| Theoretical Philosophy » Three Theocentric Modal Models » 11/04/2016 6:56 pm |
- AKG
- Replies: 12
-
Oh, I'm just wondering if this argument would necessarily have to commit us to creatio ex nihlo, like the Kalam tries to show.
| Theoretical Philosophy » Three Theocentric Modal Models » 11/04/2016 6:41 pm |
- AKG
- Replies: 12
-
But it wouldn't have to be, and could work as an act of eternal creation such as with the eternal foot, and footprint as well right?
| Theoretical Philosophy » Three Theocentric Modal Models » 11/04/2016 6:15 pm |
- AKG
- Replies: 12
-
Then it what terms would actualization occur?
| Theoretical Philosophy » Three Theocentric Modal Models » 11/04/2016 2:35 pm |
- AKG
- Replies: 12
-
Hmmm, would this necessary being have to actualize be a truthmaker via mental properties similar to the argument of eternal truths?
| Theoretical Philosophy » Three Theocentric Modal Models » 11/04/2016 10:23 am |
- AKG
- Replies: 12
-
With regards to this I have some questions, which are open to anyone:
1. How are contingent beings shown to depend on things outside of them for their existence under this account? Would it be due to them being mixture of act/potency, or essence/existence as Daniel said this approach is Aristotelian in nature.
2. Would substances be hylomorphic under this approach given the Aristotelian nature of this approach? If not then how could one define substances here?
3. With regards to the cosmological argument Daniel thinks could be formulated here, have anyone done any work on it such as what principle it uses like say for example the principle of causality and developed it further to show the attributes of God?
| Theoretical Philosophy » Neo-Aristotelianism and Classical Theism » 11/02/2016 1:03 pm |
- AKG
- Replies: 5
-
Is anyone familiar with Neo-Aristotelian metaphysical ideas such as powers, dispositions, new essentialism, and other things which can be found in works such as
1. Contemporary Aristotelian Metaphysics
2. Powers and Capacities: The New Aristotelianism
If so could a case for theism be made from these metaphysical ideas such as a cosmological argument based on powers/dispositions, arguing for the divine attributes or contingency from new essentialism or other things?
| Chit-Chat » Trump, the Debates, and the Election » 10/19/2016 9:53 pm |
- AKG
- Replies: 23
-
I don't know. I still I have a feeling if Trump ends as presidents, things will end up like this:
| Chit-Chat » Trump, the Debates, and the Election » 10/14/2016 7:59 pm |
- AKG
- Replies: 23
-
Wait a minute, are people here considering voting for Trump?
| Theoretical Philosophy » Dispositional/Categorical Properties and Act/Potency » 10/13/2016 12:46 am |
- AKG
- Replies: 0
-
Some sources have stated(Edward Feser, and Stanford's article on dispositional/categorical properties) that the dispositional/categorical distinction between properties in modern philosophy is similar but not the same as the act/potency distinction made by Aristotle. Even even if the two distinctions are not 100 percent the same, I'm wondering if it would it be possible to get to Aristotle's Unmoved Mover or something like it using an argument developed in the same vein as the one Aristotle offered, but using the dispositional/categorical distinction of properties instead of the act/potency distinction. Does anyone else think this could work?