Scholasticism II: What’s in a PON?
Ed Feser wrote a thoughtful response to my earlier post on Scholasticism. And I’d like to expand on his comments, as my afterthoughts on Pieper’s point were brief. I’m a bit puzzled by John’s statement that “Scholasticism presupposes an Aristotelian philosophy of nature that is simply not adequate to support what modern science has uncovered… Continue reading Scholasticism II: What’s in a PON?