Wednesday, January 25, 2017
In a combox remark on my recent post about James Ross’s argument for the immateriality of thought, reader Red raises an important set of issues:
Given embodied cognition, aren't these types of arguments from abstract concepts and Aristotelian metaphysics hugely undermined? In their book Philosophy in the Flesh Lakoff and Johnson argue that abstract concepts are largely metaphorical.
End quote. In fact, none of this undermines Ross’s argument at all, but I imagine other readers have had similar thoughts, and it is worthwhile addressing how these considerations do relate to the picture of the mind defended by Ross and by Aristotelian-Thomistic philosophers generally.
Wednesday, January 18, 2017
The late James Ross put forward a powerful argument for the immateriality of the intellect. I developed and defended this argument in my essay “Kripke, Ross, and the Immaterial Aspects of Thought,” which originally appeared in American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly and is reprinted in Neo-Scholastic Essays. Peter Dillard raises three objections to my essay in his ACPQ article “Ross Revisited: Reply to Feser.” Let’s take a look.
Tuesday, January 17, 2017
Monday, January 16, 2017
Invoking Amoris Laetitia, the bishops of Malta have decreed that adulterers who feel “at peace with God” and find it “humanly impossible” to refrain from sex may receive absolution and go to communion. Their declaration is published in the Vatican’s own newspaper.
Canon lawyer Edward Peters judges the Malta situation a “disaster” that makes it “urgent” that the four cardinals’ dubia be answered either by Pope Francis or Cardinal Müller. Cardinal Caffarra says that “only a blind man” could deny that the Church is in crisis. Philosopher Joseph Shaw judges that the crisis “is truly separating the men from the boys.”
The man and the theology behind Amoris: At Crux, philosopher Michael Pakaluk uncovers the depth of the influence of papal advisor and ghostwriter Archbishop Victor Fernandez.
Thursday, January 12, 2017
Addison Hodges Hart is a Christian author, former Catholic priest, and the brother of theologian David Bentley Hart. (From here on out I’ll refer to David and Addison by their first names, simply for ease of reference rather than by way of presuming any familiarity.) A reader calls my attention to the Fans of David Bentley Hart page at Facebook, wherein Addison takes issue with my recent article criticizing his brother’s universalism. His loyalty to his brother is admirable. The substance of his response, not so much. Non-existent, in fact. For Addison has nothing whatsoever to say in reply to the content of my criticisms. Evidently, it is their very existence that irks him.
Monday, January 9, 2017
Lest the impatient reader start to think of this as the blog from hell, what follows will be – well, for a while, anyway – my last post on that subject. Recall that in earlier posts I set out a Thomistic defense of the doctrine of eternal damnation. In the first, I explained how, on Aquinas’s view, the immortal soul of the person who is damned becomes permanently locked on to evil upon death. The second post argued that since the person who is damned perpetually wills evil, God perpetually inflicts on that person a proportionate punishment. The third post explains why the souls of the damned would not be annihilated instead. In this post I will respond to a critique of the doctrine of eternal damnation put forward by my old sparring partner, Eastern Orthodox theologian David Bentley Hart, in his article “God, Creation, and Evil: The Moral Meaning of creatio ex nihilo” (from the September 2015 issue of Radical Orthodoxy).
Thursday, January 5, 2017
I am pleased to announce the forthcoming publication by Ignatius Press of By Man Shall His Blood Be Shed: A Catholic Defense of the Death Penalty, which I have co-authored with Prof. Joseph Bessette of Claremont McKenna College. You can order it from Amazon or directly from Ignatius.
From the promotional materials: