The Christology of St Bonaventure contains the paradoxical claim that during his Passion Christ s... more The Christology of St Bonaventure contains the paradoxical claim that during his Passion Christ simultaneously possesses perfect beatitude and experiences immeasurable suffering. Against Bonaventure’s claim, Caroline Walker Bynum argues that the bliss of beatitude cannot coexist with the intense physical and mental agony of the Passion. This article develops a reply to her objection on Bonaventure’s behalf that identifies beatific love of the divine essence revealed in the vision of glory not with any specific feelings or emotions but with a complex habit or disposition that responds in different ways under varying circumstances. This reply is also defended against some possible objections. The article concludes by explaining the sense in which Bonaventure understands the sufferings of Christ to be not only literally immeasurable but also particularly fitting.
Drawing upon Saul Kripke’s discussion of rules, James F. Ross deduces the immateriality of thinki... more Drawing upon Saul Kripke’s discussion of rules, James F. Ross deduces the immateriality of thinking from the metaphysical determinacy of thinking and the metaphysical indeterminacy of any physical process. It has been objected that Ross does not establish the metaphysical indeterminacy of what function a physical process realizes, that Ross does not show the incoherence of a highly deflationary view of our talk about thinking, and that Ross opens up an unbridgeable gulf between sui generis thinking and behavior. Edward Feser has recently defended Ross’s argument from these objections. The present paper explains why Ross’s argument remains vulnerable to all three objections.
The Christology of St Bonaventure contains the paradoxical claim that during his Passion Christ s... more The Christology of St Bonaventure contains the paradoxical claim that during his Passion Christ simultaneously possesses perfect beatitude and experiences immeasurable suffering. Against Bonaventure’s claim, Caroline Walker Bynum argues that the bliss of beatitude cannot coexist with the intense physical and mental agony of the Passion. This article develops a reply to her objection on Bonaventure’s behalf that identifies beatific love of the divine essence revealed in the vision of glory not with any specific feelings or emotions but with a complex habit or disposition that responds in different ways under varying circumstances. This reply is also defended against some possible objections. The article concludes by explaining the sense in which Bonaventure understands the sufferings of Christ to be not only literally immeasurable but also particularly fitting.
Drawing upon Saul Kripke’s discussion of rules, James F. Ross deduces the immateriality of thinki... more Drawing upon Saul Kripke’s discussion of rules, James F. Ross deduces the immateriality of thinking from the metaphysical determinacy of thinking and the metaphysical indeterminacy of any physical process. It has been objected that Ross does not establish the metaphysical indeterminacy of what function a physical process realizes, that Ross does not show the incoherence of a highly deflationary view of our talk about thinking, and that Ross opens up an unbridgeable gulf between sui generis thinking and behavior. Edward Feser has recently defended Ross’s argument from these objections. The present paper explains why Ross’s argument remains vulnerable to all three objections.
Uploads
Papers by Peter Dillard
Bonaventure’s claim, Caroline Walker Bynum argues that the bliss of beatitude cannot coexist with the intense physical and mental agony of the Passion. This article develops a reply to her
objection on Bonaventure’s behalf that identifies beatific love of the divine essence revealed in the vision of glory not with any specific feelings or emotions but with a complex habit or disposition that responds in different ways under varying circumstances. This reply is also defended against
some possible objections. The article concludes by explaining the sense in which Bonaventure understands the sufferings of Christ to be not only literally immeasurable but also particularly
fitting.
sui generis thinking and behavior. Edward Feser has recently defended Ross’s argument from these objections. The present paper explains why Ross’s argument remains vulnerable to all three objections.
Bonaventure’s claim, Caroline Walker Bynum argues that the bliss of beatitude cannot coexist with the intense physical and mental agony of the Passion. This article develops a reply to her
objection on Bonaventure’s behalf that identifies beatific love of the divine essence revealed in the vision of glory not with any specific feelings or emotions but with a complex habit or disposition that responds in different ways under varying circumstances. This reply is also defended against
some possible objections. The article concludes by explaining the sense in which Bonaventure understands the sufferings of Christ to be not only literally immeasurable but also particularly
fitting.
sui generis thinking and behavior. Edward Feser has recently defended Ross’s argument from these objections. The present paper explains why Ross’s argument remains vulnerable to all three objections.