1Moderate Nominalism and Moderate Realism De Första Sidorna

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

1Moderate Nominalism and Moderate Realism De Första Sidorna View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Göteborgs universitets publikationer - e-publicering och e-arkiv Acta Philosophica Gothoburgensia 26 MODERATE NOMINALISM AND MODERATE REALISM CHRISTER SVENNERLIND Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis Christer Svennerlind, 2008 Distribution: ACTA UNIVERSITATIS GOTHOBURGENSIS Box 222 SE-405 30 Göteborg Sweden Typeface: Garamond Cover design: Peter Johnsen ISBN 978-91-7346-618-9 ISSN 0283-2380 Printed by Geson, Göteborg 2008 For Anette, Viktoria and Carl Acknowledgements During the years I have worked with this dissertation many persons have contributed to that progress was made. In particular this applies to my mother and father, Maj-Britt and Ingvar Svennerlind. I sincerely thank them for all their help. Equally important has been Anette Stillner, my common-law wife. With her and our two children, Viktoria and Carl, by my side life is a true pleasure. From the bottom of my heart I thank them for that. I want to thank Helge Malmgren for a lot of things. Among these is that he has employed me to work for him whenever he has had the possibility to do so. During a number of years that has meant much to me. I also thank him for the many days I have spent with him in various places discussing philosophy. During the last year Jan Almäng and Kent Gustavsson have constantly helped me to make progress in my writing. For that I cordially thank them both. I also thank all the participants of the seminars at the department of philosophy at Göteborg University. They are too numerous to be mentioned by name. One person who I want to explicitly mention though is Thomas Wetterström. He is the one who interested me in ontology. It was also he who led the seminars for many years. I have learnt very much from him. I thank Irene Karlgren, who kindly lent me her summerhouse to work in. Källby parish has also kindly helped me; for that, I am very grateful. A special person in connection with this dissertation is Ingvar Johansson. He is acting as the opponent appointed by the faculty. I have learnt very much from reading his works. I am also grateful for the discussions on various philosophical subjects we have had during the years. Genie Perdin has corrected my English. I thank her for that and also for putting up with the accelerated tempo during the last days before this book was sent to the printers. Last, but not least, I want to thank my supervisor Björn Haglund. During my time at the department of philosophy, he is among those with whom I have had the most rewarding philo- sophical discussions. I also thank him for having meticulously read the manuscript before it was sent to the printers. Contents Chapter I: Introduction 1 1.1 Ontology 1 1.2 Terminology 8 1.3 Disposition and Method 10 Chapter II: D. C. Williams on the Elements of Being 11 2.1 Introduction 11 2.2 The Analytic Ontology of the Early Williams 12 2.2.1 Overview 12 2.2.2 Two Pairs of Notions: Universal-Particular and Abstract-Concrete 13 2.2.3 The Combination of the Two Pairs 22 2.3 Williams’ Trope Theory 30 2.3.1 Overview 30 2.3.2 Parts and Components 31 2.3.3 The Alphabet of Being: Tropes 40 2.3.4 Concrete Particulars 49 2.3.5 Surrogates for Universals 58 2.3.6 Painless Realism 70 2.3.7 Predicativity 75 Chapter III: Examination of A-S. Maurin’s Ontology 77 3.1 Introduction 77 3.2 The Notion of Trope 78 3.2.1 Overview 78 3.2.2 Single Category: Trope 79 3.3 The Problem of Universalisation and Its Solution 93 3.3.1 Overview 93 3.3.2 Another Problem: The Problem of Universals 94 3.3.3 The Problem of Universalisation 97 3.3.4 Internal and External Relations 104 3.3.5 Internal Relations between Tropes 118 3.3.6 The Preferred Account of Internal Relations between Tropes 129 3.3.7 Degrees of Resemblance 139 3.4 The Problem of Thing-Construction and its Solution 142 3.4.1 Overview 142 3.4.2 The Problem of Thing-Construction 142 3.4.3 Compresence 147 3.4.4 Compresence and Bradley’s Regress 152 Chapter IV: Moment Nominalism 161 4.1 Introduction 161 4.2 Individual and Universal 162 4.2.1 Overview 162 4.2.2 A Modal Notion: Can 163 4.2.3 Semi-Individuality 167 4.2.4 Individuality 176 4.3 Relations and Complexes 178 4.3.1 Overview 178 4.3.2 Similarity 178 4.3.3 Internal and External Relations 188 4.3.4 Elementary Connection 193 4.3.5 Elementary Ideal Relation 199 4.3.6 Objects of Different Orders 202 4.4 Qualities and Quality-Moments 211 4.4.1 Overview 211 4.4.2 Three Postulates for a Theory of Qualities 212 4.4.3 Quality Relations 216 Chapter V: Moderate Realism 223 5.1 Introduction 223 5.2 One Partial and Two Mistaken Arguments for Particularism 224 5.2.1 Overview 224 5.2.2 Avicenna’s First Argument 224 5.2.3 Avicenna’s Second Argument 226 5.2.4 A Partial Argument from Segelbergian- Blackian Universes 230 5.3 The Moderate Realism of D. W. Mertz 240 5.3.1 Overview 240 5.3.2 Principles of Moderate Realism 240 5.3.3 A Refined Version of Avicenna’s Second Argument 247 5.3.4 Unit Attributes: Preliminaries 252 5.3.5 Intensional Aspect: Simple or Complex? 260 5.3.6 Unit Attributes: Continuous Composites 264 5.3.7 Predication 273 5.3.8 Networks of Unit Attributes 278 References 283 CHAPTER I Introduction 1.1 Ontology The title of this essay is ‘Moderate Nominalism and Moderate Realism’, which indicates that its subject is ontology. ‘Nominalism’ signals that in particular and appears to be (almost) exclusively used in the context of ontology. ‘Realism’, on the other hand, is used frequently in almost every area of philosophy. In any event, whether a philosopher is a nominalist or a realist, what he or she takes an interest in is a project which was initiated by Plato and Aristotle. They have marked out the issues ontology centers on to a great extent. In his early work, Categories , Aristotle lists ten categories of reality: substance, quantity, quality, relation, place, date, posture, state, action and passivity. 1 Any true description of reality should be made in terms of these ten categories. They can be characterised as the most abstract notions used when describing something, for example, we tend to say that things have qualities. For instance, the Swedish flag is partly blue; if we look at a particular flag, its blue colour has specific nuance. In the terminology introduced by W. E. Johnson, 2 the colour is a lowest determinate of a number of determinables. Most of these determinables do not have any specific adjectives expressing them. Further, the highest determinable among the colours is colour itself, but it is not the (categorially) highest determinable in the line starting with the lowest colour determinates. A still higher determinable is quality itself. Since quality is not a determinate in relation to any higher determinable, we have by now reached the end of the line: a category. This procedure can be applied to Aristotle’s other nine categories as well. Note that in this example we started out talking of 1 The names of some of these ten categories vary between the English translations made of Aristotle’s Greek terms. 2 Cf. Johnson 1921, chapt. XI. 2 CHAPTER I notions used when describing things and were fairly soon referring to traits of the things themselves. This oscillation between concepts and traits of things is difficult to avoid. However, we can use it to make a point. It is that the determinate–determinable distinction is applicable to traits of things as well as of concepts that are used to describe them. If our conceptual scheme is true to how things are, the con- cepts used have counterparts in rerum natura .1 According to some, the categories listed by Aristotle are not independent of each other. For example, the category of substance is said to be reducible to one or more of the others, in particular, quality. This has been a common view among empiricists and still has its proponents today.2 Others stick to the idea that the reduction is impossible in principle; arguing that categorial distinction between substance and quality should therefore be maintained.3 There is also a long tradition of trying to reduce relations to qualities. Aristotle himself is, at least to some extent, part of that tradition. His description of relations as the “least of all things a kind of entity or substance”4 has often been pleaded by adherents of this particular reductionism. During two millennia this was in fact the majority view among western philosophers. Nowadays, quite a few of the guardians of this tradition are found among trope theorists. Since it is difficult, I would say impossible, to consistently uphold this reductionism, the reductionist claim is only partly maintained by most of its adherents. Thus, while the so-called internal relations are con- sidered to be reducible, this is not so with regard to the so-called external relations. Central to the debate between proponents of nominalism and realism are the notions of particularity and universality. The distinc- tion between these two is applicable to all of Aristotle’s categories, as 1 Cf.
Recommended publications
  • The Coherence of Stoic Ontology
    The Coherence of Stoic Ontology by Vanessa de Harven A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Prof. Dorothea Frede, Co-chair Prof. Klaus Corcilius, Co-chair Prof. A.A. Long Spring 2012 Abstract The Coherence of Stoic Ontology by Vanessa de Harven Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy University of California, Berkeley Professors Dorothea Frede and Klaus Corcilius, Co-chairs Any thoroughgoing physicalist is challenged to give an account of immaterial entities such as thoughts and mathematical objects. The Stoics, who eagerly affirmed that only bodies exist, crafted an elegant solution to this challenge: not everything that is Something (ti) exists. Rather, some things have a derivative mode of reality they call subsistence: these entities are non-existent in that they are not themselves solid bodies, but they are nonetheless Something physical because they depend on bodies for their subsistence. My dissertation uncovers the unifying principles of Stoic subsistence, and shows how they can account for thoughts and other immaterial entities without running afoul of their physicalist commitments. While all commentators agree that the Stoics posited Something as the highest category of being, they have failed to find a coherent physicalist account of Stoic ontology. For instance, (1) a canonical set of incorporeals (time, place, void, and what is sayable (lekton)) is well attested, but there is little agreement as to what these entities have in common as incorporeals, which makes the category look like an ad hoc collection of left-over entities.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquinas on Attributes
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by MedievaleCommons@Cornell Philosophy and Theology 11 (2003), 1–41. Printed in the United States of America. Copyright C 2004 Cambridge University Press 1057-0608 DOI: 10.1017/S105706080300001X Aquinas on Attributes BRIAN LEFTOW Oriel College, Oxford Aquinas’ theory of attributes is one of the most obscure, controversial parts of his thought. There is no agreement even on so basic a matter as where he falls in the standard scheme of classifying such theories: to Copleston, he is a resemblance-nominalist1; to Armstrong, a “concept nominalist”2; to Edwards and Spade, “almost as strong a realist as Duns Scotus”3; to Gracia, Pannier, and Sullivan, neither realist nor nominalist4; to Hamlyn, the Middle Ages’ “prime exponent of realism,” although his theory adds elements of nominalism and “conceptualism”5; to Wolterstorff, just inconsistent.6 I now set out Aquinas’ view and try to answer the vexed question of how to classify it. Part of the confusion here is terminological. As emerges below, Thomas believed in “tropes” of “lowest” (infima) species of accidents and (I argue) substances.7 Many now class trope theories as a form of nominalism,8 while 1. F. C. Copleston, Aquinas (Baltimore, MD: Penguin Books, 1955), P. 94. 2. D. M. Armstrong, Nominalism and Realism (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1978), pp. 25, 83, 87. Armstrong is tentative about this. 3. Sandra Edwards, “The Realism of Aquinas,” The New Scholasticism 59 (1985): 79; Paul Vincent Spade, “Degrees of Being, Degrees of Goodness,” in Aquinas’ Moral Theory, ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy 125 — Day 9: Overview Nominalism XVII: Metalinguistic
    Branden Fitelson Philosophy 125 Lecture 1 Branden Fitelson Philosophy 125 Lecture 2 ' $ ' Philosophy 125 — Day 9: Overview $ Nominalism XVII: Metalinguistic Nominalism 2 • Administrative Stuff • Metalinguistic nominalists think that realists and austere nominalists make the same kind of mistake: thinking that there must be some non-lingusitic entities – Guest Lecture Thursday: Ed Zalta on Abstract Objects to which terms like “courage” (in, e.g., “Courage is a virtue”) refer. ∗ Introducing Ed — via iChatAV – First Paper Topics and S.Q.s announced last week (see website) • For realists, these entities are universals, for austere nominalists, the entities are concrete particulars (e.g., courageous persons). The metalingustic – Lectures should be up to date (sometimes I fiddle before lecture) nominalist thinks both the realist and the austere nominalist are incorrect. • Agenda: Nominalism • Carnap sketches how a systematic and precise metalinguistic nominalistic – Metalingusitc Nominalism theory might be worked out. Carnap proposes (roughly) that claims like ∗ Carnap’s Naive Proposal “Courage is a virtue” get unpacked as claims about predicates in languages: ∗ Sellars’ Refinement ∗ Residual Problems “Courage is a virtue” 7→ “ ‘Courageous’ is a virtue predicate”. “Trangularity is a shape” 7→ “ ‘Triangular’ is a shape predicate”. – Trope Theory ∗ The best of both worlds? • Problems: (1) Linguistic types vs linguistic tokens (trading new universals for ∗ Plus set theory? old ones?), (2) Language relativity (abs. claims don’t seem language relative). & Nominalism (Cont’d) 09/23%/03 & Nominalism (Cont’d) 09/23/03 % Y¿yellow[0pt]c Branden Fitelson Philosophy 125 Lecture 3 Branden Fitelson Philosophy 125 Lecture 4 ' Nominalism XIX: Metalinguistic Nominalism 4 $' Nominalism XX: Metalinguistic Nominalism 5 $ • Sellars addresses this first problem (for nominalism) of linguistic types/tokens • To address problem (2), Sellars introduces what he calls dot-quotation.
    [Show full text]
  • Getting Realistic About Nominalism
    Getting Realistic about Nominalism Mark F. Sharlow URL: http://www.eskimo.com/~msharlow ABSTRACT In this paper I examine critically the relationship between the realist and nominalist views of abstract objects. I begin by pointing out some differences between the usage of existential statements in metaphysics and the usage of such statements in disciplines outside of philosophy. Then I propose an account of existence that captures the characteristic intuitions underlying the latter kind of usage. This account implies that abstract object existence claims are not as ontologically extravagant as they seem, and that such claims are immune to certain standard nominalistic criticisms. Copyright © 2003 Mark F. Sharlow. Updated 2009. 1 I. What Do People Really Mean by "Exist"? There appears to be a marked difference between the way in which philosophers use the word "exist" and the way in which many other people use that word. This difference often shows itself when beginners in philosophy encounter philosophical positions that deny the existence of seemingly familiar things. Take, for example, nominalism — a view according to which multiply exemplifiable entities, such as properties and relations, really do not exist. (This definition may not do justice to all versions of nominalism, but it is close enough for our present purpose.) A strict nominalist has to deny, for example, that there are such things as colors. He can admit that there are colored objects; he even can admit that we usefully speak as though there were colors. But he must deny that there actually are colors, conceived of as multiply exemplifiable entities. A newcomer to philosophy might hear about the nominalist view of colors, and say in amazement, "How can anyone claim that there are no such things as colors? Look around the room — there they are!" To lessen this incredulity, a nominalist might explain that he is not denying that we experience a colorful world, or that we can usefully talk as if there are colors.
    [Show full text]
  • The Coherence of Stoic Ontology
    UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title The Coherence of Stoic Ontology Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3wg7m1w0 Author de Harven, Vanessa Publication Date 2012 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California The Coherence of Stoic Ontology by Vanessa de Harven A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Prof. Dorothea Frede, Co-chair Prof. Klaus Corcilius, Co-chair Prof. A.A. Long Spring 2012 Abstract The Coherence of Stoic Ontology by Vanessa de Harven Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy University of California, Berkeley Professors Dorothea Frede and Klaus Corcilius, Co-chairs Any thoroughgoing physicalist is challenged to give an account of immaterial entities such as thoughts and mathematical objects. The Stoics, who eagerly affirmed that only bodies exist, crafted an elegant solution to this challenge: not everything that is Something (ti) exists. Rather, some things have a derivative mode of reality they call subsistence: these entities are non-existent in that they are not themselves solid bodies, but they are nonetheless Something physical because they depend on bodies for their subsistence. My dissertation uncovers the unifying principles of Stoic subsistence, and shows how they can account for thoughts and other immaterial entities without running afoul of their physicalist commitments. While all commentators agree that the Stoics posited Something as the highest category of being, they have failed to find a coherent physicalist account of Stoic ontology.
    [Show full text]
  • Predication and the Problem of Universals Catherine Legg
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Research Commons@Waikato Philosophical Papers Vol. 30, No. 2 (July 2001): 117-143 Predication and the Problem of Universals Catherine Legg Abstract: This paper contrasts the scholastic realists of David Armstrong and Charles Peirce. It is argued that the so-called 'problem of universals' is not a problem in pure ontology (concerning whether universals exist) as Armstrong construes it to be. Rather, it extends to issues concerning which predicates should be applied where, issues which Armstrong sets aside under the label of 'semantics', and which from a Peircean perspective encompass even the fundamentals of scientific methodology. It is argued that Peir ce's scholastic realism not only presents a more nuanced ontology (distinguishing the existent front the real) but also provides more of a sense of why realism should be a position worth fighting for. ... a realist is simply one who knows no more recondite reality than that which is represented in a true representation. C.S. Peirce Like many other philosophical problems, the grandly-named 'Problem of Universals' is difficult to define without begging the question that it raises. Laurence Goldstein, however, provides a helpful hands-off denotation of the problem by noting that it proceeds from what he calls The Trivial Obseruation:2 The observation is the seemingly incontrovertible claim that, 'sometimes some things have something in common'. The 1 Philosophical Writings of Peirce, ed. Justus Buehler (New York: Dover Publications, 1955), 248. 2 Laurence Goldstein, 'Scientific Scotism – The Emperor's New Trousers or Has Armstrong Made Some Real Strides?', Australasian Journal of Philosophy, vol 61, No.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ascent from Nominalism Philosophical Studies Series
    THE ASCENT FROM NOMINALISM PHILOSOPHICAL STUDIES SERIES Editors: WILFRID SELLARS, University of Pittsburgh KEITH LEHRER, University of Arizona Board of Consulting Editors: J ON A THAN BENNETT, Syracuse University ALLAN GIBBARD, University of Michigan ROBERT STALNAKER, Cornell University ROBERT G. TURNBULL, Ohio State University VOLUME 37 TERR Y PENNER Department of Philosophy, The University of Wisconsin at Madison, U.S.A. THE ASCENT FROM NOMINALISM Some Existence Arguments in Plato's Middle Dialogues D. REIDEL PUBLISHING COMPANY ~~ A MEMBER OF THE KLUWER . ACADEMIC PUBLISHERS GROUP DORDRECHTj BOSTONj LANCASTERjTOKYO Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Penner, Terry, 1936- The ascent from nominalism. (Philosophical studies series; v. 37) Bibliography: p. Includes indexes. 1. Plato. 2. Aristotle. 3. Metaphysics-History. 4. Nominalism-History. I. Title. II. Series. B395.P347 1987 111'.2'0924 86·31641 ISBN-13: 978-94-010-8186-3 e-ISBN-13: 978-94-009-3791-8 DOl: 10.1007/978-94-009-3791-8 Published by D. Reidel Publishing Company, P.O. Box 17, 3300 AA Dordrecht, Holland. Sold and distributed in the U.S.A. and Canada by Kluwer Academic Publishers, 101 Philip Drive, Assinippi Park, Norwell, MA 02061, U.S.A. In all other countries, sold and distributed by Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, P.O. Box 322, 3300 AH Dordrecht, Holland. All Rights Reserved © 1987 by D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland Softcover reprint of the hardcover I 5t edition 1987 No part of the material protected by this copyright notice may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical induding photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission from the copyright owner ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Much of this work was conceived and executed between 1971 and 1975, though some of it was done much earlier, and a few bits are quite recent.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Introduction At least four assumptions appear to be part of the common ground of inter­ pretation among scholars of Ockham. The first can be described as a kind of general methodological presupposition, in that it has become standard to explore the Franciscan as a potential contributor to current philosophical debates, such as the issue of externalism in the philosophy of language and in the philosophy of mind.1 The view that medieval philosophers – or at least, Ockham – are of interest only to historians and theologians does not enjoy great popularity, especially not among philosophers working in the tradition of analytic philosophy.2 Second, Ockham is usually labelled a nominalist. While nominalism is not a single unified position,3 Ockham can be called a nominalist insofar as he sub­ scribes to the view that there are only particular things in this world: he admits only of two kinds of things in his ontology, namely particular substances (Socrates, this apple) and particularized qualities (the wisdom of Socrates, the redness of this apple).4 It would perhaps be more fitting to call Ockham’s posi­ tion ‘particularistic’. He thereby takes a conceptual stance on the problem of universals.5 According to Ockham, universals are nothing but concepts exist­ ing in the intellect. There is nothing universal ‘out there’ in the world. That a concept such as whale or wisdom is universal means that whale is semantically 1 See for instance Peter King, ‘Rethinking Representation in the Middle Ages’, in H. Lagerlund (ed.), Representation and Objects of Thought in Medieval Philosophy, Hampshire, 2007; Calvin Normore, ‘Burge, Descartes and Us’, in M.
    [Show full text]
  • William Ockham and Trope Nominalism
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Faculty Publications, Classics and Religious Studies Department Classics and Religious Studies 1998 William Ockham and Trope Nominalism Stephen E. Lahey University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/classicsfacpub Part of the Classics Commons Lahey, Stephen E., "William Ockham and Trope Nominalism" (1998). Faculty Publications, Classics and Religious Studies Department. 85. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/classicsfacpub/85 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Classics and Religious Studies at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications, Classics and Religious Studies Department by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. William Ockhsun and Trope Nominalism Can we take a medieval metaphysician out of his scholastic robes and force him into a metaphysical apparatus as seemingly foreign to him as a tuxedo might be? I believe that the terminological and conceptual differences that appear to prevent this can be overcome in many cases, and that one case most amenable to this project is the medieval problem of universals. After all, the problem for the medieval is, at base, the same as it is for contemporary philosophers, as for Plato: How do we account, ontologically, for many tokens of the same type? If one object has the property x and another, distinct object has the "same" property x, how to explain the apparent "samenessw of the property x? Is x one property or two? I will argue that William Ockharn's ontology, when considered in light of some contemporary philosophical thought, is remarkably fresh and vital, able seriously to be con- sidered as a tenable position, so long as we are clear about what Ockham is saying.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Armstrong and Aristotle There Are Two Main Reasons for Not
    RECENSIONI&REPORTS report ANNABELLA D’ATRI DAVID MALET ARMSTRONG’S NEO‐ARISTOTELIANISM 1. Armstrong and Aristotle 2. Lowe on Aristotelian substance 3. Armstrong and Lowe on the laws of nature 4. Conclusion ABSTRACT: The aim of this paper is to establish criteria for designating the Systematic Metaphysics of Australian philosopher David Malet Armstrong as neo‐ Aristotelian and to distinguish this form of weak neo‐ Aristotelianism from other forms, specifically from John Lowe’s strong neo‐Aristotelianism. In order to compare the two forms, I will focus on the Aristotelian category of substance, and on the dissimilar attitudes of Armstrong and Lowe with regard to this category. Finally, I will test the impact of the two different metaphysics on the ontological explanation of laws of nature. 1. Armstrong and Aristotle There are two main reasons for not considering Armstrong’s Systematic Metaphysics as Aristotelian: a) the first is a “philological” reason: we don’t have evidence of Armstrong reading and analyzing Aristotle’s main works. On the contrary, we have evidence of Armstrong’s acknowledgments to Peter Anstey1 for drawing his attention to the reference of Aristotle’s theory of truthmaker in Categories and to Jim Franklin2 for a passage in Aristotle’s Metaphysics on the theory of the “one”; b) the second reason is “historiographic”: Armstrong isn’t listed among the authors labeled as contemporary Aristotelian metaphysicians3. Nonetheless, there are also reasons for speaking of Armstrong’s Aristotelianism if, according to 1 D. M. Armstrong, A World of State of Affairs, Cambridge University Press, New York 1978, p. 13. 2 Ibid., p.
    [Show full text]
  • A Critical Evaluation of the Epistemology of William Pepperell Montague
    Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Master's Theses Theses and Dissertations 1957 A Critical Evaluation of the Epistemology of William Pepperell Montague John Joseph Monahan Loyola University Chicago Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses Part of the Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Monahan, John Joseph, "A Critical Evaluation of the Epistemology of William Pepperell Montague " (1957). Master's Theses. 1426. https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses/1426 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. Copyright © 1957 John Joseph Monahan I"'" A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE EFISTEiv:OLO<1Y OF WILLIAr·~ FEPfF.RELL tJ!ONTAGUE by John Joseph Monahan A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of tre Graduate School , • of Loyola University in Partial Fulfillment of· • the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Janu&.I'1 1957 , , LIFE The Reverend Jol"n J oae ,h r':!)Mran, C. f!. V. was born in Oh .:teago, 1111 [.'018 f r,~arch 2. 1926. He attended Qulgley .Preparatory Se:n.1nary, Oh,1cago t Illino1s, a.nd was gradua.ted from St. Ambrose College, Daven. port, Iowa, August, 1948, with th~ degree of Bacbelor ot Art a • In 1952 he was ordained til prl•• t from St. Thoma. Seminary, Denver, Oolo%'ado tv1 tt; the degree of Haste%' ot Art •• from.
    [Show full text]
  • ABSTRACT Augustinian Auden: the Influence of Augustine of Hippo on W. H. Auden Stephen J. Schuler, Ph.D. Mentor: Richard Rankin
    ABSTRACT Augustinian Auden: The Influence of Augustine of Hippo on W. H. Auden Stephen J. Schuler, Ph.D. Mentor: Richard Rankin Russell, Ph.D. It is widely acknowledged that W. H. Auden became a Christian in about 1940, but relatively little critical attention has been paid to Auden‟s theology, much less to the particular theological sources of Auden‟s faith. Auden read widely in theology, and one of his earliest and most important theological influences on his poetry and prose is Saint Augustine of Hippo. This dissertation explains the Augustinian origin of several crucial but often misunderstood features of Auden‟s work. They are, briefly, the nature of evil as privation of good; the affirmation of all existence, and especially the physical world and the human body, as intrinsically good; the difficult aspiration to the fusion of eros and agape in the concept of Christian charity; and the status of poetry as subject to both aesthetic and moral criteria. Auden had already been attracted to similar ideas in Lawrence, Blake, Freud, and Marx, but those thinkers‟ common insistence on the importance of physical existence took on new significance with Auden‟s acceptance of the Incarnation as an historical reality. For both Auden and Augustine, the Incarnation was proof that the physical world is redeemable. Auden recognized that if neither the physical world nor the human body are intrinsically evil, then the physical desires of the body, such as eros, the self-interested survival instinct, cannot in themselves be intrinsically evil. The conflict between eros and agape, or altruistic love, is not a Manichean struggle of darkness against light, but a struggle for appropriate placement in a hierarchy of values, and Auden derived several ideas about Christian charity from Augustine.
    [Show full text]