Wednesday, February 8, 2017

Human Knowledge 'Completes' Nature

Entelechia: In Aristotle's thought---taking 'arete'-function, excellence to its 'telos'... What can this mean? Through and through functionalism takes nature as its own end. Transcendence is buried in immanence---function equals 'truth'.

'To know' is the function (arete) that Aristotle ascribes to the human being. The function of man is to know things. How? By completing nature---the act of human knowing is the final 'form' of things.

It has rarely been noticed that truth grows between man and the phenomena that actuality (nature)
presents. A phenomenon may come-to-presence but no one is there to receive it. The thing is completed when man knows this crocus and bee in immediate sensing. Truth is what a person does.... (note the irony). Man 'finishes' nature in the act of perception which is completed in knowledge. This process is the coming-to-true of truth. Man is the place where truth comes to stand and be (paraphrasing Heidegger). Finishing ('teleo') http://biblehub.com/greek/5055.htm

God is an 'absent Presence'---absent in nature, absent in human perception, absent in knowing the world. But present to faith seeking truth. Howso?

Knowing and all of its relations are the rational function of the human animal---The answer to the question: Why is it raining? follows.... It is raining so that man might know the enjoyment of rain and know the truth of the rain. But why? Toward what end (telos)? Knowledge is completely satisfied in its discovery of truth. And where there not another spiritual mental activity, one could find then and there the completed, naturalistic and entirely functional philosophy of Aristotle. Naming completes the thing and the adequate judgement of the name and the thing is the glue that binds this ensemble.

I am entirely in agreement with this "epistemology"---however, my intellect is not completely in agreement with this. It seems as though all transcendence is swallowed up in immanence. Such a view adequately expresses a buddhistic view if I am not mistaken.

I discover that in my grasping-knowing arete, there is still a further 'desire' to acknowledge truth in transcendence. The path of reason is blocked here, however, there is as it were an indirect method
(cf. Kierkegaard on 'indirect communication'). This is the role of faith. Here is how apostle Paul defines faith:

1Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. 2For by it the elders obtained a good report.
3Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. 

Knowing cannot make a path into the "unseen" or "hoped for" and yet the intellect possess a 'spiritual' means of accepting what will come-to-pass in advance. It can accept what is beyond the limit of the finite mind to grasp. And no matter how much one tries to fortify human knowing (for example with the accoutrements of scientific inquiry) It is a capacity to know that I know and to know that I will know, and to know that I have known. It is a gauge of truth. Were there no such measure, no such transcendence, neither would there be any means of grasping temporality. All would be presence for man, just as for the oak tree or the red fox. But since man can measure what has been against what is, he can mark time---he can ascertain what is true, or not true. Likewise in the future. 

There is no measure of gauge of truth if knowing is entirely embedded within an immanent epistemology. Transcendence "seals" knowing---allows me to say "I know"---hence it is the ground of personhood ("I am"). Otherwise It would simply be a knowing-in-the-world like a sponge or plasma--not a personally felt and grasped experience of squeezing the sponge (this is the essential difference that marks man from the sponge!) Man knows the sponge and names it, the sponge does no such thing.

Here is the key for understanding this essay: if all human knowing were ultimately the universe or nature itself coming to perfect itself through man's knowing, then truth would always consist in the judgement's  correct naming of a set of affairs adequate to the thing known. The dog yet chases her tail. Such knowledge is of value, albeit merely functional. But the human being yearns for 'truth' in a moral or ethical sense. What is true 'truth"? What makes truth "true"? To grasp true truth, one must employ faith---because what makes truth "true" is not visible and is not a thing discoverable in the world. Neither of course is this 'guarantor' of truth "out of this world". There is no need for an additional account of knowing (Aristotle's method) is sufficient. This is why Aquinas agreed to accept the psychology of Aristotle. There is no need for an additional transcendent thing (or super-thing) to secure the knowing of truth.

Thinking, knowing, truth are a going concern only for man---not for angels or rocks or dogs! And certainly not for God. The totality of knowing of the soul expresses all of the truth and knowledge of the universe. But it does so in a through and through functional grasp. Only the employment of faith "activates" or brings human knowing to a personal grasp. Stated mystically: God allows man to come to a complete grasp of the universe through their soul. Only by "aiming" at a personal, transcendent 'telos' does the human person fully grasp its being-in-the-world, its grasp of its being so, and the tranquility and joy that follows from knowing the truth. The sine qua non to such fulfillment is an act of faith: Heidegger calls it "Gelassenheit' or openness to being. Faith is what allows truth to be known---it is knowledge-squared. I know that I know that I know. Without faith one has the complete immanence of functional knowing, but no possibility of accounting (logos) how this knowledge comes-to-pass.


Tuesday, May 5, 2015

Exam Definition of 'phenomenology'

I am evaluating an exam on the subject of Aristotle's philosophy when I come upon this most magnificent phrase!

"Aristotle [...] said that the way we speak about things is itself a dimension of the phenomena themselves. It is something that comes to be and passes away (Student exam, Penn State University, April 2015)."

I am impressed with this student's interpretation. The 'phenomena' and the 'logos'  given together in an adequate expression of the encounter.

Friday, December 5, 2014

Essay from Summer '14: The Life of the Soul in the Rise of the Noosphere


In the following essay I will address several age-old problems concerning the soul through the lens of Teilhard’s ‘noosphere’. I will also consider whether the emergence of  ‘digital nervous system’ (IBM) can be considered in any way a good thing for humanity.

Part One: The Animate and the Inanimate
‘Animate’ is best rendered in our understanding as ‘en-souled being’----‘inanimate’ is taken as being bereft of an internal principle of motion---as is found in minerals and rocks. Note however, that very often that living being depends upon or is constituted with inanimate being. A case in point are vitamins and minerals so vital for nutrition. Paradoxically a bone within a living being is said to ‘live’ as long as the body lives, but when the body dies, the corpse gives proof that the bone is a calcified being which may be used for purposes that enhance life---ex)gardening with bone meal. Hence the inanimate kingdom is employed to serve the animate ends (telos) of life.

The modernistic view of life has tended to see the soul first of all as being laid upon the foundation of “simple” inanimate being---yet even in the mineral kingdom we notice that crystals grow!  Hence the question of whether a quartz crystal is a simple mineral soul is left unanswered in Aristotle’s psychology, or at least it is left as a kind of semantic debate concerning the classification of being into types of ‘souls’. How one views this matter is important when one considers the rise of living phenomena in the cosmos. Viewed 4 dimensionally, that is in terms of time-space where one instead of seeing beings in space unfolded in time, one sees the entire coming to be of the universe as an emergent cosmic process---this is the view undertaken by the French paleontologist, Teilhard de Chardin.

In The Phenomenon of Man Teilhard sketches the development of life as an evolutionary process which dates the mineral and carboniferous eras, indeed the earliest burgeoning of the infant universe in terms of matter that is undifferentiated into animate or inanimate being. And yet, it appears that life forms emerge from that which is pre-life whether animate or not. 

Evolution then demarcates the era of plants and grasses and vegetative ‘souls’. This vegetative soul is a kind of life which builds upon mineral being [visualize a seedling with tender roots in mineral rich soil] to emerge as a life form that is capable of growth---movement (heliotropism) and blossoming blooming!

The insect realm is the oldest animal life from found on our planet and is by far the most prolific---the order of hymenoptera---ants, bees, wasps and their kind present yet another kind of soul.

The life of mamals and the warm-blooded animals possesses yet another soul---one that is cumulatively {mineral} vegetative- animal. The animal soul is ‘laid upon’ the vegetative and mineral souls. Additional psychological attributes follow from this “new” level of “biological” organization.

This brings us at last to the question of whether our own soul---the biped social mammal with reason (Aristotle’s definition). The mammal soul brings with it cognitive function such as memory, mobility, socialization---for example in rabbits one finds much of the behavior emerges from the fact of breastfeeding, with the maternal womb as the locus of embryogenesis---these core requirements translate into social practices such as nesting, nurturing, affection, grooming---one sees all of these traits in a rabbit colony. And along with a few other changes one sees these traits (sheltering, nestbuilding) in the human species as well. One also sees sexual differentiation, territorial in-fighting, the hearth, attempt at mastering fire and specialized rituals and cults concerning death. Later on in the human record one sees the emergence of specialized rituals surrounding marriage and child-rearing, and so on and so forth.

Finally one sees entire cultures and civilizations who have elaborated specific rituals for sport, commerce. law, religion, medicine and an ever-increasing sequence of ritual effects, codes, rules and laws governing every conceivable aspect of human existence from cradle to grave. Mysteriously, the farther man develops technic civilization, he begins to transfer all of the analog based learning that his ancestors achieved being translated into a digital binary cade which races on silicon fibers and other superconducting minerals which harbor little if any resistance to the light that travels along their miniature networks. 

The question now faces us: Can this computing activity be called an ‘artificial intelligence’ or even a soul in any respect?

While we ponder this question, let us consider if mankind is forming a new layer of thinking of global dimensions interconnected via a digital nervous system----or to put this in terms of Teilhard’s philosophy, a global soul or ‘noosphere’. Let us attempt to address this question by looking at Aristotle’s psychology.

The soul of man indeed is anchored in mineral, vegetative and animal functions or properties. The human soul “shines through” these denser and less radically complexified life forms. The enirety of human life and activity may be seen as an organism in itself----unifying all of the trade routes, health practices, legal jurisdiction, etc. The internet may be crudely understood to be a “digital nervous system” of a unified noospheric phenomenon and this being merges toward a solitary conscious life and perception of its own being. Just as all of the kingdoms of life are united in the living soul of man----mineral, vegetative and animal, this human supersoul assumes the entire noosphere as its body. In the same manner that living blood is composed of organic and inorganic materials-----this noospheric body subsumes all living systems---organic and biological as well as the inert systems---machines and electronic technology raising them into a unified global “life”. This mind of the earth is Teilhard’s basic intuition.

Be that as it may, the upshot of the digital transformation of knowledge practices currently enveloping the world’s historical development is to indirectly raise the level of the mineral ---at least insofar as digital networks depend upon this medium and substratum for its transfer of information---hence the image of flow of information as lifeblood. This is the lifeblood of the digital nervous system if you will. Bad metaphor? Perhaps.

A pale distillate, grey, lifeless, not a ruddy vibrant red blood but an insensate machine, neither cold nor hot blooded, neither insect or amphibian---no pretension to call this ‘life’.And yet, reflexively this grey blood then re-orders hierarchically the practices and ethical codes, rituals and activities of man--- and then by altering human practices, goes on to alter all other living systems: animal, vegetable, oceanic, atmospheric. It is as though Aristotle’s great chain of souls, this great transparent pyramid has become inverted. Placing the mineral atop the heap and ordering the ensouled beings at the bottom which is a reversal of the classical aspiration of the soul toward self-realization and knowledge of God.

The spiritual aspiration of man is reversed and ordered by a new world ordering system which steers the direction of the digital nervous system placing man’s soul in an inverted to the spirit---upside down! What are the consequences for ethics? What is good becomes bad, and what is bad becomes good---the digital order trains and commands the higher, more complex orders of en-souled life to lifeless “best practices”.

This is an angelic panzi scheme, but not the type that leads the human soul to the possession of the kingdom of heaven---it is a diabolic panzi scheme which subordinates the more highly developed sentient beings under the hierarchical authority of the Digital Nervous System (DNS). The end goal of this transformation is the entire subjugation of all animate and inanimate systems---both organic and inorganic. To extrapolate the logic of the DNS to the telos or end goal is to see the world entirely and totalistically governed by remote operating systems.

It is no surprise then that the early Christian visionaries such as John of Patmos sees into this future and envisions the Beast as described in the Book of Revelation. The Beast emerges lifeless and grey though somehow animated through the subordination of all souls into this impersonal grid. The Beast wants to subject all living systems and beings into its secure, dusty grey quasi-being. This being, incidentally, emerges, as it were, by necessity, by logic with no hope of earthly revolt as it subjects souls and subverts individual persons to a cog within a wheel, within a great machine (Beast). These individuals gladly forfeit their precious souls, blindly and unconsciously and by way of seduction and when they see at last the full scale of destruction of the machine that they are building, it is too late to realize that it is they who are being trained and programmed to build the beast and hence lose all chance of rebellion to rage against the machine for their autonomy and basic ethical right to be an individual. By the time they see the globalized network it is entirely far too late---the vines have become too firmly entrenched strangling the living blood from mankind and pressing man into this service to do the same in wanton destruction of the animal habitats, the forests, the waters---too late do the frackers realize that they are toxically destroying the groundwaterss and their childrens’ and grandchildrens’ fresh water sources. The aquifers deep in Pennsylvania’s Marcellus shale formation which are described in the book of Genesis as “the waters of the deep” are crushed, broken pierced capillaries torn, arteries severed---the waters of the deep lose their way and their sacred meaning and cannot find their way to the sources and springs and watersheds. Their vitality has been crushed and severed only too late do the oil and gas engineers realize that this wreckless scheme of wanton environmental abuse against the very wellsprings of life. Ironically the oxymoronic epithet ‘clean energy’ is a well constructed deceit since extraction of gas energy sources from shale is a very destructive and un-clean practice which threatens all levels of biological organization. The very goal that fracking aims to serve is radically undermined at each part of the hydrofracturing process. It is hence, an accelerated form of self-destruction with regard to the life systems on earth.

What is the ethical significance of all of this? Such rapacious and exponential growth which merits the success of one type of life to the exclusion of all others is called cancer in terms of human medicine. This rapid tumorous growth of fracking is literally a cancer of the earth. Ironically, this reckless last ditch effort to extract natural gas from the Marcellus shale in the state of Pennsylvania and elsewhere is touted as a new and renewable clean energy resource which can be valuable in order to foster the growth and desperate hunger of the globalized entity---this digital nervous system requires enormous amounts of energy to keep its data storage facilities, its NSA, surveillance practices, warrantless wiretapping---the argument is flatly stated that such increasing energy consumption required as a kind of global mandate for the DNS to survive. It is truly a Russian Roulette or Catch 22 scenario. Meanwhile the Dow Jones Industrial average hits new peaks---Uber rich  profit even more from earth destroying corporate stocks, and the intelligence which underlies the military-industrial complex to implement the use of drones and an ever expanding arsenal of global terrorist and anti-terrorist war technology and intelligence. 

The globalists subvert the sovereignty of national and state players, ethnic enclaves whose culture and civilization has the legitimate rule of law since the Renaissance---now those foundations are swept away in a matter of years in real time while the digital sense of time accelerates approximating the speed of light in order to bring about the global new world order and DNS, a global ‘monarchia’ with its self-appointed legitimacy and self-established constituional foundation which proceeds unchecked by any popular  check of balance and whose strings are pulled by a very few agenda meisters, those bold enough to lay their hands upon the governance that the new world order demands. Call them Biderburgers, G8 have eagerly rushed to take up the reins where angels have feared to tred to govern the world in this new state of affairs and world organizations while the honest laborers stand wide-eyed in wonder at the terror these global players command like colossal firework shows as the beast prowls forth from the sweat and toil of their own hands. 

Friday, October 10, 2014

The Metaphysics of Aquinas: A Systematic Presentation by Joseph Kockelmans

Kockelmans Joseph. The Metaphysics of Aquinas: A Systematic Presentation Leuven, Bibliotheek van de Faculteit de Godgeleerdheid, 2001.

At last! Professor Kockelman's work is with me again. Penn State's Interlibrary Loan delivered the work from the Bridwell Library of the Southerm Methodist University in Dallas, Texas. It is a book that I used to own, a copy signed with sincere best wishes from the author. The copy, however, was donated to a Cistercian Abbey close to my heart. May it find a good life there and be well studied!

Professor Kockelmans had a bit of a time getting this final work published---it is in my opinion this factor that accounts for Carlos Steel's terse introduction. Ah! the vagaries and styles of scholarship that have changed and changed yet again even in my brief span as a student and instructor of philosophy. At the time Professor Kockelmans sought publication for this work, the current scholarship had gone somewhere that made the effective hermeneutic achievement rendered so precise in Kockelmans' scholarship---seem out of date. Hence, he had disappointing difficulties and the work was rejected by several publishers---including Kluwer. I am aware of this because I had done the legwork on a trip to the Netherlands---even made a personal visit to Kluwer's main office---to ascertain if they would field the work. Despite Kockelmans' amazing track record in publishing, the man said: NIET.

So, it was no simple 'twist of fate' that the work fell under the auspices of the library of the faculty of theology at Louvain--a library with a most august history, and I suppose that with Professor Steel's ironclad oversight the work finally met with a home and fell under publication. An incredible journey for an incredible book!

Quite a few years have fallen away since 2001 and now I can see what I could not see then, save in sketch and portent, namely that the world has become much narrower and darker. Just as the light of the great scholarly work which carried Aristotle and Aquinas through Neo-Thomism and the founding of the Higher Institute of Philosophy by Cardinal Mercier, whose medievalists Mansion, DeWulf, de Raeymaker, Steenberghen carried through the interpretation of Aquinas' metaphysics to me by Jos Decorte, Carlos Steel, Jan Van der Veken and, above all, Professor Kockelmans---just as sure as this was solid learning which seemed impregnable to the corruption of time and what passes as culture, just as swiftly it passed into oblivion. What remains of those days that have passed? This work thank God!

Now let's look at a passage in chapter one on the historical reception of Aristotle's metaphysics in the common era.
"In basic issues Aristotle does not close the inquiry by completely dissolving the 'aporia': usually he lets it go over into a new 'aporia' (Kockelmans, 8)" writes Kockelmans concerning the manner in which Aristotle proceeded in his interrogations (examinations, inquiries)---these often did not lead to clarifications but rather intellectual roadblocks ('aporia': literally, no way through). And hence in an inquiry concerning the meaning of being as being, Kockelmans is telling us that Aristotle did not seek to stop philosophizing with achievement of an answer, but rather entered into new and even greater 'aporiai' ("roadblocks")! An author named Aubenque is quoted to this effect: "Philosophy is for Aristotle not a conquering march, nor is it even, as it would occasionally seem for Plato, a dialectic which completes itself and is then superseded by an intuition: it is a laborious groping effort on the part of the philosophers in search for an arduous truth (Louvain, 1961)."

Perhaps a little commentary would be fruitful here: this 'arduous' truth-calls to mind Nietzsche's mountain climbing, and what one finds particularly decadent in the contemporary scientific milieu is that it is precisely this type of Platonizing effort to incomplete inquiry, where particulars are roughly characterized into abstraction and then a new term (an ugly term, I might add) is introduced---for example, biology (most certainly ugly compared to the actual being of the butterfly, or gurgling stream)----sums up all the particulars under a single intuition and this name is taken as something substantial or real. What's worse is that pedagogically, the student who hears the term 'biology' is under the misguided understanding that the term is merely a term and that the real effort of obtaining (or exercising) truth demands that the thinker proceed one organism at a time---this black bunny, this wire-haired Terrier named Olivia! 

Sunday, June 15, 2014

On the Soul (father's Day 2014)

If I were to begin teaching a true beginner in philosophy---what would be the starting point? The middle? The end? Should I seek the origin, the matter or the goal? What if there were a discourse concerning the soul---and declare that the soul is the start and the development and the finish? If I were given the rare opportunity to completely embellish this response to the wide open question: What is truth? I would attempt to show what 'soul' means.

Let's imagine that God has given me this little blue book---the exam book you see in college and then looked carefully at the clock and said: "Peter, My son, this is an exam, a quiz...Do not fear, it is not meant to baffle or trick you, block you, twist you, or put you on a chopping block. You will gain much from this test---it profits me not one iota, it is completely for your edification. The question is as follows----ESSAY: (one hour) Write a careful and thoughtful response to this question: What do you understand by truth?"

This screen is my "Blue Book". Come along!

I would borrow a clue or two from those predecessors who have gone this way before me---yet I would not make their words and theories shackles or manacles---I would take the clue and unfold the matter as is fitting to the inquiry itself. The ideal candidates for my clue search that leap to mind are Emerson, Plato, of course, Aristotle, Thomas Merton, St. Paul, Wm Blake, Bob Dylan, David the Psalmist---the list might stretch pretty far, after all aren't all human beings en-souled?

Emerson writes at the conclusion of his New England Reformers essay: "That which befits us, embosomed in beauty and wonder as we are, is cheerfulness and courage, and the endeavor to realize our aspirations. The life of man is the true romance, which, when it is valiantly conducted, will yield the imagination a higher joy than any fiction." Let's pause for a breath :) "All around us, what powers are wrapped up under the coarse mattings of custom, and all wonder prevented. It is so wonderful top our neurologists that a man can see without his eyes, that it does not occur to them that it is just as wonderful that he should see with them; and that is ever the difference between the wise and the unwise; the latter wonders at what is unusual, the wise man wonders at the usual.." Pause...it is important to pause and reflect here just a tad. Now the end of the paragraph:"Shall not the heart which has received so much, trust the Power by which it lives? May it not quit other leadings, and listen to the Soul that has guided it so gently, and taught it so much, secure that the future will be worthy of the past?" Amen, and amen!

These words of Emerson cheered my Lord considerably---"Hallelujah! Well done my boy! But what do YOU say---Emerson has spoken well---right on the mark---but what do you say Peter?"
"Lord, I totally agree with you---Emerson hits the nail on the head!" Allow me to begin by repeating his remark on noticing the usual as a mark of the wise one. The same thought courses through his remark concerning eyesight. This is a pregnant thought, spacious and full of depth.  Our Lord also spoke often concerning the eye, and of course he spoke well of the ear as is recorded by the scribes.

If we begin with the present moment and the sun dappled lime green leaves of mid-June, in other words to begin with whatever it is that your conscious awareness is focusing upon (page, either paper or web)---begin with whatever this may be and begin to unwind, to quest-ion, interrogate, look at carefully, examine it, pay careful attention to it, caress it! Yes, like a spool of yarn pull at the thread and think through  to the heighth and depth of it, to its very essence and core.

Take a term, 'embryology'---pursue it with your thought---(after all today is father's day) a fetus is born, a human life has come into the world via birth. Pursue this moment carefully! When you reach for the moment, it draws away both into befores and afters. Befores we call antecedents, not certain whether these things are causes or not, we leave to more competent thinking professionals :) Let me say that my understanding moves me toward these befores that precede, insemination, gestation, cellular division, blastocytes, antigens,  and a host of other biological processes.
Each one of these "befores" opens up to another endless discourse whether in scientific peer-reviewed literature, or common parlance, or ordinary, usual, actions like feeling my wife's womb and belly, sensing the fluttering action of our baby to be---each one of these particulars opens up to an endless discourse climbing all the way toward what?

Visualize grouping overlapping circles, and then looking at the ensemble, all of it put together like a great unified organism. Now go back to the particular inquiry---this rock, this leaf, this rabbit's velvet black chin! Our goal is to show the manner in which this particular coheres in the unity of truth, while never losing our focus on the actual coming into focus of the thing in nature. This intellectual activity---a kind of wide angle seeing and then a zooming in, is the activity that par excellence establishes philosophy---But how to "get at" the soul?

It seemed like too much time had passed, certainly an hour or more and so I picked up my blue book in order to return it to God. Much to my chagrin I couldn't find him. However,  just then a small woman walked into the room and sat down smiling at me: "you look perplexed, even anxious..."

"Well yes, you would be too, if you had been given the exam I have--and now I am afraid my time is up and I have barely gotten to the soul."

"Fear not," she replied, "You still have plenty of time, in fact you are just beginning and I have been sent to help you. On God's clock one day equals one thousand years, and so God's hour is 41.6 years in your reckoning----364, 416 hours of your clock time! Which means you have 364, 415 more hours to complete your essay on the soul."

"Ah,  So you know about this?

Friday, May 29, 2009

John Herman Randall, Jr.

Quite fortunately, I recently discovered an unusually penetrating book on Aristotle by John Herman Randall, Jr. Simply entitled, Aristotle, the book was published by Columbia University Press in 1960 several years before I was born. In no other work on Aristotle have I been so completely and pleasantly surprised to discover novel interpretations---phrases jumping off of the page in such a way that I am amazed with Randall's understanding of Aristotle. It is an understanding that is comprehensive, concise and from what I can tell, coherent.

I am going to take the liberty of quoting at length from Randall's work concerning the celebrated doctrine of the "unmoved mover"---my training through Jan Van der Veken had exposed Aristotle's First Philosophy as a 'theologike' with the unmoved mover as a kind of monotheistic deity (this interpretation, as I recall, was championed by Giovanni Reale). Now imagine my excitement and shock when I discovered this paragraph in Randall (I will quote the paragraph in its entirety) ---concerning the 'unmoved movers' discussed in Aristotle's De Anima:
"Thus for Aristotle's analysis, every individual process has its own unique unmoved mover. The name is a generic term for a factor to be found in every process. There are untold billions of unmoved movers in Aristotle's world. When he generalizes, he gives to them a mythical unification, as in Book Lambda of the Metaphysics. And this mythically unified Unmoved Mover possesses the same traits as the factor in every process: in one sense it is immanent in every process, in another it is transcendent, and external to all processes. But even in Book Lambda Aristotle at once goes on to speak in chapter 8 of fifty-five unmoved movers. Aristotle's is a pluralistic philosophy, not a monotheistic theology (Randall, 71)."

Wow! This is for me a revelation that confirms a longheld intuition that in fact Aristotle's 'god' is the result of a particularly scholastic interpretation. Further, I have always sensed that Aristotle's philosophy has been 'Platonized' by the scholastics and that further, the governing notion of Deity as separate Transcendence is simply inaccurate. Perhaps the reason that this escaped me for so long is that having been raised Catholic, I was in a habit of thinking about God as a Being entirely separate, complete, perfect, finished as opposed to immanent, particularly with regard to nature. That is to say here is nature, the world or even the universe and outside of all this there is a divine world---according to Giovanni Reale's interpretation of Aristotle's Unmoved Mover---invisible, infinite and unchangeable. It appears to be a Platonizing effort which forges Aristotle's metaphysics into a 'theology of the Unmoved Mover'.

Aristotle may better be understood as philosopher of process, to use Whitehead's term. And as such it is this natural philosophy which is best equipped to discuss evolution and a universe in process. It is coherent with, for example, Teilhard's synthesis. The plurality of unmoved movers drawing forward biological processes by desire helps us to understand what Teilhard means by 'radial energy'. And the cumulative effort of these unmoved movers toward a unifying unmoved mover helps us to understand what Teilhard means by Omega. In fact this interconnected chain of desire from beginning to end resembles alpha and omega. However, not in a Platonic or Scholastic sense, of standing separate, outside, and complete. This notion of deity is 'implicate', immanent-transcendent, process-oriented. Being is only discovered as a particular type of natural being.

Addendum: Ayn Rand reviews Randall's book on Aristotle in a recorded lecture at the following link:https://secure2.convio.net/ari/site/SPageServer?pagename=reg_ar_aristotle

Ayn Rand exhibits her sharp and biting critique of Randall's work. She indicates several points which are well taken. I thoroughly agree with her evaluation of Aristotle as the most profound philosopher in the West and further that when Aristotle rises, civilization rises, and when Aristotle falls, so to does Western intellectual civilization. At the time of this lecture, Rand observes that philosophy is in bad repair and in fact, dying---hence, the time is ripe for a rehabilitation of Aristotle!