RB 65

of Hägerström’s ideas, in order that these may be applied inductively in another context.What new characteristics are added as time goes by?This does not entail that the predominately historical issues of an intellectual biography over Hägerström’s spiritual development is central to the analysis of his philosophy provided here. On the contrary, it is the ideas and doctrines thus identified and their effect upon a particular branch of science that is central. As a result, both the philosophical and historical aspects must be present not only in this type of research but in all types of research, for “history” and “philosophy” are in fact nothing less than the two elements that establish knowledge and science (here, history provides matter and content, and philosophy form and structure).“History” and “philosophy” if taken by themselves, are not in fact sciences proper, but are actually the forms in which we cast our knowledge. As forms of knowledge, they contain factual and chronological components or systematic and logical structures, but one cannot have one without the other in any account because that would eventually entail scientifically unsatisfactory effects.The account would either become a structure that lacked both an inner consistency and a logical form, or lacked external reference and material content. In science, oddly enough, there is a propensity to disregard the fact that these two perspectives are correlative. On the one hand, they presuppose one another and are therefore necessary elements in the process of acquiring knowledge; on the other hand, they attempt to exclude one another and therefore tend to complement one another. Hence, this predominantly philosophic-dogmatic investigation of Hägerström’s philosophy and theory of law and legal science will be concluded with a historical survey in PartVII A Short History of Jurisprudence. As a consequence of the aforementioned declarations an “intermediate” method of description has been chosen, a choice, however, that does not entail absolution from deference to the prina ca l l f o r s c i e n t i f i c p u r i t y 27

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=