When I investigated Wolff's German
logic, I skipped a detailed take on most of the last half of the
book, because it appeared to contain little of philosophical interest
and seemed more like a haphazard collection of different topics.
With Latin logic, I think I have a duty to be as thorough as possible
and discuss also the final sections of the book, especially as the
book is better organised, even if the topics dealt with would have no
apparent philosophical interest.
Wolff's aim is to provide his students
with a book on methodology. In addition to seeking truths, new
scholars have to acquire new skills, one of which is the ability to
write, read and review books. But before one can learn how to do all
this, one must know what different types of books there are, because
writing and reading, say, a historical treatise requires different
things than writing and reading mathematics.
Every librarian knows that trying to
place books into a neat taxonomy is ultimately a hopeless task:
there's just too many possibilities to choose from. Wolff's approach
begins actually from the standpoint of the method of book. Some books
are merely historical or merely describe experiences concerning some
specific topic. Thus, we have books on natural history, telling e.g.
how cats reproduce, books on civil history, telling what has
happened, for instance, in France and Germany in last couple of
decades, and biographies that describe morally uplifting facets of
someone's life (Wolff clearly lived before the age of rock stars).
In addition to historical, there are
also dogmatical books, which are more about general theories than
experiences: if you describe all the various changes of climate near
the coast of Britain, you are doing history, but if you attempt to
explain these changes, you are writing a dogmatical book. Note that
there are clearly two ways to approach dogmatics. One can either just
describe theory, without trying to justify it – this is essentially
a historical take on dogmas – or one can use demonstrations based
on axioms, definitions and reliable experiences and prove the dogmas
– this would be a truly scientific treatise.
Wolff's classification is meant to give
a clear answer to how such books are to be made and on what criteria
they are to be judged. Here the methods for writing and judging books
are parallel in the sense that the rules of good writing are
essentially criteria for evaluating what is good. In historical
books, one must consider especially the end of the book and on that
basis decide what is to be told and in which order. An important
question with historical books is the reliability of what is told –
note that when you are reading a historical book, you can at most
reach the level of Glauben or
faith.
The methodology of
scientific books is essentially the methodology Wolff has presented
earlier. Thus, a scientific book should define its concepts as
explicitly as possible, use only such premisses that are already
known to be certain, that is, are either axioms or demonstrated
propositions, or at least use only so-called lemmas that have been
proven in other books – all standard Euclidean stuff. A point of
interest is that Wolff notices the possibility of and condemns the
habit of plagiarism, that is, an uncredited use of works of other
authors.
While there are
then strict criteria by which to decide the worth of a book, Wolff
also suggests certain leniency in evaluation. Reader should
especially try to interpret confusing words and propositions in the
best possible manner which would make the most sense of the text –
this is what is nowadays known as a principle of charity.
Wolff extends the
use of the principle of charity also to hermenutics of sacred
writings. The ultimate source of these texts is supposed to be God,
whom we must assume to have perfect cognitive skills. Thus, what
these texts say must indeed be true. Yet, because the writers of the
texts have been imperfect human beings and God has just imported the
thoughts contained in these texts directly to their mind, these texts
are bound to have metaphors and even paradoxes, when the complexity
of these thoughts has reached over the limits of the writers.
So much for books,
next time we shall see what else was part of scholar's life in
Wolff's time.
Ei kommentteja:
Lähetä kommentti