Wojtyla Among the Philosophers

[@fr.hughmackenzie5900]

Great talk. But, perhaps sadly, Cardinal Wojtyla (in his "Afterword" to a 1970 conference on his book) demurred on synthesising phenomenology and Aristotelean ontology, hoping to keep both. Yet he rightly affirmed the "incommensurability" of the subjective "personalist" "hermeneutic" approach and the objective, scholastic "cosmological" description of nature. But he disavowed any "maximalist" synthesis beyond showing they are not incompatible. This is not withstanding some better, suggestive phrases in the other direction? e.g. "there must be some experience and some original understanding of the person already present in the starting point of the metaphysical concept of the person."

[@tomgreene1843]

JP II was a very smart man ...perhaps more so than his examiners. I think Ratzinger had those qualities also. We are not just actors from a set of propositions . Have you come across Iain McGilchrist ?

[@fr.hughmackenzie5900]

@@tomgreene1843 Yes JP II was an inspired developer from phenomenology to the Theology of the Body. And in Fides et Ratio he said we "must move from phenomenon to foundation... a step as urgent as it is necessary" But as I alluded to above, he couldn't see how. I think McGilchrist is just re-presenting the old Form-Matter dichotomy without taking on board the way the cosmos has been recently discovered as a interwoven hierarchical unity, nor phenomenology. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[@tomgreene1843]

He does cover some old ground ...but I think his voice is valuable in an atheistic world.@@fr.hughmackenzie5900

[@kamilziemian995]

Something is missing in this talk.