Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T11:06:51.276Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Dublin Review (1836–75), its Reviewers and a ‘Philosophy of Knowledge’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2015

John Warren
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In a previous number of Recusant History, the present writer discussed the philosophy of knowledge of the Liberal Catholic periodical The Rambler. The philosophy of knowledge concept was used to examine ideas on the nature of mind and reason and on the value, use and limitations of reason, on the grounds that such ideas were the foundation for the reviewers’ speculations on education—one of the most vital of nineteenth century debates. Moreover, the philosophy of knowledge proved to be a useful vehicle for relating the world-view of the periodical writers to their discussions of education at all levels.

Type
Articles
Information
British Catholic History , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , May 1992 , pp. 86 - 98
Copyright
Copyright © Catholic Record Society 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1 Warren, J. ‘ The Rambler, Its Reviewers and a “Philosophy of Knowledge”’, Recusant History 20, 1 (May 1990), pp. 127–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 Charles W. Russell (1812–80) was Professor of Humanity at Maynooth, 1835–42. He held the chair of Ecclesiastical History there from 1845–57, and was President, 1857 to death.

3 Hedley, J. C. ‘Life and Labours of S. Thomas of Aquin’, Dublin Review New Series 16(1871), p. 130.Google Scholar

4 Robertson, J. B. ‘Science and Revealed Religion’, Dublin Review 2 (1837), pp. 293–329.Google Scholar

5 De Morgan, A. ‘The Elements of Euclid’, Dublin Review 11 (1841), pp. 330–55.Google Scholar

6 Robertson, J. B. ‘Modern Deism’, Dublin Review 35 (1853), pp. 336–62.Google Scholar

7 Dunne, D. B. ‘Ward’s Philosophical Introduction to Nature and Grace’, Dublin Review 48 (1860), p. 391.Google Scholar

8 Guy, R, E. ‘Dr. M’Cosh’s “Intuitions of the Mind” and “Examination of Mill’s Philosophy”’, Dublin Review New Series 8 (1867), pp. 172–91.Google Scholar

9 Ward, W. G. ‘Mr. Mill on the Foundation of Morality’, Dublin Review New Series 18 (1872), p. 45.Google Scholar

10 Ward, W. G. ‘Science, Prayer, Free Will, and Miracles’, Dublin Review New Series 8 (1867), pp. 255–98.Google Scholar

11 Ward, W. G. ‘Mr. Mill’s Philosophical Position’, Dublin Review New Series 22 (1874), pp. 1–38 Google Scholar. The footnote on Kleutgen is on p. 32.

12 Barry, W. F. ‘St. Thomas on the Theory of Human Knowledge’, Dublin Review New Series 25 (1875), p. 433.Google Scholar

13 Ward, W. G. ‘Mr. Mill’s Philosophical Position’, op. cit., p. 32.Google Scholar

14 Talbot, J. ‘The Reformation and its Consequences’, Dublin Review 14 (1843), pp. 379–411.Google Scholar

15 Barry, W. F, ‘St. Thomas on the Theory of Human Knowledge’, op. cit.

16 Robertson, J. B. ‘Modern Deism’, op. cit.

17 Jennings, W. ‘Tendencies of Modern Logic’, Dublin Review 36 (1854), pp. 419–51.Google Scholar

18 Finlayson, W. F. ‘Luther’, Dublin Review 39 (1855), pp. 1–60.Google Scholar

19 Unknown. ‘Unsectarian and Scientific Secularism’, Dublin Review New Series 19 (1872), p. 1.

20 Robertson, J. B. ‘Science and Revealed Religion’, op. cit.

21 De Coux, C. ‘Saint-Simonism’, Dublin Review 4 (1838), pp. 138–79.Google Scholar

22 Steinmetz, J. ‘The Literature of Art’ (Part 1), Dublin Review 12 (1842), pp. 38–80.Google Scholar

23 Jennings, W. ‘Tendencies of Modern Logic’, op. cit.

24 Jennings, W. ‘Legitimate Influence of Authority in Philosophy—Des Cartes, the Sensationalists, and Kant’, Dublin Review 38 (1855), pp. 169–212.Google Scholar

25 Ward, W. G. ‘Authority of the Scholastic Philosophy’, Dublin Review New Series 13 (1869), pp. 33–47.Google Scholar

26 Crolly, G. ‘The Monks and Schoolmen of the Middle Ages’, Dublin Review 30 (1851), p. 323.Google Scholar

27 Allies, T. W. ‘The Catholic University’, Dublin Review 31 (1851), p. 533.Google Scholar

28 ibidem., p. 543.

29 Ward, W. G. ‘Authority of the Scholastic Philosophy’, op, cit.

30 Hedley, J. C. ‘Life and Labours of S. Thomas of Aquin’, op. cit., pp. 111–38.Google Scholar

31 Dalgairns, J. B. ‘The Relation of Scholastic to Modern Philosophy. Mr. Hutton and Mr. Martineau’, Dublin Review New Series 20 (1873), p. 314.Google Scholar

32 Barry, W. F. ‘St. Thomas on the Theory of Human Knowledge’, op. cit., p. 431.Google Scholar

33 Hedley, J. C. ‘Life and Labours of S. Thomas of Aquin’, op. cit.

34 Dalgairns, J. B. ‘The Relation of Scholastic to Modern Philosophy, Mr. Hutton and Mr. Martineau’, op. cit.

35 Robertson, J. B. ‘Balmes’s Catholicism and Protestantism Considered in respect to Civilization’ (Part I), Dublin Review 24 (1848), p. 49.Google Scholar

36 Robertson, J. B. ‘The Life and Writings of Görres’. Dublin Review 6 (1839), p. 31.Google Scholar

37 Robertson, J. B. ‘Modern Deism’, op. cit.

38 Jennings, W. ‘Legitimate Influence of Authority in Philosophy—Des Cartes, the Sensationalists, and Kant’, op. cit.

39 Ward, W. G. ‘Authority of the Scholastic Philosophy’, op. cit.

40 Ward, W. G. ‘Science, Prayer, Free Will, and Miracles’, op. cit.

41 Ward, W. G. ‘Mr. Mill on the Foundation of Morality’, op. cit.

42 Dunne, D. B. ‘Ward’s Philosophical Introduction to Nature and Grace’, op. cit.

43 Thompson, H. ‘The Principles of ‘89’ (Part I), Dublin Review New Series 3 (1864), pp. 253–77.Google Scholar

44 Arnold, T. ‘Mill on Liberty’ (Parts I & II), The Rambler 3rd. Series 2 (1859–60), pp. 62–75, 376–85Google Scholar.

45 Lucas, E. (prob.) ‘Mill on Liberty’, Dublin Review New Series 13 (1869), pp. 62–75.Google Scholar

46 Allies, T. W. ‘The Catholic University’, op. cit., p. 582.Google Scholar

47 ibidem., p. 583.