Since Descartes, Philosophy has been a highly specialized discipline. As Western Civilization has progressed, the different disciplines have become fragmented, specialized and sub-specialized. Within the study of history, for example, there are disciplines of Egyptology, European Studies, American History, Classical Studies, and the list goes on. Science and philosophy have been separated (or have they?) and both are in turn separated from theology and literature.
The reason is that during the "enlightenment" of the late 17th and 18th centuries, philosophers and thinkers began to study these subjects in isolation, believing that they had little to do with one another. In stark contrast, the classical-medieval approach was that all subjects were inter-connected.
For this reason, Aristotle didn't just write about the proper approach to ethics, but about beauty, drama, science, and mathematics. He, like the other pre-moderns, saw clearly that all knowledge is inter-connected and that general knowledge increases one's knowledge of whatever is of special interest.
As an example, my knowledge of physics or biology may very well tie in with my special discipline of philosophy. This is why a holistic view of knowledge and education is beneficial: it enables a person to go deeper in their own discipline and still keep a larger perspective of how it fits into the big picture.
Probably the great example of pre-modern thought is Thomas Aquinas's Summa Theologica. In this monumental work, the theologian not only addresses theological questions, but discusses philosophy, political theory, ethics, and even science, while drawing on past thinkers. Aquinas saw clearly that all truth is inter-connected because it is God's truth. A pre-modern holistic view of knowledge keeps this in perspective as opposed to the ever-fragmenting modern view.
~Roccondil
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 Responses:
Post a Comment