From The Father of Cartesian Empiricism: Robert Desgabets on the physics and metaphysics of blood transfusion

 

8.3
From Metaphysics to Physics to expérience:
Cartesian Empiricism
Descartes more than once remarks that the role of experiment is to provide
demonstrations of the first principles or truths of physics by connecting them to the
way God actually made the world. In Part IV of his Discourse on Method he says:
But I must also admit that the power of nature is so ample and so vast, and the principles
so simple and so general, that I notice hardly any particular effect of which I do not know
at once that it can be deduced from the principles in many different ways; and my greatest
difficulty is usually to discover in which of these ways it depends upon them. I know no other means to discover this than by seeking further observations whose outcomes vary
according to which of these ways provides the correct explanation.49
In Part III, Article 46 of Descartes’ Principles of Philosophy he says:
For, seeing that these parts could have been regulated by God in an infinity of diverse ways; experience alone should teach us which of all these ways He chose. That is why we are nowat liberty to assume anything we please, provided that everything we shall deduce from it
is
{entirely} in conformity with experience.50
The idea is that human reason alone cannot discover how God chose to create the world—for the possible ways that reason can conceive exceed the one actual world that the senses come into contact with. The appeal to experience and observation is what delimits the merely conceivable, possible ways to the actual one, and so plays a necessary role in scientific knowledge. We must appeal to experience in order to
find our way back from effects to their causes.
A similar idea runs throughout Desgabets’ Supplement:
He [Descartes] founds the laws of nature for physics only upon the simple supposition that God, in creating the world, put as much movement in the totality of matter as is found there
at present, which we know from experience: this is sufficient for Descartes to deduce the
formation and nature of all things that make up the visible world, in reasoning always from
the cause to effects with consequences similar to those of mathematics. [author’s
emphasis]51
x
x

Dada poem

  Really good does belief in the dark tower.

The mailman is the random person who would suggest that they have a sci-fi game of thrones.

You missed a point?

It depends on your mouth that makes men go to Narnia and we don't want to carry it down on a lot of things that you wake up.

If Alice had one of popcorn and the dark tower of popcorn and a few months of popcorn, you wake 2 minutes of popcorn and then go back to bed.

It depends on your body or your mouth that makes men go through spelled thru the pandemic of popcorn and you wake in the belly of popcorn and you will have a little bit more calories and you'll probably have always taken it off a lot of water in love pterodactyl and we don't need the opportunity to get a sci-fi book report on how you can't get back in your mouth or mythology with the buck or something?

If Alice was bland enough to bind the ball and we don't know how much chat is going on, you wake up in space for some explanation about what the monster of ash was weird and we don't need the rest of popcorn and care about Trilobites and never be alive again!

It's amazing👍 but 8 times in your life and you wake me up in my mouth that makes it down to bind the button for reason and I don't know what to be an answer for reason and it doesn't matter if you want a little bit of popcorn.

Bukarin

 

Friend of Life,

 Friend of Life,

Do you know what your political party platform says about abortion?

Our nation's most vulnerable, the preborn, are at risk of being forgotten by both major political parties. For the first time since 1984, the Republican party's platform lacked vital language to federally protect our preborn children. The Democrat's party platform has been catastrophic for human life for decades. Their current platform states, "We believe unequivocally, like the majority of Americans, that every woman should be able to access high-quality reproductive health care services, including safe and legal abortion."

Live Action believes in protecting life— starting at conception. It's disheartening to see that the core American value of defending the innocent has been forgotten by both party platforms.

Do you believe party platforms should protect human life?

If so, you need to speak up NOW. Click to add your name to our growing petition of concerned Americans. We will take this crucial message to both the Republican and Democrat parties.

Click now to demand both political parties recognize and protect a preborn child's fundamental God-given right to life.

For Life,

Lila Rose
President and Founder

Dinowave

 

Sexy dino?

 

Dinosaur

 

Modernism

 

Fundamentalism

 

Booker T. and W.E.B. By Dudley Randall

 Booker T. and W.E.B.

By Dudley Randall

“It seems to me,” said Booker T.,

“It shows a mighty lot of cheek

To study chemistry and Greek

When Mister Charlie needs a hand

To hoe the cotton on his land,

And when Miss Ann looks for a cook,

Why stick your nose inside a book?”

“I don’t agree,” said W.E.B.,

“If I should have the drive to seek

Knowledge of chemistry or Greek,

I’ll do it. Charles and Miss can look

Another place for hand or cook.

Some men rejoice in skill of hand,

And some in cultivating land,

But there are others who maintain

The right to cultivate the brain.”

“It seems to me,” said Booker T.,

“That all you folks have missed the boat

Who shout about the right to vote,

And spend vain days and sleepless nights

In uproar over civil rights.

Just keep your mouths shut, do not grouse,

But work, and save, and buy a house.”

“I don’t agree,” said W.E.B.,

“For what can property avail

If dignity and justice fail.

Unless you help to make the laws,

They’ll steal your house with trumped-up clause.

A rope’s as tight, a fire as hot,

No matter how much cash you’ve got.

Speak soft, and try your little plan,

But as for me, I’ll be a man.”

“It seems to me,” said Booker T.—

“I don’t agree,”

Said W.E.B.

The Oath Against Modernism Pope Pius X - 1910

 

The Oath Against Modernism

Pope Pius X - 1910

THE OATH AGAINST MODERNISM

To be sworn to by all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries.

I . . . . firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day. And first of all, I profess that God, the origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of reason from the created world (see Rom. 1:19), that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, his existence can also be demonstrated: Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time. Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time. Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical’ misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely. Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our creator and lord.

Furthermore, with due reverence, I submit and adhere with my whole heart to the condemnations, declarations, and all the prescripts contained in the encyclical Pascendi and in the decree Lamentabili,especially those concerning what is known as the history of dogmas. I also reject the error of those who say that the faith held by the Church can contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in which they are now understood, are irreconcilable with a more realistic view of the origins of the Christian religion. I also condemn and reject the opinion of those who say that a well-educated Christian assumes a dual personality-that of a believer and at the same time of a historian, as if it were permissible for a historian to hold things that contradict the faith of the believer, or to establish premises which, provided there be no direct denial of dogmas, would lead to the conclusion that dogmas are either false or doubtful. Likewise, I reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture which, departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of faith, and the norms of the Apostolic See, embraces the misrepresentations of the rationalists and with no prudence or restraint adopts textual criticism as the one and supreme norm. Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic tradition or about the divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever; and that they should then interpret the writings of each of the Fathers solely by scientific principles, excluding all sacred authority, and with the same liberty of judgment that is common in the investigation of all ordinary historical documents.

Finally, I declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the modernists who hold that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition; or what is far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple fact-one to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history-the fact, namely, that a group of men by their own labor, skill, and talent have continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and his apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way.

I promise that I shall keep all these articles faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing. Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God. . .