THE METAPHYSICS OF THE WILL

 Click here to listen to Prof Edward Feser

Dr Feser argues that metaphysical errors about the nature of the will have caused significant damage to moral theory and practice. The best way to clear up such errors is to take things back to first principles and work them forward again. In this Quarantine Lecture, Dr. Feser considers what a substance is in general and what the power of a substance is. The technical Aristotelian-Thomistic way of capturing the difference between a true physical substance and a mere aggregate or artefact, is to say that a physical substance has qua substance a substantial form, whereas an aggregate or an artefact has qua aggregate or artefact a merely accidental form

A power is a capacity to act or operate in a certain way. A power is a kind of attribute and exists only in a substance rather than in a free stranding way. Because powers have a kind of teleology, for an Aristotelian-Thomistic metaphysician, the notion of a causal power is closely related to the notions of formal and final causality. Aquinas tells us that every form has some inclination following upon it and every agent acts for the sake of an end.

A rational substance is a substance with an intellect; an intellect is precisely to have the capacity to conceptualize what one knows. We have then a hierarchy of degrees to which the source of a thing's behavior is within it. A rational substance such as a human being or an angel (as opposed to an inanimate, vegetative or non-human animal substance) has a perfect knowledge of the ends toward which its powers are directed insofar as the very essences of those ends are within it. It possesses a kind of causal power which we can classify as rational appetite.

To have a will is, for Aquinas, precisely to have a rational appetite, to have in the most perfect way possible the source of one's activity within. Having a will also entails immateriality and possessing forms abstracted from matter.

Dr Feser concludes by touching on Aquinas's treatment of the reality of free choice and the lack of changeability of the human will after death.

Dr. Feser argues that metaphysical errors about the nature of the will angeability of the hu

EXPERTS,

 What should be my attitude in regard to EXPERTS?

 

1.   Do I believe the experts?

a)   No matter which expert on which subject, I never suspend my judgment which means analyzing the facts at hand and see if they make sense so that the action(s) I am going to take based on those facts will be reasonable.

Ex.: I need surgery. Question of life and death.

        My judgment in every case with any expert will be limited due to my limited knowledge, but I owe to myself to go as far as I can. There is no question of questioning his technique, how could I; but I can check to see if he has a good reputation for example.

In this case, if possible I inquire if his previous patients were satisfied.

How long as he been practicing?

Does he inspire confidence when I talk to him? Etc. etc.

Then I make a decision after I’ve done the best I could.

 

Ex.: I listened to an expert on nuclear energy.

         How much will it affect me personally? Not immediately, I suppose but maybe in the long run, if not me, my descendants.

However if it is an interest of mine, I will find out the pros and cons of many experts to compare and at least have a general idea before I could give my opinion on the subject one way or the other.

The immediate consequences of me not “being right” would be negligible, so I will not worry about knowing so little about the subject.

After all, I’m only satisfying my curiosity as perhaps I’ll have to make a political decision in a voting boot, later on.

 

Ex.: What the expert says can be applied in my personal life.

        Like: which way to set a ceiling fan in the winter.

Does the info comes from a ‘reliable’ source or is it simply something repeated so many times by journalists or others?

Does it make sense when I think about it in details?

If it does not make sense, I have to know why it does not and be able to demonstrate that it does not.

a)   Ceiling fan clock wise in winter I did not agree with.

See attached diagrams.

                  

                    b)another one is when pressure washing the side of                     a house one should start from the bottom and finish at the                 top.

                             Common sense told me right away that it could not         be right.

                             Experimenting I quickly discovered that the expert         was wrong and that I was right.

        Measurements would probably show very little difference either way, I'm guessing. But if I have to choose, I definitely think CCW is better in Winter for the reasons shown in diagram.

Critique of my logic or of my diagram is very welcome indeed.            

 c)This last one. I heard from the weather person on tv             that one should save water by taking baths instead of showers.

I remember my father-in-law saying that he had experimented, a very simple thing to do, and that one uses much less water by having a shower.

So, I did my own experiment to make sure and found out that he was right.