In this episode of our regular Q&A podcast we answer the seemingly simple question, what is ontology? We delineate three thinkers and three notions of the primary philosophical science, out of which only one qualifies as ontology. Those thinkers are Christian Wolff, Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas, whereas Wolff is the one who, in 18th Century, introduced ontology as a discipline in the "system of philosophical sciences". We proceed to demonstrate that ontology, as modern invention, is a far cry from what Aristotle and Aquinas considered inquiry into "being qua being" to be. Off course, there are number of random digressions into all kinds of related subjects, from traditional notion of genera/species relation, nature of ens universalis, Kant's blending of metaphysics with Wolffian system and more.
In the second part of our Q&A on corrosive influence of Heidegger, we turn to actual (not in the sense of presence, but in the sense of energeia) texts, i.e. to concrete examples of how he misinterprets Aristole's notions of energeia, kinesis, entelehia.
We conclude with overall evaluation of Heidegger's influence and remarks on low grade philosophy found online.
After going through a number of metaphysical notions, now, prompted by reader's query, we finally try to answer the simple question: what is metaphysics? The very fact that one can talk about metaphysics for a long time without explicitly defining what it is gives us an important clue about this type of knowledge, more common that most people think. We sum up some of the notions we expounded upon before and attempt to give definition of "science sought for" in both traditional sense and its modern, we would claim, misconception of the "system of science". Also we touch upon the possible reasons for shunning it by modern thinkers like adherents of "analytical" philosophy and say few words on technology and its latent metaphysical origin.
In this podcast we talk about the traditional notion of Being and its unwarranted "deconstruction" by modern philosophers, premier among them being Martin Heidegger. As a starting point we take a passage from Boethius' De Trinitate on how Being can never be a subject or substrate and juxtapose it to Heidegger's "phenomenological destruction of traditional ontology" which claims that Tradition does precisely the opposite. From there on we point out the importance of spacial metaphors in metaphysics, where what is "groundless" can mean both something below and something above. It is our contention that thinkers in the vein of Heidegger confuse this metaphysical above and below, and seek abyss where traditional thought sought heaven.
When someone says that being and one are convertible, what does this mean? In this podcast we'll explicate some of the distinctive qualities of this distinct indivisibility and undivided distinction. Also, we address the error of understanding explication of oneness as reduction to mathematical or physical unit, quite alien to traditional thought, and proneness of contemporary "back to origins" thinkers to perpetuating it especially when they're explicitly trying to refute it. We demonstrate how somewhat natural temptation to find one, indivisible and comprehensive historical point from which all the ills of our times can be explained is utterly in opposition to the One that transcends determinations and is the proper origin of time and what it brings forth.
Movie review that doesn't review the movie but the structure of Being instead ... that sounds silly, doesn't it? Not on Kali Tribune.
This is introductory podcast in the series dealing with Aristotle's Metaphysics through close reading of it's fourth book (gamma). The aim is to show how ancient philosophy dealt with most immediate reality disclosed to us in experience, and how it proves to be utterly abundant with meaning and mystery. In this introduction we explore the origin and the meaning of the expression ta meta ta fysika and it's use in every day life, as well as some obstacles postmodern men have to face in approaching it.