Philosophy (Between Two Swedes)

Johan Eddebo

There's something off about people being genuinely enthusiastic about and interested in philosophy for its own sake rather than exclusively with regard to the answers and truths it provides.

It's sort of like being unduly fascinated about the mechanics of autopsy procedures or morbidly preoccupied with the minutiae of different kinds of stool samples. Like a general who actually likes the methods of killing.

Philosophy is a necessary evil in the treatment of disease, and anyone who is actually compelled to perform it for any length of time may certainly learn to love it for the sake of its utility, but there's something uncanny about loving this sort of autopsy as such.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I don't know what philosophy you have been doing, see nothing that could relate to scholasticism here

Johan Eddebo

I'm a Thomist. You know that attributed quote about straw?

And you're aware of Garrigou-Lagrange's reflections on the dangers of philosophy?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
This is a relevant quote (Lagrange):

In this discussion of retarded souls, a most important consideration should be noted: namely, that we must be on the alert to preserve in our souls the subordination of the natural activity of the mind to the essentially supernatural virtues, especially to the three theological virtues.

These three infused virtues and their acts are certainly very superior to the natural activity of the mind necessary for the study of the sciences, of philosophy, and of theology. To deny this truth would be a heresy; but it is not sufficient to admit it in theory. Otherwise we would end by really preferring the study of philosophy and theology to the superior life of faith, to prayer, to the love of God and of souls, to the celebration of the holy Sacrifice of the Mass, which would be hurriedly celebrated without any spirit of faith, in order to give more time to a piece of work, to an intellectual overloading that would remain quite empty and fruitless, because it would be destitute of the spirit that ought to animate it.

Thus we would fall into an evil intellectualism, in which there would be something like the hypertrophy of the reasoning powers to the detriment of the life of faith, of true piety, and of the indispensable training of the will. Then charity, the highest of the theological virtues, would no longer truly hold the first place in the soul, which might remain forever retarded and in part fruitless.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

You are aware that St. Paul endorses the strictly Geocentric version of Prima Via in Romans 1?

I think he primes Garrigou-Lagrange, and as for St. Thomas, he may have regretted not having been an even sharper philosopher.

Johan Eddebo

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Rom. 1:18-20? I don't see how this implies geocentrism nor why Aquinas' First Way would have to relate to heavenly bodies -- that said, I'm not disregarding geocentrism, and there are interesting novel arguments for the position that build on contemporary scientific cosmology.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

What proofs of God were:

a) visible
b) and so since the creation of the world
c) and show specifically how God's power is inexhaustable?

Beauty could be several different limited spirits. Flagellum of the bacterium and modern cosmology were not available.

So, this leaves lots of things available and visible in the First Century AD, but the one most obviously implying that God has inexhaustable power is that He keeps turning the sky around us, with Sun, Moon and stars every day.

Johan Eddebo I think I also recall

"manifestum est et patet sensibus aliquid moveri, utputa sol" (maybe Leonine edition, maybe Contra Gentiles).

And Riccioli actually referred to God moving Heaven around us (which he didn't agree with, he preferred angels moving all celestial bodies East to West), as the proof given by St. Thomas, no doubt in Prima Via.