My readers should know that Vincent Torley has added a disclaimer to his recent post, apologizing for any misrepresentation of my views contained in the post. I appreciate this, and I apologize if the tone of my original response to Torley and his fellow ID defenders Jay Richards and Denyse O’Leary (which I have since replaced) was excessively harsh. Torley has also put up another post, as has Thomas Cudworth. I will reply to them as soon as I am able.
Popular Posts
-
The principle of sufficient reason (PSR), in a typical Neo-Scholastic formulation, states that “there is a sufficient reason or adequate ne... -
Concluding my overview of the main varieties of Thomism, with some final outtakes taken straight from the Aquinas cutting room floor : 6....
-
While we’re on the subject of Steve Martin , consider the following passage from his memoir Born Standing Up . Martin recounts the insight... -
What’s more tiresome than reading yet another brain-dead atheist attack on the “Everything has a cause” straw man? Having to write up a r... -
I commend to you the late historian of philosophy Paul Hoffman’s paper “Does Efficient Causation Presuppose Final Causation? Aquinas vs. ... -
Today Jonah Goldberg took Kathleen Parker and others to task here for some of the silly and ill-informed things they have been saying in de...
-
In a recent post I spoke of the soul after death as essentially the human being in a “radically diminished state.” The Aristotelian-Thomi... -
On the subject of time and our awareness of it, Augustine says the following in The Confessions : But how does this future, which does no... -
Suppose you go out on a blind date and a friend asks you how it went. You pause and then answer flatly, with a slight smirk: “Well, I like... -
In the sixth of his Meditations on First Philosophy , Descartes writes: [T]here is a vast difference between mind and body, in respect tha...
0 nhận xét:
Đăng nhận xét