Hi Dr. Sadler. Your Channel has been a great benefit to me. One of my hobbies is to try to come up with little clerihews about the different philosophers I've studied. I 've got this one for Anselm. Anselm of Cantebury Went on rather merrily Considering the majesty of Heaven above No greater philosopher could be conceived of. Thank you for your channel.
Nope. It just means that those who claim to dispense with or despise metaphysics end up doing it, like it or not, but less consciously, less adequately, in a cruder fashion. You want to be able to distinguish between claiming not to do metaphysics or have metaphysical assumptions -- which is quite possible for them -- and actually doing so -- which isn't. And, btw, Scheler, Heidegger, Von Hildebrand, Marcel, Merleau-Ponty, Sartre -- all phenomenologists who do metaphysics
Ontology is, for most practical purposes, the same as metaphysics. Some philosophers -- and a few schools -- like to restrict its meaning to something fairly specific. But, in my view, that's a good reason NOT to use their category -- particularly with beginners -- since doing so will end up trying to cram everyone else's philosophical views in the history of philosophy into the particular categories of that thinker's or movement's position.
I was never aware of St. Anselm's work until I came across your videos. I very much enjoyed St. Thomas Aquinas's Summa, or rather Peter Kreeft's ' A Summa of the Summa' It seems that if we're discerning enough we can find truth in anyone's teaching, even from untruth. I don't identify as a Christian but Christian scholars (of course not all) seem to resonate with a sense of authenticity (in that what they-the scholars-put forth i.e. Augustine, Aquinas, and I'm betting Anselm). Anyways, I look forward to inquiring further into your videos. Thank you Dr. Sadler.
Another of the "Philosophical Development" videos -- this one about a thinker on whose work and writings I never thought I would end up becoming a specialist. . . .
Well, first I say "By ontology, you mean metaphysics generally, right? Not some thinker's particular technical use of the term, like Heidegger's or Quine's" And, yes, metaphysics permeates the whole of philosophy, like it or not (even for the "end of metaphysics" people) -- but then again, so does moral theory. It can also be -- and ought to be -- studied thematically as a distinguishable branch of Philosophy. The question of the supernatural order, now, that's a whole other can of worms...
Admittedly it is a breath of fresh air to listen to you. With a MA with a thesis long ago concerning the problem of universals, I would love to ask you an odd question. Have you ever compared the chiastic method with the type seen in the tetralemma or from the Asian schools - Catuṣkoṭi ?
Do you have a video that explains your personal theological views and how your philosophical studies have influenced that? I’m interested in how the one affects the other and vice versa
like you, for the love St. Anselm, can you share some of good references both primary and secondary regarding St. Anselm? Thanks in advance for your help.
Have you heard of Saint Irenaus of Lyon? He is an early figure just after the time of John the Apostle who wrote a piece called "Adversus Haeresus" (Against the Heresies) where he really debunks Gnosticism of his time. Anselm was probably influenced by him. I am influenced by Irenaeus because I have believe in the One God who needs nothing from his creation. God is so Great he needs nothing from anybody.
As a specialist, which books on Anselm's works would you recommend? Not biography, but nontrivial books/papers on his works and ideas. For example, in the video you mentioned a longer paper you wrote, where you look at the Anselm scholarship. What's that paper called? Is there a list of your papers anywhere? Any recommendations you might have are much appreciated.
Hi Dr. Sadler. Your Channel has been a great benefit to me. One of my hobbies is to try to come up with little clerihews about the different philosophers I've studied. I 've got this one for Anselm.
Anselm of Cantebury
Went on rather merrily
Considering the majesty of Heaven above
No greater philosopher could be conceived of.
Thank you for your channel.
Nope. It just means that those who claim to dispense with or despise metaphysics end up doing it, like it or not, but less consciously, less adequately, in a cruder fashion.
You want to be able to distinguish between claiming not to do metaphysics or have metaphysical assumptions -- which is quite possible for them -- and actually doing so -- which isn't.
And, btw, Scheler, Heidegger, Von Hildebrand, Marcel, Merleau-Ponty, Sartre -- all phenomenologists who do metaphysics
These more personal videos are *very* interesting. Thank you for posting them.
You're very welcome!
Ontology is, for most practical purposes, the same as metaphysics. Some philosophers -- and a few schools -- like to restrict its meaning to something fairly specific.
But, in my view, that's a good reason NOT to use their category -- particularly with beginners -- since doing so will end up trying to cram everyone else's philosophical views in the history of philosophy into the particular categories of that thinker's or movement's position.
I was never aware of St. Anselm's work until I came across your videos. I very much enjoyed St. Thomas Aquinas's Summa, or rather Peter Kreeft's ' A Summa of the Summa' It seems that if we're discerning enough we can find truth in anyone's teaching, even from untruth. I don't identify as a Christian but Christian scholars (of course not all) seem to resonate with a sense of authenticity (in that what they-the scholars-put forth i.e. Augustine, Aquinas, and I'm betting Anselm). Anyways, I look forward to inquiring further into your videos. Thank you Dr. Sadler.
Well, I'm very glad that my channel has got you interested in Anselm!
Another of the "Philosophical Development" videos -- this one about a thinker on whose work and writings I never thought I would end up becoming a specialist. . . .
Thank you for this wonderful video. You have interested me in Ansel m, which means I have a lot of reading to do!
Well, first I say "By ontology, you mean metaphysics generally, right? Not some thinker's particular technical use of the term, like Heidegger's or Quine's"
And, yes, metaphysics permeates the whole of philosophy, like it or not (even for the "end of metaphysics" people) -- but then again, so does moral theory.
It can also be -- and ought to be -- studied thematically as a distinguishable branch of Philosophy.
The question of the supernatural order, now, that's a whole other can of worms...
Hahaha! Very nice. I will have to send that to my Anselm-scholar colleagues
Admittedly it is a breath of fresh air to listen to you. With a MA with a thesis long ago concerning the problem of universals, I would love to ask you an odd question. Have you ever compared the chiastic method with the type seen in the tetralemma or from the Asian schools - Catuṣkoṭi ?
I have not.
what an incredible scholar. thanks so much for this, Greg.
You’re very welcome!
It was the 900 year anniversary -- if you want to be very specific, it's a nonocentenial, if I remember right
Do you have a video that explains your personal theological views and how your philosophical studies have influenced that? I’m interested in how the one affects the other and vice versa
I do not. And that's really more my business than anyone else's who isn't a close friend
@@GregoryBSadler that’s fair. Thanks for all the content you continue to upload on philosophy
Good stuff Dr. Sadler, very interesting. But isn't a centennial only a 100 year anniversary?
great sharing, if I may ask, how can we contextualize in today's time his notion on "faith seeking understanding"
I don't think "contextualizing" (whatever that's supposed to mean) would be different today than it was in his time
@@GregoryBSadler good to note, however, how can this notion substantial today amidst the raise of contemporary philosophy?
@@lordanselglennn.bongcassmm3348 No idea what you might mean by "substantial". Nor what a "raise of contemporary philosophy" means
like you, for the love St. Anselm, can you share some of good references both primary and secondary regarding St. Anselm? Thanks in advance for your help.
ua-cam.com/video/nSRbV_5hLPE/v-deo.html
Have you heard of Saint Irenaus of Lyon? He is an early figure just after the time of John the Apostle who wrote a piece called "Adversus Haeresus" (Against the Heresies) where he really debunks Gnosticism of his time. Anselm was probably influenced by him. I am influenced by Irenaeus because I have believe in the One God who needs nothing from his creation. God is so Great he needs nothing from anybody.
David Viscuso I've read Irenaeus
You like Anselm and Plato. What about Plotinus?
What's that got to do with this video?
Very Interesting
In your opinion, which is the best English translation so far of the Monologion and the Proslogion (+Gaunilo+reply)?
I like Williams'
Well, fortunately, his body of work is relatively small, in comparison to other philosophers
As a specialist, which books on Anselm's works would you recommend? Not biography, but nontrivial books/papers on his works and ideas. For example, in the video you mentioned a longer paper you wrote, where you look at the Anselm scholarship. What's that paper called? Is there a list of your papers anywhere? Any recommendations you might have are much appreciated.
reasonio.academia.edu/GregorySadler - that will get you started with my own papers and the references in them
Thank you, this is very helpful.