Crossref Citations
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref.
Walter Staggs, D.
2013.
Interdisciplinary and Religio-Cultural Discourses on a Spirit-Filled World.
p.
97.
Article contents
Dualism or Duality?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 November 2011
Extract
Do we live in an intrinsically rent and warring world? or is the schism only apparent, veiling a fundamental and all-pervasive harmony? or is the universe of such a nature as to admit of a conflict which, though it has sprung up within it, is not of it?
These three possibilities offer themselves to the mind that is trying to push through the world of appearances into the world of reality. The first is the conclusion of Dualism. The second is the conclusion of Monism. The third is an undifferentiated, but long prevalent and well-grounded, conviction, sometimes wrongly identified with dualism, sometimes with monism, but in reality independent of both. For want of a better term we may call it the principle of Duality.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1913
References
1 This is not a case of a distinction without a difference, but of a distinction without a terminology. I assume that the term Duality avoids the sense of disruption and hostility implied in the ending “ism.”
2 See G. F. Moore, “Zoroastrianism,” Harvard Theological Review, vol. v, especially pp. 224, 225.
3 Dualism proper regards the second principle as well as the first as active. The Stoics, like Plato, regarded matter as passive. “Das wahre Charaktermerkmal der ὔλη ist Passivität.” Aal, Geschichte der Logosidee, p. 113.
4 Plato, Timaeus, 30.
5 Ibid., 41.
6 Ibid., 48.
7 For a discussion of the dependence upon Plato of the Christian fathers in the Hexaemeroi see an article by Robbins, Frank E. on “The Influence of Greek Philosophy in the Early Commentaries on Genesis,” in the American Journal of Theology, April, 1912.Google Scholar
8 1 Cor. 15 44–49; also 1 Cor. 2 14.
9 Gal. 5 17–21.
10 1 Cor. 11 12.
11 “There is no reason why Paul should not have been familiar with dualism as it existed in Hellenic thought; but that he embraced it or held it is a supposition obviously incompatible with the general tenour of his teaching.” F. R. Tennant, The Fall and Original Sin, p. 269.
12 It is to this prevalent but unjust notion of the doctrine of the Logos that its present disrepute is largely due.
13 De Opificio Mundi, § 47.
14 “From the end of the second century it was for ever established in the church that the belief in an essential dualism of God and the world, spirit and nature, was irreconcilable with Christianity.” Harnack, Monasticism, p. 23.
15 Paul, who (together with the Johannine author) is as largely responsible for this conception of the superhuman character of evil as he is for the non-dualistic sanity of the Christian attitude toward life, seems to have intended by these vigorous terms to emphasize the power of evil rather than to define it metaphysically.
16 Thus Martineau says: “With Descartes we enter upon the true era of metaphysical dualism.” Types of Ethical Theory, i, 126.
17 There can be no action, says Eucken, without this duality—keine Tat ohne Zweiheit—and the duality itself is indigenous to the action; it is both grounded within and overcome within it. Boyce Gibson, Rudolf Eucken's Philosophy of Life, p. 96.
18 Creative Evolution, p. 186.
19 Ibid., p. 369.
20 Ibid., p. 218.
21 “Life and Consciousness,” Hibbert Journal, October, 1911, p. 41.
22 Ibid., p. 87.
23 James Ward has strikingly set forth the contrast of these two realms in the first two chapters of his recent volume, The Realm of Ends.
24 G. M. Stratton, The Psychology of the Religious Life, p. 355.
- 1
- Cited by