tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post303704504397340814..comments2024-03-28T21:43:44.433-07:00Comments on Edward Feser: Besong on Scholastic MetaphysicsEdward Feserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13643921537838616224noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-69033162729764735832017-02-05T04:26:17.182-08:002017-02-05T04:26:17.182-08:00Thanks! Great tip!Thanks! Great tip!CorneliusGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05175405116658358697noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-5088936509340124542016-12-31T22:59:20.956-08:002016-12-31T22:59:20.956-08:00Hi Dr. Feser
Thanks a lot for clarification , I&...Hi Dr. Feser <br /><br />Thanks a lot for clarification , I'll look forward to your forthcoming work on the subject. but can I take you to mean that an A-T-ist Can be an eternalist? doesn't five ways require there to something like the objective Becoming of the sort that only presentism can afford ? <br />the kind of cosmological arguments that WLC defend get completely undermined by Block universe<br />wouldn't the argument for unmoved mover require there to be real difference between tenses ?<br />I'll see how would you defend principle of motion in a block universe ..as you mention in neo scholastic essays ..given Minkowski's conception there is no real actualization of potency in the natural world.<br /><br />It will certainly be interesting how you defend presentism but right now to me it seems Presentism is a view that is scientifically undermined and philosophically suspect ( again, i am sorry if i am wrong ) defending presentism requires requires significant scientific revisionism . There is already enough swimming against the tide in theistic philosophy already .<br /><br />All the best . <br />Redhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05569340378356607760noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-23412386955160483182016-12-31T10:12:22.321-08:002016-12-31T10:12:22.321-08:00Hello Red,
It is true that I am a presentist, and...Hello Red,<br /><br />It is true that I am a presentist, and presentism is, I think, the most natural position for any Aristotelian to take. (Certainly an A-theory of some sort is.) But it is not correct to say that the Five Ways go through only given presentism. Indeed, I would say that, for the <i>specific purpose</i> of defending any of the Five Ways, one doesn’t even need to defend an A-theory of any sort. Ordinary examples of change merely play the role of introducing the act/potency distinction. Once that general idea is grasped, the specific details of the examples don’t matter. (This is why it is a complete waste of time to go on, as some critics do, about whether the motion of a stick and the rock it is pushing are strictly simultaneous etc.) <br /><br />Hence, as long as there is <i>some</i> kind of potency in need of actualization, an argument like the First Way or Second Way will go through. And there would be that even given an eternalist or block conception of the universe. The universe as a whole would still be contingent and thus still exhibit potency in need of actualization. Nor would you need change in order to show that it is contingent. You could e.g. point instead to the fact that the universe is composite.<br /><br />This doesn’t entail that an Aristotelian or Thomist should in fact accept eternalism, or should agree that physics has shown change to be illusory. These claims should <i>not</i> be accepted. Nor have I said, contrary to what you imply, that change exists only in the observer. What I’ve said is that even IF change did not exist in external physical reality, it would still exist in the observer. But I would not for a moment concede that physics has shown that it does not exist in physical reality. I know people make that sort of claim all the time, but it is false. But explaining why it is false essentially requires putting forward a general treatment of relativity, and since that is not necessary for the specific purposes of defending the Five Ways, I haven’t done it in that context. Relativity at best affects <i>where</i> we locate potency in physical reality, not whether we need to locate it somewhere there or other, and thus it need not be dealt with at length in a treatment of the Five Ways.<br /><br />I’ve made this point here at the blog before and I made it also in my article “Motion in Aristotle, Newton, and Einstein.” But I have a lot more to say about relativity in an article on that subject in a forthcoming anthology on Aristotelianism and modern science to which I am one of the contributors. And I say much more about it still, and about philosophy of time in general (including a general defense of presentism), in the book on Aristotelian philosophy of nature that I am currently working on.Edward Feserhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13643921537838616224noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-37595270876048456182016-12-30T23:50:51.276-08:002016-12-30T23:50:51.276-08:00@ Lucretius
I would say that part of Thinker'...@ Lucretius<br /><br />I would say that part of Thinker's criticism which has Real bite is his discussion of Eternalism ..I think TLS is probably the weakest work by Feser . I don't know why he would write that book when all the key notions of his metaphysics are defended only in his later works and I think Feser fails to rescue the most important aspect of his Philosophy,Change,from the modern physics. he only defends it later on in neo-scholastic essays and his article on Existential inertia even then though he deals well with Newton but fails to knock down Einstein and Minkowski.<br /><br />I mean how can you build sound arguments when the most crucial premises in your arguments depend on our theories of tense and persistence (again it only seems to me, I am sorry if its not true)Redhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05569340378356607760noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-62384395770569438172016-12-30T00:31:28.232-08:002016-12-30T00:31:28.232-08:00I know some of you have encountered The Thinker...I know some of you have encountered The Thinker's review of Dr. Feser's book on his blog <i>Atheism and the City</i>. Can someone link me to some discussions regarding it please?<br /><br />Christi pax.Lucretiushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00685308727148242500noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-74865803509093210132016-12-28T22:24:50.052-08:002016-12-28T22:24:50.052-08:00From Bookfinder.com, here are two places to buy a ...From Bookfinder.com, here are two places to buy a new copy of the book for less than it sells on Amazon:<br /><br />Used Textbook Depot<br />via<br />Barnes and Noble<br />United States Softcover, ISBN 9783868385441<br />Publisher: Editions Scholasticae, 2014<br />New Edition. 398 pages. Usually ships within 24 hours. Scholastic Metaphysics: A Contemporary Introduction provides an overview of Scholastic approaches to causation, substance, essence, modality, identity, persistence, teleology, and other issues in fundamental metaphysics. The book interacts heavily with the literature on these issues in contemporary analytic metaphysics, so as to facilitate the analytic reader’s understanding of Scholastic ideas and the Scholastic reader’s understanding... <br />$13.98<br />2. Used Textbook Depot<br />via<br />Textbooks.com<br />United States Softcover, ISBN 9783868385441<br />Publisher: Editions Scholasticae, 2014<br />New copy. UPS Ground will be used on all shipments. PO Boxes could delay shipment. <br />$13.98Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-15553244770010503592016-12-28T20:25:30.792-08:002016-12-28T20:25:30.792-08:00To Thomas Gilliespie
Why just try to order from A...To Thomas Gilliespie<br /><br />Why just try to order from Amazon? This is the BEST SITE to compare prices of new and used books and order them.<br /><br />BookFinder.com - Official Site<br />www.bookfinder.com<br />Find nearly any book: new, used, rare and textbooks. Get the best deal by comparing prices from over 100,000 booksellers.<br />Used Books Textbook Buyback ISBN Search Our Booksellers Textbooks AboutAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-79025830266570925182016-12-28T16:21:34.553-08:002016-12-28T16:21:34.553-08:00I would love to read something like that as well!I would love to read something like that as well!JBThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14619726418630788172noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-40202409690704415882016-12-28T15:06:14.760-08:002016-12-28T15:06:14.760-08:00I found Scholastic Metaphysics extremely useful, a...I found Scholastic Metaphysics extremely useful, and make sure I keep it and David Oderberg's Real Essentialism close at hand for reference.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10793795436570393555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-51649185802483658022016-12-28T10:32:21.927-08:002016-12-28T10:32:21.927-08:00It's a great book. Though i was given Neo-scho...It's a great book. Though i was given Neo-scholastic Essays for Christmas which rivals it. I'm waiting for the book on philosophy of nature now!Callumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15175263766263579648noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-90602965979233210872016-12-28T04:06:16.068-08:002016-12-28T04:06:16.068-08:00Tried to order it on Amazon and it was out of stoc...Tried to order it on Amazon and it was out of stock! CorneliusGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05175405116658358697noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-8339310929600881772016-12-27T22:49:57.838-08:002016-12-27T22:49:57.838-08:00Hi Feser.
Although being a theist, I am very symp...Hi Feser.<br /><br />Although being a theist, I am very sympathetic to Thomism but what I find problematic about it is that it seems to me that it requires Presentism/A-theory of time for five ways to go through.. It seems like the kind of real change it requires is absent on eternalism..<br />in Neo-Scholastic Essays Feser suggests that modern science hasn't really eliminated change its only relocated to first person experience but I couldn't understand , I mean how can we run an argument for an unmoved mover or any cosmological argument with just this phenomenological sort of change and although I am not much familiar with it ..but several philosophers have published papers on our experience of passage of time an B-theory of time ..<br /><br />and one more thing ..though i haven't read it Feser argues against Four-dimensionalism in Scholastic Metaphysics..I take it to mean theory of persistence known as Perdurantism if thats true ..Does arguments like five ways depend on contemporary metaphysical debate on Presentism/Eternalism , Endurantism/Perdurantism ?<br /><br />All the best and Happy new yearRedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05569340378356607760noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-8513955683867995982016-12-27T20:29:05.138-08:002016-12-27T20:29:05.138-08:00Dr. Feser,
I don't think I have ever seen you...Dr. Feser,<br /><br />I don't think I have ever seen you comment on your life as a professor of philosophy at Pasadena College. What's it like teaching Aquinas and the philosophy of religion in the classroom?<br /><br />Thanks. Happy New Year.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-43160129962247533942016-12-27T17:10:47.005-08:002016-12-27T17:10:47.005-08:00Scott, I would say that if you're sticking wit...Scott, I would say that if you're sticking with Feser, Aquinas or even The Last Superstition have a very good introduction to Thomism built in, as he needs it for the understanding of the Five Ways.bombcarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07958208687903429992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-33939466285103968312016-12-27T16:13:48.527-08:002016-12-27T16:13:48.527-08:00I have truly appreciated every book of yours I hav...I have truly appreciated every book of yours I have read including this one. I'm one of those who assumed the book was for beginners, but I did not find it at all difficult to read. That said, what book(s) covering these same essential would you recommend for the beginner? Thank you.Scott Shafferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12972248186798670537noreply@blogger.com