It's interesting, yes. But I do worship matter. Every object around is my idol. It's fun! — Gregory
He is a fundamentalist Catholic who thinks all philosophies that don't agree with Thomism can be lumped into one theory. — Gregory
This I never thought would be printed. But everything under the Sun comes to pass, I reckon.fundamentalist Catholic — Gregory
He has no arguments to prove Aquinas was right and Descartes wrong about "substance", yet he accepts it as gospel truth that there is an invisible substance, for one thing — Gregory
Materialists and atheists believe that the world operates without any supernatural power's intervention. — god must be atheist
These three varieties of evolution Peirce renames, respectively, as: tychasm, anancasm, and agapasm (using the related Greek roots to provide a technical terminology). The first two, he claims, are degenerate forms of the agapastic: that is, while each is a real evolutionary force, the reality of the evolutionary universe as a whole is comprised by the third form. While tychasm finds growth from the lower into the higher a matter of luck (as well as “lower” and “higher” being purely circumstantial adjectives), and anancasm sees it as a matter of internally-driven necessity (and is thus a Whiggish theory of nature, at heart), agapasm sees it as “a love which embraces hatred as an imperfect stage of it”; which seeks elevation of the lesser through a not-yet-realized better. That is: “Love, recognising germs of loveliness in the hateful, gradually warms it into life, and makes it lovely. That is the sort of evolution which every careful student of my essay ‘The Law of Mind’ must see that synechism calls for.”
This, as Peirce calls it, is creative love. It is not a love which seeks fulfillment of itself, but which calls out for as-yet-unrealized perfection. It is love as a final cause: first in intention, last in execution, the cause that makes anything to be at all. It is the cause that answers the question “why?” for anything.
Few people already convinced that evolution proceeds through random chance will be persuaded of its inherent purposiveness, let alone that this purposiveness is not itself the product of chance — it echoes too loudly of a theistic hand guiding the universe; and natural purposiveness implies all sorts of normative consequences, including moral ones.
The challenge that Peirce’s synechism issues us, however, is this: if the universe really is found to be continuous, such that between any two things there is no unbridged gap but a gradient of infinitesimal degrees of difference — in at least potency if not actuality — if this continuity exists in fact and not only in theory (and a careful examination, I think, can only lead one to the former conclusion): what then explains this continuity, if not agapasm?
Which means, in effect, that nothing happens that science cannot explain in principle. That's how it works out. — Wayfarer
Again, I am not a Thomist. but I am hoping to find a philosopher here who has studied Thomism and Duns Scotus, and who is willing to delve into the differences with me. — Mapping the Medium
It seems a reasonable analysis, but why is it called ontological individualism, when it describes individual's beliefs and belief-forming processes (i.e. it's epistemological). It also doesn't seem limited to the US.Everyone's is unique, because no person has the same experiences or is exposed to the same environmental factors. Every mapped connection in the brain is engrained, and leads to how future interactions or experiences are processed, incorporated. and mapped, leading to understanding or often 'misunderstanding'. ...
.... The 'Medium' is always cloaked, unless we interact with each other through dialogue toward a shared understanding. This has all caused us to get further and further apart, encouraging divisiness, hatred, etc.. We are now dealing with screen infested, narcissistic demands, and less and less cooperation and dialogue. ..... I hope this explanation helps a little. This is 'ontological individualism'. — Mapping the Medium
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.