The inherent nature to have an end arises not from an extrinsic imposition in an already existing being, but insofar as the essence of something received existence from God. In this sense, while the teleos is dependent upon God as an extrinsic agent, it’s given in an essential series of contingency rather than an accidental one. It would therefore be simultaneously inherent with its being, as opposed the an essentialist notion of something existing as such then ascertaining an end.
In this way we cannot really arrive at a notion of teleos from an accidental series of contingency. We might have an inference of it via probability, but the deductive work of the metaphysics of Aristotle and Aquinas’ work On Being and Essence seem to fundamentally underlie the argument. Whereas material cause and agent cause cannot reach such a conclusion if studied in isolation from form and compositional contingencies.
Interesting essay. You have read Fr. Chaberek. Do you know he is an intelligent design advocate as well as a Dominican priest well versed in Thomism?
Arguments can be made both from science and philosophy. It is not necessary to choose one over the other. They support one another. As what we know of science grows, and the amazing discoveries increase, I suspect that Aquinas would make use of this new knowledge in his arguments.
We hope to release a book soon that deals with many aspects of Catholic teaching that are absolutely consistent with the claim that we are the product of intelligent design and not chance and necessity. Paley agrees. Aquinas agrees. The science reveals it also. Hurrah! This should be cause for celebration.
Being and essence are imparted by God. How that is done we don't know. The Church teaches we receive our souls from God at the moment of conception. Our souls (now I am out on a philosophical limb) "inform" our bodies. Together they bring into being who we are meant to be--unique human beings. I can speculate a lot here based on what I know of developmental biology ( the area of my PhD) but it would far exceed my knowledge of philosophy. But this I know. Science and philosophy point to the One Truth. They cannot conflict when rightly understood.
The inherent nature to have an end arises not from an extrinsic imposition in an already existing being, but insofar as the essence of something received existence from God. In this sense, while the teleos is dependent upon God as an extrinsic agent, it’s given in an essential series of contingency rather than an accidental one. It would therefore be simultaneously inherent with its being, as opposed the an essentialist notion of something existing as such then ascertaining an end.
In this way we cannot really arrive at a notion of teleos from an accidental series of contingency. We might have an inference of it via probability, but the deductive work of the metaphysics of Aristotle and Aquinas’ work On Being and Essence seem to fundamentally underlie the argument. Whereas material cause and agent cause cannot reach such a conclusion if studied in isolation from form and compositional contingencies.
Is there an article this is originating from
Interesting essay. You have read Fr. Chaberek. Do you know he is an intelligent design advocate as well as a Dominican priest well versed in Thomism?
Arguments can be made both from science and philosophy. It is not necessary to choose one over the other. They support one another. As what we know of science grows, and the amazing discoveries increase, I suspect that Aquinas would make use of this new knowledge in his arguments.
We hope to release a book soon that deals with many aspects of Catholic teaching that are absolutely consistent with the claim that we are the product of intelligent design and not chance and necessity. Paley agrees. Aquinas agrees. The science reveals it also. Hurrah! This should be cause for celebration.
Being and essence are imparted by God. How that is done we don't know. The Church teaches we receive our souls from God at the moment of conception. Our souls (now I am out on a philosophical limb) "inform" our bodies. Together they bring into being who we are meant to be--unique human beings. I can speculate a lot here based on what I know of developmental biology ( the area of my PhD) but it would far exceed my knowledge of philosophy. But this I know. Science and philosophy point to the One Truth. They cannot conflict when rightly understood.