Between Babel and Beast
(America and Empires in Biblical Perspective)

The Glory of Kings: A Festschrift for James B. Jordan

Fyodor Dostoevsky
(Christian Encounters Series)

Athanasius
(Foundations of Theological Exegesis and Christian Spirituality)

The Four: A Survey of the Gospels

Defending Constantine: The Twilight of an Empire and the Dawn of Christendom

From Behind the Veil: The Epistles of John

Deep Exegesis:The Mystery of Reading Scripture

Jane Austen
(A Biography)

Solomon Among the Postmoderns

The Baptized Body

1 & 2 Kings
Brazos Theological Commentary

The Promise Of His Appearing: An Exposition Of Second Peter

A Great Mystery: Fourteen Wedding Sermons

Deep Comedy: Trinity, Tragedy, And Hope In Western Literature

Miniatures & Morals: The Christian Novels of Jane Austen

The Priesthood of the Plebs: A Theology of Baptism

A Son To Me: An Exposition of 1 & 2 Samuel

Against Christianity

From Silence to Song: The Davidic Liturgical Revolution

Ascent to Love: A Guide to Dante's Divine Comedy

Blessed Are the Hungry: Meditations on the Lord's Supper

A House For My Name: A Survey of the Old Testament

Heroes of the City of Man: A Christian Guide to Select Ancient Literature

Brightest Heaven of Invention: A Christian Guide To Six Shakespeare Plays

Wise Words: Family Stories That Bring the Proverbs to Life

The Kingdom and the Power: Rediscovering the Centrality of the Church

« Previous Post | Next Post »
« Previous post in category | Next post in category »

Philosophy: Dual Descartes

In his Fallen Nature, Fallen Selves: Early Modern French Thought II (v. 2) (p. 43-4), Michael Moriarty observes that Descartes limited the scope of mechanistic philosophy.  For Descartes, mechanical explanations offer “a new theory of how the passions work” but in contrast to Hobbes “he does not attempt to rethink ethics altogether in terms of the mechanistic philosophy.  The mechanistic perspective is alone valid within physics, but it cannot be generalized beyond that context.”

Thus, from one angle, we can consider an injury in mechanistic terms “as the result of bodies moving in blind acquiescence to the laws of motion,” but he still retains “another perspective” by which “we should consider it as expressly visited on us by God.”

These perspectives are “not reconcilable to our finite minds, but each is valid in its sphere.”  Ethics is “a branch issuing from the trunk of physics,” but “this does not mean that ethical perspectives are wholly subordinated to those of physics.”  There are no final causes in nature, since it was not created for us, but “when he discusses these questions, Descartes tends to draw a distinction between the scientific and moral perspective.”

Thus, “in Ethicis,” he argues, “it is a good and pious thought . . . to think that God has made all for our sake. . . . This encourages us to love God and feel grateful to him; what is more, it is true so far as there is nothing we cannot make use of, since to consider it affords exercise for the mind and gives us a reason to praise God.”  In a letter, “he admits that we can say that all things were created for God’s glory: this is true in ethics, and in relation to the human species, since we are all bound to praise God for his works.”