Jerry, list,

I wonder whether there was more than one Schleiermacher. Or did Schleiermacher start out in theology? Or maybe Peirce was in some sort of error or insufficient information about Schleiermacher in the first quote below. Anyway, here are the results. In the third quote, Peirce credits Schleiermacher's school of thought with the invention of the word _/normative/_.

Contributions to _The Nation_ 3:93
75 (11 September 1902) 209-211: PAULSEN'S KANT

   At any rate, it was exclusively in the way of thought that Kant can
   be deemed great, if he was great at all. There are different kinds
   of thought: there is mathematical thought, that works by diagrams;
   there is the thought which, from observing a fragment, divines a
   whole; and there is logical analysis. Kant was certainly not a
   mathematician. In scientific theorizing, however, he was decidedly
   strong. He is accounted by astronomers the author of the Nebular
   Hypothesis. In his younger days, he was a physicist; and he always
   remained a physicist who had taken up philosophy (naturally, less
   strikingly so as his powers declined), contrasting in this regard
   with Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, and Schleiermacher, not to speak of
   Baader, Günther, etc., who were all theological students, and as
   strongly with Jacobi, Fries, Krause, etc., who came to philosophy by
   the route of theology; and even more or less, with Schopenhauer,
   Herbart, Beneke, and all the others before Fechner and Lotze, who,
   at any rate, breathe rather the atmosphere of the seminary than that
   of the laboratory. Every scientific reader feels the philosopher of
   Königsberg to be of his kindred.

CP 2.38  from "Minute Logic", Ch. 1, 1902

   Of logics which in modern times more or less take for granted
   special systems of metaphysics, the earliest were a series of
   Aristotelian treatises. [....] Leibnitzianism, systematized by
   Wolff, numbered its logics by scores. Kantianism had its Krug and
   Esser, to mention only those of whom English readers are likely to
   know something; and every subsequent German philosopher, Baader,
   Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, Schleiermacher, Schopenhauer, von
   Hartmann, Dühring, down to Häckel, has been followed by his train of
   logicians. Thus, a large proportion of all the logics that have ever
   been written have more or less pursued this vicious order of thought.

CP 1.575, from "Minute Logic", Ch. 4, 1902-3

   The word _/normative/_ was invented in the school of Schleiermacher.
   The majority of writers who make use of it tell us that there are
   three normative sciences, logic, esthetics, and ethics, the
   doctrines of the true, the beautiful, and the good, a triad of
   ideals which has been recognized since antiquity. On the other hand,
   we quite commonly find the term "normative science" restricted to
   logic and ethics; and Schleiermacher himself states their purposes
   in a way that seems to give room for no third. The one, he says,
   relates to making thought conform to being, the other, to making
   being conform to thought. There seems to be much justice in this
   restriction. [....]

Best, Ben

On 4/14/2014 9:21 PM, Jerry LR Chandler wrote:

Ben, List

On Apr 14, 2014, at 8:06 PM, Benjamin Udell wrote:

He mentions Schleiermacher a few times in passing.

Would you be so kind as to post the references to Schleiermacher?

He played a critical role in the trio of students (with Schelling and a poet whose name I forget,) who moved forward from Kantian foundations, at least according to Roberts.

I have spent some time looking for translations of Schleiermacher's work without success, unfortunately. He was a chemist and in Germany, chemistry then and now, plays a substantial role in public discourse.

Cheers

Jerry

-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L 
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To 
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the 
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at 
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .




Reply via email to