Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'Confessions', 'The Big Book of Concepts' and 'Interview with Philippa Foot'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these texts


55 ideas

7. Existence / A. Nature of Existence / 2. Types of Existence
I prefer a lack of form to mean non-existence, than to think of some quasi-existence [Augustine]
     Full Idea: I sooner judged that what lacks all form does not exist, than thought of as something in between form and nothing, neither formed nor nothing, unformed and next to nothing.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XII.6), quoted by Robert Pasnau - Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 03.1
     A reaction: Scholastics were struck by the contrast between this remark, and the remark of Averroes (Idea 16587) that prime matter was halfway existence. Their two great authorities disagreed! This sort of thing stimulated the revival of metaphysics.
7. Existence / D. Theories of Reality / 1. Ontologies
Three main questions seem to be whether a thing is, what it is, and what sort it is [Augustine]
     Full Idea: I am told that I can ask three sorts of questions - whether a thing is, what it is, and what sort it is.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.10)
     A reaction: This seems to be a very Aristotelian approach. I am pleased to see that what it is and what sort it is are not conflated. The first one must be its individual essence, and the second its generic essence.
12. Knowledge Sources / B. Perception / 5. Interpretation
Research shows perceptual discrimination is sharper at category boundaries [Murphy]
     Full Idea: Goldstone's research has shown how learning concepts can change perceptual units. For example, perceptual discrimination is heightened along category boundaries.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch.13)
     A reaction: [Goldstone 1994, 2000] This is just the sort of research which throws a spanner into the simplistic a priori thinking of many philosophers.
12. Knowledge Sources / E. Direct Knowledge / 4. Memory
Mind and memory are the same, as shown in 'bear it in mind' or 'it slipped from mind' [Augustine]
     Full Idea: The mind and the memory are one and the same. We even call the memory the mind, for when we tell a person to remember something, we tell them to 'bear this in mind', and when we forget something 'it slipped out of my mind'.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.14)
     A reaction: This idea has become familiar in modern neuroscience, I think, presumably because we do not find distinct types of neurons for consciousness and for memory.
Memory contains innumerable principles of maths, as well as past sense experiences [Augustine]
     Full Idea: The memory contains the innumerable principles and laws of numbers and dimensions. None of these can have been conveyed to me by the bodily senses.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.12)
     A reaction: Even if you have a fairly empirical view of the sources of mathematics (a view with which I sympathise), it must by admitted that our endless extrapolations from the sources also reside in memory. So we remember thoughts as well as experiences.
Why does joy in my mind make me happy, but joy in my memory doesn't? [Augustine]
     Full Idea: How can it be that my mind can be happy because of the joy that is in it, and yet my memory is not sad by reason of the sadness that is in it?
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.14)
     A reaction: This seems to contradict his thought in Idea 22981, that memory and mind are the same. Recall seems to be a part of consciousness which is not fully wired up to the rest of the mind.
We would avoid remembering sorrow or fear if that triggered the emotions afresh [Augustine]
     Full Idea: If we had to experience sorrow or fear every time that we mentioned these emotions, no one would be willing to speak of them.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.14)
     A reaction: Remembering the death of a loved one can trigger fresh grief, but remembering their dangerous illness from which they recovered no longer contains the feeling of fear.
I can distinguish different smells even when I am not experiencing them [Augustine]
     Full Idea: I can distinguish the scent of lilies from that of violets, even though there is no scent at all in my nostrils.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.08)
     A reaction: Augustine has a nice introspective account of how we experience memory, and identifies lots of puzzling features. I know I can identify the smell of vinegar, but I can't bring it to mind, the way I can the appearance of roses.
14. Science / C. Induction / 1. Induction
Induction is said to just compare properties of categories, but the type of property also matters [Murphy]
     Full Idea: Most theories of induction claim that it should depend primarily on the similarity of the categories involved, but then the type of property should not matter, yet research shows that it does.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch. 6)
     A reaction: I take this to be good empirical support for Gilbert Harman's view that induction is really inference to the best explanation. The thought (which strikes me as obviously correct) is that we bring nested domains of knowledge to bear in induction.
15. Nature of Minds / A. Nature of Mind / 6. Anti-Individualism
Memory is so vast that I cannot recognise it as part of my mind [Augustine]
     Full Idea: The memory is a vast immeasurable sanctuary. It is part of my nature, but I cannot understand all that I am. Hence the mind is too narrow to contain itself entirely. Is the other part outside of itself, and not within it? How then can it be a part?
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.08)
     A reaction: He seems to understand the mind as entirely consisting of consciousness. Nevertheless, this seems to be the first inklings of the modern externalist view of the mind.
16. Persons / D. Continuity of the Self / 2. Mental Continuity / a. Memory is Self
Without memory I could not even speak of myself [Augustine]
     Full Idea: I do not understand the power of memory that is in myself, although without it I could not even speak of myself.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.16)
     A reaction: Even if the self is not identical with memory, this idea seems to establish that memory is an essential aspect of the self. This point is neglected by those who see the self as an entity (the 'soul pearl') which persists through all experience.
16. Persons / F. Free Will / 6. Determinism / a. Determinism
If the future does not exist, how can prophets see it? [Augustine]
     Full Idea: How do prophets see the future, if there is not a future to be seen?
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XI.17)
     A reaction: The answer, I suspect, is that prophets can't see the future. The prospect that the future already exists would seem to saboutage human freedom and responsibility, and point to Calvinist predestination, and even fatalism.
18. Thought / A. Modes of Thought / 5. Rationality / b. Human rationality
Full rationality must include morality [Foot]
     Full Idea: You haven't got a full idea of rationality until you've got morality within it.
     From: Philippa Foot (Interview with Philippa Foot [2003], p.35)
     A reaction: Does this mean that mathematical proofs are not rational, or that they are moral?
18. Thought / B. Mechanics of Thought / 5. Mental Files
Memories are preserved separately, according to category [Augustine]
     Full Idea: In memory everything is preserved separately, according to its category.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.08)
     A reaction: This strikes me as the first seeds of the idea that the mind functions by means of mental files. Our memories of cats are 'close to' or 'linked to' our memories of dogs.
18. Thought / D. Concepts / 1. Concepts / a. Nature of concepts
The main theories of concepts are exemplar, prototype and knowledge [Murphy]
     Full Idea: The three main theories of concepts under consideration are the exemplar, the prototype and the knowledge approaches.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch.13)
18. Thought / D. Concepts / 4. Structure of Concepts / c. Classical concepts
The classical definitional approach cannot distinguish typical and atypical category members [Murphy]
     Full Idea: The early psychological approaches to concepts took a definitional approach. ...but this view does not have any way of distinguishing typical and atypical category members (...as when a trout is a typical fish and an eel an atypical one).
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch. 2)
     A reaction: [pp. 12 and 22] Eleanor Rosch in the 1970s is said to have largely killed off the classical view.
The theoretical and practical definitions for the classical view are very hard to find [Murphy]
     Full Idea: It has been extremely difficult to find definitions for most natural categories, and even harder to find definitions that are plausible psychological representations that people of all ages would be likely to use.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch. 2)
Classical concepts follow classical logic, but concepts in real life don't work that way [Murphy]
     Full Idea: The classical view of concepts has been tied to traditional logic. 'Fido is a dog and a pet' is true if it has the necessary and sufficient conditions for both, ...but there is empirical evidence that people do not follow that rule.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch. 2)
     A reaction: Examples given are classifying chess as a sport and/or game, and classifying a tree house (which is agreed to be both a building and not a building!).
Classical concepts are transitive hierarchies, but actual categories may be intransitive [Murphy]
     Full Idea: The classical view of concepts explains hierarchical order, where categories form nested sets. But research shows that categories are often not transitive. Research shows that a seat is furniture, and a car seat is a seat, but it is not furniture.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch. 2)
     A reaction: [compressed] Murphy adds that the nesting of definitions is classically used to match the nesting of hierarchies. This is a nice example of the neatness of the analytic philosopher breaking down when it meets the mess of the world.
The classical core is meant to be the real concept, but actually seems unimportant [Murphy]
     Full Idea: A problem with the revised classical view is that the concept core does not seem to be an important part of the concept, despite its name and theoretical intention as representing the 'real' concept.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch. 2)
     A reaction: Apparently most researchers feel they can explain their results without reference to any core. Not so fast, I would say (being an essentialist). Maybe people acknowledge an implicit core without knowing what it is. See Susan Gelman.
18. Thought / D. Concepts / 4. Structure of Concepts / d. Concepts as prototypes
There is no 'ideal' bird or dog, and prototypes give no information about variability [Murphy]
     Full Idea: Is there really an 'ideal bird' that could represent all birds? ...Furthermore a single prototype would give no information about the variability of a category. ...Compare the incredible variety of dogs to the much smaller diversity of cats.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch. 3)
     A reaction: The point about variability is particularly noteworthy. You only grasp the concept of 'furniture' when you understand its range, as well as its typical examples. What structure is needed in a concept to achieve this?
Prototypes are unified representations of the entire category (rather than of members) [Murphy]
     Full Idea: In the prototype view the entire category is represented by a unified representation rather than separate representations for each member, or for different classes of members.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch. 3)
     A reaction: This is the improved prototype view, as opposed to the implausible idea that there is one ideal exemplar. The new theory still have the problem of how to represent diversity within the category, while somehow remaining 'unified'.
The prototype theory uses observed features, but can't include their construction [Murphy]
     Full Idea: Nothing in the prototype model says the shape of an animal is more important than its location in identifying its kind. The theory does not provide a way the features can be constructed, rather than just observed.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch. 6)
     A reaction: This makes some kind of mental modelling central to thought, and not just a bonus once you have empirically acquired the concepts. We bring our full range of experience to bear on even the most instantaneous observations.
The prototype theory handles hierarchical categories and combinations of concepts well [Murphy]
     Full Idea: The prototype view has no trouble with either hierarchical structure or explaining categories. ...Meaning and conceptual combination provide strong evidence for prototypes.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch.13)
     A reaction: Prototypes are not vague, making clearer classification possible. A 'mountain lion' is clear, because its components are clear.
Prototypes theory of concepts is best, as a full description with weighted typical features [Murphy]
     Full Idea: Our theory of concepts must be primarily prototype-based. That is, it must be a description of an entire concept, with its typical features (presumably weighted by their importance).
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch.13)
     A reaction: This is to be distinguished from the discredited 'classical' view of concepts, that the concept consists of its definition. I take Aristotle's account of definition to be closer to a prototype description than to a dictionary definition.
Learning concepts is forming prototypes with a knowledge structure [Murphy]
     Full Idea: My proposal is that people attempt to form prototypes as part of a larger knowledge structure when they learn concepts.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch.13)
     A reaction: This combines theory theory (knowledge) with the prototype view, and sounds rather persuasive. The formation of prototypes fits with the explanatory account of essentialism I am defending. He later calls prototype formation 'abstraction' (494).
18. Thought / D. Concepts / 4. Structure of Concepts / e. Concepts from exemplars
The most popular theories of concepts are based on prototypes or exemplars [Murphy]
     Full Idea: The most popular theories of concepts are based on prototype or exemplar theories that are strongly unclassical.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch. 2)
The exemplar view of concepts says 'dogs' is the set of dogs I remember [Murphy]
     Full Idea: In the exemplar view of concepts, the idea that people have a representation that somehow encompasses an entire concept is rejected. ...Instead a person's concept of dogs is the set of dogs that the person remembers.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch. 3)
     A reaction: [The theory was introduced by Medin and Schaffer 1978] I think I have finally met a plausible theory of concepts. When I think 'dog' I conjure up a fuzz of dogs that exhibit the range I have encountered (e.g. tiny to very big). Individuals come first!
The concept of birds from exemplars must also be used in inductions about birds [Murphy]
     Full Idea: We don't have one concept of birds formed by learning from exemplars, and another concept of birds that is used in induction.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch.13)
     A reaction: In other words exemplar concepts break down when we generalise using the concept. The exemplars must be unified, to be usable in thought and language.
Exemplar theory struggles with hierarchical classification and with induction [Murphy]
     Full Idea: The exemplar view has trouble with hierarchical classification and with induction in adults.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch.13)
     A reaction: To me these both strongly support essentialism - that you form the concept 'dog' from seeing some dogs, but you then extrapolate to large categories and general truths about dogs, on the assumption of the natures of the dogs you have seen.
Children using knowing and essentialist categories doesn't fit the exemplar view [Murphy]
     Full Idea: The findings showing that children use knowledge and may be essentialist about category membership do not comport well with the exemplar view.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch.13)
     A reaction: Tricky, because Gelman persuaded me of the essentialism, but the exemplar view of concepts looks the most promising. Clearly they must be forced to coexist....
Conceptual combination must be compositional, and can't be built up from exemplars [Murphy]
     Full Idea: The exemplar accounts of conceptual combination are demonstrably wrong, because the meaning of a phrase has to be composed from the meaning of its parts (plus broader knowledge), and it cannot be composed as a function of exemplars.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch.13)
     A reaction: This sounds quite persuasive, and I begin to see that my favoured essentialism fits the prototype view of concepts best, though this mustn't be interpreted too crudely. We change our prototypes with experience. 'Bird' is a tricky case.
18. Thought / D. Concepts / 4. Structure of Concepts / f. Theory theory of concepts
We do not learn concepts in isolation, but as an integrated part of broader knowledge [Murphy]
     Full Idea: The knowledge approach argues that concepts are part of our general knowledge about the world. We do not learn concepts in isolation, ...but as part of our overall understanding of the world. Animal concepts are integrated with biology, behaviour etc.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch. 3)
     A reaction: This is one of the leading theories of concepts among psychologists. It seems to be an aspect of the true theory, but it needs underpinning with some account of isolated individual concepts. This is also known as the 'theory theory'.
Concepts with familiar contents are easier to learn [Murphy]
     Full Idea: A concept's content influences how easy it is to learn. If the concept is grossly incompatible with what people know prior to the experiment, it will be difficult to acquire.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch. 6)
     A reaction: This is a preliminary fact which leads towards the 'knowledge' theory of concepts (aka 'theory theory'). The point being that the knowledge involved is integral to the concept. Fits my preferred mental files approach.
Some knowledge is involved in instant use of categories, other knowledge in explanations [Murphy]
     Full Idea: Some kinds of knowledge are probably directly incorporated into the category representation and used in normal, fast decisions about objects. Other kinds of knowledge, however, may come into play only when it has been solicited.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch. 6)
     A reaction: This is a summary of empirical research, but seems to fit our normal experience. If you see a hawk, you have some instant understanding, but if you ask what the hawk is doing here, you draw more widely.
People categorise things consistent with their knowledge, even rejecting some good evidence [Murphy]
     Full Idea: People tend to positively categorise items that are consistent with their knowledge and to exclude items that are inconsistent, sometimes even overruling purely empirical sources of information.
     From: Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch. 6)
     A reaction: The main rival to 'theory theory' is the purely empirical account of how concepts are acquired. This idea reports empirical research in favour of the theory theory (or 'knowledge') approach.
20. Action / C. Motives for Action / 3. Acting on Reason / a. Practical reason
Practical reason is goodness in choosing actions [Foot]
     Full Idea: Practical rationality is goodness in respect of reason for actions, just as rationality of thinking is goodness in respect of beliefs.
     From: Philippa Foot (Interview with Philippa Foot [2003], p.35)
     A reaction: It is very Greek to think that rationality involves goodness. There seems to be a purely instrumental form of practical reason that just gets from A to B, as when giving accurate street directions to someone.
20. Action / C. Motives for Action / 3. Acting on Reason / c. Reasons as causes
It is an odd Humean view to think a reason to act must always involve caring [Foot]
     Full Idea: One would need a very special, very Humean, view about reasons for actions to think a man doesn't have a reason unless he cares.
     From: Philippa Foot (Interview with Philippa Foot [2003], p.34-5)
     A reaction: She says she used to believe this, but was wrong. It is hard to imagine acting for reasons if they don't care about anything at all (even that it's their job). But then people just do care about things.
22. Metaethics / A. Ethics Foundations / 2. Source of Ethics / d. Biological ethics
Human defects are just like plant or animal defects [Foot]
     Full Idea: We describe defects in human beings in the same way as we do defects in plants and animals. …You cannot talk about a river as being defective.
     From: Philippa Foot (Interview with Philippa Foot [2003], p.33)
     A reaction: This is a much clearer commitment to naturalistic ethics than I have found in her more academic writings. My opinion of Foot (which was already high) went up when I read this interview. …She says vice is a defect of the will.
22. Metaethics / A. Ethics Foundations / 2. Source of Ethics / k. Ethics from nature
Humans need courage like a plant needs roots [Foot]
     Full Idea: A plant needs strong roots in the same way human beings need courage.
     From: Philippa Foot (Interview with Philippa Foot [2003], p.33)
     A reaction: I'm not quite convince by the analogy, but I strongly agree with her basic approach.
Concepts such as function, welfare, flourishing and interests only apply to living things [Foot]
     Full Idea: There are concepts which apply only to living things, considered in their own right, which would include function, welfare, flourishing, interests and the good of something.
     From: Philippa Foot (Interview with Philippa Foot [2003], p.33)
     A reaction: This is a very Aristotelian view, with which I entirely agree. The central concept is function.
22. Metaethics / B. Value / 1. Nature of Value / b. Fact and value
There is no fact-value gap in 'owls should see in the dark' [Foot]
     Full Idea: If you say 'an owl should be able to see in the dark' …you're not going to think that there's a gap between facts and evaluation.
     From: Philippa Foot (Interview with Philippa Foot [2003], p.33)
     A reaction: I take this to be a major and fundamental idea, which pinpoints the failure of Humeans to understand the world correctly. There is always total nihilism, of course, but that is a sort of blindness to how things are. Demanding 'proof' of values is crazy.
22. Metaethics / B. Value / 1. Nature of Value / f. Ultimate value
Principles are not ultimate, but arise from the necessities of human life [Foot]
     Full Idea: I don't believe in ultimate principles that must be simply affirmed or denied, but rather in an appeal to the necessities of human life.
     From: Philippa Foot (Interview with Philippa Foot [2003], p.37)
     A reaction: I agree. Humans have a strong tendency to elevate anything which they consider important into an absolute (such as the value of life, or freedom).
22. Metaethics / B. Value / 2. Values / a. Normativity
If you demonstrate the reason to act, there is no further question of 'why should I?' [Foot]
     Full Idea: You lose the sense of 'should' if you go on saying 'why should I?' when you've finished the argument about what is rational to do, what you've got reason to do.
     From: Philippa Foot (Interview with Philippa Foot [2003], P.34)
     A reaction: Some people reify the concept of duty, so that they do what is required without caring about the reason. I suppose that would wither if they were shown that no reason exists.
22. Metaethics / C. The Good / 2. Happiness / c. Value of happiness
Everyone wants happiness [Augustine]
     Full Idea: Surely happiness is what everyone wants, so much so that there can be none who do not want it?
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], X.20)
     A reaction: His concept of happiness is, of course, religious. Occasionally you meet habitual grumblers about life who give the impression that they are only happy when they are discontented. So happiness is achieving desires, not feeling good?
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 1. Nature of Time / c. Idealist time
Maybe time is an extension of the mind [Augustine]
     Full Idea: I begin to wonder whether time is an extension of the mind itself.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XI.26)
     A reaction: The observation that the mind creates a 'specious present' (spreading experience out over a short fraction of second) reinforces this. Personally I like David Marshall's proposal that consciousness is entirely memory, which would deny this idea.
To be aware of time it can only exist in the mind, as memory or anticipation [Augustine, by Bardon]
     Full Idea: Augustine answers that for us to be aware of time it must exist only in the mind, …and the difference between past and future is just the difference between memory and anticipation.
     From: report of Augustine (Confessions [c.398]) by Adrian Bardon - Brief History of the Philosophy of Time 1 'Augustine's'
     A reaction: This is an extreme idealist view. Are we to say that the past consists only of what can be remembered, and the future only of what is anticipated? Absurd anti-realism, in my view. Where do his concepts come from, asks Le Poidevin.
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 1. Nature of Time / g. Growing block
How can ten days ahead be a short time, if it doesn't exist? [Augustine]
     Full Idea: A short time ago or a short time ahead we might put at ten days, but how can anything which does not exist be either long or short?
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XI.15)
     A reaction: A nice question, which gets at the paradoxical nature of time very nicely. How can it be long, but non-existent? We could break the paradox by concluding '..and therefore time does exist', even though we can't see how.
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 1. Nature of Time / h. Presentism
If the past is no longer, and the future is not yet, how can they exist? [Augustine]
     Full Idea: Of the three divisions of time, how can two, the past and the future, be, when the past no longer is, and the future is not yet?
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XI.14)
     A reaction: This is the oldest bewilderment about time, which naturally leads us to the thought that time cannot actually 'exist'. The remark implies that at least 'now' is safe, but that also succumbs to paradox pretty quickly.
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 1. Nature of Time / i. Denying time
The whole of the current year is not present, so how can it exist? [Augustine]
     Full Idea: We cannot say that the whole of the current year is present, and if the whole of it is not present, the year is not present.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XI.15)
     A reaction: Another nice way of presenting the paradox of time. We are in a particular year, so it has to be real.
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 2. Passage of Time / a. Experience of time
I know what time is, until someone asks me to explain it [Augustine]
     Full Idea: I know well enough what time is, provided that nobody asks me; but if I am asked what it is and try to explain, I am baffled.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XI.14)
     A reaction: A justly famous remark, even though it adds nothing to our knowledge of time. This sort of thought pushes us towards accepting many things as axiomatic, such as time, space, identity, persons, mind.
27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 2. Passage of Time / h. Change in time
I disagree with the idea that time is nothing but cosmic movement [Augustine]
     Full Idea: I once heard a learned man say that time is nothing but the movement of the sun and the moon and the stars, but I do not agree.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XI.22)
     A reaction: It is tempting to say that you either take time or movement as axiomatic, and describe one in terms of the other, but you are stuck unable to give the initial statement of the axiom without mentioning the second property you were saving for later.
27. Natural Reality / E. Cosmology / 3. The Beginning
Heaven and earth must be created, because they are subject to change [Augustine]
     Full Idea: The fact that heaven and earth are there proclaims that they were created, for they are subject to change and variation; ..the meaning of change and variation is that something is there which was not there before.
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XI.04)
     A reaction: It seems possible that the underlying matter is eternal (as in various conservation laws, such as that of energy), and that all change is in the form rather than the substance.
28. God / A. Divine Nature / 5. God and Time
If God existed before creation, why would a perfect being desire to change things? [Augustine, by Bardon]
     Full Idea: If nothing existed by God before creation, then what could have happened to, or within, God that led God to decide to create the universe at that particular moment? Why would an eternal or perfect being want or need to change?
     From: report of Augustine (Confessions [c.398]) by Adrian Bardon - Brief History of the Philosophy of Time 1 'Augustine's'
     A reaction: I suppose you could reply that change is superior to stasis, but then why did God delay the creation?
If God is outside time in eternity, can He hear prayers? [Augustine]
     Full Idea: O Lord, since you are outside time in eternity, are you unaware of the things that I tell you?
     From: Augustine (Confessions [c.398], XI.01)
     A reaction: This strikes me as the single most difficult and most elusive question about the nature of a supreme divine being. If the being is trapped in time, as we are, it is greatly diminished, and if it is outside, it is hard to see how it could be a participant.