Encyclopedia of sacred theology - pagina 184

160

§ 49.

tainiiig a certain

science.

In the

TWO KINDS OF SCIENCE

[Div. II

mutual contact between the two kinds of from this fact it follows that the

first place,

accuracy of one another's demonstrations can be critically ex-

amined and verified, in so far at least as the result strictly By keeping a sharp depends upon the deduction made. watch upon each other, mutual service is rendered in the discovery of logical faults in each other's demonstrations, and thus in a formal way each will continually watch over the other. And, on the other hand, they may compel each other to justify their points of view over against one another. Let not this last be misunderstood. If, as we remarked, palingenesis occasions one group of men to exist differently from the other, every effort to understand each other will be futile in those points of the investigation in which this difference comes into play; and it will be impossible to settle No polemics between these two the difference of insight. kinds of science, on details which do not concern the statement of an objectively observable fact, or the somatic side of the psychical sciences, or, finally, a logical fault in argumentaThis is the reason why, as tion, can ever serve any purpose. soon as it has allowed itself to be inveigled into details, and lias undertaken to deal with things that are not palpable phenomena or logical mistakes. Apologetics has always failed to reach results, and has weakened rather than strengthened the reasoner. But just because, so soon as the lines have diverged but a

little

much

the more important that sharp and constant attention

the divergency cannot be bridged over,

it

is

so

be fixed upon the junction where the two lines begin to di-

For though

verge.

it is

known beforehand that even at no agreement can be reached for

well

this point of intersection

;

then no divergence would follow; yet at this point of intersection us,

If

it

can be explained to each other what

from

we

this point of intersection, to

it is

draw our

that compels

line as

we

do.

neglect to do this, pride and self-conceit will come into

and our only concession

to our scientific opponent will Because he does not walk in our footsteps we dispute not only the accuracy of his results, but also formally deny the scientific character of his work.

play,

be the mockery of a laugh.

Deze tekst is geautomatiseerd gemaakt en kan nog fouten bevatten. Digibron werkt voortdurend aan correctie. Klik voor het origineel door naar de pdf. Voor opmerkingen, vragen, informatie: contact.

Op Digibron -en alle daarin opgenomen content- is het databankrecht van toepassing. Gebruiksvoorwaarden. Data protection law applies to Digibron and the content of this database. Terms of use.

Printen