DOCSLIB.ORG

Phil O S Ophy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Phil O S Ophy PHILOSOPHY 52 School gerston Hag ANALOGY AND SYMBOL ANALOGY SYMBOL Analogy – compares the normal use of a word to • Developed the theory that religious its religious use, used by Aquinas and Aristotle language could be symbolic but Univocal –words with identical meaning in distinguished between a sign/symbol different statements • Signs are just conventional whereas a Equivocal – words with entirely different symbol requires participation meanings in different sentences • Religious language has the Aquinas – we can deduce 4 ways of making characteristics of a symbol judgements – strength of any analogy depends on • If you say “God is love” - utterance is not similarities; similarity only exists in identical merely a sign of what God is but a relations/properties; good analogies are based on participation in the reality of God underlying principles; they do not need to assume • Religious statements do not give us acquaintance literally true about God but they are Aristotle – the apophatic way says human cognitive language is wholly inadequate in describing God • May have a limited lifespan, changing in but we do not need to assume it tells us nothing power or meaning AQUINAS J. H . RANDALL JR Analogy of attribution – something about an • Argues religious symbols are non-cognitive author/maker from the product he has created and non-representative (does not stand for (eg “the bread is good” suggests “the baker is any reality beyond itself) good” • Religion is a human activity and contributes to human culture • Based on the belief that God is creator of the universe so everything comes from him • Eg a piece of music speaks to us in a way Analogy of proportion – from a lesser object, say translated into anything else something else such as God has proportionately • Religion has it it’s own world like music – more of the same quality (eg a 3yo is good at arouses certain feelings Character drawing might be good at drawing for a 3yo, not • God is another aspect of our psyche and compared to an artist spirituality so it makes no sense to ask if this is “true” • doesn’t apply to God – we can ‘t say God is proportionately more just than us as he is • We don’t need to determine truth/accuracy infinitely more just than us of God as a symbol, religion is a human enterprise which performs a valuable function but symbols are PROBLEMS OF ANALOGY non-representative Brummer – God’s nature is not accessible to us Creativity Creativity as use of an adjective only tells us what humans PROBLEMS OF SYMBOL mean by it • Is symbol any better than analogy? - Ramsey – there has got to be something in tells us what the terms do but not what language we can use to describe God; Disclosure they mean situation – happens when see something beyond • If God simply stands for the unknown reality/understanding vs Qualified Model – nature of God, how does symbol Organiser language models something else participate? – is the symbol the entire Barth – Ramsey/analogy is mistaken – we cannot proposition or the underlying concept approach God through language based on our of the goodness of God? Aspiration experience • What are the different levels of participation with a symbol? KS5 Knowledge KS5 Knowledge Organiser Haggerston School Ethics Conscience Knowledge Organiser Kohlberg’s 3 levels of conscience Freud’s view of conscience as an aspect of the Super-Ego Durkheim’s view of sanctions in society: Fromm’s 2 types of conscience: 1. Pre-conventional: established in childhood through reward and Psyche – Freud’s term for the human mind and personality. God is a useful idea: Authoritarian Conscience: punishment – right behaviours are rewarded and wrong behaviours are Super Ego: controlling, restraining self. Controls the Eros and God is a useful idea in society, giving us a moral obligation to obey • Society is designed to make us obey rules and conform to punished. Thanatos. Acts as an “inner parent” and gives moral commands. society’s demands. Conscience is part of our loyalty to society and norms. 2. Conventional: the development of good relationships with others The conscience is the operating of the SE: giving moral commands fear of judgment from others. • People feel guilt and fear when they are disobedient to the rules leads people to want to obey the rules of society to avoid guilt. and punishing us with guilt. of society. This is because they don’t want to be shunned by 3. Post-conventional: Utilitarian understanding that good for society is Ego: the rational self, helping us to process the desires of the id. The collective conscience: society for disobeying rules. more important than good for individuals. This leads to the Id: the unconscious and instinctive part of personality, containing beliefs agreed on by those in the same society. Acts are bad • Rather than people focusing on moral issues, people feel guilt development of an individual conscience that makes consistent choices the Eros (sexual desire) and Thanatos (aggression). because society disapproves of them. when they have broken a rule. for the good of everyone. This is Kantian in nature as choices become The role of upbringing: • The conscience becomes the internalised voice of society, which universalizable. Not many people get here. Conscience is an expression of the rules that we learnt in early How the conscience is evolutionary: disapproves of our actions. Application to the Heinz Dilemma: (should a man steal medicine for his childhood – we were “trained” as children to understand what is allows society to grow stronger, it is a survival mechanism Humanistic Conscience: dying wife from a corrupt pharmacist?) right and wrong – therefore the conscience is developed by our developed by people sharing the same moral values. • The humanistic conscience has awareness of what makes life 1. Pre-conventional - Heniz should not steal the drug because he relationships with other people and does not exist as a moral flourish and what destroys it. personally could be punished, e.g put in prison. authority without those people. • The humanistic conscience leads humans to civil disobedience 2. Conventional – whilst society thinks this is wrong, which means it The function of guilt: Therefore, the conscience develops to allow society to survive, and when necessary – humans therefore resit societies norms when could be wrong to steal, he may be justified in saving his wife as we The conscience cannot be seen as the voice of God, but feelings of having a good conscience allows us to fall in line with society’s they are morally wrong. Examples come from those who understand this is good and he has a good motivation. guilt and shame can be caused in us through religious laws, expectations of us. We are controlled by our fear of judgement and resisted the Nazi regime and more recently have resisted that 3. Post-conventional – we cannot universalize the act of stealing and particularly if we had a religious upbringing. exclusion, so we follow our conscience, this is particularly true in implementation of nuclear weapons. we have to uphold society's rules, so he should not take the drug. The conscience, as the “Inner Parent” is simply our internalised religious social groups. • Rejecting the authoritarian conscience and embracing the views that have come from our upbringing, experienced as feelings humanistic conscience allows us to reach our full potential as of guilt and shame. people.. Aquinas: Conscience as a faculty of reasons. Butler’s reflective Principle. Fletcher’s Agapeic Principle: Christianity – conscience as the “voice of God”: Synderesis Rule: Conscience as a natural property: Act in a way that produces the most loving consequence in every Augustine: Act in a way that does good and avoids evil Like Aquinas, he agrees that the conscience is our God-given ability situation. • The conscience is a part of God’s creation of humans. to reason that should always be followed. He presumes that all Conscience as a verb, not a noun: • The conscience is innate – meaning that it is put into the minds Relationship to Natural Moral Law: human beings have a sense of right and wrong. Everyone has a Conscience is not something we have, it is a process that we use, it (or souls!) of humans by God. Conscience is our God-give ability to reason, so it is how we work out conscience and ought to obey it. is more accurate to say that we are “consciencing” because it is an • He literally sees the conscience as the “voice of God”. the primary and secondary precepts, and allows us to formulate 2 principles that govern human behaviour: active and dynamic process. deontological rules. 1. Self-love - This is a desire for happiness for the self. It is "who can St Paul: reflect upon themselves and their own interest or happiness, so as How conscience relates to the Rule of Love: • Romans 2:15: The conscience is “a witness to the requirements of Relationship with Divine Law: to have that interest an object to their minds" We are using this process of weighing up the consequences of our the law.” The laws that we understand through reason are supported through 2. Benevolence - This is the desire or hope for happiness in other actions and considering, in a teleological way, how we can limit • God judges those who are “pure of heart” – showing that there is divine law, meaning that the Bible and Catholic tradition work as a people. human suffering and act in the way that Jesus did (showing some internal part of us that God will consider when giving out useful guide to help us confirm our reasoning is right. Conscience as an intuitive moral judge: unconditional love).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Peter Thomas Geach, 1916–2013
    PETER GEACH Peter Thomas Geach 1916–2013 PETER GEACH was born on 29 March 1916 at 41, Royal Avenue, Chelsea. He was the son of George Hender Geach, a Cambridge graduate working in the Indian Educational Service (IES), who later taught philosophy at Lahore. George Geach was married to Eleonore Sgnonina, the daughter of a Polish civil engineer who had emigrated to England. The marriage was not a happy one: after a brief period in India Eleonore returned to England to give birth and never returned to her husband. Peter Geach’s first few years were spent in the house of his Polish grandparents in Cardiff, but at the age of four his father had him made the ward of a former nanny of his own, an elderly nonconformist lady named Miss Tarr. When Peter’s mother tried to visit him, Miss Tarr warned him that a dangerous mad woman was coming, so that he cowered away from her when she tried to embrace him. As she departed she threw a brick through a window, and from that point there was no further contact between mother and son. When he was eight years old he became a boarder at Llandaff Cathedral School. Soon afterwards his father was invalided out of the IES and took charge of his education. To the surprise of his Llandaff housemaster, Peter won a scholarship to Clifton College, Bristol. Geach père had learnt moral sciences at Trinity College Cambridge from Bertrand Russell and G. E. Moore, and he inducted his son into the delights of philosophy from an early age.
    [Show full text]
  • PETER Geach's Views of Relative Identity, Together With
    SOME RADICAL CONSEQUENCES OF GEACH'S LOGICAL THEORIES By jAMES CAIN ETER Geach's views of relative identity, together with his Paccount of proper names and quantifiers, 1 while presenting what I believe is an inwardly coherent and consistent account, presents us with radical consequences regarding what arguments are to be accepted as valid. For example, consider the argument: ( 1) All men are mortal Fido is a man Thus, Fido is mortal in which 'Fido' names a dog. While this would normally be thought to be a valid argument with a false premise, we shall see that on Geach's theories it turns out to be invalid. In fact for every form of general categorical syllogism we can produce an argument of that form which on Geach's theories turns out invalid. 1 I will only be concerned with the theory of restricted quantifiers worked out in the main body of Reference and Generality, third edition {Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1980), not with either his theory of unrestricted quantifiers or the method of interpreting restricted quantifiers mentioned in the appendix to Reference and Generality. 84 ANALYSIS Let us see how this situation arises. We first look briefly at Geach's semantics. According to Geach every proper name is associ­ ated with a criterion of identity which could be expressed using a substantival term; e.g., 'Fido' is, let's say, associated with the criterion of identity given by 'same dog': this can be expressed by saying that 'Fido' is a name for a dog (we may go on to say that it is a name of a dog if it is non-empty; Reference and Generality p.
    [Show full text]
  • Educational Rights and the Roles of Virtues, Perfectionism, and Cultural Progress
    The Law of Education: Educational Rights and the Roles of Virtues, Perfectionism, and Cultural Progress R. GEORGE WRIGHT* I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 385 II. EDUCATION: PURPOSES, RECENT OUTCOMES, AND LEGAL MECHANISMS FOR REFORM ................................................................ 391 A. EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES AND RIGHTS LANGUAGE ...................... 391 B. SOME RECENT GROUNDS FOR CONCERN IN FULFILLING EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ............................................................. 393 C. THE BROAD RANGE OF AVAILABLE TECHNIQUES FOR THE LEGAL REFORM OF EDUCATION ............................................................... 395 III. SOME LINKAGES BETWEEN EDUCATION AND THE BASIC VIRTUES, PERFECTIONISM, AND CULTURAL PROGRESS ..................................... 397 IV. VIRTUES AND THEIR LEGITIMATE PROMOTION THROUGH THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM ...................................................................... 401 V. PERFECTIONISM AND ITS LEGITIMATE PROMOTION THROUGH THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM ...................................................................... 410 VI. CULTURAL PROGRESS OVER TIME AND ITS LEGITIMATE PROMOTION THROUGH THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM .............................................. 417 VII. CONCLUSION: EDUCATION LAW AS RIGHTS-CENTERED AND AS THE PURSUIT OF WORTHY VALUES AND GOALS: THE EXAMPLE OF HORNE V. FLORES ............................................................................................ 431 I. INTRODUCTION The law of education
    [Show full text]
  • Peter Geach's Ethics
    July 1, 2018 Grammar and Function: Peter Geach's Ethics Katharina Nieswandt Pre-print, to appear in: Martin Hähnel (ed.) (forthcoming) Aristotelian Naturalism: A Research Companion. Springer: Dordrecht. A German version of this paper appeared as: Katharina Nieswandt (2017): “Grammatik und Funktion: Peter Geach.” In: Martin Hähnel (ed.): Der Aristotelische Naturalismus: Ein Handbuch. Metzler: Stuttgart,163-174. ISBN: 978-3-476-04332-0 (Hardcover). DOI: 10.1007/978-3-476-04333-7. Table of Contents Introduction.............................................................................................................................................1 Short Biography......................................................................................................................................2 The Grammar of Moral Expressions such as “Good” or “Should”.............................................3 The Frege-Geach Problem....................................................................................................................6 The Supposed “Naturalistic Fallacy”..................................................................................................8 Natural Teleology...................................................................................................................................9 The Role of the Virtues in Moral Life..............................................................................................10 Annotated Bibliography......................................................................................................................11
    [Show full text]
  • [Sample Title Page Format]
    To Want Nothing: A Badiouian Reading of Radical Orthodoxy By David John DeCoste A Thesis Submitted to Atlantic School of Theology, Halifax, Nova Scotia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Theology and Religious Studies. March 2013, Halifax, Nova Scotia Copyright David John DeCoste, 2013. Approved: Dr. David Deane Supervisor Dr. Susan Slater Examiner Dr. Neil Robertson Examiner Date: April 3, 2013 2 Abstract To Want Nothing: A Badiouian Reading of Radical Orthodoxy by David John DeCoste April 3, 2013 This thesis argues that Alain Badiou presents a challenge to Radically Orthodox thinkers by claiming that theological discourse on being can only articulate a description of a structured presentation of an inconsistent multiplicity; a situation referred to throughout the thesis as “a Badiouian thinking of the One.” The argument begins by explaining how in the contemporary context Badiou identifies two forms of thinking the One: positivism and theology. It follows that if positivism and theology are two forms of the same thinking then there must be common elements or logics at work in their separate discourses. Three elements shared by both discourses are shown to be at work in both a positivist project—Daniel Dennett’s philosophy of consciousness—and a theological project—Radical Orthodoxy. Ultimately, in establishing how the three elements are common to both discourses Radical Orthodoxy is identified as an example of a Badiouian thinking of the One. 3 Contents Introduction: 0 ................................................................................................................................. 4 1.0 Thinking the One: A Positivist Example............................................................................... 8 1.01 Evolutionary progression ............................................................................................... 33 1.02 Positing an abstraction: Dennett’s Universal Acid .......................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Metaphysics and Natural Kinds: Slingshots, Fundamentality, and Causal Structure
    METAPHYSICS AND NATURAL KINDS: SLINGSHOTS, FUNDAMENTALITY, AND CAUSAL STRUCTURE By ANDREW LEE MCFARLAND Submitted to the graduate degree program in the Department of Philosophy and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ________________________________ Chair: John Symons ________________________________ John Bricke ________________________________ Armin Schulz ________________________________ Clif Pye ________________________________ Philippe Huneman Date Defended: May 16, 2014 The Dissertation Committee for Andrew Lee McFarland certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: METAPHYSICS AND NATURAL KINDS: SLINGSHOTS, FUNDAMENTALITY, AND CAUSAL STRUCTURE ________________________________ JOHN SYMONS Date approved: May 16, 2014 ii DISSERTATION ABSTRACT Metaphysics and Natural Kinds: Slingshots, Fundamentality, and Causal Structure Andrew Lee McFarland My dissertation addresses a question relevant to metaphysics, philosophy of language, and philosophy of science: What are natural kinds? I explore a view that holds that natural kinds are complex, structural properties that involve causal structure. Causal structure describes the idea that for the many properties associated with natural kinds, these properties are nomically linked – that is causally connected – in such a way that the properties of non-natural kinds are not. After criticizing arguments in favor of a nominalist theory of kinds – one that holds that a natural kind just is to be identified with its class of instances – and after defending the notion of a complex structural property from several prominent objections posed by David Lewis, I apply a causal account of natural kinds to a set of problematic cases, paying special attention to isomeric kinds from chemistry. iii Dedication I dedicate this doctoral thesis to my family and to the tireless support they have given me over the years.
    [Show full text]
  • The Oberlin Colloquium in Philosophy: Program History
    The Oberlin Colloquium in Philosophy: Program History 1960 FIRST COLLOQUIUM Wilfrid Sellars, "On Looking at Something and Seeing it" Ronald Hepburn, "God and Ambiguity" Comments: Dennis O'Brien Kurt Baier, "Itching and Scratching" Comments: David Falk/Bruce Aune Annette Baier, "Motives" Comments: Jerome Schneewind 1961 SECOND COLLOQUIUM W.D. Falk, "Hegel, Hare and the Existential Malady" Richard Cartwright, "Propositions" Comments: Ruth Barcan Marcus D.A.T. Casking, "Avowals" Comments: Martin Lean Zeno Vendler, "Consequences, Effects and Results" Comments: William Dray/Sylvan Bromberger PUBLISHED: Analytical Philosophy, First Series, R.J. Butler (ed.), Oxford, Blackwell's, 1962. 1962 THIRD COLLOQUIUM C.J. Warnock, "Truth" Arthur Prior, "Some Exercises in Epistemic Logic" Newton Garver, "Criteria" Comments: Carl Ginet/Paul Ziff Hector-Neri Castenada, "The Private Language Argument" Comments: Vere Chappell/James Thomson John Searle, "Meaning and Speech Acts" Comments: Paul Benacerraf/Zeno Vendler PUBLISHED: Knowledge and Experience, C.D. Rollins (ed.), University of Pittsburgh Press, 1964. 1963 FOURTH COLLOQUIUM Michael Scriven, "Insanity" Frederick Will, "The Preferability of Probable Beliefs" Norman Malcolm, "Criteria" Comments: Peter Geach/George Pitcher Terrence Penelhum, "Pleasure and Falsity" Comments: William Kennick/Arnold Isenberg 1964 FIFTH COLLOQUIUM Stephen Korner, "Some Remarks on Deductivism" J.J.C. Smart, "Nonsense" Joel Feinberg, "Causing Voluntary Actions" Comments: Keith Donnellan/Keith Lehrer Nicholas Rescher, "Evaluative Metaphysics" Comments: Lewis W. Beck/Thomas E. Patton Herbert Hochberg, "Qualities" Comments: Richard Severens/J.M. Shorter PUBLISHED: Metaphysics and Explanation, W.H. Capitan and D.D. Merrill (eds.), University of Pittsburgh Press, 1966. 1965 SIXTH COLLOQUIUM Patrick Nowell-Smith, "Acts and Locutions" George Nakhnikian, "St. Anselm's Four Ontological Arguments" Hilary Putnam, "Psychological Predicates" Comments: Bruce Aune/U.T.
    [Show full text]
  • The Problem of Evil and the Grammar of Goodness
    religions Article The Problem of Evil and the Grammar of Goodness Eric Wiland Department of Philosophy, University of Missouri-St. Louis, One University Blvd, St. Louis, MO 63121, USA; [email protected] Received: 5 January 2018; Accepted: 20 January 2018; Published: 31 January 2018 Abstract: I consider the two venerated arguments about the existence of God: the Ontological Argument and the Argument from Evil. The Ontological Argument purports to show that God’s nature guarantees that God exists. The Argument from Evil purports to show that God’s nature, combined with some plausible facts about the way the world is, guarantees (or is very compelling grounds for thinking) that God does not exist. Both presume that it is coherent to predicate goodness (or greatness) of God. But if Peter Geach’s claim that goodness is logically attributive is cogent, then both arguments fall to the ground. Keywords: god; evil; goodness; religion 1. Here I consider two venerated arguments about the existence of God: the Ontological Argument and the Argument from Evil. The Ontological Argument purports to show that God’s nature guarantees that God exists. The Argument from Evil purports to show that God’s nature, combined with some plausible facts about the way the world is, guarantees (or is very compelling grounds for thinking) that God does not exist. Obviously, both arguments cannot be sound. But I argue here that they both are unsound for the very same reason. 2. Consider first the Argument from Evil. There are very many ways the Argument from Evil can be formulated. For the most part, these differences will not affect the issue at hand in this article.
    [Show full text]
  • In Defense of the Fourth Way and Its Metaphysics
    In Defense of the Fourth Way and its Metaphysics Submitted by Monty De La Torre Bachelor of Arts in Music and Philosophy Master of Arts in Theology PhD Candidate in Philosophy A dissertation submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy School of Philosophy Faculty of Theology/Philosophy Australian Catholic University University Graduate Research Office North Sydney Campus (MacKillop) 19-21 Berry Street-Level 4 North Sydney NSW 2059 May 2016 1 Declaration of Authorship and Sources This thesis contains no material published elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part from a thesis by which I have qualified for or been awarded another degree or diploma. No parts of this thesis have been submitted towards the award of any other degree or diploma in any other tertiary institution. No other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgment in the main text of the thesis. All research procedures reported in the thesis received the approval of the relevant Ethics/Safety Committees (where required). Abstract The Fourth Way of Thomas Aquinas is one of the least popular and heavily neglected demonstrations one can find for the existence of God. Most scholars in the field of natural theology or the philosophy of Aquinas are well versed in Aquinas’ other Ways. But the Fourth Way is, for some reason or other, rarely afforded the time of day. This is very unfortunate. However, recent scholarship has shed some much needed light on the proof, arguing for its metaphysical lucidity and defensibility among its detractors and interlocutors. Edward Feser is one such scholar who has gone to great lengths to promote and defend Aquinas’ general metaphysics and its application to all of Aquinas’ Five Ways within the area of contemporary analytic philosophy.
    [Show full text]
  • Being of God: a Trinitarian Critique of Postmodern A/Theology
    RICE UNIVERSITY (DE)CONSTRUCTING THE (NON)BEING OF GHD: A TRINITARIAN CRITIQUE OF POSTMODERN A/THEOLOGY by B. KEITH PUTT A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY APPROVED, THESIS COMMITTEE Niels C. Nielsen, Jr.,Director Professor Emeritus of Philoso¬ phy and Religious Thought Werner H. Kelber Isla Carroll Turner and Percy E. Turner Professor of Reli¬ gious Studies Stjeven G. Crowell Associate Professor of Philoso¬ phy Houston, Texas May, 1995 Copyright B. Keith Putt 1995 ABSTRACT (DE) CONSTRUCTING THE (NON) BEING OF G8D: A TRINITARIAN CRITIQUE OF POSTMODERN A/THEOLOGY by B. KEITH PUTT Langdon Gilkey maintained in 1969 that theological language was in "ferment" over whether "God" could be ex¬ pressed in language. He argued that "radical theology," specifically the kenotic christology in Altizer's "death of God" theology, best represented that ferment. Some twenty- five years later, in the postmodern context of the 1990's, whether one can speak of God and, if so, how remain promi¬ nent issues for philosophers of religion and theologians. One of the most provocative contemporary approaches to these questions continues to focus on the "death of God." Mark Taylor's a/theology attempts to "do" theology after the divine demise by thinking the end of theology without ending theological thinking. Taylor's primary thesis, predicated upon his reading of Jacques Derrida's deconstruetive philos¬ ophy, is that God gives way to the sacred and the sacred may be encountered only within the "divine milieu" of writing. God is dead, the self is dead, history has no structure, and language cannot be totalized in books; consequently, theo¬ logy must be errant and textually disseminative.
    [Show full text]
  • Fall 2014 Department of Philosophy Graduate Course Descriptions
    Fall 2014 Department of Philosophy Graduate Course Descriptions http://www.buffalo.edu/cas/philosophy/grad-study/grad_courses.html CANCELLED: PHI 519 (w/489) DIP Topics in Logic: Phi Software Dipert, R (Special Topics) #22597 After a rapid review of propositional and quantificational logic, including some alternative logics and alternative notations, we will study two important "extensions" of first-order logic, axiomatic formulations of mereology (part-whole theory) and axiomatic (Zermelo-Fraenkel) set theory. We will discuss some of the philosophical issues that surround these theories but will mostly explore their deductive structure. The last part of the course will be devoted to software tools for use in exploring logical theories: the computer language Prolog (and the paradigm of logic programming), software tools in Prolog, and then various “automatic” theorem-provers and reasoners, such as Prover9 and SNARK. At the end of the course we will also look at logical formulations of metaphysics, in the form of characteristic axioms of the Basic Formal Ontology (BFO 2.0). PHI 556 PWL Topics in History of Philosophy Powell, L TH, 4:00-6:50 Park 141 #24196 In this course, we will read Thomas Reid’s Inquiry into the Human Mind on the Principles of Common Sense, as well as related works from John Locke, David Hume, George Berkeley and Mary Shepherd, as well as secondary literature on these figures. Thomas Reid’s concerns in the work are centered around Epistemology, Perception, and the Philosophy of Mind. Students will gain familiarity with some major early modern positions about epistemology and perception, and influential criticisms of those views.
    [Show full text]
  • IN MEMORIAM Peter Geach (1916-2013)
    IN MEMORIAM Peter Geach (1916-2013) PETER GEACH (1916-2013) In memoriam Peter Geach (1916-2013) CRAIG IFFLAND University of Notre Dame Notre Dame, IN 46556 (Estados Unidos) cjiffl [email protected] eter Geach was born on March 29, 1916. He studied Classics and Philosophy at Balliol College, Oxford, where, in 1938, he P converted to Roman Catholicism. He married G.E.M. Ans- combe (1919-2001) in 1941 and went on to take up academic posts at the University of Birmingham (until 1966) and the University of Leeds (until his retirement in 1981). He also served a semester as Visiting Professor at the Universidad de Navarra. Along with his wife, Geach can be credited with much of the revived philosophical interest in the work of Aristotle and Aquinas—indeed the two pub- lished a philosophical exploration of the two thinkers (along with Gottlob Frege) in Three Philosophers: Aristotle, Aquinas, and Frege (Blackwell, 1961). This has led some to memorialize Geach and Anscombe as the founders of the school of “Analytic Thomism”, but the truth of the matter is that the intellectual formation they received from Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-1951) would wholly pre- clude either from daring to create a philosophical “school”. Geach published widely, but some of his most infl uential phil- osophical interventions came in the form of journal articles. Among the most notable are Subject and Predicate (“Mind”, 1950), Good and ANUARIO FILOSÓFICO 47/2 (2014) 453-457 455 ISSN: 0065-5215 PETER GEACH (1916-2013) Evil (“Analysis”, 1956), Imperative and Deontic Logic (“Analysis”, 1958) and Ascriptivism (“Philosophical Review”, 1960).
    [Show full text]