2024/06/04 by Paul McHugh, Paul James McHugh
Arts and Humanities · #Catholicism and Religious Studies
paper · pdf · doi:10.1111/heyj.14329
crossref issued 2024/06/04 · crossref published 2024/06/04 · crossref published-online 2024/06/04 · openalex publication_date 2024/06/04 · crossref created 2024/06/04 · crossref published-print 2024/07/01 · crossref deposited 2024/07/13 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · crossref indexed 2026/07/30 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/30
Abstract The difficulties in placing Newman in a philosophical school or in putting some sort of shape on Newman the philosopher stem in part from Newman's (understandable) near failure to guide the reader as to his overt philosophical method. On the other hand, in the many discussions and controversies that occupied Newman throughout his life—whether conducted through letters or more formal writings—there is gathering witness to a consistent philosophical way in Newman. This paper seeks to put some shape on Newman the philosopher by two principal methods. First, by considering some inaccurate or wholly misleading philosophical labels which have been attached to Newman both in his day and in contemporary times. These help, as it were, to shape Newman the philosopher from without. Second, by examining those elements of his writing that have a philosophical cast, and teasing out hints and clues to Newman the philosopher. The paper argues that while Newman can most certainly be thought of as a philosopher, his subtle philosophical way situates him only problematically in any particular philosophical school, though there can in his work be traced connections to particular philosophical programmes, such as, for example, British empiricism.