Shokhin Vladimir

How was the Classical Metaphysics Made?

Shokhin Vladimir (2015) "How was the Classical Metaphysics Made? ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia, 2015, vol. 61, pp. 41-58 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI201561.41-58


It is true that the Western metaphysics could be described as a continual tradition, which up to these days has been working on the issues and challenges coming from the Academy and Liceum, but its history has also undergone the shifts of paradigms linked with changes in its self-consciousness. The article deals with the passage from the traditional metaphysics, which covered two millenniums, to the classical stage dating from the early Modernity to the early Enlightenment wherein not the most notorious “great philosophers” but the scarcely known German “school philosophers” of the latest sixteenth — earliest seventeenth centuries played key roles. The research is concluded by reflections on the significance of the classical metaphysics for the later periods of the Continental philosophy and on the relevance of Clemens Timpler’s and Jacob Lorhard’s postulate that not so much the real as the intelligible should be the subject matter of metaphysics for contemporary theology.


metaphysics, the first philosophy, ontology, cosmology, psychology, theology, the real, the intelligible, Aristotelianism, “school philosophy”


1. Kruglov A. N. 2013 “I. N. Tetens i ego sochinenie «O vseobshhej spekuljativnoj filosofii»” (I. N. Tetens and His Work “About General Speculative Philosophy”), in Tetens I. N. O vseobshhej spekuljativnoj filosofii, Moscow, 2013.
2. Cuares F. 1987 “Predislovie k knige «Metafizicheskie rassuzhdenija» i 1-j razdel pervogo rassuzhdenija «O prirode pervoj filosofii, metafizike»” (Introduction to Book “Metaphysical Considerations” and First Part of First Consideration “About Nature of First Philosophy, Metaphysics”), in Istoriko-filosofskij ezhegodnik, Moscow, 1987, pp. 218–241.
3. Shohin V. K. Agatologija: sovremennost' i klassika (Agathology: Modernity and Classics), Moscow, 2014.
4. Kremer K. 1984 “Ontologie“, in Gründer K. (ed.) Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie, Basel; Stuttgart, 1984, vol. 6, pp. 1189–1198.
5. Kobusch T. 1980 “Metaphysik II: Aristoteles“, in Gründer K. (ed.) Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie, Basel; Stuttgart, 1980, vol. 5, pp. 1188–1196.
6. Kobusch T. 1980 “Metaphysik III: Antike bis Hochmittelalter“, in Gründer K. (ed.) Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie, Basel; Stuttgart, 1980, vol. 5, pp. 1196–1217.
7. Lamanna M. 2014 “Ontology Between Goclenius and Suárez”, in Novak L. (ed.) Suárez’s Metaphysics in Its Historical and Systematic Context, Berlin, 2014, pp. 135–152.
8. Lorhard J. Diagraph of Metaphysic or Ontology, in www.illc.uva.nl/Research/ Publications/Reports/X-2008 04.text.pdf/ (Date: 22.07.2015)
9. Øhrstrøm P., Schärfe H., Uckelman S.L. 2008 “Jacob Lorhard’s Ontology: a 17th Century Hypertext on the Reality and Temporality of the World of Intelligibles”, in Ecklund P., Haemmerle O. (eds.) Conceptual Structures: Knowledge, Visualization and Reasoning, Berlin, 2008, pp. 74–87.
10. Sparn W. Wiederkehr Der Metaphysik. Die Ontologische Frage in der Lutherischen Theologie des 17. Jahrhunderts, Stuttgart, 1976.
11. Vollrath E. 1962 “Die Gliederung der Metaphysik in Eine Metaphysica generalis und Eine Metaphysica specialis“, in Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung, 1962, vol. 16, pp. 258–284.
12. Wollgast S. Philosophie in Deutschland zwischen Reformation und Aufklärung, Berlin, 1988.
13. Wundt M. Die deutsche Schulmetaphysik des 17. Jahrhunderts, Tübingen, 1939.

Information about the author

Shokhin Vladimir