tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post1145913498926974555..comments2024-03-18T15:57:33.286-07:00Comments on Edward Feser: Nagel and his critics, Part VIEdward Feserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13643921537838616224noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-61355728162093006092013-01-01T01:36:43.375-08:002013-01-01T01:36:43.375-08:00Thank you, RS. I already knew about TLS, of course...Thank you, RS. I already knew about TLS, of course, but I’ll look up the Oderberg.Tom Simonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16067031472666752839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-20207530676319004512012-12-28T23:13:10.193-08:002012-12-28T23:13:10.193-08:00Tom,
I recommend Prof. Feser's TLS and Oderbe...Tom,<br /><br />I recommend Prof. Feser's TLS and Oderberg's Real Essentialism. If you're working yourself up to read Aquinas straight, those two books are pretty important. rank sophisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01644531454383207175noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-73730367388487841652012-12-28T23:02:54.031-08:002012-12-28T23:02:54.031-08:00Dr. Feser,
I am delighted to hear of your forthco...Dr. Feser,<br /><br />I am delighted to hear of your forthcoming ‘Kripke, Ross, and the Immaterial Aspects of Thought’. I trust you’ll let us know through this blog when the relevant issue of the ACPQ appears. I suspect it will have a strong bearing on my own chief (amateur) philosophical pursuit, which has to do with reinterpreting semiotic constructs and so-called ‘emergent properties’ in terms of a model conceptually similar to the OSI networking model. If that sounds like gobbledygook, it probably is; but I have a strong intuition that there is an interesting discovery to be made in that area, and I haven’t been able to find that anyone has yet made it.<br /><br />Meanwhile, I recently finished reading your <i>Aquinas: A Beginner’s Guide,</i> and found it helpful and rewarding, but alas, all too brief and cursory. I wonder if you could recommend a good book that would help the autodidact bridge the gap between your <i>Aquinas</i> and the level of knowledge required to digest the <i>Summa Theologiae</i> directly. I ask here, rather than by email, because I know you are extremely busy and others of your blog readers may be interested in your answer.<br /><br />Merry Christmas, and thank you for the light you have shed.Tom Simonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16067031472666752839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-57760440823834573252012-12-27T08:59:22.683-08:002012-12-27T08:59:22.683-08:00Merry Christmas to prof. Feser and commenters. Hap...Merry Christmas to prof. Feser and commenters. Happy birthday to you sweet little Jesus, my Lord and my God. The blog is great, TLS and POM too. Greetings from Croatia!vukovarachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04170176548450314049noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-40622991129529881682012-12-26T22:42:50.239-08:002012-12-26T22:42:50.239-08:00Kant, rather than rejecting the rationalist and em...<i>Kant, rather than rejecting the rationalist and empiricist extremes and returning to the Aristotelian middle ground position -- mind-independent necessity, knowledge of which is grounded in experience -- for all practical purposes embraced the anti-Aristotelian aspects of both rationalism and empiricism and chucked out the remaining Aristotelian bits of each: Conceptual truths reflect no mind-independent necessity (at least as far as we can possibly know) and are not grounded in experience but are a priori.</i><br /><br />Oh, wow.<br /><br />Okay, I'm a regular reader just de-lurking to say that I tried to explain the above criticism of Kant to a philosophy professor I had once. Or something close to that.<br /><br />But I was an amateur (still am, really). The professor didn't really buy, and finally I just gave up. Now I'm kicking myself. But thank you, Dr. Feser, for crystallizing for me the problems I had with Kant's epistemology.jmhenryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10108615537455993311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-83691084211086976572012-12-26T15:19:08.712-08:002012-12-26T15:19:08.712-08:00Actually I personally can understand why they thin...Actually I personally can understand why they think that being an a-theist = begin rational.<br /><br />I think it has something to do with the concept of emancipation/freedom. A person feels that most people are slaves of their religion so they reject the idea altogether and then look for reasons to make their rejection justifiable. After they found reasons that pleases their needs they just get amazed on how people didn't caught up to that, and that obviously people are not really rational since they don't test their beliefs, which leads the person to conclude that HE is rational especially because he got rid of the greatest scam in society (religion), and now they find themselves free at least in their minds, while others are just ideological zombies going with the flow.<br />So people seek new ways to guide themselves, some people join some militant group to fight for the greater good, others join skeptic sites to be part of a select group free and critical thinkers, others go Carpe Diem until they die, others join philosophy sites, other joins science sites; but very few go all the way to the end of the rabbit hole and try doubting their cherished beliefs and analyse what other people have to offer and what they have to offer.<br />After all the idea was never to doubt everything but just to justify their disbelief, hence the pathological behavior, they don't wanna be slaves of religion ever again so they are ready to go high and low to avoid that.<br />Eduardonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-27364414589953409092012-12-26T14:48:16.523-08:002012-12-26T14:48:16.523-08:00Woah Nancy works in the department of Philosophy, ...Woah Nancy works in the department of Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method... <br /><br />They have a department just for the method... t_t tears have run down from my eyes, this is awesome.Eduardonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-12341892166686746872012-12-26T13:32:39.202-08:002012-12-26T13:32:39.202-08:00@BenYachov:
"The idea one become instantaneo...@BenYachov:<br /><br />"The idea one become instantaneously rational by mere denial of "gods"."<br /><br />The power of magical, superstitious thinking at its strongest.grodrigueshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12366931909873380710noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-10003936042001680652012-12-26T12:21:51.399-08:002012-12-26T12:21:51.399-08:00Bonhoeffer coined the term "Cheap Grace"...Bonhoeffer coined the term "Cheap Grace" I've always toyed with the concept of "Cheap Rationality".<br /><br />The idea one become instantaneously rational by mere denial of "gods".<br /><br /><br />I guess it's related to Theophobia?<br />BenYachovhttp://www.catholic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-32811958445720534982012-12-26T09:56:54.261-08:002012-12-26T09:56:54.261-08:00This Nagel flap makes it necessary, I think, to co...This Nagel flap makes it necessary, I think, to coin a new phrase: Theophobia.<br /><br />Theophobia is a form of cognitive bias where a naturalistically inclined philosopher refuses to grant any degree of credibility to a proposition that is:<br /><br />a)Inherently plausible<br />b)Has valid supporting arguments<br />c)Does not directly imply theism<br /><br />but<br /><br />d)Is perceived to indirectly support theism.Untenurednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-86640086966582727402012-12-26T06:15:34.599-08:002012-12-26T06:15:34.599-08:00*Sigh*
One of the commentators in that thread acc...*Sigh*<br /><br />One of the commentators in that thread accuses you of being "sleazy and disingenuous" because cite Nancy Cartwright as a "Thomist", even though you have repeatedly said that philosophers such as Cartwright would have no truck with your Thomism even though their ideas point in its general direction. <br /><br />Party politics much?Untenurednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-57463486293498682792012-12-25T09:11:19.067-08:002012-12-25T09:11:19.067-08:00Schliesser on Aristotle:
His final causes are root...Schliesser on Aristotle:<br /><i>His final causes are rooted in the worldly natures of worldly things.</i><br /><br /><i>Bzzzt!</i> Wrong. He's got it exactly backwards. Final causes are not rooted in the nature of things; rather the nature of things are rooted in final causes. If A is rooted in B, then A presupposes B. But this would be absurd in the case of final causes; for it would mean that the reason for a thing's existence would presuppose the existence of the thing, which is completely unintelligible. It's like saying a cause depends on its effect.George R.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-37014183185161180132012-12-25T07:23:25.199-08:002012-12-25T07:23:25.199-08:00"Philosophy isn't party politics". I..."Philosophy isn't party politics". I can think of one prominent regular reader of the NewAPPS blog who didn't get the memo.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-26145996401266554202012-12-25T00:05:33.624-08:002012-12-25T00:05:33.624-08:00Of all the blogs that I read... Yours are consiste...Of all the blogs that I read... Yours are consistently the longest ones i will ever read. I'm about 2/3rd through it and i will get back to it tomorrow! I requested 3 of your books as Christmas gifts, so can treat them as gifts from a wise man? ;)<br /><br />Merry Christmas Ed Feser!Sonick92http://olsenator.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-35372391914127418542012-12-24T20:55:09.225-08:002012-12-24T20:55:09.225-08:00Merry Christmas Rank.Merry Christmas Rank.Eduardonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-14062386986552815212012-12-24T20:43:59.293-08:002012-12-24T20:43:59.293-08:00Great article. And I can't wait to read that n...Great article. And I can't wait to read that new piece on intentional forms--I hope it'll be available to non-subscribers. <br /><br />Anyway, Merry Christmas to Prof. Feser and fellow commenters.rank sophisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01644531454383207175noreply@blogger.com