iwpoe wrote:

If I understand how this service works, they start removing messages once you've hit about 500. This is certainly not ideal for a philosophy forum, since we will eventually, if we're moderately successful, want to keep archives.

Where did you read that? Their front page says:

Long before Youtube or Facebook came about, we were already giving away free message boards. We'll be here for you in the future as well. Instantly create a Boardhost forum that allows you unlimited categories, postings, users, and even pageviews, or create a classic Boardhost message board, loved by our customers and easy to use. Over the years, we have become known for our reliability and ease of use. Our service is easy enough for beginners, yet contains high powered tools that advanced users crave. (my emphasis)

Scott wrote:

iwpoe wrote:

Well, whatever the language, all I was trying to flag was something I think we can all agree with, namely that philosophically everyone here he is more sympathetic to a position that is largely continuous with something like what Plato and Aristotle were doing as opposed to something more like what Descartes, Hume, Kant, or Ayer were trying to do.

Doesn't "classical" already cover that? I'm not sure "Classical Theism" doesn't work fine as a title all by itself, but if something about philosophy has to be added, why not just "Classical Theism and Philosophy"? The adjective "classical" can, but need not, be taken to modify both of the nouns that follow it.

"Classical Theism and Philosophy" sounds good to me. It's short, covers everything without struggling, and sounds half-decent.

We don't need to pontificate about it in vague language:

iwpoe wrote:

Does Feser practice ancient philosophy, medieval philosophy, modern philosophy, or analytic philosophy or some combination of all of these?

The Thomistic Tradition Part I, Part II. Ed identifies as an Analytic Thomist of the third type, which he characterizes in part two.

Ancient Philosophy refers explicitly to the type of philosophy done by the Ancients, which was not analytic.

If it's all the same to you, I would rather not add any temporal categories like that. Since classical theism spans Neo-Platonism and Scholasticism, I think classical theism gets that point across fine.

I also think it would be a shame to implicitly exclude contemporary philosophy. For example, a lot of the people at Ed's blog are analytically trained, including Ed himself.