Dale Tuggy

Dale Tuggy is Professor of Philosophy at the State University of New York at Fredonia, where he teaches courses in analytic theology, philosophy of religion, religious studies, and the history of philosophy.


  1. Stephen H. Webb
    January 7, 2014 @ 1:10 pm

    David Hart’s book is interesting because he is an example of how so much of the current “consensus” over classical theism is driving by an Eastern Orthodox understanding of Thomas Aquinas. That is, the Orthodox are much more comfortable with mystery, in fact, with admitting that there can be no doctrine of analogy or concept of simplicity that does not, at the end of all elaboration and explanation, fade into the murky, mystical sea of negative theology. That is why I get so frustrated by classical theists. At the end of the day, they appeal to church authority and mystery. Well, yes, God is very, very mysterious, but God has also revealed himself to us in Jesus Christ, and he is very, very real. And his reality, as an agent who acts for us, makes him seem to be something that is quite like us, a claim that can be theologically grounded in a variety of ways. Here is my review of Hart’s book, by the way:


  2. newenglandsun
    December 28, 2013 @ 11:53 am

    You know, there was a time when Trinitarian Christians were accused of atheism by polytheistic pagans, right?


  3. Brendan
    December 25, 2013 @ 9:29 pm

    See the discussions at SacredWeb.com, issues 30, 31, and the coming issue 32.


  4. Blog dei blogs: breve rassegna web – 15 | Croce-Via
    December 16, 2013 @ 6:15 am

    […] Feser Il filosofo Tuggy ha risposto allo splendido post di Feser (imprescindibile della rassegna precedente) nel quale il nostro eroe […]


  5. Greg
    December 6, 2013 @ 12:21 am

    “It’s the conception of God at issue, for example, in the large scholarly literatures (in analytic philosophy) surrounding the problems of evil and the various argument for God’s existence.”

    I’m not really sure how relevant this is. Classical theism was the majority view throughout history. But even if it is not the majority view among Protestants, atheists, agnostics, and Hindus right now, it’s not like no one holds it, or all those who hold it are atheists (“naturalistic” or otherwise). Was Elizabeth Anscombe an atheist? What about John Haldane?


  6. Edward Feser
    December 5, 2013 @ 6:13 pm

    Hello and thanks for the reply, Dale, I’m traveling at the moment but I’ll respond next week.


  7. David
    December 5, 2013 @ 4:49 pm

    Aye! It seems quite silly for Dale to first give an apparently *irrelevant* quote from Descartes, as if it contributed to his cause; and second to talk about Locke’s attitude towards the over-reliance on authority in the “traditions of medieval philosophy” before quoting the man as if he could be relied upon as an authority on the true nature of medieval philosophy, as part of an attempt to confute the view of a man who is well aware of Locke’s views, who has also written a rather nice little book about him describing his importance in the arrival of what Dale entirely question-beggingly calls the “golden age” of philosophy, and who clearly would reject both Locke’s clearly naïve views about the general enterprise of philosophy in the Middle Ages. But maybe Tuggy has written his own book about Locke, and it’s way better than Feser’s? Probably not, but If he has, he might have mentioned it.


  8. Eoin Moloney
    December 5, 2013 @ 2:47 pm

    Now, I don’t pretend to be any good at philosophy, much less the classical theism-vs-theistic personalism dispute, but it sounds very much like you’re dismissing much of medieval philosophy on the grounds that a bunch of *other* people thought it was confusing and labyrinthine. I’m not intending to insult you, Sir, for I am not even close to the level where I could debate you or your points myself, but it honestly does sound like you’re trying to defeat a philosophy that “relies on appeals to authority” by appealing to a different authority, namely the early moderns.


  9. Matthew N. Petersen
    December 5, 2013 @ 12:37 pm

    It’s worth pointing out that Descartes did not say a being, since there is no definite article in Latin.

    And, that people like Basil, Denis, Aquinas, Palamas, etc. are attempting to say that they are metaphysically unable to say what God is (hence Palamas’ claim that God is beyond all affirmation and negation), and so the objection that you can’t understand them misses the point. If you could, they would be wrong, since their claim is that there is, as it were, no comparison between being and hyperbeing, and so it is impossible for a being to understand hyperbeing.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Solve : *
13 × 7 =