tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5743370102334877264.post6667956176531400317..comments2023-04-05T09:07:08.419-07:00Comments on Fides et Ratio: Atomism and Its Irrelevance to Classical TheismAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07034462951274070391noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5743370102334877264.post-56321861823262299192014-11-19T10:30:28.751-08:002014-11-19T10:30:28.751-08:00Sure, I hold to the immateriality -- and the real ...Sure, I hold to the immateriality -- and the real existence -- of the human soul, or 'self'.<br /><br />"<i>We are, after all, the same persons we were a decade ago.</i>"<br /><br />Exactly. I am the same person, the same self, that I was several decades ago, despite that most, if not all, the molecules and atoms of which I am materially comprised have been replaced by other atoms and molecules several times over.<br /><br />On the other hand, if we sequentially replace all the parts of Perseus' Ship, and then reassemble the parts we've removed, what do we have? Is it that Perseus' Ship now exists in *two* instantiations? that *both* ships -- and we can see with our very eyes that there are now two "identical" ships where there was just one -- are the *same* ship? Of course not.<br /><br />Or, if we start with two "identical" ships, one of which was Perseus', and one of which was not, and sequentially <i>swap</i> "identical" parts between them, do both ship become simultaneously Perseus' Ship and *not* Perseus' Ship? Of course not.<br /><br />One could go on and on in like vein. The only solution to the paradox is that Perseus' Ship doesn't really exist -- it doesn't exist <i>intrinsically</i> -- but rather that we (who do exist intrinsically) <i>ascribe</i> existence to Perseus' Ship.<br /><br />The same reasoning applies to *most* physical objects of which we speak: sun, moon, stars, earth, mountains, rocks, and so on. It turns out that they don’t really exist -- for they have no <i>identity</i> nor “selfhood” -- but that we <i>ascribe</i> existence to them by speaking <i>as though</i> they possessed identity of selfhood.Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5743370102334877264.post-24688618266879371292014-11-17T09:42:31.761-08:002014-11-17T09:42:31.761-08:00One of the differences between the two of you (and...One of the differences between the two of you (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that you hold to the immateriality of the human soul. So, while non-living composite things do not really exist, living things do. In fact, I regularly cite the Ship Paradox as evidence for the immateriality of the human soul. We are, after all, the same persons we were a decade ago.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07034462951274070391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5743370102334877264.post-48715813316583425762014-11-15T23:20:48.311-08:002014-11-15T23:20:48.311-08:00"Peter van Inwagen, for instance, holds to me..."<i>Peter van Inwagen, for instance, holds to mereological nihilism: that no composite material thing really exists. He does, nevertheless, make an exception for living things.</i>"<br /><br />Sounds like me (and I'm an uneducated yahoo); I came to those conclusions all by myself in considering the 'Perseus' Ship Paradox'Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5743370102334877264.post-78744313913113475182014-11-04T13:20:53.581-08:002014-11-04T13:20:53.581-08:00Hi Dave,
A classical theist could be a mereologic...Hi Dave,<br /><br />A classical theist could be a mereological nihilist (very rare to find one, though, I'm sure), it seems to me, and even maintain the reality of formal and final causality so long as the cause in question is ultimately found in God. For example, if all that exists are quarks, it can still be asked whether certain composites of quarks have functions/purposes distinct from one another. I think atomism and mereological nihilism only succeed in pushing the question back a step.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07034462951274070391noreply@blogger.com