Science and Philosophy in a Thomistic Anthropology of Sexual Difference
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 3352137 |
|---|---|
| Authors | John Desilva Finley (Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA 93060, USA), John Finley (0000-0002-3950-5482, Thomas Aquinas College, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 15 |
| Issue | 9 |
| Pages | 1026 |
| Publication date | 2024-08-23 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Religions (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2077-1444 • E-ISSN: 2077-1444 |
| Publisher | MDPI AG (PUBLISHER • IT) |
| DOI | 10.3390/rel15091026 |
| OpenAlex | W4401835304 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 7 |
This essay examines the relation between scientific inquiry and philosophical thought in the context of a Thomistic account of human sexual difference. I begin by considering Thomas's own view and its explicit though brief appeal to biological observation. In particular, I focus on his claim that being male or female stems more from a substance's matter than from its form. Then, I look at a fairly recent exchange between William Newton and myself, in which, drawing upon Thomistic thought in the context of contemporary science, we argued opposing positions. Mine held that sex stems more from form than from matter, while Newton maintained that Thomas's original position is better. In reviewing this exchange, I note strengths in Newton's argument and suggest a further distinction, even while concluding that my fundamental position is still a better account. Lastly, I turn to further questions and the necessity of continued partnership between philosophy and science
Appeal · Epistemology · Philosophy of science · Sociology · Historical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal Changes · History · Law · Medieval Philosophy and Theology · Philosophy · Reproductive Health and Technologies
| Highly cited | No |
|---|