Burke’s political thought, while lacking a complete metaphysics, tracks the Aristotelian-Thomist tradition even though he is fundamentally an English empiricist. His foremost contribution is a theory of change within a hierarchic, teleological universe: ‘By preserving the method of nature in the conduct of the state, in what we improve, we are never wholly new; in what we retain, we are never wholly obsolete’, he wrote in Reflections. The best synthesis is in Thoughts on Our Present Discontents: ‘It is the business of the speculative philosopher to mark the proper ends of government. It is the business of the politician, who is the philosopher in action, to find out the proper means towards those ends, and to employ them with effect’. Pappin begins by dismissing claims of Burke’s utilitarianism as language for rhetorical effect; elsewhere, he denies Burke is an existentialist or a reactionary, for his views are neither a ‘swirl of abstraction’ nor premised on defending an unchanging order. The balance of the book sketches the metaphysical principles of Aristotle, Aquinas, and to a lesser degree Jacques Maritain (i.e., Collingwood’s absolute presuppositions). Action follows nature; action and existence require structure and essence; growth is essential for the subject to reach its teleological ends; wisdom perfects the intellect as virtue the will. For Burke as for Aquinas, social (secondary) nature is shaped by habits and customs that naturally emerge from man’s primary nature. In Economical Reform, ‘It would be wise to attend upon the order of things, and not to attempt to outrun the slow, but smooth and even course of nature’. In a volume of his writings, ‘Man is made for speculation and action, and when he pursues his nature he succeeds best at both’. Where contemporary philosophers posit the rejection of metaphysical essence liberates man, Burke unites change and constancy, possibility and structure. Thus man’s place is within the social community, not bound but prudentially circumscribed in his behavior. Ultimately, Burke distinguishes between abstraction and universal / absolute and so contends that society’s proper ends are realized according to unique characteristics of the epoch. Pappin asserts Burke should have given more thought to metaphysics but concedes his primary purpose was political. The work is carefully organized and helpfully illustrates metaphysical concepts, but the prose is choppy. While the natural law view of Burke is often referenced, where is Harvey Mansfield? Coda: another Burke quote: ‘All men have equal rights but not to equal things’.
Metaphysics
20. Collingwood, Essay on Metaphysics (27 Oct 2019)
Metaphysics is the study of absolute presuppositions which underpin contemporary scientific inquiry. Invented by Aristotle, who erroneously conceived it as a science of being (‘ontology’ to Collingwood), the subject’s birth simultaneously gave rise to science: for to think scientifically is to answer a question; questions require presuppositions; and all such questions and presuppositions must somehow be grounded. (Propositions seek to answer ‘is it true’ or similar queries; facts, from Bacon onward, are things that answer questions.) All metaphysical questions are historical questions: what was the contemporary view?
Mistaking the certainties of one’s age for the certainties of all ages is a fundamental error. It is religion’s role to promote the development of absolute presuppositions. Thus Collingwood concludes the Christian church has been the guarantor of Western science. He shows how the doctrine of the trinity corresponds with modern science, which rests of absolute presupposition of nature as one, and therefore science as one in corresponding to law.
‘Antimetaphysics’ is an irrational, unscientific view of life, to which Collingwood ascribes various personas. Deductive metaphysics is a constellation of absolute presuppositions which are without conflict, like coherent mathematics; but metaphysics (i.e., history of ideas) is never without internal tensions. Logical positivism, which seeks to prove presuppositions (and all else) as fact, is the most prominent example of the pair of enemies of metaphysics; in actuality it treats fact in a medieval manner.
By targeting metaphysics, positivism continues the 18th-century attack on classical Greek thought. Separately, psychology, which purports to be the science of how we think, cannot claim dominion over metaphysics because it does not uniquely do so (so too does logic) and since it makes no recourse to truth and falsehood and thus to self-criticism which is the end of thinking (i.e., was my thought successful?). Theoretic thought is logic, practical thought is ethics. Psychology in actuality is not cognitive (as the ancients thought); it is the science of feeling; lacking not only self-criticism but also a science of the body and also an understanding of truth, it is no science at all. Psychology is a pseudo-science which cannot supplant metaphysics and other sciences because it ignores procedure: it is the propaganda of irrationalism, which is not a conspiracy but an epidemic undermining the scientific pursuit of truth.
Elsewhere, Collingwood treats the sequence of physics from Newton (all events have causes) to Einstein (all events are governed by laws, but most have no cause). Physicians escaped the anthropomorphic problems of the 19th century – nature causing things – by concluding there are few causes only behavior according to law. But philosophers and positivists alike extended Kant’s view that every event has a cause. Kant himself considered metaphysics as ‘god, freedom, immortality’. Of his categories of modality – possibility, actuality, necessity – possibility (i.e., something that could be) is a major stumbling block for positivism. The scholastics considered that pagans ended Roman civilization, but it was really the loss of faith in Latin absolute presuppositions.
12. Duckworth, Grit (4 Jul 2021)
Propounds the nature and virtue of tenacity, ‘grit’, illustrating with American sporting and other contemporary examples. Talent plus effort equals skill; skill plus effort equals achievement. Environment greatly determines one’s tendencies to meet challenges; yet one can learn to be optimistic. Once proficient, an individual’s deliberate practice propels advancement through demanding objectives and laborious work at isolated elements. Thus deliberate work is the opposite of ‘flow’, albeit complementary in that both produce satisfaction. Duckworth treats purpose as the outcome of cultivated interest, however, dismissing ethics (as well as hedonism) as biologically determined, baked into the cake, so to speak. The slight reveals the primary shortcoming of her work and psychology in general. As Collingwood observed in An Essay on Metaphysics, the ‘science of feeling’ lacks an intrinsic measure of right and wrong. It ‘wipe[s] out the old sciences of thought, logic and ethics, with their criteriological methods and their guiding notions of truth and error, good and evil. …The only difference between a logical and a psychological science of thought is that a logic of thought faces the fact that thought is self-critical and consequently attempts to give some account of the criteria used in this self-criticism, while a psychological science does not. …Psychology has always approached the study of thought with a perfectly clear and conscious determination to ignore one whole department of the truth, namely to ignore the self-critical function of thought and the criteria which that function implied’ (pp. 114-116). In fine, grit is valuable for those with well-defined teleology. All of Duckworth’s subjects are such paragons, but tenacity in pursuit of questionable ends is no benefit.
20. Collingwood, Essay on Metaphysics (27 Oct 2019)
Metaphysics is the study of absolute presuppositions which underpin contemporary scientific inquiry. Invented by Aristotle, who erroneously conceived it as a science of being (‘ontology’ to Collingwood), the subject’s birth simultaneously gave rise to science: for to think scientifically is to answer a question; questions require presuppositions; and all such questions and presuppositions must somehow be grounded. (Propositions seek to answer ‘is it true’ or similar queries; facts, from Bacon onward, are things that answer questions.) All metaphysical questions are historical questions: what was the contemporary view?
Mistaking the certainties of one’s age for the certainties of all ages is a fundamental error. It is religion’s role to promote the development of absolute presuppositions. Thus Collingwood concludes the Christian church has been the guarantor of Western science. He shows how the doctrine of the trinity corresponds with modern science, which rests of absolute presupposition of nature as once, and therefore science as one in corresponding to law.
‘Antimetaphysics’ is an irrational, unscientific view of life, to which Collingwood ascribes various personas. Deductive metaphysics is a constellation of absolute presuppositions which are without conflict, like coherent mathematics; but metaphysics (i.e., history of ideas) is never without internal tensions. Logical positivism, which seeks to prove presuppositions (and all else) as fact, is the most prominent example of the pair of enemies of metaphysics; in actuality it treats fact in a medieval manner.
By targeting metaphysics, positivism continues the 18th-century attack on classical Greek thought. Separately, psychology, which purports to be the science of how we think, cannot claim dominion over metaphysics because it does not uniquely do so (so too does logic) and since it makes no recourse to truth and falsehood and thus to self-criticism which is the end of thinking (i.e., was my thought successful?). Theoretic thought is logic, practical thought is ethics. Psychology in actuality is not cognitive (as the ancients thought); it is the science of feeling; lacking not only self-criticism but also a science of the body and also an understanding of truth, it is no science at all. Psychology is a pseudo-science which cannot supplant metaphysics and other sciences because it ignores procedure: it is the propaganda of irrationalism, which is not a conspiracy but an epidemic undermining the scientific pursuit of truth.
Elsewhere, Collingwood treats the sequence of physics from Newton (all events have causes) to Einstein (all events are governed by laws, but most have no cause). Physicians escaped the anthropomorphic problems of the 19th century – nature causing things – by concluding there are few causes only behavior according to law. But philosophers and positivists alike extended Kant’s view that every event has a cause. Kant himself considered metaphysics as ‘god, freedom, immortality’. Of his categories of modality – possibility, actuality, necessity – possibility (i.e., something that could be) is a major stumbling block for positivism. The scholastics considered that pagans ended Roman civilization, but it was really the loss of faith in Latin absolute presuppositions.