[Serious] Thomism: Then & Now

[vulcanlogician]

How about to something receivable?

I can see what I have to work on now! I'll have to do more reading on essence, and what exactly is meant to be happening in the Second Way. 

It's tempting to think that essence is information, because that would be graspable by us moderns. And we are accustomed to the idea of information (e.g. a blueprint or code) manifesting itself and getting changed into something concrete. At the same time, I'm wary of translations like this -- ancient concepts that slot too easily into modern grooves.

I don't think I can resist the temptation to think like a moderner. I want to have a clear understanding of what Aquinas meant, of course. I don't want to conflate his ideas with modern notions.

But at the same time, modern science and ancient/medieval philosophers are involved in the same project: understanding reality. One must admit, on some fronts, modern science has advanced our understanding in ways that exceed medieval understanding. That's not to say Aquinas can't be relevant. Plato and Seneca had an understanding of things that holds up today.

I think the question on my mind is: does the Aristotelian understanding of motion/change conflict with modern science's understanding of those phenomena? If it doesn't, fine. Aquinas is speaking of something deeper. If it does conflict, then I want to say Aquinas's ideas need to be reworked to conform with science... or dismissed as error... whichever is most appropriate.