Conciliatorics and eclecticism: philosophy on the way to a concept of open system

Keywords: syncretism, conciliatorics, eclecticism, open system, Early Modern philosophy, methodology

Abstract

The recent historic-philosophical tradition which has its roots in the Hegelian school usually mixed conciliatorics with eclecticism and considered the last as a main opponent of systematics (Ch. Wolf and his followers). By reduction of eclecticism to syncretism, Hegel and his school gave negative sense to the term "eclecticism", which was fashionable in 17-18th cent., completely denying its progressive role in the history of philosophy. Contrary to this view the author shows the need for distinguishing eclecticism from syncretism and conciliatorics, and tries to show its crucial role in the formation of a philosophical concept of system.
The author argues that syncretism, conciliatorics and eclecticism rejected not the idea of system but only attempts of aprioristic creation of systems (B. Keckerman, C. Timpler, Ch. Wolff). Despite the general starting point of philosophizing (opinion of philosophers) and a common goal (the aspiration to reduce variety of the views to unity), these currents disagree as to the way of the achieving of their goal. The author shows that only syncretism noncritically combines different views. Conciliatorics, on the contrary, tries to estimate and reconcile them, and eclecticism tries to select the best opinions on the basis of experience and reasoning.
It is inadmissibly to consider a conciliatorics as a kind of eclecticism. Conciliatorics is focused not on the truth, but on the unity of views. Its epistemological and methodological principles are not firmly defined. Eclecticism, on the contrary, accurately formulated its principles and has its own methodological program which is focused on growth of knowledge. Knowledge considered here as the collective, dialogical and historically developing process of gradual approach to truth

Author Biography

Sergiy Secundant, I. Mechnikov Odessa National University
Doctor of sciences in philosophy, associated professor of Department of Philosophy and Grounds of Humanities

References

Albrecht, M. (1994). Eklektik. Eine Begriffsgeschichte mit Hinweisen auf die Philosophie und Wis-senschaftsgeschichte. Stuttgart-Bad Canstatt: Fromman-Holzboog.

Beck, L. W. (1997). Early German Philosophy: Kant and His Predecessors. Harvard: Harvard UP.

Brucker, J. (1735). Kurtze Fragen aus der philosophischen Historie, vom Christi Geburt bis auf unseren Zeiten (T. 6). Ulm: Bartholomäi.

Brucker, J. (1742). Historia critica philosophiae (T. 2). Lipsiae: Breitkopf.

Brucker, J. (1743). Historia critica philosophiae (T. 4.1). Lipsiae: Breitkopf.

Erwards, M. (2013). Time and Science of the Soul in the Early Modern Philosophy. Leiden, & Boston: Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004232334

Freudenthal, J. (1879). Goclenius, Rudolf. In R. F. von Liliencron (Hrsg.), Allgemeine deutsche Bibliographie (Bd. 9, S. 308-312). Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot.

Gantet, C. (2010). Der Traum in der Frühen Neuzeit. Ansätze zu einer Kulturellen Wissenschafts-geschichte. Berlin, & New York: De Gruyter.

Gocklenius, R. (1609). Conciliator philosophicus. Cassellis: Mauritiana.

Gocklenius, R. (1615). Lexicon Philosophicum graecum. Marchioburgi: Rudolphi Hutwelckeri, Petri Musculi.

Hoefler, J. J., & Baier, J. D. (1742). Conciliatorum et eclecticorum diversam philosophandi rationem. Altdorf: Meyerus.

Hotson, H. (2007). Commonplace Learning. Ramism and its German Ramifications 1543-1630. Oxford: Oxford UP.

Janke, W. (1977). Historische Dialektik: Destruktion dialektischer Grundformen von Kant bis Marx. Berlin, & New York: De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110860467

Mercer, Ch. (2002). Platonism and the Philosophical Humanism on the Continent. In S. Nadler (Ed.), A Companion to Early Modern Philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Mercer, Ch. (2004a). Leibniz's metaphysics: its Origins and Development. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.

Mercer, Ch. (2004b). Leibniz and his Master: The Correspondents with Jakob Thomasius. In Lodge, P. (Ed.), Leibniz and his Correspondents (pp. 10-46). Cambridge: Cambridge UP.

Mesterton, C. (1750). Specimen academicum De Syncretismo pholosophico. Aboae: Joh. Kaempe.

Micraelius, J. (1653). Lexicon philosophicum terminorum philosophis usitatorum ordine alpha-bethico sic digestorum, ut inde facile liceat cognosse. Jena: Mamphrasius.

Morhof, D. G. (1732). Polyhistor literarius, philosophicus et practicus (T. 2). Lubeckae: Petri Boeckmani.

Novak, L. (2014). Suárez's Metaphysics in its Historical and Systematic Context. Berlin: De Gruy-ter.

Petersen, P. (1921). Geschichte der Aristotelischen Philosophie im protestantischen Deutschland. Leipzig: Meiner.

Schmidt-Biggemann, W. (1983). Topica universalis. Eine Modelgeschichte humanistischer und barocker Wissenschaft. Hamburg: Meiner.

Sturm, J. Ch. (1676). Collegium experimentale, sive Curiosi… Pars. I. Norimbergae: Endter.

Sturm, J. Ch. (1679). De philosophia Sectaria et Electiva Dissertatio Academica. Altdorfi: H. Meyer.

Sturm, J. Ch. (1686). Philosophia eclectica, h.e. Exercitationes Academicae. Altdorfi: J.H. Schönnerstädt.

Sturm, J. Ch. (1687). Physicae conciliatricis per generalem pariter ac specialem partem conami-na succinctis aphorismis adumbrata. Nürnberg: Wolfgang Mauritio.

Tomasoni, F. (2009). Christian Thomasius: Geist und kulturelle Identität an der Schwelle zur eu-ropäischen Aufklärung. Münster: Waxmann.

Walch, J. G. (1726). Philosophisches Lexicon (1. Teil). Leipzig: Gleditschens.

Walch, J. G. (1775). Philosophisches Lexicon (2. Teil). Leipzig: Gleditschens.

Wund, M. (1992). Die deutsche Schulmetaphysik des 17. Jahrhunderts. Hildesheim, Zürich, & New York: Georg Olms.
Published
2017-06-16
How to Cite
Secundant, S. (2017). Conciliatorics and eclecticism: philosophy on the way to a concept of open system. Sententiae, 36(1), 31-50. https://doi.org/10.22240/sent36.01.031
Section
ARTICLES