![]() Portal Site for Russellian in Japan |
(社会思想社,1968年6月(上巻)及び9月(下巻) 304pp(上巻)及び293p.(下巻) (原著:Wisdom of the West, 1959) |
松下訳に変更 |
||||
最後に,哲学の固有な特徴を1つあげてよいだろう。誰かに,数学とは何かと質問された場合,私たちは,たとえば,それは数の科学だという辞書の定義を,議論の種として与えることができる。これは,議論に関するかぎり,今さら議論の余地のない陳述であり,その上,質問者が数学を知らなくてもすぐ理解することができるものである。定義は,このように,ひとまとまりの明確な知識の存在する分野なら,いかなる分野についても,与えることができる。しかし,哲学は,このように定義することはできない。いかなる定義にも,議論の余地があり,定義(の提示は)は既に1つの哲学的態度の具現である。哲学とは何かということを見つけ出す唯一の方法は,哲学を実践することである。人びとが従来このことをどのようにやってきたを示すことが本書の主要目的である。 |
What are the philosophers doing when they are at work? This is indeed, an odd question, and we might try to answer it by first setting out what they are not doing. There are, in the world around us, many things which are understood fairly well. Take, for instance, the working of a steam engine. This falls within the fields of mechanics and thermo-dynamics. Again, we know quite a lot about the way in which the human body is built and functions. These are matters that are studied in anatomy and physiology. Or, finally, consider the movement of the stars about which we know a great deal. This comes under the heading of astronomy. All such pieces of well defined knowledge belong to one or other of the sciences. But all these provinces of knowledge border on a circumambient area of the unknown. As one comes into the border regions and beyond, one passes from science into the field of speculation. This speculative activity is a kind of exploration, and this, among other things, is what philosophy is. As we shall see later, the various fields of science all started as philosophic exploration in this sense. Once a science becomes solidly grounded, it proceeds more or less independently, except for borderline problems and questions of method. But in a way the exploratory process does not advance as such, it simply goes on and finds new employment. At the same time we must distinguish philosophy from other kinds of speculation. In itself philosophy sets out neither to solve our troubles nor to save our souls. It is, as the Greeks put it, a kind of sightseeing adventure undertaken for its own sake. There is thus in principle no question of dogma, or rites, or sacred entities of any kind, even though individual philosophers may of course turn out to be stubbornly dogmatic. There are indeed two attitudes that might be adopted towards the unknown. One is to accept the pronouncements of people who say they know, on the basis of books, mysteries or other sources of inspiration. The other way is to go out and look for oneself, and this is the way of science and philosophy. Lastly, we may note one peculiar feature of philosophy. If someone ask the question what is mathematics, we can give him a dictionary definition, let us say the science of number, for the sake of argument. As far as it goes this is an uncontroversial statement, and moreover one that can be easily understood by the questioner though he may be ignorant of mathematics. Definitions may be given in this way of any field where a body of definite knowledge exists. But philosophy cannot be so defined. Any definition is controversial and already embodies a philosophic attitude. The only way to find out what philosophy is, is to do philosophy. To show how men have done this in the past is the main aim of this book. | |||