Zombie errors…

“The reader will observe that the Law of Causation does not state (as some modern writers most unfairly would have us believe) that Everything that exists has a cause. In this form it is quite untrue, since God is uncreated and uncaused. If it were worded thus, the objection, that we first formulate our universal law and then exclude from it Him on Whom all existence depends, would be perfectly valid. But this is entirely to misrepresent our position. It is one of the unworthy devices of the enemies of a priori philosophy.”

— (Fr. Richard F. Clarke, Logic [1895], pp. 78-79)



About The Codgitator (a cadgertator)

Catholic convert. Quasi-Zorbatic. Freelance interpreter, translator, and web marketer. Former ESL teacher in Taiwan (2003-2012) and former public high school teacher (2012-2014). Married father of three. Multilingual, would-be scholar, and fairly consistent fitness monkey. My research interests include: the interface of religion and science, the history and philosophy of science and technology, ancient and medieval philosophy, and cognitive neuroscience. Please pray for me.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Zombie errors…

  1. Tony Jokin says:

    Very interesting. I ended up following some of his internal links and ended up on this one and read the whole thing


    I have to say, it made me want to buy the book Aquinas that he refers frequently in that post.

    Still, I cannot help but wonder if anyone changes position because of the Cosmological argument. If an argument itself is so intricate and complex that one needs a deep understanding of metaphysics to even fully grasp what the argument is saying, I think it will probably be less effective at getting people to abandon atheism.

  2. Tony:

    I would definitely invest in Feser’s Aquinas book, if you’re really interested. Extremely lucid, very current, and quite comprehensive. The cosmological argument may not win many souls (but that is arguable), but Feser’s larger project is that, until people take classical metaphysics seriously, they will never take seriously classical Catholic theology. So restoring the one helps buttress the other.

  3. Tony Jokin says:

    Thanks Codg. I think I might definitely get this text.

    I wanted to study St. Thomas sometime back and I purchased a book by Étienne Gilson titled Christian Philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas. That was… well… a little over my head. I even attempted to read the same chapter over and over again with relatively little progress until I abandoned it altogether haha.

    But reading the preview of the Aquinas book in amazon, I had a different experience. So it might help me more 🙂

Be kind, be (relatively) brief, be clear...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s