Glad to hear from a new voice here, @Dominik_Kowalski. If you are so inclined, tell us a bit about yourself.
There isn´t too much to tell. I´m from Germany, I´m a medical student and I will roll in when the discussions become philosophical rather than purely scientific. I´ve been interested in the philosophy of religion and of science for quite some time, although in the latter, if you specialized in biology, chemistry or physics you are nowadays busy cleaning up the mess philosophical illiterate scientists leave behind when they take a new finding and present it to the public combined with an absolutely nonsensical worldview. So I can´t contribute anything new to the science here, but I can help when it comes to developing a coherent metaphysic.
I´m also a catholic.
I think we share a broad general agreement, Dominik. I look forward to hearing more from you.
Yes probably, but I´m not an ID proponent, A-T-philosophy is even quite critical of that. I will come in here from time to time, when it gets into the metaphysics.
How is AT philosophy critical of ID? Is it the movement or the individual arguments? BTW glad to have you here
[Post edited for prose and to correct the link to Amazon page]
Hi, Dominik. Like yourself, I have background on the philosophy and theology side. I won’t try to convert you to ID, but regarding ID and Thomism, there is some debate over the possibilities. I take it that you are following people like Edward Feser or Nicanor Austriaco for your understanding of where Thomism would weigh in on the issue, but there are other voices, equally well trained in A-T philosophy, who differ, such as Michael Chaberek, O.P.
In case it is of interest, the second edition of Michael Chaberek’s Aquinas and Evolution book is now out on Amazon. Amazon is selling both the Polish version (which I mention in case you happen to read Polish) and the revised English translation. Chaberek is a Dominican and therefore is trained in the subject. I’m not saying you have to agree with Chaberek against the others, but given the one-sided statements made by Feser, Austriaco, etc., and their habit of making claims about Aquinas (I mean claims related to the metaphysics of evolution and ID) without adequate textual support, Chaberek’s detailed, text-focused study of Aquinas is definitely worth reading.
If you order the revised English edition, make sure you don’t confuse it with the 2017 edition, which is also still up for sale on Amazon. I have given the link to the 2019 edition Amazon page. You will see that the Amazon product number and ISBN are different for the 2019 edition. If Amazon has both editions in stock, you will want the newer one, with improved English translation and typos etc. cleaned up.
This topic was automatically closed 3 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.