From the time of the thinkers of ancient Greece, the question of what can be said about the existence and nature of God has been debated by many philosophers and theologians. In Theism and Atheism: The Eternal Debate, F.F. Centore presents a broad analysis of the major positions that address the question and the thinkers who have contributed to the debate. This is an admirably lucid and thorough examination of the history of natural theology. Covering the material in a (...) thematic rather than in a strictly chronological way, Centore draws out the key positions on topics such as the relationship of science and religion, the problem of evil, Naturalistic and Supernaturalistic theism and the dispute between essence and existence. The proponents of the various positions are considered alongside their most explicit critics. Important thinkers dealt with in this work include Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Descartes, Pascal, Kant, Hume, Hegel, Nietzsche, Freud and Darwin. The diversity of exploration also goes beyond the Judeo-Christian tradition to look at Hinduism, Buddhism, Stoicism, Zoroastrianism, Confucianism and Classical Paganism. This work, however, is much more than a survey of the major historical arguments and rebuttals concerning God's existence and nature. Overall, it is a work by a well-established Catholic philosopher who concludes that God's existence and nature are indeed compatible with modern science, human freedom and the existence of evil in the world. (shrink)

Contemporary society, according to Centore, is dominated by a post-modern philosophical world-view. Lacking until now, from the many works that have been written on post-modernism, is one that scrutinizes its fundamental assumptions and presuppositions. Being and Becoming attempts to fill this need by synthesizing the key developments in contemporary post-modernism. By taking the reader through the various historical periods and developments which have led to the current situation, Centore shows what is now taken for granted by the vast (...) majority of people is not necessary for either philosophical or theological reasons. (shrink)

The adventurous hero Indiana Jones makes his long-awaited return to theaters this summer! Filled with the intrigue and drama characteristic of all the classic Indiana Jones films, the fourth release is all brought to life by an incredible soundtrack. Selections from Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull features popular music from the film, as composed by Academy Award winner John Williams, plus 8 pages of color artwork straight from the movie. This book is part of an instrumental (...) series arranged for Flute, Clarinet, Alto Sax, Tenor Sax, Trumpet, Horn in F, and Trombone. The arrangements are completely compatible with each other and can be played together as solos. Each book contains a carefully edited part that is appropriate for the Level 2–3 player, and a fully orchestrated accompaniment CD. The CD includes a demo track of each song, which features a live instrumental performance, followed by a play-along track. A piano accompaniment book (optional) is also available. It includes a CD that features various instrument demo tracks from the series. Titles include: *Raiders March* *The Adventures of Mutt* *The Journey to Akator* *Marion’s Theme* *Irina’s Theme*. (shrink)

CCP is not, generally speaking, well-respected today. This is not so much because CCP is impure, being, as it is, all mixed up with dogmatic statements drawn from Scripture, Church teachings, and so on, but because CCP is impure in a certain way. All philosophies are always and everywhere impure in the sense of always and everywhere being embedded in some particular time and culture. Philosophies are written by philosophers, each of whom is taught many things at his mother’s knee (...) long before he ever becomes a philosopher. What he is taught, though, will vary, and some doctrines, it would seem, are more damaging than others to what today is considered good philosophizing. My purpose in this paper is to set out the obnoxious form of impurity which is generally thought to invalidate CCP, and then briefly to provide some hints as to why the situation is not at all as bad as the critics make it out to be. (shrink)

Can one deny the intelligibility of “extramental nonbeing” in pure ontology while affirming its intelligibility in physics? When one sweeps the heavens clean of matter does one also necessarily affirm the existence of absolute nonbeing in those “clean” spaces? Does talking about space necessarily mean talking about nonbeing? How could there possibly be “space” which is not absolute nothingness? How, if at all, can statements about space be reconciled with such self-contradictory statements as “What is not, is“?The purpose of this (...) brief paper is not to argue, within the context of the physical sciences, about whether or not there exist voids or absolutely empty spaces in the universe. Neither is it to discuss the existence or nonexistence of the aether. And although I shall be using texts taken from several famous historical figures, my purpose is not primarily historical. (shrink)

This book brings together the chief elements of 3,000 years of philosophy as found mainly in Western thought in a highly readable form. The work concentrates on problems and issues much more than on names, dates and places. he book includes an extensive bibliography of works related to the main themes of the text, followed by a long list of names and dates of leading historical figures in various fields, especially in science, philosophy, and theology.

DOES the sun travel around the earth or does the earth travel around the sun? Our limited objective in this article is to see how one seventeenth century thinker of note, thinking on the topic previous to the publication of Newton’s Principia, answered this question and why he gave the answer that he did. Our procedure will be to set out the views of Copernicus’ important predecessors, the view of Copernicus, the view of Hooke, and then to place these views (...) in their wider historical context. (shrink)

This work is a paperback reissue, with an added preface, of a 1959 anthology of essays on the background to Darwin’s Origin of Species. It was meant to serve two purposes. One was to honor Darwin on the hundredth anniversary of his famous book. The other was to honor Professor A O Lovejoy, the Johns Hopkins scholar who did so much to popularize process philosophy in the United States. About half of the new preface is devoted to an extensive, though (...) by no means complete, bibliographic note on recent Darwinian scholarship. Over-all this is an excellent volume. It does, however, have certain shortcomings. (shrink)

THE aim of this paper is to examine the reaction of an Aristotelian and a Cartesian to Newton’s 1672 paper on light and colors. The Aristotelian is Francis Hall, an English Jesuit who held the position of professor of mathematics in the Jesuit college at Liège. In his own time he was better known by his pseudonym Francis Line or Linus. The Cartesian is Robert Hooke, the Curator of Experiments to the Royal Society of London since its official beginning in (...) 1662. It is not my purpose to pass judgment on Newton’s theory itself or to analyze his replies. Rather it is to investigate the ways in which two intellectual attitudes, representing two different carry-over philosophical orientations, approached the same problem. I shall set out Newton’s main thesis, the criticisms directed against it by Hooke and Linus and then evaluate the merits and demerits of each approach. (shrink)

THE aim of this paper is to examine the reaction of an Aristotelian and a Cartesian to Newton’s 1672 paper on light and colors. The Aristotelian is Francis Hall, an English Jesuit who held the position of professor of mathematics in the Jesuit college at Liège. In his own time he was better known by his pseudonym Francis Line or Linus. The Cartesian is Robert Hooke, the Curator of Experiments to the Royal Society of London since its official beginning in (...) 1662. It is not my purpose to pass judgment on Newton’s theory itself or to analyze his replies. Rather it is to investigate the ways in which two intellectual attitudes, representing two different carry-over philosophical orientations, approached the same problem. I shall set out Newton’s main thesis, the criticisms directed against it by Hooke and Linus and then evaluate the merits and demerits of each approach. (shrink)

IT cannot be denied that metaphysics is an unpopular subject among many contemporary professional philosophers. Historically speaking, the reasons for this present-day phenomenon can be traced back to the rise and spread of philosophical Idealism over the past several hundred years. What is common to all Idealistic philosophers is the orientation adopted at the beginnings of their philosophical investigations: they attempt to unravel the mysteries of being by viewing being through ideas. Their prime concern becomes the analyses of terms and (...) propositions. Indeed, this approach is so commonplace that many thinkers cannot imagine doing things in any other way. In our age this approach shows up very clearly in the way many thinkers are perfectly willing to talk about propositions but possess a deep aversion to talking about what a thing is in itself. It is sometimes said that we currently live in a philosophical era dominated by materialism. It would seem, however, that the situation is the other way around; discussions of intramental entities take up most of the time of many philosophers, at least of non-scholastic philosophers. Most scholastic philosophers still want to talk about things i.e. extramental entities. Most of their contemporary philosophers, on the other hand, are perfectly content talking about propositions. If the latter is ever to move closer to the former group, it would seem that what is required is a more materialistic attitude on their part, in the sense of a greater concentration on things as opposed to ideas. (shrink)

This work penetrates difficult ethical issues by examining human experience and reasoning in conjunction with actual choices of action.

ALFRED NORTH WHITEHEAD has been dead now for almost a quarter-century. Nevertheless, his influence lives on. This fact is revealed both by the appearance in recent years of scholarly books directly about Whitehead and by works bearing the unmistakable stamp of direct Whiteheadian influence.

ALFRED NORTH WHITEHEAD has been dead now for almost a quarter-century. Nevertheless, his influence lives on. This fact is revealed both by the appearance in recent years of scholarly books directly about Whitehead and by works bearing the unmistakable stamp of direct Whiteheadian influence.

Studying human beings as physicists have studied the world for so many years has been the aim of a substantial number of social scientists at least since the time of Comte. Basing their claim upon a certain metaphysics and anthropology, such thinkers have insisted over and over again that such a program is at least theoretically possible. But can a program, which cannot be put into practice on even a very rudimentary level, really be theoretically possible in the first place? (...) Physicists have known that space travel was theoretically possible ever since the seventeenth century and have made steady progress towards its implementation up until its recent fulfillment. Instead of making progress, however, the social scientists are still talking about what they are going to do some day when they acquire the tools for doing it. Even this would not be so bad, provided they knew exactly what kind of tools they needed and how to manufacture them. Today, though, even this pre-preliminary stage has not been brought to a successful conclusion. Some thinkers among the ranks of social scientists, however, are beginning to see their way clear to a better understanding of their collective predicament. H M Blalock Jr., professor of Sociology at the University of North Carolina, appears to be one of these thinkers. (shrink)