"Literature and philosophy both allow past idols to be resurrected with a frequency which would be truly distressing to a sober scientist"

The quote from Morris Raphael Cohen uses a compelling juxtaposition of the disciplines of literature, approach, and science, highlighting the special methods which they engage with concepts and iconic figures from the past. Here, Cohen recommends that literature and viewpoint often restore and re-examine historic figures and their ideas, treating them with a sort of reverence that would be upsetting to a scientist, who typically values empirical rigor over the resurrection of once-revered however perhaps outdated principles.

Literature works as a vessel through which human experience, feeling, and understanding are continually improved and reviewed, frequently drawing upon the tradition of previous idols to bring depth and context to contemporary stories. Authors often mention classical texts, reimagining figures like Shakespeare's Hamlet or Homeric heroes to talk to contemporary issues and universal themes. Literature allows these icons to persist since it values the emotive and subjective along with the intellectual, giving them new life and relevance in various cultural contexts.

Philosophy similarly revives previous idols, like Socrates, Kant, or Nietzsche, encouraging a continuous discussion with their concepts. Philosophers review foundational ideas not by discarding them when they end up being outdated, however by returning to them, critiquing them, and building upon them to address brand-new concerns. There's an implicit regard for the foundational pillars of human thought, acknowledging that even ancient approaches can offer insights into today's ethical, metaphysical, or epistemological issues.

In contrast, science prioritizes development through the accumulation of understanding, empirical proof, and reproducible results. When a concept is disproven or outdated, it is generally reserved in favor of new, confirmed theories. For a scientist, the regular return to disproven or unverifiable idols might appear inefficient or detrimental since the clinical approach seeks to eliminate bias, focusing on the present state of knowledge instead of venerating the past.

Hence, Cohen captures a necessary stress in between disciplines: the humanities' embrace of historic continuity and respect versus science's progressive pursuit of reality. Each technique has its own value, showing how different fields contribute uniquely to human understanding and culture.