LOOOS 328, LOOOfl
logic in the direction of empiriciam, BenBism, or Leib- his people", vliile rationalism on the other side set m nizian inoatisin. In the treatises which they vrote bounds to the use of lo^c, going eo far as to place it tin on logic there is nothiog that one might consider of a plane with Divine faith. Out of this conflict issued primary importance. toe Scholasticism of the thirteenth century, which Kant and the other Gorman Transcendentalism of gave due credit to the mystic contention in so far as the nineteenth century took a more equitable view that contention was sound, and at the same time of Aristotle's services to the science of logic. As a acknowledged freely tbe claims of rationalism within rule, they recognized the value of what he hod accom- the limits of orthodoxy and of reason. St. Thomas pliBh^and,insteadof tryingtoundohiswork, theyat- and hia contemporaries looked upon logic as an in- tempted U) supplement it. It is a question, however, strument for the discovery and exposition of natuia] whether they did not do as much hium to logic in one truth. They considered, moreover, that it is the way as Bacon and Descartes did in another. By with- instrument by which the theologian is enabled to ex- drawing from the domain of logic what is empirical, pound, systematise, and defend revealed truth. This and confining the science to an examination of " the view of the theological use of logic is the basis for the necessary laws of thought", the Transcendentalists charge of intcUcctualism which Modernist philoso- gave occasion to Mill and other Assoc in tionists to phers imbued with Kantism have made aj^amst the accuselogicot being unreal, and out of touch with the Scholastics. Modernism asserts that the logical nexus ni>eds of an ago which was, above ail things, an age of is "the weakest link" between the mind and spiritual Lpirical science. Most of the recent German litera- truth. So that the contest waged in the twelfth re on logic is characterized by the amount of atten- century is renewed in slightly different terms in our in which it pays either to historical inquiries, or to own day, the application of logic to theology being inquiries into the value of knowledge, or to investiga- now, as then, the principal point in dispute. tion of the philosophical foundations of the laws of In every Hystem of logic there is an underlying logic. It has added verv little to the technical por- philosophical theorj-, though this is not always formu- tion of the science. In England, the most important lated in explicit terms. It is impossible to explain event in the history of logic in the nineteenth century and demonstrate the laws of thought without falling was the publication, in 1843, of John Stuart Mill s back on some theoiy of the nature of mind. For this "System of Logic". Alill renewed all the claims put reason CathoEc philosophers and educators, as well as forward by Uacon, and with some menaure of sue- those who by Iheir position in the Church are respon- cess. At least, he brought about a change in the siblcfor the purityofdoctrinein Catholic institutions. method of leachuig logic at the great English seats of have recognized that there is in logic the Catholic ana leaniing. Carrj'ing Locke's empiricism to its ultimate the non-Cathohc point of view. Our obiection to a conclusion, andadopting the association theory of the gooddealof recent logical literature is not nased on an human mind, he rejected all necessary truth, dis- unfavourable estimate of its scientific quality; what carded the syllogism as not only useless but fallacious, we object to is the sensism, subjectivism, agnosticism, and maintained that all reasoning is from particulars or other philosophical doctrine, which underlies the to particulars. He did not make many converts to logical theories of the author. Works on logic written these views, but he succeeded in giving inductive by Catholics generally adhere very closely to the logic a place in every textbook on Icwic published traditional Anstotelean logic of the schools. Yet, since his time. Not so successful was the attempt of that is not the reason why they are approved. They r William Hamilton to establish a new liwic (the are apprtvcd because they arc free from false philo- lew analytic"), on the princifile that the predicate as sophical assumptions. In many non-Cathohc workson
well as the subject of a proposition should be (juanti- logic the underlying philosophy is not only erroneous,
fied. Nor, indeed, was ne quite original in this: the bjt BubvLra:\e tf thp nhile t>ody of natural sptntuaj
idea had been put forward in the seventeenth ccnturj- tn ih iihi I thi Cath 1 Church guards as carefully by the Catholic philosopher Caramuel {1606-*25. \
Recent logical literature in English has striven above
all tilings to attain clearness, intelligibility, and
of Induin Philn-ajhv (Lon I
^raeticalutility inits expositionofthelawsof thought, tor Arutotoliao l«io Latmtna etc _.
(henever it indulges in speculalion as to the nature totu: Wartt I (SBrBn jSl-l8T0) inuiBUtions o! the Of-
of m.„l1 ™».,, it ij, o( com«, colorad by the fT »',.5^"£™™' iSS -"§;»"'(£=-»;
various philosoplues of the time. TiiE.-iDEi.KNBOiia, Loruchi Unlertadiwietrt p vols.. L«pii(.
Indeed, the history of logicisinterestingand profit- IS60}; St-Htuihe, La looirpu iTAriaoii: (Parin. 1838). For
able chieav because it shows how the philosophical f^iT"??^ '^. i^^iSif Tsai- ™rthe"L^e Slufat
theories influence the method and the doctrine of the Roma, 1882—1; Pethos Hibpanub. Summula Logiraitt eSi
logician. The empiricism and sensism of the English Frr-joniPorMirnraEiponWoiif (Venire. 15B01.
kSooI, <le,ce»linB from Hobta ll,jou|jh Locte, Hum., ^^^ J-^ S.i"!^"^,™' ,S, SSS- «^
andtheAssociationistfi, could lead m logic to no Other (London, 1808); TinmiiB.i^i™ in toineCWfahington, 1910).
condition than that to which it does lead m Mil! S Inolltbo Latin Icitbooksof pJiilosoptiyllie traditjoQalkiBicti
^i,oti.„ of .;„ .»itogi.„jm<i of f o.o=™jT i™th. s'VdSoS.T^va^s.'iw z's-i^sssa
On the other hand, Descartes s exaltation ol deduction h (Freiburg. lOOB) . and in Frenth, Mebcieb. tomjucr (Lmivaia.
and Leibniz's adoption of the mathematical method 1902). (21 Non^C^lholic: Hn-t, Suilrm of uiie JlaadaB,
lav. their origin io U»t.doclrin. of innotijn whi.h i, iiJ^^SSSffl™ lioW.iS&S^i'SJSi
the opposite of empiricism. Again, the domination jon. 1870); BAni, iwic. Indt-dint and DaliKlirr (Now York,
of industrialism, and the insistence for recognition on 1883); Hyslop, Eltmenu of Looje {Neit Voris, 1802); Mnmi,
the part of the social economist, have had in our own ^^i^ ^Jl^'t^ ^^'^^%\^}^^^^
day the effect of pushing logic more and more towards ^j ^ogic (New VWk. I894)V Wiltom, ' Mtmml o} Loiic a
the position of a purveyor of rules for scientific dis- vols., London, 1904).
covery and practical invention. The materialism of '^J' "f^J^l'f ■^™'^^i'"Jl."f^i."' !ll^^w"J5
li \ -^ , ^ i(*f<.i * *i_ i_^j _jji.UA wealth of detail la rBAJITL. UeKh. der Logde im Aomdlande i4
the last half of the mneleenth centmy demanded that mi,., Leipiig, 1855— ;aBooniJe<l., LMptig, 1885). The useful- logic prove its utility in a practical way. Hence the nera of the wnrk ia, bawover. very mucb impaired by ibr au- premE,.oc. mon to induction. But, of. II tlecri^. S^JSS'SSlfi'" TbTtSib'S."!;":.! S through which logic has passed, the most interesting is year leooT
that which is known as the "Storm and Stress of Wiluam Turner. Scholasticism", in which mysticism on the one side
rejecteddiaIecticas"thedevii'sart",andmaintainBd LogOK. Th» fOr. A*t»«; Lat. Verfcum — Word). —
Uutt " God did not choose logic as a meaps of sfiving The word Logot u the term by which Christian thenf- ^
