[Preliminary notes: 1. The translation below is at times extremely wooden and clunky; this is because I have tried to translate as literally as possible. For clarification on a particular phrase or section, leave a comment below. 2. In the … Continue reading Translatio: Scotus’s Lectura Proof of the Existence of God
According to the Thomistic picture, individual created beings are compositions of essence and existential act (esse). The essence stands as potency to the esse which actuates it, resulting in an existing substance. In a paper I am working on and … Continue reading Are the Existential Acts of Created Beings Pure Act?
I. Intro Benjamin Watkins of Real Atheology has presented what he calls “the Agony Argument” (which appears to draw its inspiration from Parfit’s famous Agony Argument) as an objection to a traditional privation theory of evil. It goes as follows: … Continue reading The Agony Argument and the Privation Theory of Evil: A Response to Watkins
Most adherents of monotheistic faiths hold that God — whatever else this name may designate — is a reality that is in some sense “personal.” Consider the opening verses of the first chapter of Genesis, a text which has had … Continue reading Is God Personal? Aquinas’s Arguments for the Divine Intellect
Keith E. Yandell was a respected philosopher at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, retiring in 2011. He specialized in the philosophy of religion, and wrote the philosophy of religion volume for the Routledge Contemporary Introductions to Philosophy series (which I highly … Continue reading Yandell’s Presentation and Analysis of the First Way
The question of what existence is/means is a controversial one in philosophy. In the last few centuries, the debate has largely centered around the question of whether existence is a predicate or property, especially in relation to ontological arguments for … Continue reading What is Existence? Aquinas’s Argument for Existence as Act
Jonathan MS Pearce of the “A Tipppling Philosopher” blog has written a reply to my response to his critique of the Thomistic understanding of act and potency. Recall that his original critique, in essence, stipulated that causal determinism undermines the … Continue reading Second Response to A Tippling Philosopher on Act and Potency
Over at the “A Tippling Philosopher” blog, Jonathan MS Pearce has written a brief post critiquing the Thomistic understanding of actuality and potentiality (or act and potency, or actus and potentia). His aim in doing so appears to be to … Continue reading Response To A Tippling Philosopher On Act and Potency
In the previous post, we examined a critique of the Thomistic view of act and potency from Ben Bavar (a cohost of Real Atheology) and offered a response. Bavar maintained that potency, in order to be real, must itself be … Continue reading Resonse to Ben Bavar on Act and Potency, Part 2
Ben Bavar, a cohost of the Real Atheology Podcast, and Matthew Su, one of the admins for the Thomism Discussion Group on Facebook, have been having a back and forth on Bavar’s critique of Feser’s presentation of the argument from … Continue reading A Response to Ben Bavar on Act and Potency, Part 1
Disputed Questions 