Abstract

The problem of distinguishing within the same investigation between the scientific and the philosophical orders of constructive thinking has increased with the complex speculation of current theory and urgently demands systematic clarification, against the dangers of ambiguity and abuse of evidence. M. Maritain has proposed a detailed conceptual classification, which expands Aristotle’s division of the planes of abstraction: his pioneer effort is still under discussion even in Scholastic circles. In particular his proposed distinction of mathematics and its allied empirio-schematic and empirio-metrical sciences from the philosophy of nature, which he brought nearer to, and yet really distinguished from the empiriological sciences has been recently criticised by the Laval and Forest Hill schools in North America. Now Father Connolly outlines this debate and bravely offers a tentative ‘compromise theory’. Restricting philosophy to metaphysics proper, he proposes that “some of the empiriological sciences belong to the philosophy of nature—and to this extent the theory agrees with the anti-Maritain position; secondly, some of the empiriological sciences fall outside its orbit and, along with Mathematics, constitute a distinct field of human knowledge—and to this extent the theory agrees with the Maritain position”.