Date sent: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 11:00:25 -0700 (PDT)

The parts Roger has written are in italics. The parts Toby has written are in normal text. 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

Toby: > aristotle thomas aquinas

Roger: I don't think I've read any of their stuff directly. I know Aristotle opened some important doors in how to think about the world, but he was so early in the process that most of his science side is now discounted.

yes, but not his ideas about existence itself

I don't recall what philosophic elements are attributed to him. Likewise, I don't recall what elements attributed to Aquinas.

well before you write let me you give a shorter-shorter-shorter summa (summa theologica) and st A and A's take on the soul.

> just out of curiosity -- contradictions?

All the stuff we've been talking about: size of universe, efficiency, knowing God's thinking...

oh

Date sent: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 07:26:07 -0700 (PDT)

Toby: I reviewed my Aristototle, who operated from a view of an eternal universe, he concluded, properly i think, that a small g god was needed to keep the heavenly bodies in motion or to sustain whatever kept them in motion. because anything in motion was not actualized, and only something perfectly actualized could supply the energy to have the universe change (reach its potential)

then i got to thinking about this unseen small g god and my God (the god of abraham, etc.) and how unseen he is... struggling with his unseen nature occurs in the psalms and on to today (yes me, i repeat the lamentation of old and no i have not heard god "speak to me" or seen any private visions" though i believe that others have.

the essential question is "Why do we have a creator who allegedly CARES SO MUCH

for us, but never shows himself." at least directly to each of us, why no revelation of such proportions we would know he existed and that he knew and cared for us..."

this comes in the strong form

and the weak form, the problem of evil

more on each later

Date sent: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 20:00:37 -0700 (PDT)

Toby: > I reviewed my Aristototle...

Artistotle was a white hot thinker with too small a knowledge base. His ideas about motion were good, but he was not aware of modern concepts of air and friction. This left him with the "axiom" that the natural state of matter was at rest -- which left him needing little gods to push things around. This flawed axiom lead to a cascade of misconceptions about motion... a symbol of the last of these misconceptions was university educators in Spain seriously asking how many angels could fit on the head of a pin, which carried on almost to the 20th century, I think.

true, since there is no perpetual motion, he was right that you need a force to keep the universe moving if it is eternal or an intial creator if it isn't. ergo: you still need that first cause, ironically Aristotle, like your froggie philosoph, thought there were a couple of layers before you got to the first cause (first mover) but he didn't get silly and say there was no ultimate causation of movement or creation.

It was Newton, and his Three Laws, that redefined the natural state of matter as "not accelerating", and this enormously simplified the laws of motion -- in space, and on Earth. Newton got rid of the little angels.

angels yes, first cause no, he believed in god the creator.

> then i got to thinking about this unseen small g god and my God....

> the essential question is "Why do we have a creator who allegedly CARES SO MUCH for us, but never shows himself."....

I would agree. My answer has been, "I'll never figure this one out, so I'm not even going to deal with it." I'm curious to hear how you deal with it.

on that, more tomorrow

The parts Roger has written are in italics. The parts Toby has written are in normal text. 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36