Affiliation:
1. Division of Humanities—Theology, Saint Louis University Madrid, 28003 Madrid, Spain
Abstract
In this paper, we discuss with some contemporary Thomists the possibility of re-actualizing Thomas’s fifth way to God in the science–theology dialogue. We start with a reference to Spinoza’s critique of teleology in light of some recent Spinoza studies, and after summarizing several Thomistic defenses of Aquinas’s teleological argument, we interpret that critique as targeting the fifth way as well. We then focus on Darwin’s impact on biological design arguments. We argue that his naturalistic explanation of biological teleology also affects the fifth way. The distinction between internal-Aristotelian and external-Platonic conceptions of teleology does not seem to be able to protect the teleological argument from a Darwinian critique. We conclude by stressing the importance and fruitfulness of Thomas’s thought for contemporary interdisciplinary dialogue, provided that Darwin’s impact on the biological version of the fifth way is taken into due account.
Reference55 articles.
1. Rose, Michael Robertson, and Lauder, George V. (1996). Historical Development of the Concept of Adaptation. Adaptation, Academic Press.
2. Fathers of the English Dominican Province (1948). Summa Theologica, Benziger Brothers.
3. Ariew, André, Perlman, Mark, and Cummins, Robert (2002). Platonic and Aristotelian Roots of Teleological Arguments. Functions: New Essays in the Philosophy of Psychology and Biology, Oxford University Press.
4. Hull, David, and Ruse, Michael (2007). Teleology. The Cambridge Companion to the Philosophy of Biology, Cambridge University Press.
5. Teleological Explanations in Evolutionary Biology;Ayala;Philosophy of Science,1970