| |
| | 21ST |
 | | For most contemporary metaphysical studies are (quite paradoxically) the direct descendants of the logical positivist/analytic movement,[5] which in turn established its platform on a radical rejection of traditional metaphysics (proclaiming it to be simply meaningless). |
 | | So contemporary metaphysical investigations (here we should think of works of authors such as Armstrong, Bealer, Butchvarov, Gupta, Fine, Kripke, Lewis, Parsons, Plantinga, Putnam, Quine, van Inwagen, etc.) are radically different in their methods and principles as well as in their goals from anything that might pass for "traditional metaphysics". |
 | | For the metaphysical considerations of the scholastics, as far as their methodology is concerned, are strikingly similar to these modern considerations in that we find the same continuous presence of the reflection on the metaphysical use of language in their treatment of metaphysical problems as we can find in the works of their modern counterparts. |
| www.fordham.edu /gsas/phil/klima/21ST.HTM (1176 words) |
|