Feser Reviews Koons's Book

At Public Discourse, I review Rob Koons’s @robkoons excellent new book Is St. Thomas’s Aristotelian Philosophy of Nature Obsolete?: https://t.co/f7AoiwwAEZ

— Edward Feser (@FeserEdward) January 2, 2023

Metaphysics or Physics?

My latest book: https://t.co/y1Hp1afDRZ

— robkoons (@robkoons) August 22, 2022

Virtue and Meaning: A Neo-Aristotelian Perspective

A symposium on my book Virtue and Meaning: A Neo-Aristotelian Perspective (@CambridgeUP @CambUP_PHILNYUK ) is now out with American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly: https://t.co/EDEAYoL7ip

— David McPherson (@davidlmcpherson) May 3, 2021

Cambridge University Press

Participation in God by Andrew Davison

Cambridge University Press

Participation in God: A Study in Christian Doctrine and Metaphysics sold out in a couple of months, and was out of print for two months. Happily, it's now available again. @CambridgeUP @CUPBookshop pic.twitter.com/PLihXduWiY

— Andrew Davison (@AP_Davison) December 14, 2019

A review by James Clark at FPR: Imagining Divine Participation

Related:
Church Times review by David Brown.

The CT review has this bit:

In a rare exception, Moltmann’s idea of God’s making space for the world is declared unchristian, whereas from that perspective it is surely Davison, not Moltmann, who radically diminishes the divine nature in not allowing that God could ever create anything radically different from his own nature. Equally, Moltmann would offer a quite different way of thinking about the inexplicable and evil.

What happened to God's being unable to create a square circle not contradicting his omnipotence?

Again, the doctrine of the Trinity is simply assumed throughout, and no attempt is made to engage with why Platonism might have thought its introduction unnecessarily complicating in the conception of everything as derived from one single source.

If course it is assumed, it's a book about Christian doctrine, and Davison would probably acknowledge that it is something that we cannot know or prove by reason alone but a truth that must be revealed to us by God Himself. One wonders about the author of the review...

Of course, Christianity had an answer in insisting on the introduction of the Trinity as revealed doctrine; but, again, except in his introductory section when discussing creation, Davison entirely fails to engage with the way in which our understanding of scripture has changed. St John’s Gospel is repeatedly quoted as though it gave us the historical mind of Jesus, but does it? And, if not, how easily can Aquinas’s account of the incarnate one survive? But what, even, of participation itself? It would seem odd to make the term foundational of all Christian thought if it is not found reflected somewhere in human experience. Yet Davison fails to discuss what might be meant by such experience.

The reviewer sounds like a liberal Protestant. What sort of Christian life is he living if he does not understand that Christians participate in the life of Christ?

James Franklin on Mathematics

Ed Feser: Franklin on Aristotelian realism and mathematics

His website.

Palgrave Macmillan: An Aristotelian Realist Philosophy of Mathematics: Mathematics as the Science of Quantity and Structure

Monte Ransome Johnson

Monte Ransome Johnson, an academic specialists missing the point?

Ed Feser: Johnson on Aristotle’s Revenge

Monte's book: Aristotle on Teleology

A Latin Defense of Transubstantiation

1P5: Substance and Accidents: A Beginner’s Guide to Defending the Eucharist

Both the application of substance and substance/accident as applied to bread must first be corrected, and then we can see if verbally, the theologoumenon that is transubstantiation can still be maintained. Regardless, a naive application of Aristotelian-Thomistic metaphysics is no longer viable given how sophisticated received opinion on material reality has become.

Matthew Gaetano: Aristotle against Epicurus

First Things: Aristotle Returns by Tim Crane

Neo-Aristotelian Perspectives on Contemporary Science edited by william m. r. simpson, robert c. koons, and nicholas j. teh routledge, 352 pages, $140 Raphael’s School of Athens depicts Aristotle and Plato at the center of a group of ancient Greek philosophers modeled on . . . . Continue Reading »

An Overhaul of the Aristotelian Sciences Is Needed?

Do the categories need to be reconsidered in a way going beyond the phenomenologists (e.g. William Marra)? What about the predicaments? Are the predicaments and attributes/properties confusing to the neophyte to Aristotelian philosophy? While the categories seem to be integral of the Metaphysics, are they so important to the Physics? Can one limit a discussion of change, generation, and corrruption to substance and accident? No, Aristotle does mention alteration of quality, quantity, and place. Out of those three, it seems that the category of quality is the one that may need to be revised in light of a better understanding of the natural world, even if it itself is a rather broad category that includes both color and thought?

MacIntyre Has a New Book

Cambridge University Press: Ethics in the Conflicts of Modernity

Thinker Behind the “Benedict Option” Appears to be Taking a Neo-Marxist Turn