tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post7008608310218470543..comments2024-03-29T02:29:03.388-07:00Comments on Edward Feser: Out on the linksEdward Feserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13643921537838616224noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-91427781739466310692013-08-26T07:51:22.948-07:002013-08-26T07:51:22.948-07:00I already have Takho's Contemporary Aristoteli...I already have Takho's Contemporary Aristotelian Metaphysics anthology. If I do, is it worth it to purchase Dr. Feser's Aristotle anthology?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-27510018355288892402013-08-26T02:54:03.180-07:002013-08-26T02:54:03.180-07:00Ed,
Vjtorley has written an incredibly long criti...Ed,<br /><br />Vjtorley has written an incredibly long criticism of your fifth way over at ud, in case you care to comment. It seems like your twin sins of dissing id generally, and torley in particluar, has won you eternal attention.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-63639368193282235102013-08-24T02:14:18.275-07:002013-08-24T02:14:18.275-07:00Hello Edward, to my mind the thought experience of...Hello Edward, to my mind the thought experience of Nagel "What is it like to be a bat?" is one of the greatest argument against the truth of atheism, would you agree?<br /><br />Materialists generally try to evade the question while granting that the scientist cannot know what the bat feels, but as I explain here, there is no way they can do so:<br /><br />http://lotharlorraine.wordpress.com/2013/08/11/on-the-feeling-of-a-lonesome-bat-von-den-gefuhlen-eines-einsamen-fledermauses-des-sentiments-dune-chauve-souris-solitaire/<br /><br /><br />I think that if someone says that a scientist knowing everything about the physics of the bat's brain would know its experience, he or she is very close to eliminitavism.<br /><br />Would you agree with that assessment?<br /><br /><br />Lovely greetings from continental Europe.<br /><br /><br />Lothars Sohn – Lothar’s son<br /><br />http://lotharlorraine.wordpress.com<br /><br />Marchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08328792937888689350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-33613171120788873122013-08-23T18:34:40.301-07:002013-08-23T18:34:40.301-07:00Jeremy,
I think the Maverick Philosopher had some...Jeremy,<br /><br />I think the Maverick Philosopher had something similar to say. If I remember right, it was that some people were trying obsessively to find the 'subject' of subjectivity under a magnifying glass, and when they fail to find it there, conclude that it doesn't exist. Crudehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-8367347810805300162013-08-23T18:12:16.962-07:002013-08-23T18:12:16.962-07:00Crude,
Someone in that combox referred to any int...Crude,<br /><br />Someone in that combox referred to any interesting point that I have been ruminating on. They mentioned the ineffability of consciousness, the fact that all we experience, all sense, all we think is, in some sense, not the ultimate 'I', as these are all an object of this 'I'.<br /><br />This is a Platonic perspective, and I'm a Platonist, so it quite interested me. It seems to not only shed important light on consciousness, but to have the potential of another argument against naturalism. That is, if all we perceive is in some sense not the ultimate 'I' then that might cause problems for the contention that the 'I' could be reduced to the physical brain - a brain it can perceive and contain. Such a suggestion would seem to try and place the container within the contained.<br /><br />But, obviously, this is just ruminations - but I think there is matter in it, so to speak!Jeremy Taylornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-23743307822626950792013-08-23T17:45:11.932-07:002013-08-23T17:45:11.932-07:00Ed,
There's another materialist explanation f...Ed,<br /><br />There's another <a href="http://www.aeonmagazine.com/being-human/how-consciousness-works/" rel="nofollow">materialist explanation for consciousness</a> getting some minor press, in case you ever tire of beating up on Rosenberg and company and want a new view to criticize.Crudehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-46617243300148849982013-08-23T11:43:18.867-07:002013-08-23T11:43:18.867-07:00It is broadly speaking the arrangement that makes ...It is broadly speaking the <i>arrangement</i> that makes up the formal cause; the 'pattern,' if you will. <br /><br />My understanding is that atoms are the material causes of molecules, whose formal cause lies in the <i>number, kinds, and arrangement</i> of those atoms. An example would be the double helix form of the DNA molecule.<br /><br />For atoms, the material causes are the protons, neutrons, and electrons, and the formal cause is the number and arrangement of these. <br /><br />For protons and neutrons, the material causes are believed to be quarks, and the formal cause is the number (always three) and kind (top, bottom, etc.) and we don't know enough about their arrangement. <br /><br />In any case, 'atoms' do not eliminate formal causation, but only provide another example of it. TheOFloinnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14756711106266484327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-67114189852965895612013-08-23T10:15:40.681-07:002013-08-23T10:15:40.681-07:00Atoms are part of the material cause, not the form...Atoms are part of the material cause, not the formal cause.George R.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-66020384221393394002013-08-23T08:07:18.867-07:002013-08-23T08:07:18.867-07:00how does the discovery of atoms ...not conflict wi...<i> how does the discovery of atoms ...not conflict with formal causes?</i> <br /><br />As I understand it, and especially as regards the inanimate, the atoms <i>are</i> a part of the formal cause. Sodium and chlorine are made of the same matter: protons, electrons, and neutrons. What gives them different powers and potencies is the number and arrangement of those parts; i.e., their form. <br />TheOFloinnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14756711106266484327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-44412109375816318192013-08-23T07:19:20.826-07:002013-08-23T07:19:20.826-07:00Ed, When is the longer article on the "perver...Ed, When is the longer article on the "perverted faculty" argument coming out? Where? I'd like to read it NOW!Joshnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-62992504375358292432013-08-23T01:18:17.861-07:002013-08-23T01:18:17.861-07:00Anonymous,
Thanks for that; very helpful, though ...Anonymous,<br /><br />Thanks for that; very helpful, though I think a little too technical for my level.<br /><br />Greg Johnsonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-19263352340783917082013-08-22T21:46:27.387-07:002013-08-22T21:46:27.387-07:00There is a bit about forms in this post that might...There is a bit about forms in this post that might be relevant.<br /><br />http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/03/whats-matter-with-matter.html?m=0Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-55881712249125684272013-08-22T21:16:44.505-07:002013-08-22T21:16:44.505-07:00Edward,
Correct me if Im wrong, but I dont think ...Edward,<br /><br />Correct me if Im wrong, but I dont think you've ever specifically outlined arguments that things have essences or natures as such; is this because if they dont we have no way of stating what things are?<br /><br />Also, how does the discovery of atoms (and hence every is composed of such things) not conflict with formal causes? Thanks.Greg Johnsonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-89739654137775932722013-08-22T17:59:31.107-07:002013-08-22T17:59:31.107-07:00Sure, since if I don't have time to answer (an...Sure, since if I don't have time to answer (and I usually don't) someone else may either have something to say in response or know of a blog post in which I address it.Edward Feserhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13643921537838616224noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-77641632029367188322013-08-22T17:04:48.680-07:002013-08-22T17:04:48.680-07:00Would it be okay if people posted their theologica...Would it be okay if people posted their theological/philosophical questions here? Though they would have to keep it simple, so the combox doesn't explode.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com