{"id":504,"date":"2016-01-24T13:12:42","date_gmt":"2016-01-24T13:12:42","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/?p=504"},"modified":"2017-10-31T15:40:37","modified_gmt":"2017-10-31T15:40:37","slug":"appendix-z20-take-2-where-is-competing-the-metaphysics","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/?p=504","title":{"rendered":"APPENDIX Z20: Take #2: Where Is Competing The Metaphysics?*"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
APPENDIX Z20:<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
T<\/span>ake #2: Where Is The
\n Competing\n <\/div>\n
Metaphysics?* <\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
The Bard Symposium \u2018take<\/span>\u2019\n <\/div>\n
The three basic gr<\/span>oups of
\n academics represented at the\n <\/div>\n
April 2012 international academic conference at
\n Bard\n <\/div>\n
College (NY) on Summa Metaphysica<\/span> were:\n <\/div>\n
A) Religious philosophers<\/div>\n
B) Secular Philosophers\/Metaphysicians<\/div>\n
C) Scientists<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Conference co-Chair Gary Hagberg** posed the
\n (above-\n <\/div>\n
noted) question, (see title above) to the assemblage
\n of\n <\/div>\n
academics:<\/div>\n
answers<\/div>\n
(A)<\/div>\n
Group A academics leaned-towar<\/span>ds the proposition\n <\/div>\n
that each of their respective r<\/span>eligions could potentially\n <\/div>\n
embrace Summa<\/span> as an
\n elegant dovetailing add-on to <\/span><\/span><\/div>\n
their respective belief systems.<\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n
\n
(B)<\/div>\n
Group B academics leaned-towar<\/span>ds the proposition\n <\/div>\n
that Neoplatonism as a whole was the closest
\n (albeit\n <\/div>\n
indirectly) competing neo-metaphysics. However<\/span>,\n <\/div>\n
Neoplatonism is more a modality<\/span> of looking at pr<\/span>oblems,\n <\/div>\n
rather than a particular speci\ue0c4c all-embracing
\n intellectual\n <\/div>\n
or metaphysical structure. Indeed, we all operate on
\n a\n <\/div>\n
Neoplatonism platform. Meaning, that there was,
\n indeed,\n <\/div>\n
no salient viable directly competing metaphysics.\n <\/div>\n
[However<\/span>,
\n respectfully<\/span>, Aristotelianism and its Jewish\n <\/div>\n
offshoot, Maimonidean philosophy ar<\/span>e important historical\n <\/div>\n
systems, still embraced by many<\/span>, which do so-to-speak <\/span><\/span>\n <\/div>\n
on signi\ue0c4cant levels compete with Summa<\/span>. Daniel Khalil\n <\/div>\n
directly and articulately deals with \u2013 and exposes
\n the fatal <\/span><\/div>\n
metaphysical gap in \u2013 Aristotle and Maimonides in his <\/span>\n <\/div>\n
Forewor<\/span>d to Summa II: God
\n and Good.]\n <\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
(C)<\/div>\n
Group C academics went along with Oxfor<\/span>d scientist and\n <\/div>\n
Conference pr<\/span>esenter Peter Atkins\u2019 \u201cinteresting\u201d mini- <\/span><\/span>\n <\/div>\n
metaphysics that \u201cpurposeless decay\u201d was the allegedly <\/span><\/span><\/div>\n
more powerful and competing metaphysics. Atkins\n <\/div>\n
repeatedly articulates this theme in his published
\n works.\n <\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
When challenged as to whether he preferr<\/span>ed to view\n <\/div>\n
himself as the product of Birnbaumian Quest for\n <\/div>\n
Potential<\/div>\n
\u221e<\/div>\n
\/Extraordinariation or of Atkinsonian purposeless <\/span><\/div>\n
decay, Atkins responded with the latter<\/span>, to the dismay of <\/span><\/div>\n
the assemblage.<\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n
\n
In Summation<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
re: the pr<\/span>oposed
\n \u201cPurposeless decay\u201d metaphysics:<\/span><\/div>\n
Thus, the prime direct challenge to the Potential\/\n <\/div>\n
Extraordinariation metaphysics, is, accor<\/span>ding to at least\n <\/div>\n
one segment of the Conference, only \u201cpurposeless\n <\/div>\n
decay<\/span>.\u201d Frankly<\/span>, hard-to-believe that this pessimistic\n <\/div>\n
quick-\ue0c4x \u2013 which has no formal structure and no <\/span>\n <\/div>\n
answers to many key questions \u2013 is even quali\ue0c4ed
\n to\n <\/div>\n
challenge. Aside from the fact that the \u2018visceral
\n appeal\u2019\n <\/div>\n
of \u201cpurposeless decay\u201d is not, shall we say<\/span>, stellar<\/span>. <\/span><\/span><\/div>\n
As well, it has neither a \u201cstarting point\u201d nor
\n signi\ue0c4cant\n <\/div>\n
\u201cintegration\u201d beyond a few speci\ue0c4c physics issues.\n <\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
re: the Aristotelian metaphysics:<\/span><\/div>\n
As noted above, Khalil deals with the fatal gap in\n <\/div>\n
Aristotelian or neo-Aristotelian systems.***<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Conclusion:<\/span><\/div>\n
Thus, with no readily available seriously
\n challenging\n <\/div>\n
metaphysics, we would need to juxtapose Summa<\/div>\n
against putative competing systems as they are<\/div>\n
potentially offer<\/span>ed-up.\n <\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
see also \u201cAppendix Z4: Where is Option B?\u201d<\/div>\n
** Chairman, Dept. of Philosophy<\/span>, Bard College<\/span><\/div>\n
***<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
For the recor<\/span>d, Orthodox
\n Jewish scientist and academic Khalil\n <\/div>\n
does not challenge the religious doctrines of
\n Orthodox Jewish\n <\/div>\n
Maimonides. Nor does Khalil truly need to do so in
\n order to challenge\n <\/div>\n
the metaphysics of Maimonides. [Please note that
\n Khalil and I are in-\n <\/div>\n
sync on both fronts her<\/span>e.]\n <\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

APPENDIX Z20: Take #2: Where Is The Competing Metaphysics?* The Bard Symposium \u2018take\u2019 The three basic groups of academics represented at the April 2012 international academic conference at Bard College (NY) on Summa Metaphysica were: A) Religious philosophers B) Secular Philosophers\/Metaphysicians C) Scientists Conference co-Chair Gary Hagberg** posed the (above- noted) question, (see title above) […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/504"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=504"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/504\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":520,"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/504\/revisions\/520"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=504"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=504"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=504"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}