I'm not a theologian, but this distinction is similar to others found in philosophy. For Schelling, positive philosophy deals with something like revelation, whereas negative philosophy is purely in the realm of reasoning. I've found this really helpful for thinking about metaphysical issues. I also think you're right that paying attention to this kind of distinction can help avoid some confusions. For instance, many people take certain theodicies as positive theology, when in fact they're speculative, which leads to confusion.
Yes, I think the principle is definitely portable into other disciplines, because in the end it's a matter of what the person is doing, which mental operations are involved, rather than something already out there now in the material content of the object of inquiry.
I'm not a theologian, but this distinction is similar to others found in philosophy. For Schelling, positive philosophy deals with something like revelation, whereas negative philosophy is purely in the realm of reasoning. I've found this really helpful for thinking about metaphysical issues. I also think you're right that paying attention to this kind of distinction can help avoid some confusions. For instance, many people take certain theodicies as positive theology, when in fact they're speculative, which leads to confusion.
Yes, I think the principle is definitely portable into other disciplines, because in the end it's a matter of what the person is doing, which mental operations are involved, rather than something already out there now in the material content of the object of inquiry.
The flip side of this malaise is to fetischize experience or experiential knowledge or words like concrete situation. Great post! Amen.