A disappointment
2 stars
Long-winded essays tracing the historical debates regarding teleology in evolution, with more negation than affirmations made. The greatest merit of Thomists and Aristotelians are their strong belief in common sense, which is also their greatest flaw. Also, philosophers and theologians have a bizarre habit of citing authoritative figures: even if someone like Darwin believed that teleology is needed to account for evolution, since Darwin is not an authority of Nature, quoting Darwin's words on his belief says nothing about the necessity of taking teleology into account. If the Jesuits are still trying to use the arguments that can be classified in the same class the arguments given in this book are in, then they're certainly doomed. They're too easy and hand-wavy, if present at all. All negative assessment of positions that are counter to what Gilson holds are made in the name of common sense, and the problem with that …
Long-winded essays tracing the historical debates regarding teleology in evolution, with more negation than affirmations made. The greatest merit of Thomists and Aristotelians are their strong belief in common sense, which is also their greatest flaw. Also, philosophers and theologians have a bizarre habit of citing authoritative figures: even if someone like Darwin believed that teleology is needed to account for evolution, since Darwin is not an authority of Nature, quoting Darwin's words on his belief says nothing about the necessity of taking teleology into account. If the Jesuits are still trying to use the arguments that can be classified in the same class the arguments given in this book are in, then they're certainly doomed. They're too easy and hand-wavy, if present at all. All negative assessment of positions that are counter to what Gilson holds are made in the name of common sense, and the problem with that is that it doesn't provide a valid or viable, or at the least, interesting, alternative to what is negated. Clinging to intellectual stagnation is never a good way to defend a philosophical position, and is precisely what Gilson is trying to do.