Academic Writings

The objective of this paper is to examine the thought of John Philoponus contra Aristotle, as it pertains to consciousness and its emergence, in light of both contemporary cosmology and philosophy. It will be argued that in an eternal universe the emergence of consciousness is an impossibility. The inspiration for this line of reasoning is found in Philoponus’ sixth century arguments against Aristotle on the eternity of the world. It will be shown that much of Philoponus’ argumentation is corroborated by contemporary cosmology and philosophy.

In this article, I examine a critical issue that is central to the Christian faith; one that has divided Western Christendom ever since. I will explore Martin Luther’s and Jacques Maritain’s positions on justification by faith. First, I will outline Luther’s view which is more accurately known as sola fide, that is, justification by faith alone. Second, I will outline Maritain’s understanding of faith and examine his criticism of Martin Luther in his Three Reformers (1925) which analyzes the coherence of Luther’s position. The introduction of Luther’s 95 theses is recognized by many as the incipient moment of the reformation. One may ask a practical question: where in our present context, can Catholics and Protestants situate themselves in this wider dialogue regarding justification? I will conclude with a brief reflection on this question.

In this paper, I wish to reflect on the psyche of the West with respect to the changing cultural trends involving Christianity, Islam, and the human person. I propose that we first understand the context we find ourselves in regarding the apparent confusion surrounding Islam in the West. Then, in the second section, I suggest that it will be useful to define and examine some terms, including religion, relativism, tolerance, and intolerance. This will help provide a clearer picture of some of the conflicting and confusing ideas circulating throughout the media, academic institutions, and everyday life. Third, it will be important to provide an examination of the discourse on apologetics while primarily focusing on Christian and Islamic apologetics.

In this paper, I wish to reflect upon the insistence on the use of gender-neutral language and its implications for freedom of speech in Canada. There has been much controversy in Canada over recent legislation that adds gender expression and gender identity as protected grounds under the Canada Human Rights Act, i.e., Bill C-16. Jordan B. Peterson, professor of psychology at the University of Toronto, has expressed his dissatisfaction with Bill C-16 and its implications for free speech. Peterson argues that free speech is the mechanism by which democracies have survived over the centuries! He has further argued that the imposition of language on people can have devastating effects. For example, there is a clear distinction between legislation concerning what one ought not to say, such as screaming “fire!” in a crowded cinema, and mandating speech about what one must say, such as compelling the use of gender-neutral pronouns. In order to understand the background behind Bill C-16 and to gather insights as to what is motivating certain cultural trends and what is at stake, I will examine two distinct philosophical approaches. First, we will examine the thought of Jordan Peterson, whom I would dub the “defender of objectivity.” Second, I will present some of the views of the postmodern epistemologist, Jacques Derrida. Derrida can be dubbed the “wishful mortician of the absolute” for his methodology of deconstructionism. Through examining these distinct approaches, I wish to put a clearer finger on the complex issues surrounding Bill C-16, political correctness, and free speech.

After having examined many of Teilhard’s writings and commentaries provided by both supporters and detractors, I am persuaded that one should not take an all or nothing approach to Teilhard.

Users who liked this:

In this paper, I examine three significant periods of the cosmological argument that exemplify the importance of contestation: first, Plato’s and Aristotle’s formulation of it; second, Philoponus’ own reactions and influence; and third, the contemporary state of such discourses. Contestation has an inestimable role in philosophical development and reflection, as will be demonstrated through the examination of such periods.

In this paper, I will argue that the best explanation for the origin of embodied human consciousness is grounded in God, as understood through the doctrine of divine simplicity. First, I will present a modern expression of Aquinas’ understanding of divine simplicity. I will focus on one of Aquinas’ main contentions, namely, the impossibility that God possesses any spatial or temporal parts. Second, I will offer a modern version of a cosmological argument that will fortify the doctrine of divine simplicity with respect to the implied transcendent cause. Third, for embodied consciousness to arise, given modern science, it must arise through an evolutionary process of some sort. I will take a theistic evolutionary approach. Such an understanding will be explored while providing a connection to Jacques Maritain’s view of human evolution as expressed in his sixth chapter of Untrammeled Approaches, titled “Toward a Thomist Idea of Evolution.” From there, I will tie the main three threads of this paper together.

This paper will examine the problem of suffering as it arises from both moral and natural evil from a Christian philosophical and theological perspective. Suffering on our planet is pervasive. We all experience it in one form or another. In western culture, we are bombarded through the media with the terrible tragedies that occur in our home country and abroad. Inevitably, we ask ourselves the following question, as Professor Ramon Martinez probes into his book, Sin and Evil: “Why does God permit suffering?” In order to address the question of suffering and its relation to the God of Christianity, we must understand what suffering is and how it affects humanity.