Comments on Marco Stango’s Essay (2017) "Understanding Hylomorphic Dualism" Comments on Marco Stango’s Essay (2017) "Understanding Hylomorphic Dualism"
Peirce's Secondness and Aristotle's Hylomorphism

Comments on Marco Stango’s Essay (2017) "Understanding Hylomorphic Dualism‪"‬

    • 1,99 €
    • 1,99 €

Description de l’éditeur

In 2017, Marco Stango makes a daring claim. He presents the claim and publishes it in the Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association (volume 91, pages 145-158).
The standard interpretation of Aquinas’s philosophy of mind does not live up to its reputation. Most discussions of the intellect start with weak hylomorphic dualism. The immaterial soul is the form of the material body, working in the same way that form configures matter.
He offers strong hylomorphic dualism as an alternative. The body substantiates the soul, in the same way that matter substantiates form.
Well, it’s not exactly that, it’s actually a hylomorphism so strong that it is no longer hylomorphic, but rather this: The intellect is immaterial. The body is material. The intellect does not configure the body. Nor does the body substantiate the intellect.
Or, something like that. So, I will stick to the strong hylomorphism where the body substantiates the soul. Plus, I will start at the point where the intellect is a power (or faculty) of the soul. That is a close approximation to the beginning of Strango’s journey.
In these comments, I associate elements of Stango’s argument to two Peircean structures, the dyadic nature of actuality and the triadic category-based nested form.
For example, the term, “hylomorphic dualism” instantiates two distinctions. “Hylomorphism” matches the dyadic nature of actuality. “Dualism” points to two distinctly different nested forms. Thus, weak and strong hylomorphisms belong to two different category-based nested forms, producing the opportunity for a third category-based nested form, whose actuality weighs one against the other.
These remarkable associations bring Stango’s bold argument from its Aquinian starting point to a location just beyond the reach of Baroque scholasticism. Peirce’s categories opens new ground beneath Stango’s remarks, intimating that the bedrock beneath Thomistic traditions includes triadic relations.

GENRE
Essais et sciences humaines
SORTIE
2020
8 juin
LANGUE
EN
Anglais
LONGUEUR
15
Pages
ÉDITIONS
Razie Mah
TAILLE
331,9
Ko

Plus de livres par Razie Mah

Comments on Mariusz Tabaczek's Arc of Inquiry (2019-2024) Part 2 Comments on Mariusz Tabaczek's Arc of Inquiry (2019-2024) Part 2
2024
Comments on Mariusz Tabaczek's Arc of Inquiry (2019-2024) Part 1 Comments on Mariusz Tabaczek's Arc of Inquiry (2019-2024) Part 1
2024
Comments on Michael Tomasello's Arc of Inquiry (1999-2019) Part 1 Comments on Michael Tomasello's Arc of Inquiry (1999-2019) Part 1
2024
Comments on Michael Tomasello's Arc of Inquiry (1999-2019) Part 2 Comments on Michael Tomasello's Arc of Inquiry (1999-2019) Part 2
2024
Comments on David Graeber and David Wengrow's Book (2021) "The Dawn of Everything" Comments on David Graeber and David Wengrow's Book (2021) "The Dawn of Everything"
2023
Comments on Daniel Estulin's Book (2021) "2045 Global Projects at War" Comments on Daniel Estulin's Book (2021) "2045 Global Projects at War"
2022

Autres livres de cette série

Comments on Christopher Austin and Anna Marmodoro's Essay (2018) "Structural Powers" Comments on Christopher Austin and Anna Marmodoro's Essay (2018) "Structural Powers"
2020
Comments on Janice Breidenbach’s Essay (2018) "Action, Agency, and Substance Causation" Comments on Janice Breidenbach’s Essay (2018) "Action, Agency, and Substance Causation"
2020
Comments on Christopher Austin’s Essay (2018) "A Biologically Informed Hylomorphism" Comments on Christopher Austin’s Essay (2018) "A Biologically Informed Hylomorphism"
2020
Comments on William Jaworski’s Essay (2018) "Psychology Without A Mental-Physical Dichotomy" Comments on William Jaworski’s Essay (2018) "Psychology Without A Mental-Physical Dichotomy"
2020
Comments on Daniel De Haan’s Essay (2018) "Hylomorphism and the New Mechanist Philosophy" Comments on Daniel De Haan’s Essay (2018) "Hylomorphism and the New Mechanist Philosophy"
2020
Comments on Miguel Espinoza's Essay (2012) "Physics and the Intelligibility of Nature" Comments on Miguel Espinoza's Essay (2012) "Physics and the Intelligibility of Nature"
2018