterised on all sides by far too many assertions unsupported by argument. "Moreover, the lecturer and some of his questioners had difficulty in finding common ground on which to argue. This was reflected in" . . . . the dispute regarding of the word 'know,' which generated a considerable amount of heat, but did not throw much light on the problems raised by linguistic analysis; these would appear to deserve more attention than they could be given in such a discussion.

The lecture indicated the difficulty of presenting in less than one hour such a comprehensive doctrine as that of the scholastics, particularly to an audience not familiar with its method of approach,

(1) Van Steenberghen, F. (1949); Epistemology. Joseph Winner, New York.