Classical Theism, Philosophy, and Religion Forum

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



12/02/2015 8:02 am  #1


William Wallace Lectures

I saw a link to a lectures by William Wallace and his book the Modeling of Nature, but the link does not work unfortunately, here is the link, http://home.comcast.net/~icuweb/c02001.htm.
Does anyone know of any alternative links to his lectures?
 

 

12/02/2015 12:01 pm  #2


Re: William Wallace Lectures

Thanks for letting me know, I tried this link just today, and I had the same result. Unfortunate that I can't access it anymore .

 

12/02/2015 12:02 pm  #3


Re: William Wallace Lectures

I saw one youtube video by him as well as other articles that he wrote. There is also a link to the lectures I want to view, but it does not work like the one I posted. Do the articles he wrote that Dr. Feser listed explain his view on philosophy of nature.

     Thread Starter
 

12/02/2015 2:11 pm  #4


Re: William Wallace Lectures

@Alexander,
Since William Wallace was also a masters degree in physics do you know if he wrote anything on the claim that the total net energy in the universe is zero therefore(as some atheist claim) the universe came from nothing? I'm skeptical about this as I think they might be redefining nothing, but I don't know a lot in order to retort that even if this was true, it would still not be the case the universe came from nothing.

     Thread Starter
 

12/02/2015 6:08 pm  #5


Re: William Wallace Lectures

AKG wrote:

@Alexander,
Since William Wallace was also a masters degree in physics do you know if he wrote anything on the claim that the total net energy in the universe is zero therefore(as some atheist claim) the universe came from nothing? I'm skeptical about this as I think they might be redefining nothing, but I don't know a lot in order to retort that even if this was true, it would still not be the case the universe came from nothing.

Two things:

1. This is a claim it's impossible to even research empirically. If made in serious cosmology, it would be a theoretical posit only being so-called "confirmed" by research not discovered in that research.

2. The argument you're referencing tacitly assumes that God or God's creative activity requires the use of "energy" in the sense employed by physics. This amounts, in theological terms, to the presumption that God is a created thing, and philosophically it is a tacit scientism. It was long ago rejected in Christian theology and in Platonic thought. God and God's activity is not *dependant* upon the presence or use of anything outside God's being.

In non-theological terms we could put it this way:

1. God is non-finite.
2. Energy is discreet and bounded.
∴ God isn't energy.

1. God created everything that isn't himself.
2. Energy isn't god.
3. God created energy.
4. If god created energy, then energy can't have been used in that creation.
∴ Energy wasn't used in creation.

Last edited by iwpoe (12/03/2015 4:55 am)


Fighting to the death "the noonday demon" of Acedia.
My Books
It is precisely “values” that are the powerless and threadbare mask of the objectification of beings, an objectification that has become flat and devoid of background. No one dies for mere values.
~Martin Heidegger
 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum