In this thought-provoking discussion, Joe Schmid, a philosophy and theology expert, dives into the debate between Platonism and divine conceptualism regarding abstract objects. He explores the implications of existence for propositions and critiques various philosophical perspectives. The conversation touches on divine simplicity, the nature of God as a necessary being, and the classification of abstract concepts. With a mix of serious analysis and light-hearted banter, Schmid sheds light on complex themes like divine freedom and the relationships between divine attributes and abstract realities.
The debate between Platonism and divine conceptualism centers on whether abstract objects, like propositions, exist independently or in God's mind.
Joe Schmid critiques Edward Fazer's Augustinian proof, arguing it faces internal inconsistencies regarding God's nature and knowledge of contingent truths.
Concerns about divine freedom arise as the conversation questions whether God can freely choose thoughts or is compelled by necessary truths.
The podcast explores the bootstrapping problem in divine conceptualism, emphasizing the challenges of defining God's nature without circular reasoning.
Deep dives
Introducing Divine Conceptualism and Platonism
The podcast delves into the debate between divine conceptualism and Platonism concerning the existence of abstract objects such as propositions. Divine conceptualism posits that propositions, which represent the meanings of sentences, exist in the mind of God, while Platonism holds that they exist in a non-spatial, transcendent realm. The conversation contrasts these two views, highlighting that divine conceptualists argue that abstract objects like propositions are grounded in God's intellect, making them inseparable from the divine being. Joe Schmid, the guest, reviews relevant literature and previous arguments against Platonism, emphasizing the evolution of his views influenced by discussions with Edward Fazer and other philosophers.
Scholastic Realism Defined
The discussion introduces scholastic realism as a middle-ground perspective between Aristotelian and Platonic realism. Aristotelian realism claims that universals exist as inherent properties within particular objects, whereas Platonism posits that they exist independently in a transcendental realm. Scholastic realism, on the other hand, acknowledges the existence of universals while asserting that they also exist in the divine intellect of God. This nuanced view integrates elements from both sides, allowing for a unique interpretation of how abstract objects relate to the divine being.
Premise Analysis of Fazer's Augustinian Proof
The speakers examine specific premises in Edward Fazer's Augustinian proof, identifying internal inconsistencies within the argument. Premises stating that a necessarily existing intellect must be purely actual and omniscient are scrutinized, with Joe Schmid arguing that the premise assumes too much about God's nature. Concerns are raised over whether God can be conceptually aware of contingent truths and how this awareness relates to divine simplicity. The premise's implications suggest challenges to both divine property and the coherence of God's intellect, thus inviting deeper exploration of the necessary attributes of a perfect being.
The Problem of Divine Freedom
A notable challenge arises regarding how divine conceptualism potentially restricts God's freedom. Schmid questions whether a perfect being can be compelled to think certain necessary truths and whether God can refrain from creating certain properties or thoughts. This raises concerns about the nature of divine freedom and the implications of necessitarian views that suggest God is bound by his own properties. The discussion leads to a broader philosophical inquiry: if God's thoughts are necessary, does this undermine his ultimate freedom?
Bootstrapping Dilemmas in Divine Conceptualism
The podcast addresses the bootstrapping problem in divine conceptualism, specifically how God can create or possess properties without falling into circular reasoning. Schmid articulates that if God's properties must precede Him in some sense, then His existence could be seen as dependent on these properties, challenging the notion of aseity. The talk emphasizes the difficulties of defining God's nature in a way that avoids this bootstrapping dilemma while maintaining the necessary properties. This raises critical questions about the interconnectedness of God’s properties and their implications for the understanding of divine nature.
Engagement with Classical Theistic Tradition
The conversation reflects on the implications of Divine Conceptualism for classical theistic beliefs. The participants explore how traditional views hold that God, as a perfect being, possesses freedom to choose without being bound by necessity. Challenges are presented regarding the acceptance of properties that exist outside of God's ultimate will, complicating the classical view. The dynamic discussion weaves through philosophical traditions and modern interpretations, stressing the need for consistency in affirming God's nature while navigating contemporary arguments.
Potential grounds for Propositions
The podcast discusses whether abstract propositions can maintain a grounding within God’s mind without reducing to a simplistic view of divine thought. The exploration raises questions about the nature of propositions and the role they play in God’s consciousness. Proponents of divine conceptualism must clarify how thoughts about propositions are grounded in divine intentions and how the arrangement of these thoughts ensures their intentionality. The discourse suggests that clarity in understanding the nature of propositions could strengthen the conceptualist argument.
Conclusions on Theistic Conceptualism
The dialogue encourages reflections on the robustness of theistic conceptualism against challenges identified throughout the episode. The speakers acknowledge the landscape of argumentation surrounding the existence of abstract entities and their implications for divine attributes. They also indicate fertile ground for further exploration of how these philosophical positions can inform and alter classical theistic thought. Ultimately, the discussion underscores the need for ongoing dialogue and examination of the complexities within the relationship between God, properties, and abstract objects.
In this episode of the Parker's Pensées Podcast, I'm joined once again by wunderkind, Joe Schmid. This time we are talking about the debate between the Platonist and the divine conceptualist about abstract objects. We focus in on propositions and try to figure out which view of the world provides a better explanation for the existence of propositions.
Check out his video on whether or not abstract objects can prove God's existence: https://youtu.be/REgU-84fQU8
and check out Joe's website here: https://www.josephschmid.com/?fbclid=IwAR2-FuTkoIfJTBzBDeRgGrYXVxUCQl4mBCVYXeZK6LHQYFY9gMWg8XTTgkk and his blog here: https://majestyofreason.wordpress.com/
If you like this podcast, then support it on Patreon for $1, $3, or $5 a month. Any amount helps, and for $5 you get a Parker's Pensées sticker and instant access to all the episode as I record them instead of waiting for their release date. Check it out here:
