Dr. Peter Kreeft - "10 Influential Philosophers and Why You Should Know What They Said"

Welcome to our Winter Newman Lecture with Dr. Peter Kreeft. He will present the key ideas of ten philosophers that can help us become wiser. As Socrates said, "the unexamined life is not worth living." Come and learn how to live an examined life and wrestle with important questions!
The Newman Lecture Series is made possible by the Newman Center at Oregon State University and all of our generous supporters.
Website: osunewman.org/
Instagram: / corvocatholic
Institutional Video: • OSU Newman Center
If you enjoyed this lecture, consider donating to the Newman Center here: osunewman.org/donate
List of Philosophers and Recommended Books:
Plato: "The Republic"
Aristotle: "Nicomachean Ethics"
Augustine: "Confessions"
Boethius: "The Consolation of Philosophy"
St. Thomas Aquinas: "Summa Theologiae" (or "Summa of the Summa" by Peter Kreeft)
Blaise Pascal: "Pensées" (or "Christianity for Modern Pagans" by Peter Kreeft)
G.K. Chesterton: "Orthodoxy" and "The Everlasting Man"
Fyodor Dostoevsky: "The Brothers Karamazov"
J.R.R. Tolkien: "The Lord of the Rings"
C.S. Lewis: "Till We Have Faces" and "The Great Divorce"

[@lizmonard]

58y/o fem, no interest in philosophy, no knowledge of philosophy, always found it too much hard work for my lazy brain, but I accidentally clicked on this video, and listened to it all! I have read Dostoyevsky, brothers Karamazov however.
My interest is now piqued.. may learn some more. Thanks Prof. Kreeft.

[@user-kf8wb2cq4f]

Dr. Kreeft never ceases to inform me, make me think deeper and inspire me.👍

[@tinakek9601]

thank you for sharing this 😄 Professor Kreeft is awesome!

[@gossedejong9248]

Thank you very, very much!

[@dynamic9016]

Really appreciate this video.

[@robertjarman4261]

Greetings from Holy Russia 🇷🇺 Excellent analysis.

[@leebarry5686]

Many novels have a lot of heroes, but what matters is whether they followed the prophets or deviated from his teaching

[@bpornthikhunyai7427]

🎉🎉🎉😊

[@springinfialta106]

11. Ed Feser

[@Dr.Nguyen-Bakersfield]

For any other videos, a dropped word here and there would not be a big deal. Sadly, every single word by Professor Kreeft counts, and the defective audio really hurts.

[@ironymatt]

I don't ordinarily get too hung up on production values, but it's still incumbent upon anyone who desires their videos to be watched to maintain minimum standards. I hope for their sake the folks at Newman Center see this and take it under consideration for their future endeavors.

[@qwizzler]

It's a college church, recording a zoom call. it's not that serious.

[@carlosrangel3986]

Dr Peter Kreeft what is your opinion about «Cornelio Fabro»?

[@PaoloGasparini-ux2kp]

I'm sorry, I'm not Peter Kreeft. I'm only Italian, a Peter Kreeft's fan!
In a memorable critical study, the great theologian of the last century, Father Cornelio Fabro, highlighted the idealist root of Karl Rahner's theology, disguised under a false interpretation of the metaphysical gnoseology of St. Thomas. Surprisingly, Fabro's study was not significantly supported within the Church. Rahner makes St. Thomas say exactly the opposite of what he actually teaches on this very delicate topic of knowledge, stating that Thomas "rejects the vulgar conception of the cognitive act as a bump against something, an intentional reaching outwards".
He quotes without understanding it and in a truncated way an assertion by Thomas, who, speaking of the knowledge of the angel, quotes Plato for whom knowing takes place "through contact with the intelligible thing, and makes Thomas say that knowing does not take place in this way.
In this way, the problem of knowing can be given two opposite solutions, one realist and one idealist. The realist realizes that he knows reality, and to explain this fact he develops the doctrine of the idea as a means of knowing and representing reality. Knowledge is true if the idea is adequate to reality.
In idealism, the reverse occurs. Since for the idealist knowledge does not start from reality as for the realist, but starts from the idea of self-awareness, he finds himself having to explain how the intellect can pass from the idea to reality. He solves the problem by arguing that knowledge is true if reality is adequate to the idea, so he identifies the ideal with the real. But then does he create reality?
The idealist will tell the realist that he too, and indeed better than him, grasps the real by the very fact that the real is ideal and the ideal is real, while the realist with his distinction between idea and reality would not be able to realize the identity of the subject with the necessary object of knowing. The realist replies that in knowing, there is only an intentional or representative identity between subject and object. To speak of an ontological identity is nonsense. It is not the stone that is in the soul, but the image of the stone.

[@carlosrangel3986]

@@PaoloGasparini-ux2kp ok

[@nicholasbenedictrobinson7841]

1:08:25
Anthony who?

[@jeffsmith1798]

I believe it’s Anthony Esolen. A brilliant writer and translator.

[@nicholasbenedictrobinson7841]

@@jeffsmith1798 Thanks!

[@jhljhl6964]

The thing about philosophy is that it is based on logic and not fear-ridden faith.

[@allenbrady8083]

But there is fear in logic.

[@maryann7619]

Too bad the audio stinks. Tell the guy to not move his head back and forth, but into the mic.

[@richardzellers]

Sounds biased toward religious thinkers

[@Oera-B]

What did you expect?