Edward Feser

From Religions Wiki
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Edward C. Feser (born April 16, 1968) is an American philosopher. He is Associate Professor of Philosophy at Pasadena City College in Pasadena, California. He has been a Visiting Assistant Professor at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles and a Visiting Scholar at the Social Philosophy and Policy Center at Bowling Green State University in Bowling Green, Ohio.

He is best known for his writings on philosophy, especially his works on neo-scholasticism, and The Last Superstition: A Refutation of the New Atheism.

Arguments

As a Thomist he uses Aquinas' five proofs of the existence of God:

  1. The unmoved mover
  2. The cosmological argument
  3. The argument from contingency
  4. The argument from degree
  5. The teleological argument

In additon he has his own Five Proofs:

  1. The Aristotelian Proof: Argues that things need an unsustained sustainer of their existence. A combination of Unmoved mover and Preservation argument
  2. The Neo-Platonic Proof: Argues that compositions need a non-composite cause to keep them together. Preservation argument on compositions
  3. The Augustinian Proof: Argues that abstract things like numbers must exist in a divine mind. Related to the Argument from mathematical realism.
  4. The Thomist Proof: Argues that things, due to their existence not being part of their essence, depend on an external cause for their existence. A variant of the Argument from contingency
  5. The Rationalist Proof: Argues that things have an explanation for their existence with the only out of regress is a necessary being. A variant of the Leibniz cosmological argument

All of them except the Augustinian Proof can be disputed by arguing for a Metaphysics where existence is the default condition and where cessation of existence requires forces acting upon things to end their existence. The Augustinian Proof can be disputed by disputing the Thomist realism it is based on.

References