Online research in philosophy

This work contains five essays on modern philosophy entitled: Locke and the Frontiers of Common Sense; Fifty Years of British Idealism; Revolutions in Science; ...

This paper deals with Angus Kerr-Lawson's interpretation of George Santayana's philosophy of values. I claim that Kerr-Lawson reads Santayana correctly; however, as regards axiology, he reads Santayana literally and misses Santayana's engagement with it. Santayana's engagement with the philosophy of values is clearly seen when we use axiological terms and problematics in approaching his thought.

Memorial discussion of the work of George Santayana on the occasion of his 100th birthday.

Santayana's epiphenomenalism is best understood as part of his thinking about teleology and final causes. Santayana makes a distinction between final causes, which he rejects, and teleology, which he finds ubiquitous. Mental causation is identified with a doctrine of final causes which he argues is an absurd form of causation. Thus mental causes are rejected and Santayana embraces epiphenomenalism.

Selections from the writings of George Santayana.

This paper is a contribution toward the clarification of the meaning and evolution of liberalism. Liberal values are distinguished from liberal social philosophy. Liberal values, specifically individuality, government by consent of the governed, and private property in a capitalist economy are modern despite their clear classical and medieval origins. Liberal social philosophy consists of ontological realism, epistemological individualism, and axiological teleology. Liberal social philosophy is classical, and it reflects an attempt to rationalize modern values with a classical philosophy. I argue that liberal social philosophy is seriously flawed, and when it is modified for modern contexts it is inimical to liberal values. Liberal values are better understood and more defensible, as well as more compatible with nonliberal values, when divorced from liberal social philosophy.

: This article explores Santayana's critique of Modern philosophy and its connections with his views of Nietzsche. The aim is to highlight, primarily, the importance of Santayana's critique for contemporary philosophers working in the shadow of Nietzsche. The resounding view of Nietzsche is that he is an anti, and/or postmodern thinker. Santayana's critique interestingly challenges this view.