Talk:Edward Feser

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Icon sociology.svg This article contains information about one or more living persons.

Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats.
Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed.
If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

Icon christianity.svg

This Christianity related article has been assessed as SIGNIFICANTLY PROBLEMATIC in one or more ways. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

This article requires attention for the following reason(s):
  • Pitiful stub. Needs expansion and sources.

What to do about good faith edits that aren't good[edit]

I don't want to revert the guy, but this change by @Maxwell Hse isn't great. It includes lots of quotes and content, and "references" but doesn't stop along the way to make a point, it's dry and factual but not really informative. It also adds categories that don't exist, suggesting that he thinks this is wikipedia, and I'd really like a second pair of eyes on it. Thanks ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 22:11, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

On asking the stone what it's doing[edit]

This is wrong (not that I am a fanboy), but as per his guide to Aquinas he explicitly says there that this way of attack is wrong. Things don't have to consciously direct at anything (apart from conscious beings). All that matters in the efficient and the final cause is that they are tied together at this very moment and they inevitably lead to something. For example, the cup is falling down is the cause of it hitting the ground (final cause). It doesn't necessarily stretch all the way to its telos; telos you can ascribe to living beings or laws of physics, based on observations, but that's about it, nothing in particular for a stone. The important distinction is his distinction of effects by accident in which cause and effect are not bound in sequence and the ones in direct sequence, acting on each other at the same time, this is effects per se. — Unsigned, by: Maciejsitko / talk / contribs