Man’s Knowledge of Reality by Frederick Wilhelmsen (review)

BOOK REVIEWS Man's Knowledge of Reality. By FREDERICK WILHELMSEN. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1956. Pp. ~15 with indices. $4.00. It is probably true as far as textbooks are concerned that even a good one is at best only a mixed blessing. Nevertheless, considering the average size of the contemporary class, we must be alert to the appearance of any worthwhile textbook which may assist us in our teaching. Teachers of scholastic philosophy have for years watched for the appearance of an adequate textbook in epistemology. Their watch has, for the most part, been unrewarded. Because there is little agreement on the exact nature of epistemology and because any investigation into the mystery of knowledge is exceedingly difficult, only few attempts have been made to satisfy the need for a textbook in epistemology. Of these few perhaps the most significant {at least in English) has been Frederick Wilhelmsen's Man's Knowledge of Reality, published in 195~ by Prentice-Hall. In the two years since its publication this book has found favor with many, and in that time no other textbook in epistemology written by a scholastic has appeared to challenge it. Because of this it seems highly reasonable to predict not only continued but even increased use of this book in the philosophy curricula of our Catholic colleges. This is the situation which prompts this present critical review of the book. Man's Knowledge of Reality (subtitled An Introduction to Thomistic Epistemology) is proposed by the author not strictly as a textbook but more simply as an essay towards a Thomistic epistemology. Wilhelmsen requests that his work be evaluated first of all by the way it measures up to reality and secondly by the extent of its faithfulness to the philosophy of St. Thomas. There is no question but that he feels that if it measures up to the one it will measure up to the other. As for his brand of Thomism, Wilhelmsen declares himself outside of the school of the classical Commentators . That this is true is clearly seen in his own text and in his choice of the majority of his secondary references. Clearly Wilhelmsen owes most, as far as secondary sources are concerned, to philosophers who have repudiated the Thomistic authenticity of the teaching of Cajetan and John of St. Thomas. Wilhelmsen opens his book with the admission that there is no science which is uniquely epistemology. However, he insists that there is a philosophical investigation properly epistemological in nature, though the investi542 BOOK REVIEWS 543 gation is not limited to any one philosophical discipline. In fact, an evaluation of the several possible meanings of " epistemology " reveals for Wilhelmsen three valid meanings for the term. Histo.Jically, "epistemology" refers to the way men confront the critical problem. This is the first valid meaning. Secondly, "epistemology" can refer to an investigation linking the metaphysics of knowledge (itself not epistemology) with the psychology of knowledge (itself not epistemology). Finally," epistemology" (and here there are as many distinct epistemologies as there are distinct knowledges) can refer to the investigation of the conditions proper to the many different kinds of human knowledge. Wilhelmsen proceeds to order his book according to these three meanings of "epistemology." In Part I ("Metaphysical Realism") he confronts, and disposes of, the "critical problem." In Part II ("Judgment and Truth ") he moves from a general consideration of the metaphysics and psychology of human knowledge to a searching analysis of judgment, and thence to a consideration of truth and certitude. Finally, in Part III ("An Introduction to Epistemology of Speculative Science ") he considers generally the nature of speculative science and the classification of the speculative sciences. The result is, for the most part, a well ordered textbook maturely composed and proportioned to upper division students with a solid formation in the philosophy of man and metaphysics. Since the time of Descartes the " critical problem " has proven to be a stumbling block to philosophers, if not to philosophy itself. The compulsion to attempt philosophically to establish the right to philosophize has invariably driven the critical philosopher into a blind alley, leading him nowhere save further and further into his criticism. The history of philosophy...