Evolutionary Biology and Classical Teleological Arguments for <scp>G</scp>od's Existence

Rooney, James Dominic

doi:10.1111/heyj.12036

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Amato Masnovo (1880Masnovo ( -1955, faculty member and professor of medieval philosophy and metaphysics, was the leader of the school of philosophy that originated there (Neva 2002;Pagani 2012a). Masnovo admired the intellectual enterprise of his Belgian colleagues and offered his contribution to the dialogue with several philosophical exchanges, as well as with some papers in the journal of the institute (Pietroforte 2005;Gilbert 2008). The schools of Louvain and Milan-notwithstanding their differences and specificities-developed lines of inquiry whose first aim was elaborating a rigorous and simplified philosophy: one that would be able to dismiss the obsolete elements of classic philosophy and medieval scholasticism and, at the same time, to safeguard all those ancient and medieval achievements in philosophy that, in their eyes, should be considered as perennially valid.…”

Section: Louvain and Milanmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grounding Intelligibility, Safeguarding Mystery: A Neoclassical Reading of Ernan McMullin’s Legacy

Barzaghi

2024

Religions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper suggests a “neoclassical” reading of Ernan McMullin’s thought on science and theology. McMullin’s Augustinian convictions on God and the God–world relation coincide with those of some prominent scholars from two renowned schools of neo-scholastic philosophy of the twentieth century in Louvain and Milan. The school of Milan, thanks to the work of some disciples of its leading figure, Amato Masnovo, developed a neoclassical version of neo-scholasticism, articulating a fundamental theory of knowledge, as well as an essential, rigorous path to God. We recall the main tenets of a neoclassical path to God, and we interpret this path as a possible contribution to the science–theology dialogue, in line with McMullin’s Augustinism. A neoclassical approach to science and theology, with its rediscovery and reactualization of some ideas of classic philosophy in an interdisciplinary context, grounds the intelligibility of the universe and safeguards its mystery.

show abstract

Section: Louvain and Milanmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grounding Intelligibility, Safeguarding Mystery: A Neoclassical Reading of Ernan McMullin’s Legacy

Barzaghi

2024

Religions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…96 However, if you don't like deity theories, then at least one other option seems open. 97 All that is required for my response to the Euthyphro dilemma is a view that doesn't allow God to have been able to make different definitional essences or that the current one's be other 92 Feser (2013), Rooney (2013). 93 Murphy (2011, p. 160).…”

Section: Godless Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dis-positioning Euthyphro

Page

2017

Int J Philos Relig

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Euthyphro objection is often perceived, rightly or wrongly, as the king objection to theistic meta-ethics. This paper proposes a response that hasn't been much explored within the contemporary literature, based on the metaphysics of dispositions and natural law theory. The paper will first contend that there is a parallel between ways theists conceptualise God's role in creating laws of nature and the ways God creates goods. Drawing upon these parallels I propose a possible response to the dilemma, where this response parallels the dispositionalist response as to how God creates laws of nature. I do this by first explicating a natural law theory of goodness, then suggesting how the ontology of dispositions can be used in a novel way to account for goods, and finally by explaining how all this relates to the dilemma. I conclude the paper by posing some objections to myself and providing some replies.

show abstract

“…Kojonen, in a book that argues for The Compatibility of Evolution and Design (Kojonen 2021). 7 In the same vein, see also (Rooney 2009(Rooney , 2013. 8 For a careful analysis of this distinction in the science-theology dialogue see (McMullin 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Barzaghi

2024

Religions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Evolutionary Biology and Classical Teleological Arguments for God's Existence

Cited by 3 publications

References 22 publications

Grounding Intelligibility, Safeguarding Mystery: A Neoclassical Reading of Ernan McMullin’s Legacy

Grounding Intelligibility, Safeguarding Mystery: A Neoclassical Reading of Ernan McMullin’s Legacy

Dis-positioning Euthyphro

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About