tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-936435279424511988.post8322297983452826438..comments2023-07-14T07:52:44.959-07:00Comments on Rocket Philosophy: The Teleological Argument from St Thomas Aquinas - The Fifth WayMartinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06038086497147379685noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-936435279424511988.post-88728682983391411642013-11-25T12:42:31.876-08:002013-11-25T12:42:31.876-08:00B is indeed a sort of in between state. That was A...B is indeed a sort of in between state. That was Aristotle's distinction between actuality and potentiality as a response to Parmenides, who said there was only actuality and non-existence.<br /><br />From this point on, it gets a bit tricky and I may be coming to the end of my knowledge. One can study Aristotle and Aquinas for years before really having a good grasp of it.Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06038086497147379685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-936435279424511988.post-67192448640721065152013-11-25T12:31:47.704-08:002013-11-25T12:31:47.704-08:00My understanding is that a flammable liquid (to us...My understanding is that a flammable liquid (to use your example) could be described accurately in the following ways:<br /><br />(A) It does not have the potential to turn into an oak tree.<br /><br />(B) It has the potential to catch fire.<br /><br />(C) It is not actually on fire at the moment.<br /><br />It seems to me that (A) is not part of reality and (C) is part of reality. But (B) seems to be in some in-between state. My (elementary) understanding of Aquinas is that he holds that the potency is in the substance and not solely in the mind of God.Jaymanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06413844619464733681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-936435279424511988.post-82207888324133207832013-11-25T12:14:09.923-08:002013-11-25T12:14:09.923-08:00The problem is that they are merely potentials tha...The problem is that they are merely potentials that are not yet actual. The "flammability" of a flammable liquid is a disposition, or potential, but does not exist yet. It cannot be observed, measured, etc. <br /><br />This is why empiricists generally reject dispositions. They are ephemeral.Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06038086497147379685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-936435279424511988.post-55195283798048440342013-11-25T12:10:34.493-08:002013-11-25T12:10:34.493-08:00Doesn't the final cause/potential exist, in so...Doesn't the final cause/potential exist, in some sense, in the object under discussion? If so, couldn't one counter the Fifth Way by saying the final cause exists in reality (premise 3 is false)?Jaymanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06413844619464733681noreply@blogger.com