RE: Book reports
November 13, 2019 at 1:59 pm
(This post was last modified: November 13, 2019 at 2:10 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
Can you point to any thomist position on cause, of any kind, that isn't explicitly informed by notions of cause derived from those you've segregated as purely efficient? It's a bit of a conundrum, as Saint Tommy was in absolutely no position to know or comment on cause outside of this context (and in fact, he didn't - his notions were built on his 13th century study of change). Not his fault, but that's the way the cookie crumbles sometimes.
GIGO. Or, to put it into more palatable terms for this cultured discussion....we no longer have any reason to believe that the fundamental propositions to any thomist example of cause are sound. Therefore, we can have no confidence in any thomist argument, however valid it may be. Current notions of causality don't suffer from this handicap, as they're built on provisional certitude of empirical demonstration by tools with much greater ability than a monk wondering about things, locked in time as he..and subsequently, that position was. It could be the case that the current interpretation is inaccurate, and that might rescue some notions of cause, including thomist cause, but it's not certain that any future discovery that points to inaccuracy in the current interpretation would rescue a specific notion of cause, in this case thomist notions of cause.
GIGO. Or, to put it into more palatable terms for this cultured discussion....we no longer have any reason to believe that the fundamental propositions to any thomist example of cause are sound. Therefore, we can have no confidence in any thomist argument, however valid it may be. Current notions of causality don't suffer from this handicap, as they're built on provisional certitude of empirical demonstration by tools with much greater ability than a monk wondering about things, locked in time as he..and subsequently, that position was. It could be the case that the current interpretation is inaccurate, and that might rescue some notions of cause, including thomist cause, but it's not certain that any future discovery that points to inaccuracy in the current interpretation would rescue a specific notion of cause, in this case thomist notions of cause.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
