Background
COPLESTON, Frederick was born on April 10, 1907 in Taunton, Somerset. Son of Frederick Selwyn Copleston and Norah Margaret Copleston (nee Little).
COPLESTON, Frederick was born on April 10, 1907 in Taunton, Somerset. Son of Frederick Selwyn Copleston and Norah Margaret Copleston (nee Little).
Marlborough; St John’s, Oxford. And the Gregorian University at Rome.
Professor, of History’ of Philosophy, Heythrop College, Oxon 1939-1970. Professor, of Metaphysics, Gregorian University, Rome, one semester each year 1952-1969. Principal Heythrop College, University of London 1970-1974, Dean, Faculty of Theology’, University of London 1972-1974, Professor, of History’ of Philosophy (personal chair), University of London 1972-1974.
Visiting Professor, University of Santa Clara, California, United States of America 1975-1982. Honorary Fellow of St. John's College Oxford since 1975. Honorary Doctor of Letters (St. Andrews) 1990.
Main publications:(1942) Friedrich Nietzsche. Philosopher of Culture', revised edition, London: Search Press, 1975. (1946) Arthur Schopenhauer. Philosopher of Pessimism, London: Burns, Oates & Washbourne. (1946-1975) /( History of Philosophy, 9 vols, vols: 1-8, London: Bums & Oates
vol 9, London: Search Press
paperback reprint, Garden City, NY: Image Books.(1948) Existentialism and Modern Man, Oxford: Blackfriars.U952) Mediaeval Philosophy, London: Methuen.(1955) Aquinas, Harmondsworth: Pelican Books.(1956) Contemporary Philosophy, revised editon, London: Bums & Oates, 1972.(1972) A History of Mediaeval Philosophy, London: Methuen.(1976) Philosophers and Philosophies, London: Search Press.0979) On the History of Philosophy, London: Search Press.(1980) Philosophies and Cultures, Oxford: Oxford University Press.(1982) Religion and The One, London: Search Press. (1986) Philosophy in Russia. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.(1988) Russian Religious Philosophy, London: Search Press.Secondary literature:Conway, J. I. (1947) ‘Reflections on the function of the history of philosophy in liberal education’. New Scholasticism 21: 419-37.Heinemann. F. H. and Allen E. L. (1955) ‘Survey of recent philosophical and theological literature-, Hihhert Journal. 54: 397-404.
Frederick Copleston, together with Feng Youlan and Surendranath Dasgupta, will probably be remembered as one of the most distinguished historians of philosophy of this century: his ninevolume History of Philosophy (1946-1975) has no serious English-language rivals as a history of Western thought. Announced, in the Preface to its First volume, as a textbook designed for use in Catholic seminaries for students expected to devote most of their time to studying the Philosopltia perennis. it soon became clear that, despite Copleston’s modesty, a major work was in 'he making. From first volume to last, the History •s based on a scrupulous and scholarly reading of Primary sources.
It is written in a uniformly lucid style and, as might have been expected from a Jesuit who could write well on Nietzsche and Schopenhauer, extremely fairtninded. Copleston’s own commitment to Thotnism does not obtrude itself, and the work is nothing if not free from partisan spirit. Indeed Copleston did not understand by philosophia Perennis a body of doctrine fixed for all time, but a worldview which, if true in its main lines, is not at any given moment complete and can be revised and improved in certain respects (cf.
Introduction.
Later on in his career, Copleston widened his horizons even further, to include some work on Russian thought—hardly dealt with in the History—and on the several traditions Westerners lump together under the heading ‘Oriental’. He noted the attractions of Eastern systems for those in the West disenchanted with various aspects of our culture, philosophy included. For example, recent English-language ethics has tended to concentrate on the arid technicalities of metaethics. a function of the separation of ethics from philosophical anthropology and metaphysics.
The appeal of Eastern systems is precisely that they do place human conduct in a cosmic context, and this is a challenge Western philosophy should take up once more.
Unsurprisingly, Copleston had developed views on the principles of philosophical historiography. and in his writings in this area consistently rebuts the claims of sceptics, subjectivists and relativists. For example, it has been argued that no sustainable distinction can be drawn between historical data and interpretation, and that therefore there are only perspectives on the past, unassessable with regard to truth. Copleston admits that there are indeed no ‘uninterpreted data’, but denies that this entails that history is a kind of fiction, since it remains true that the historian does not invent the data, and that not all interpretations are regarded as equally persuasive.
Again. Copleston denies the thesis of those cultural relativists who maintain that we are so determined by our own milieu that we are unable to enter into the mentalities of people belonging to other societies. Those who derive their view from the autonomy of language-games can only make their case if they so define the term ‘understand’ that I can understand only language-games I share: yet there is no reason whatever to accept this definition. A good historian, in Copleston's view, is one who progressively overcomes his or her own milieu, developing the ability to enter fully and sympathetically into other mentalities and outlooks.
Sources: Who’s Who 1993. Obituary. Daily Telegraph, Feb 1994.
History of Western thought. Later extended to Russian philosophy and religion, and Oriental thought.
The scholastic tradition.