Classical Theism, Philosophy, and Religion Forum

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



6/25/2018 12:44 pm  #1


The First Way and Circular Motion

What would be a good, non-deflationary response for an objection to Aquinas’ First Way founded on the basis of the conceivability of two planets that function in an explanatory loop with regards each others motion (on the basis of their gravitational pull)?

I understand an appeal to final causality, the form-matter composition, or the objective potency of the planets considered in themselves would work, but these seem to require getting outside the scope of the argument. I am simply asking to see if a more natural response can be formulated.

Thanks and God bless you all,

Cameron

 

6/25/2018 1:30 pm  #2


Re: The First Way and Circular Motion

Here is the video my friend drew the objection from:

https://youtu.be/XJzCYqiLWt0

     Thread Starter
 

6/25/2018 2:23 pm  #3


Re: The First Way and Circular Motion

By circular motion, you either mean a causal series that loops back onto itself (last member causes first member) or a circular explanation (explaining the explanandum with more explanandum) like the one above.

Both are compatible with the first way.

A causal loop of derivative instruments would still a need a prime mover to derive their motus or causal powers. Otherwise, your friend is saying that the gears can move without a motor provided that they are in a circle. We still need a source of actualization outside the loop to get the gears or derivative instruments going. You can put the instruments or gears in a circle, net, stack them but without a prime mover or motor, there will be no effect. You still need a prime mover or a motor to actualze their potency.

Explaining the explanadum with more explanadum is obviously avoidong the question since all it does is introduce new derivative instruments or more "gears".

As for the example of gravity: The potential gravitation of the smaller mass to  the bigger mass is actualized by the spacetime curve which is actualized by their masses which is actualized by the Higgs boson and so on.

 

6/25/2018 2:45 pm  #4


Re: The First Way and Circular Motion

I agreed with the first part and that wasn’t so much my issue. I think the crucial difference is whether there is a possible capacity for actuality in operation given the constituents. I agree in the gear series there isn’t.  The last part is really helpful however, although I didn’t suppose the objector was trying to focus on anything other than the mundane aspects of it. Sorry if I was really unclear about what I was trying to convey.

Thanks and God bless you,

Cameron

Last edited by Camoden (6/25/2018 2:46 pm)

     Thread Starter
 

6/25/2018 4:53 pm  #5


Re: The First Way and Circular Motion

Camoden wrote:

I agreed with the first part and that wasn’t so much my issue. I think the crucial difference is whether there is a possible capacity for actuality in operation given the constituents. I agree in the gear series there isn’t. The last part is really helpful however, although I didn’t suppose the objector was trying to focus on anything other than the mundane aspects of it. Sorry if I was really unclear about what I was trying to convey.

Thanks and God bless you,

Cameron

It would apply to all essentially-ordered series.  

 

6/25/2018 6:35 pm  #6


Re: The First Way and Circular Motion

Noble_monkey wrote:

Camoden wrote:

I agreed with the first part and that wasn’t so much my issue. I think the crucial difference is whether there is a possible capacity for actuality in operation given the constituents. I agree in the gear series there isn’t. The last part is really helpful however, although I didn’t suppose the objector was trying to focus on anything other than the mundane aspects of it. Sorry if I was really unclear about what I was trying to convey.

Thanks and God bless you,

Cameron

It would apply to all essentially-ordered series.  

After rereading it I agreed with everything mentioned. It probably was just an example of mutual manifestation after all anyways. There is nothing about the First Way that requires more than qualitative priority just looking at the dependent members themselves.

     Thread Starter
 

6/25/2018 7:11 pm  #7


Re: The First Way and Circular Motion

I honestly wish I could delete this whole thread. I had just gotten up and thought that there was a lot more to this objection than there was. This is literally just as much an example of mutual manifestation as almost any physical example would be.

Thanks for the responses,

Cameron

     Thread Starter
 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum