Home
/
Social Science
/
In No Other Department Is a Thorough Knowledge of History so Important as in Philosophy. Like Historical Science in General, Philosophy

Question

In no other department is a thorough knowledge of history so important as in philosophy. Like historical science in general, philosophy is, on the one hand, in touch with exact inquiry, while on the other, it has a certain relationship with art With the former it has in common its methodical procedure and its cognitive aim with the latter, its intuitive character and the endeavor to compass the whole of reality with a glance. Metaphysical principles are less easily verified from experience than physical hypotheses but also less easily refuted. Systems of philosophy.therefore, are not so dependent on our progressive knowledge of facts as the theories of natura science, and change less quickly; notwithstan ding their mutual conflicts, and in spite of the talk about discarded standpoints they possess in a measure the permanence of classical works of art they retain for all time a certain relative validity. (from History of Modem Philosophy by Richard Falckenberg) Does the author succeed in supporting the claim that "In no other department is a thorough knowledge of history so important as in philosophy"? )1. Yes, because he gives examples of why knowledge of history is vital to philosophy. ) 2. Yes, because he proves that other departments of thought are not reliant on historica knowledge. 3. No, because he proceeds to explain why knowledge of history is as important to other disciplines. ) 4. No, because he digresses into another topic and does not address historical knowledge.

Solution

Expert Verified
4.7 (116 Votes)
Ansley Veteran · Tutor for 10 years

Answer

لا، لم ينجح الكاتب في دعم ادعائه بأن "لا يوجد قسم آخر تكون فيه المعرفة الشاملة للتاريخ بنفس أهميتها في الفلسفة". الاختيار الصحيح هو (4).الكاتب لم يقدم أمثلة على أهمية المعرفة التاريخية للفلسفة، بل قارن الفلسفة بالعلوم الدقيقة والفنون من حيث المنهج والهدف. لم يتطرق إلى أهمية التاريخ في الفلسفة بشكل مباشر، ولم يقارن أهمية التاريخ في الفلسفة بأهميته في المجالات الأخرى. لذلك، انحرف الكاتب عن الموضوع الرئيسي ولم يتناول المعرفة التاريخية بالشكل المطلوب لدعم ادعائه.