Page History

...

In its first, "analytic" phase, philosophy thus mediates precisely by analyzing the "depth" structure of science and religion, as well as, I should think, any other forms of understanding and transforming reality, nondiscursive as well as discursive, analogously to the way in which metaphysics analyzes the "depth" structure of human existence as such, relating the results of the two types of analysis each to the other. In its second, "existential" phase, philosophy thus mediates by relating the results of its metaphysical and ethical analyses, not to the results of philosophical analyses of science and religion and any other forms of understanding and transforming reality, but to the results ofIhe...;e \'ariollsforms them ...,.elve....' as well as common sense, allowing each to inform the other. This is why metaphysical theology is one thing, philosophical theology, something else. And so, too, with metaphysical and philosophical cosmology, as well as metaphysical and philosophical anthropology. In all three cases, the philosophical discipline is not metaphysically "pure" but "mixed," and rightly so -- - just as, on Heinrich Scholz's view, a "real-philosophical" metaphysics of nature, or of the actual world, is as important to philosophy, in its way, as a "transcendental-philosophical" metaphysics of all possible worlds (or kinds of world) is, in its significantly different way. 

One may say that "existentialist analysis," or "fundamental ontology," is metaphysical anthropology in something like the sense in which one may also speak of metaphysical theology and metaphysical cosmology. I say "something like the sense," because, although there can be no adequate distinction between ontology as metaphysica generalis, on the one hand, and either metaphysical theology or metaphysical cosmology as disciplines of metaphysica specialis, on the other, there can and should be an adequate distinction between ontology, on the one hand, and metaphysical anthropology, i.e., "fundamental ontology," on the other. But, then, ifit if it is correct to distinguish metaphysics from philosophy, and therefore metaphysical theology and cosmology from philosophical theol06'Y and cosmology, it is presumably no less correct to distinguish metap.hysical anthropology from philosophical anthropology.

...