Religions

Research

10 pages, 179 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Science and Philosophy in a Thomistic Anthropology of Sexual Difference

by John DeSilva Finley

Religions 2024, 15(9), 1026; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15091026 - 23 Aug 2024

Viewed by 856

This essay examines the relation between scientific inquiry and philosophical thought in the context of a Thomistic account of human sexual difference. I begin by considering Thomas’s own view and its explicit though brief appeal to biological observation. In particular, I focus on [...] Read more.

This essay examines the relation between scientific inquiry and philosophical thought in the context of a Thomistic account of human sexual difference. I begin by considering Thomas’s own view and its explicit though brief appeal to biological observation. In particular, I focus on his claim that being male or female stems more from a substance’s matter than from its form. Then, I look at a fairly recent exchange between William Newton and myself, in which, drawing upon Thomistic thought in the context of contemporary science, we argued opposing positions. Mine held that sex stems more from form than from matter, while Newton maintained that Thomas’s original position is better. In reviewing this exchange, I note strengths in Newton’s argument and suggest a further distinction, even while concluding that my fundamental position is still a better account. Lastly, I turn to further questions and the necessity of continued partnership between philosophy and science. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Aquinas and the Sciences: Exploring the Past, Present, and Future)

12 pages, 260 KiB

Open AccessArticle

A Plea to Thomists: Will the Real Darwinian Please Stand Up? On Some Recent Defenses of the Fifth Way

by Amerigo Barzaghi

Religions 2024, 15(6), 736; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15060736 - 17 Jun 2024

Viewed by 1407

Abstract

In this paper, we discuss with some contemporary Thomists the possibility of re-actualizing Thomas’s fifth way to God in the science–theology dialogue. We start with a reference to Spinoza’s critique of teleology in light of some recent Spinoza studies, and after summarizing several [...] Read more.

In this paper, we discuss with some contemporary Thomists the possibility of re-actualizing Thomas’s fifth way to God in the science–theology dialogue. We start with a reference to Spinoza’s critique of teleology in light of some recent Spinoza studies, and after summarizing several Thomistic defenses of Aquinas’s teleological argument, we interpret that critique as targeting the fifth way as well. We then focus on Darwin’s impact on biological design arguments. We argue that his naturalistic explanation of biological teleology also affects the fifth way. The distinction between internal-Aristotelian and external-Platonic conceptions of teleology does not seem to be able to protect the teleological argument from a Darwinian critique. We conclude by stressing the importance and fruitfulness of Thomas’s thought for contemporary interdisciplinary dialogue, provided that Darwin’s impact on the biological version of the fifth way is taken into due account. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Aquinas and the Sciences: Exploring the Past, Present, and Future)

15 pages, 273 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Presence in the Dark: Joint Attention and the Varying Modes of Being Aware of God’s Presence

by Juan Camilo Espejo-Serna, John Anderson P-Duarte and Jorge Eduardo Arbeláez

Religions 2024, 15(6), 701; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15060701 - 6 Jun 2024

Viewed by 1149

Abstract

This paper examines the phenomenon of joint attention and its relevance in understanding the modes of awareness of the presence of God. It explores the perspectives of Eleonore Stump and Andrew Pinsent, as well as the challenge raised by Donald Bungum, with the [...] Read more.

This paper examines the phenomenon of joint attention and its relevance in understanding the modes of awareness of the presence of God. It explores the perspectives of Eleonore Stump and Andrew Pinsent, as well as the challenge raised by Donald Bungum, with the aim of reaching a better understanding of a distinct way of being ‘moved by God in a divine way’. According to Stump and Pinsent, joint attention can deepen our understanding of our relationship with God, emphasizing the importance of sharing attention with Him and making better sense of the way humans may be moved in a divine way. However, Bungum challenges this view by suggesting the possibility of closeness without explicit awareness. The paper concludes by emphasizing the need for a nuanced understanding of awareness and the presence of God in our spiritual lives, for our connection with God can manifest in diverse ways different from traditional accounts of explicit awareness. We suggest that a view of joint attention centered in action may be more suitable for an attempt to make sense of what ‘to be moved in a divine way’ amounts to. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Aquinas and the Sciences: Exploring the Past, Present, and Future)

21 pages, 320 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Freeing the Will from Neurophilosophy: Voluntary Action in Thomas Aquinas and Libet-Style Experiments

by Daniel D. De Haan

Religions 2024, 15(6), 662; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15060662 - 28 May 2024

Viewed by 1391

Abstract

This essay presents a substantive Thomist response to neurophilosophy’s main experimental challenge to free will: the Libet-style experiments on the neural antecedents of conscious voluntary actions. My response to this challenge will disclose that Thomists are rationally justified in rejecting both the conclusions [...] Read more.

This essay presents a substantive Thomist response to neurophilosophy’s main experimental challenge to free will: the Libet-style experiments on the neural antecedents of conscious voluntary actions. My response to this challenge will disclose that Thomists are rationally justified in rejecting both the conclusions of neurophilosophy skeptics of free will, and more fundamentally, the rival philosophical conceptions of voluntary action and free will that were chosen to be operationalized in these neuroscientific experiments. I show how the Thomists’ alternative conception of human action justifies a significantly different interpretation of Libet-style experiments, one which reveals the psychological phenomenon targeted by these experiments is miscategorized as a voluntary action. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Aquinas and the Sciences: Exploring the Past, Present, and Future)

22 pages, 363 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Science-Engaged Thomism

by Simon Maria Kopf

Religions 2024, 15(5), 591; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15050591 - 11 May 2024

Viewed by 1984

Abstract

This article discusses a form of Thomism that has emerged in the field of science and theology, which is termed “Science-Engaged Thomism” (SETh), following the recent and growing movement of Science-Engaged Theology (SET). After a brief introduction of SET, various definitions and essential [...] Read more.

This article discusses a form of Thomism that has emerged in the field of science and theology, which is termed “Science-Engaged Thomism” (SETh), following the recent and growing movement of Science-Engaged Theology (SET). After a brief introduction of SET, various definitions and essential features of SET and SETh are introduced and discussed, highlighting their similarities and differences. To showcase the latter, the article presents recent examples of SETh. The objective is to suggest that SETh is a form of Thomism, although not necessarily a new form of Thomism. As such, SETh might be considered a complementary approach to SET. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Aquinas and the Sciences: Exploring the Past, Present, and Future)

13 pages, 233 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Neo-Thomism and Evolutionary Biology: Arintero and Donat on Darwin

by Gonzalo Luis Recio and Ignacio Enrique Del Carril

Religions 2024, 15(5), 579; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15050579 - 4 May 2024

Viewed by 1420

Abstract

Pope Leo XIII’s publication of Aeterni Patris (1879) was a major factor in the great revival of Thomistic thought in the late 19th and the first half of the 20th centuries. Among the authors that took up the challenge implicit in the Pope’s [...] Read more.

Pope Leo XIII’s publication of Aeterni Patris (1879) was a major factor in the great revival of Thomistic thought in the late 19th and the first half of the 20th centuries. Among the authors that took up the challenge implicit in the Pope’s document of bringing Aquinas and his thought into the intellectual debates of the times we find two interesting proposals. The first is that of Juan González Arintero, a Spanish Dominican, and the second one is that of Josef Donat, a Jesuit born and raised in the Austrian Empire. Arintero is mostly known in Catholic circles for his influential works on mysticism, but in fact he devoted much of his early work to the subject of evolution, and how it could interact with the Catholic faith in general, and with Thomism in particular. Donat is the author of a Summa Philosophiae Christianae, a collection that was widely read in Catholic seminaries well into the 20th century. In this paper we will focus on the differing ways in which these authors tackled the problems and questions presented by Darwinian evolutionism to the post-Aeterni Patris Thomism. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Aquinas and the Sciences: Exploring the Past, Present, and Future)

17 pages, 281 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Losing the Forest for the Tree: Why All Thomists Should (Not) Be River Forest Thomists

by Philip-Neri Reese O.P.

Religions 2024, 15(5), 569; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15050569 - 30 Apr 2024

Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1682

Abstract

One of the most influential and controversial schools of 20th century Thomism—especially in North America—is the “River Forest School” or “River Forest Thomism”. And one of the most influential and controversial theses associated with that school is the thesis that metaphysics cannot be [...] Read more.

One of the most influential and controversial schools of 20th century Thomism—especially in North America—is the “River Forest School” or “River Forest Thomism”. And one of the most influential and controversial theses associated with that school is the thesis that metaphysics cannot be established as a distinct and autonomous science unless one has already proven the existence of a positively immaterial being. The purpose of this paper is to show that River Forest Thomism cannot and should not be reduced to that controversial thesis. As such, rejection of the thesis cannot and should not constitute a rejection of the school. Indeed, as soon as we understand what River Forest Thomism was really about, it will become clear that all Thomists should be River Forest Thomists. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Aquinas and the Sciences: Exploring the Past, Present, and Future)

32 pages, 2244 KiB

Open AccessArticle

A Contemporary Aristotelian–Thomistic Perspective on the Evolutionary View of Reality and Theistic Evolution

by Mariusz Tabaczek

Religions 2024, 15(5), 524; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15050524 - 24 Apr 2024

Viewed by 3215

Abstract

This article presents a coherent and comprehensive proposal of a renewed contemporary Aristotelian–Thomistic approach to the evolutionary view of reality and the position of theistic evolution. Beginning with a proposal of a hylomorphically–grounded essentialist definition of species—framed within a broader revival of biological [...] Read more.

This article presents a coherent and comprehensive proposal of a renewed contemporary Aristotelian–Thomistic approach to the evolutionary view of reality and the position of theistic evolution. Beginning with a proposal of a hylomorphically–grounded essentialist definition of species—framed within a broader revival of biological essentialism—a constructive model of the Aristotelian–Thomistic metaphysics of evolution is being offered, together with a reflection on the alleged violation of the principle of proportionate causation in evolutionary transitions and the role of teleology and chance in evolution. The theological part of the article addresses a number of questions concerning the Thomistic school of theology in its encounter with the evolutionary worldview, including the question of whether God creates through evolution, the query concerning the concurrence of divine and created causes in evolutionary transitions, and the question regarding evolutionary and theological notions of anthropogenesis. A list of ten postulates grounding a contemporary Thomistic version of theistic evolution is offered as a conclusion to the research presented in the text. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Aquinas and the Sciences: Exploring the Past, Present, and Future)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 279 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Thomas Aquinas and Some Neo-Thomists on the Possibility of Miracles and the Laws of Nature

by Ignacio Silva

Religions 2024, 15(4), 422; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15040422 - 28 Mar 2024

Viewed by 1667

Abstract

This paper discusses how Thomas Aquinas and some Neo-Thomists scholars (Juan José Urráburu, Joseph Hontheim, Édouard Hugon, and Joseph Gredt) analysed the metaphysical possibility of miracles. My main goal is to unpack the metaphysical toolbox that Aquinas uses to solve the basic question [...] Read more.

This paper discusses how Thomas Aquinas and some Neo-Thomists scholars (Juan José Urráburu, Joseph Hontheim, Édouard Hugon, and Joseph Gredt) analysed the metaphysical possibility of miracles. My main goal is to unpack the metaphysical toolbox that Aquinas uses to solve the basic question about the possibility of miracles and to compare how his late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century followers solved the issue themselves. The key feature to differentiate the two approaches will reside in their use of different notions to account for the possibility of miracles, namely obediential potency for Aquinas and the laws of nature for the Neo-Thomists. To show why neo-Thomist scholars source to this notion, I also briefly discuss how the notion of the laws of nature emerged in the seventeenth century. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Aquinas and the Sciences: Exploring the Past, Present, and Future)

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

Aquinas and the Sciences: Exploring the Past, Present, and Future

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editors

Special Issue Information

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

Published Papers (9 papers)

Research

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI