Book
Review: God and Philosophy – By Etienne Gilson
by Jeremiah
Dahl
The Author
Étienne Gilson (1884–1978) was a French philosopher and educator. He taught the history of medieval philosophy at the Sorbonne, took the chair of medieval philosophy at the College de France, and in 1929 helped found the Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies in Toronto, Canada. Although primarily a historian of philosophy, Gilson was also one of the leaders of the Roman Catholic neo-Thomist movement. Honored by universities around the world, he wrote many books, including The Spirit of Mediaeval Philosophy and Wisdom and Love in Saint Thomas Aquinas.
Overview
God and Philosophy is author
Etienne Gilson’s history of philosophy as regards its relationship with the
idea of God and the demonstration of his existence. The text is divided into
four sections: God and Greek Philosophy, God and Christian Philosophy, God and
Modern Philosophy, and Contemporary Thought, roughly following the progression
of thought from the Milesians through Augustine and Aquinas to Descarte,
Spinoza, and finally Kant, Comte, Einstein and Huxley.
The history of philosophy presented
by Gilson is very well done, yet it is the analysis and critique found within
each of the sections which makes the text truly worthwhile. Here we see the
tension of the Greeks between philosophy and religion, the medieval wrestling
with metaphysics that they borrowed from the Greeks, the Enlightenment in turn
borrowing from the scholastics in reconciling their science, and finally the
scientists disregarding metaphysics and wondering why their science cannot
answer questions that it is no designed to ask.
All in all Gilson’s text is a
lucid, insightful and fairly accessible text regarding the way that the world
has approached the notion of God, the difficulties in reconciling him with the
philosophies of the day, and the shortcomings of the various systems in
confronting the question. I’ve chosen a rather large number of memorable quotes
as I feel they can better sum up the position and the merits of this text than
I can through summation.
Memorable Quotes:
-“The great curse of modern
philosophy is the almost universally prevailing rebellion against intellectual
self-discipline. Where loose thinking obtains, truth cannot possibly be
grasped, whence the conclusion naturally follows that there is no truth.”(pXV)
-“The Greek gods are the crude but
telling expression of this absolute conviction that since man is somebody, and
not merely something, the ultimate explanation for what happens to him should
rest with somebody, and not merely with something… Mythology is not the first
step on the path to true philosophy. In fact, it is no philosophy at all.
Mythology is a first step on the path to true religion: it is religious in its
own right.”(p22)
-“Human reason feels at home in a
world of things, whose essences and laws it can grasp and define in terms of
concepts; but shy and ill at ease in a world of existences, because to exist is
an act, not a thing.”(p67)
-“Modern philosophy has been
created by laymen, not by churchmen, and to the ends of the natural cities of
men, not to the end of the supernatural city of God.”(p74)
-“The essence of the true Christian
God is not to create but to be.”(p88)
-“The true reason why this universe
appears to some scientists as mysterious is that, mistaking existential, that
is, metaphysical, questions for scientific ones, they ask science to answer
them. Naturally, they get no answers. Then they are puzzled, and they say that
the universe is mysterious.”(p123)
“Why should those eminently
rational beings, the scientists, deliberately prefer to the simple notions of
design, or purposiveness, in nature, the arbitrary notions of blind force,
chance, emergence, sudden variation, and similar ones? Simply because they much
prefer a complete absence of intelligibility to the presence of a nonscientific
intelligibility.”(p130)
-“Yet the fact that final causes
are scientifically sterile does not entail their disqualification as
metaphysical causes, and to reject metaphysical answers to a problem just
because they are not scientific is deliberately to maim the knowing power of
the human mind.”(p132)
-“We do not need to project out own
ideas into the economy of nature; they belong there in their own right. Our own
ideas are in the economy of nature because we ourselves are in it. Any and
every one of the things which a man does intelligently is done with a purpose
and to a certain end which is the final cause why he does it… Through man, who
is part and parcel of nature, purposiveness most certainly is part and parcel
of nature. In what sense is it arbitrary, knowing from within that where there
is organization there always is a purpose, to conclude that there is a purpose
wherever there is organization?”(p134)
Specific Criticisms
I don’t really have any criticisms
of this text. There are a few random bits that
I either failed to understand or disagreed with, such as the assertion
that science has been successful in coming to a “perfectly consistent
philosophy of the mechanical universe of modern science” and this somehow shows
that the pure philosophical positions are somehow found more truly in science
than Christianity.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar