Feser’s Case for God – Part 3: Actualization of Potential
FESER TAKES OWNERSHIP OF THE FIVE ARGUMENTS In Five Proofs of the Existence of God (hereafter: FPEG), Edward Feser presents five “proofs” or arguments, each of which was inspired by an historical philosopher (or two). However, Feser takes full ownership of these five arguments, so that none of these arguments is put forward as merely … Feser’s Case for God – Part 3: Actualization of Potential
Reply to Prof. Feser’s Response, (Part IV)
Ed, I am going to take the liberty of first replying to your response to my answer to your fourth question. I am going to do this because I think that this is where we most significantly clash, that is, where our fundamental disagreements are most apparent. I want to address these points right away, … Reply to Prof. Feser’s Response, (Part IV)
Naturalism and Objectively Horrifying Evils
A serious and thoughtful objection against metaphysical naturalism is that it cannot provide a basis for some of our deepest and most intuitive moral judgments. If so, a metaphysical naturalist could bite the bullet and say “so much for our deepest and most intuitive moral judgments!” Still, if this consequence could be avoided, it would … Naturalism and Objectively Horrifying Evils