Thursday, February 12, 2009

Pertinacious Papist: Aquinas Institute in the Year of St. Paul. Website for the institute.

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Uniting Faith and Culture: Hans Urs von BalthasarJohn-Peter Pham (from Modern Age 42:2, Spring 2000)

There are a number of reasons why it could be said, albeit from different perspectives, that the Swiss theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar (1905–1988) occupies a unique place among the great thinkers of the twentieth century. From the point of view of sheer literary volume, he is almost alone in the sheer monumental proportions of his written corpus. . . .

Thought experiments

Just a quick note on the problem of using thought experiments in philosophy: there is a danger of using the imagination without understanding. One is often held captive to the reality present in the thinker's mind, as it is elaborated in the thought experiment, not to actual reality. Without a grasp of the natures involved, one could imagine all sorts of causal relationships.

SEP: Thought Experiments
Fulvio Di Blasi has set up blogs for three recently published books (in Italian): Conoscenza pratica, teoria dell'azione e bene politico, a book on John Finnis ,and a collection of essays, La vitalità del diritto naturale, which was co-edited with Paolo Heritier.

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

HDS - Events Online - 2007-08 Dudleian Lecture - Paul Rorem

"Negative Theologies and the Cross"
Edward Feser, The Newspeak of the moderns
T. David Curp, A Necessary Bondage? When the Church Endorsed Slavery (via Mark Shea)

A good companion for this post over at Per Caritatem: Augustine and Scotus on Slavery

Ms. Nielsen writes:

I often hear the claim made that convictions such as (1) human beings should not be considered the “property” of another human being and (2) slavery per se is morally reprehensible are simply modern/postmodern sensibilities created and propagated by political liberalism (which is not a jab at political liberalism). I have to admit that I am deeply suspicious of this claim and find it rather unconvincing. After all, there were at least two premoderns (Augustine and Scotus and imagine many others of which I am unaware) who claimed that slavery was un-natural (contra Aristotle) and that it violated natural law. (Augustine does, however, seem to offer more of a justification for the institution that might not be in the end very helpful for seeking to abolish slavery. Scotus’s position, in contrast, might provide a stronger argument for the injustice and moral wrongness of all forms of slavery wherein one human “owns” another as property).
Do the ancients and medievals speak of slaves being "property"? Is the concept of property equivalent to that of dominion?