The Personalization of Intellectual Combat

Bruce Kinzer
{"title":"The Personalization of Intellectual Combat","authors":"Bruce Kinzer","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198846499.003.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"James Fitzjames Stephen—prominent barrister, prolific journalist, pugnacious polemicist, and older brother of Leslie Stephen—was elected a member of the Metaphysical Society in 1873. He presented seven papers between his election and his last appearance in 1879, making him one of the Society’s most active members. Alan Brown, in his monograph on the Metaphysical Society, says that Stephen’s papers ‘are the most coherent, consistent, and closely reasoned body of opinion contributed by a single member’. This coherence and consistency, this chapter argues, stem from the identity of those Stephen considered his intellectual adversaries within the Metaphysical Society, adversaries whose views he deemed badly flawed and utterly repugnant. These were its Catholic members, whom Stephen did not regard as true Englishmen. The chapter explains Stephen’s animus and analyses the means he employed to demonstrate the faulty nature of the beliefs held by those he chose to attack. It also examines the impact of his conduct on the health of the Metaphysical Society. Brown asserts that Stephen ‘was in many ways the dominating figure in the latter half of the Society’s history’. This domination, the essay contends, had as much to do with the manner of his doing battle as with the substance of the arguments he set forth. Stephen’s impact, on balance, was harmful, his belligerence discouraging rather than aiding the exchange of ideas and spirit of inquiry the founding members of the Metaphysical Society had sought to foster.","PeriodicalId":194796,"journal":{"name":"The Metaphysical Society (1869-1880)","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Metaphysical Society (1869-1880)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198846499.003.0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

James Fitzjames Stephen—prominent barrister, prolific journalist, pugnacious polemicist, and older brother of Leslie Stephen—was elected a member of the Metaphysical Society in 1873. He presented seven papers between his election and his last appearance in 1879, making him one of the Society’s most active members. Alan Brown, in his monograph on the Metaphysical Society, says that Stephen’s papers ‘are the most coherent, consistent, and closely reasoned body of opinion contributed by a single member’. This coherence and consistency, this chapter argues, stem from the identity of those Stephen considered his intellectual adversaries within the Metaphysical Society, adversaries whose views he deemed badly flawed and utterly repugnant. These were its Catholic members, whom Stephen did not regard as true Englishmen. The chapter explains Stephen’s animus and analyses the means he employed to demonstrate the faulty nature of the beliefs held by those he chose to attack. It also examines the impact of his conduct on the health of the Metaphysical Society. Brown asserts that Stephen ‘was in many ways the dominating figure in the latter half of the Society’s history’. This domination, the essay contends, had as much to do with the manner of his doing battle as with the substance of the arguments he set forth. Stephen’s impact, on balance, was harmful, his belligerence discouraging rather than aiding the exchange of ideas and spirit of inquiry the founding members of the Metaphysical Society had sought to foster.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
智力战斗的个性化
詹姆斯·菲茨詹姆斯·斯蒂芬——杰出的律师、多产的记者、好斗的辩论家、莱斯利·斯蒂芬的哥哥——在1873年被选为形而上学学会的成员。从他当选到1879年最后一次露面,他发表了七篇论文,使他成为学会最活跃的成员之一。艾伦·布朗在他关于形而上学社会的专著中说,斯蒂芬的论文“是一个成员贡献的最连贯、最一致、最严密的观点体”。这一章认为,这种连贯性和一致性,源于斯蒂芬认为他在形而上学社会中的智力对手的身份,他认为这些对手的观点有严重缺陷,完全令人反感。这些都是天主教成员,斯蒂芬并不认为他们是真正的英国人。这一章解释了司提反的敌意,并分析了他用来证明他选择攻击的人所持信仰的错误本质的方法。它还考察了他的行为对形而上学社会健康的影响。布朗断言,斯蒂芬“在协会后半段的历史中,在许多方面都是举足轻重的人物”。这篇文章认为,这种统治与他进行战斗的方式以及他所提出的论点的实质有关。总而言之,斯蒂芬的影响是有害的,他的好斗非但没有促进思想交流,反而阻碍了形而上学学会的创始成员们所寻求的探索精神。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Expertise in the Miracles Debate Cause, Nature, and the Limits of Language The Editors of the Metaphysical Society, or Disseminating the Ideas of the Metaphysicians Catholics and the Metaphysical Basis of Science Intuitionism, Religious Belief, and Proof in the Papers of the Metaphysical Society
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1