Murder by Science

In the centuries that have passed, and with them the ideas and thoughts of generations, there is a forgotten piece of the study of the humanities. The record is showing that the 'forgotten' is not merely a lapse in memory as the definition implies. It is not a lapse, but a death. From the time passed, it was important, albeit imperative, for one's study to include philosophy. The discipline of philosophy broke ground for many other disciplines; even if those disciplines refuse to acknowledge its incubator.

In philosophy, before it became an autonomous discipline, the student learned of the principles of nature, logic, and discourse. However, in synthesis with the study of philosophy and the sciences was the study of theology, in the 12th and 13th centuries, the Middle Ages were not dark (as in dead) in regards to all knowledge ceasing and development having ceased. Philosophy, nor theology for that matter, did not become deceased. In Paris, where universities were thriving, were developing, becoming in greater numbers, modern scholastics seem to fail to give credit and account for theology having given such innovation and development.

The notion of 'university' has its derivation from the Latin 'universitas magistorum et scholarium,' which means "community of teachers and scholars." Clearly, from just the Latin assignment of the historical context, a person interested can see that there is a relation to theology. In medieval Europe, specifically Italy, the university was created from cathedral schools because the diocese believed, and still do, that education is important. Education is important for clergy to be knowledgeable in the Scripture, as well as knowledgeable to attain a greater understanding of the work of the Creator (God). It was also for the clergy to be a guiding light to people, lost in darkness, to find the Truth; that Truth being God.

Along the way, the discipline of philosophy (and adjoining sciences), being conjoined with theology, decided to break from the theological discipline in the Faculty of Arts and become autonomous. As more effort was put forth to procure separation, more texts and commentaries were developed either in support or opposition. While the break was occurring, some masters of education noticed a problem. Although theology is an influencer in science becoming great, it was losing a place in the scientific disciplines, some intentional.

If the definition is used from Wikipedia alone, the information and clarity is enough to indicate that theology is a strong suit for science. The Wikipedia definition states: "Theology is the systematic study of the nature of the divine and, more broadly, of religious belief...adherents still consider theology to be a discipline that helps them live and understand concepts such as life and love...". It is evident then, that theology is a system of study, just as science, that helps people understand life and its related concepts (therefore, its meaning and essence). These concepts and the life can be of any particular interest to an individual: physics, mathematics, geography, technology, business, etc. Why do you think that it is mandatory for general education in college to take one or two humanities courses? And that the options include philosophy (or branches of it like: sociology or psychology) but not theology?

In the 13th century, when the split was happening, there were texts written to oppose the separation by the Faculty of Arts, to retain the synthesis of philosophy and theology. One such writer-philosopher, Boethius of Dacia (1240), in his work De Summo Bono. Boethius, in the author's opinion, tries to reconcile the differences between the two disciplines. He explains that there are two truths: truth 'simpliciter' (absolute truth), and truth 'secundum quid' (truth as relative). When the philosopher, for instance, declares that the world has no beginning nor end (an eternal world), he speaks according to physics; it is in relation to physics, therefore, secundum quid. So there is a sharp distinction between Christian faith and philosophy, yet there can be a Christian philosopher, where theology speaks from the First Cause (absolute truth), and philosophy speaks from relation (relative truth: secundum quid).

Therefore, these disciplines can share a commonality as to truth and still hold their respective differences, both are systematic (scientific) and both are deductive. However, it has become prevalent to hermetically separate the domain of philosophical reason and its sciences (which are founded on nature and the elements) and the domain of faith (which is founded on miracles, which run "counter" to the course of nature), the masters of education (liberal arts) are inevitably forced to marginalize the Christian faith, whether they want to or not. And this marginalization leads logically to unbelief, or fideism.

Overall, there is a witnessing of not a synthesis of two happiness's: natural and supernatural, but a death of an important part of all of science. Saint Thomas Aquinas said it best as he explained that, in effect, knowledge, is centripetal: it makes the known object to exist in the knower, according to the same mode of knowing. Love, by contrast, is centrifugal, "ecstatic," since it carries us (across) to the loved object it is existential reality. However, it knowledge of God is to exist in us, it will be reduced to our measure, whereas charity enlarges us and helps us attain God himself.

Therefore, the two disciplines have a true synthesis. The breath of science is by the vapors of theology. However, due to the desired individualism of philosophy, but all sciences and arts, there is a disdain and separation. The sciences declare the death of God in life, school, the overall workings of the universe. They have committed a murder and hid the body of theologia. I hope that she is found, safe and sound.