There is a dilemma for all God-talk: either the predicates retain their familiar connotation , but then they are unsuitable for God; or they measure up to God, but then we no longer know what they mean. As a way out of the dilemma tradition has appealed to analogy. For Aristotle analogy is what is later called proportionality, i.e. a similarity between relations. It is shown that this analogy, by itself, cannot solve the problem. Aristotle, however, has another ontologico-semantic device, (...) namely 'to be or to be named from one or towards one' , which looks more promising. This is the later so called analogy of proportion or of attribution. Thus an accident, f.i. a quality, is called 'being' from the substance, the primary being, because it is directed towards the substance and depends on it. For Thomas this is the kind of analogy that makes God-talk possible. It implies a twofold dynamic: the three ways of Dionysius and the strategy of seeing creatures as traces of or pointers towards God. I.T. Ramsey's theory of qualified models leading to a disclosure makes this dynamic more explicit. Far from being old-fashioned, the theories of analogy and of qualified models have everything to do with what J.-F. Lyotard sees as the concern of both avant-garde art and postmodern philosophy: to make allusions to the Sublime, to point towards the Transcendent, which as transcending the observable cannot be represented. (shrink)

The main thesis of this book is that "we find in Russell more system than he is given credit for, and indeed more than he even knew he had". With this the author opposes the current interpretations, which chop Russell's philosophy into pieces without any connection. The basic notion is that of "order", defined in Russell's terms as asymmetrical and transitive connexity. This serial relation would be omnipresent for Russell: in thought and in reality, both cosmological and political. Yet the (...) author is not blind to the fact that "not only did Russell constantly alter his theories of truth; at any period of development we can find him taking both sides to illuminate the problem in a dialectical way". Thus Russell's journey may have gone in different directions, but what incited him was always "his concern with objective truth and with the explicit virtues of the liberal humanitarian". So the unity of his work may have to do also with Russell's staying faithful to himself. (shrink)