Philosophy Now Forum

“A principle is that from which anything in any way proceeds; a starting point of being, or of change, or of knowledge, or of discussion.”
Summary of Scholastic Principles, p. 4

I have decided to make a disciplined study of scholastic philosophy, about an hour and a half each day. I’ve started with the Summary and next will read Professor Clark’s book. I have a tape of a fascinating interview with Clarke on metaphysics. The thought of the schoolmen goes well with a background of jazz.

http://www.amazon.com/Summary-Scholasti ... 1258190311

http://www.amazon.com/Dictionary-Schola ... 1622920007

http://www.amazon.com/One-Many-Contempo ... =268037078

http://www.catholicapologetics.info/cat ... iomata.htm

"The scholastic philosopher is interested in definition for a different reason than the lexicographer and linguist. The philosopher is trying to learn things. He defines, after investigating reality, in an attempt to describe reality clearly and to sum up some aspect of his understanding of reality. Hence, we find our scholastic philosophers adopting as a main feature of their method this insistance on defining, on precise and detailed explanation of their definitions, and on proving that their definitions do correctly express what a nature or activity is." iii, Preface, Dictionary of Scholastic Philosophy

One year the Duluth school district was holding an all class, all high schools (East, Denfeld, and Morgan Park high schools) reunion. For those people who did not graduate from any of the three schools (I graduated from Mankato Loyola high school), the organizers scheduled a series of social activities for a "Mythical High School." Folks like me were supposed to register in advance, or at the door, and pay the applicable fee for each social activity or event.

I was interested in the all class reunion because, at the time, one of my clients was a reunion organizer.

I was not interested in attending any of the "Mythical High School" activities. First, I reasoned that the reunion of two or more entities (students) who had never before been united was an impossibility. I would not know any of the "students" who had graduated from "Mythical High School." There was no real relation between me and any such "student".

A week or so after the reunion ended, my client came in for a meeting on his matter. During our small talk, I asked him about the reunion, specifically, about the turnout for the "Mythical High School" events. He said that the turnout was terrible, and that the school district had lost a lot of money on the events.

He was quite surprised when I said that I expected that result and I explained my resoning on the matter.

real relation, a reference of one real thing to another really distinct from it because of an objective foundation; a relation existing in things independently of the mind knowing the relation.
Dictionary of Scholastic Philosophy, p. 108

Modern philosophy is not scholastic philosophy. I am modern philosophy. So, I am not scholastic philosophy. Ten years is philosophy, and religion. I am ten years. So, I am philosophy, and religion.
Philosophy is not pretentious, and quoting dead people. Thinking is philosophy. So, thinking is not pretentious, and quoting dead people.
Thinking is western philosophy. Skepticism is thinking. So, skepticism is western philosophy.
Hume are relations. Ideas are not Hume. So, ideas are not relations. 2+2=4, is definition. Terms are 2+2=4. So, terms are definitions.

jimmy cricket wrote:Modern philosophy is not scholastic philosophy. I am modern philosophy. So, I am not scholastic philosophy. Ten years is philosophy, and religion. I am ten years. So, I am philosophy, and religion.
Philosophy is not pretentious, and quoting dead people. Thinking is philosophy. So, thinking is not pretentious, and quoting dead people.
Thinking is western philosophy. Skepticism is thinking. So, skepticism is western philosophy.
Hume are relations. Ideas are not Hume. So, ideas are not relations. 2+2=4, is definition. Terms are 2+2=4. So, terms are definitions.

I choose to learn scholastic philosophy and, if relevant, to apply its principles to contemporary problems.

You are also free, subject to the laws of thought and evidence, to choose a philosophy.
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=14703&p=189450#p189450

Logic is learning. You are not logic. You are not learning.

Today at the Arlington dog park Charlie, barking, rushed two big dogs, females, who were just entering the park. Provoked, they responded and put him on his back. I told the owner, who I knew, that his dogs were angry feminists. He laughed. I think that when Charlie rushes big dogs, barking, he is being protective of me.
https://www.facebook.com/tbieter
http://www.stpaul.gov/index.aspx?nid=2066

As we left the park, I noticed that he was very subdued and he favored his right leg. At home, I noticed a wound. I called the vet (who was Jack's vet) and the assistant said I should bring him in. He had two superficial wounds, but they bled. He received a shot and some other meds. I paid the bill - $213.

Previously, Charlie had rushed a Boxer and a Doberman. They just slapped him and put him on his back.

In view of Charlie's provocative behavour, the issue is: should I continue taking him to the dog park or just walk him on a leash?

In considering the issue, some scholastic principles come to mind. They are:

Conscience
NOTE The principles refer to antecedent conscience.
63 A prudently certain conscience, whether correct or invincibly erroneous, must be obeyed. confer 241

64 A vincibly erroneous conscience must be corrected before acting. confer 242

65 A prudently certain conscience is (1) sufficient and (2) necessary for moral action.
COROLLARY In a practical doubt, one may not act until the practical doubt is solved directly or reflexly.

Reflex solutions (66-67)

66 In a remaining doubt of conscience (after attempted direct solution), when the doubt concerns the certain right of another or an end necessarily to be attained, the safer course must be chosen. In other words, no unnecessary risk of harming oneself or others may be taken.(Emphasis added)

Charlie is not a puppy. He's about seven years old. I doubt that I can train him not to engage in the provocative behavour. Thus, there is the possibility that he could be seriously injured at the dog park. He is safe being walked on a leash and riding on the bike.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... =3&theater

Comments anybody?

Maritain's book, Art and Scholasticism:
http://www3.nd.edu/Departments/Maritain/etext/art.htm

I'm interested in his treatment of the speculative and practical orders of reality for a project that I'm working on.

John Searle is now a proponent of what he calls Direct Realism! I wonder if he is reading the schoolmen.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/ ... ?nopager=1
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0199385157/ref=rdr_ext_tmb