Reply to Professor Anderson

Abstract
Before I come to Professor Anderson’s objections to the argument in question, I should like to clarify just a few points. The argument that I presented is taken immediately from Mortimer Adler’s presentation of it, so let us call it ‘Adler’s Argument,’ though in fact its origins go all the way back to Aristotle. My reading of Adler’s presentation of the argument was that he gave it in two different forms, one categorical, the other hypothetical. Both forms of the argument, of course, have effectively the same conclusion, which is, in the case of its categorical version, that “concepts are not physical beings” [proposition 3 for Professor Anderson] and, in the case of its hypothetical version, that “A concept is not an act of a bodily organ” [proposition 6 for Professor Anderson]. Now Adler concludes immediately from propositions 3/6 that “the power of conceptual thought is an immaterial power.” I argued in my original article that it was not obvious that this proposition was equivalent to propositions 3/6 and so I presented an additional argument to the bridge the gap [propositions a, b, c and d for Professor Anderson]. Let us call this ‘Casey’s Addendum.’.
Keywords Catholic Tradition  Contemporary Philosophy  History of Philosophy  Philosophy and Religion
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 1051-3558
DOI 10.5840/acpq199569419
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 30,370
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Reply to Professor Gerard Casey.Thomas Anderson - 1995 - American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 69 (4):619-620.
Remarks on Professor Cunningham's "Reply".James F. Anderson - 1949 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 10 (2):262.
Reply to Professor Brender and Professor Byrne.Phillip Cole - 2002 - Social Philosophy Today 18:197-206.
Professor F. Haverfield.J. G. C. Anderson - 1919 - The Classical Review 33 (7-8):165-166.
I. Mathematical Modeling of Election Predictions: Final Reply to Professor Aubert.Herbert A. Simon - 1983 - Inquiry : An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 26 (2):231 – 232.
Professor Anderson's Translation of the Edda.W. T. H. - 1877 - Journal of Speculative Philosophy 11 (1):109 -.
On Professor Martin's Beliefs.Alan Ross Anderson - 1962 - Journal of Philosophy 59 (21):600-607.
Social Contracts and Corporations: A Reply to Hodapp. [REVIEW]Thomas Donaldson - 1990 - Journal of Business Ethics 9 (2):133 - 137.
Logic and Professor Anderson.Gilbert Ryle - 1950 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 28 (3):137 – 153.
Some Features of Professor Anderson's Logic.W. A. Merrylees - 1929 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 7 (2):130 – 138.
Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total downloads
35 ( #151,259 of 2,193,769 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #145,873 of 2,193,769 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature