The book does a very good job of explaining the topic we're discussing in class. Overall, the chapters I read were accessible and tied very well with Dr. Inman's lectures.
One of the best introductions to metaphysics I have ever read! The author explains very complex and profound ideas in an accessible language. A must read for everyone!
“If God has created the world with a deep, natural grain to it—an objective (mind-independent) metaphysical order that specifies what is real, what we are as humans, and what we humans are for—then wisely discerning and living with (and not against) this deep natural grain is vital to a human life well-lived (Proverbs 8:22-36).”
My biggest takeaway from this book is that there are A LOT of distinctions when I comes to the field of metaphysics and the careful analysis of being and reality. Yet, Inman writes about metaphysics in a very refreshing way that gets you excited about the discipline. This is a well-written book in which Inman takes you by the hand through the key areas of metaphysics, but the book is still a challenging and slow read at times as you grasp each issue. Inman writes as a Christian metaphysician from a Neo-Aristotelian perspective. He uses the doctrine of divine aseity as his “Metaphysical lodestar” throughout the book or the basis for a good Christian metaphysic. Each view is analyzed based on its compatibility or incompatibility with God’s aseity. There are also blurbs throughout the book called “Getting Theological” that show the implicates of the metaphysical topic for Christian theology. I quite enjoyed that. The book is also loaded with lists of resources for further reading on metaphysics. The best chapter for me was the discussion on Mereology or the issue of part-whole composition in metaphysics. Below is Inman’s own list of questions tackled throughout the book:
• What, exactly, is metaphysics? (chap. 1) • Are metaphysical discoveries possible? Is pure (a priori) rational insight an intelligible mode of human inquiry that yields genuine knowledge of reality? If so, how? (chap. 2) • How should one go about doing metaphysics in a distinctively Christian key? What habits of mind should a Christian metaphysician strive to cultivate? (chap. 3) • What is it to be or exist, and are there different ways and degrees of being? (chap. 4) • What is identity and how does it account for sameness and difference in the world? Is reality classifiable into mind-independent, ontological cat-egories? (chap. 5) • What accounts for modal truths, truths about what must be (necessary) and what could be (possible)? What are creaturely natures or essences, and do possible worlds help shed light on this question? How might God play a role in grounding modal truths? (chap. 6) • Do characteristics or properties exist? If so, are properties particular (nonsharable) or universal (sharable)? What might God have to do with the age-old debate about properties? (chap. 7) • What are substances as unified property-bearers? Is there an ontological distinction between the categories of Substance and Aggregate? Do substances have metaphysical ingredients such as properties and/or substrata that enter into their makeup? (chap. 8) • Is there deep unity in the material world in the midst of widespread plurality? Are material objects ever composed of other material objects? (chap. 9)
Ah extremely worthwhile read for anyone interested in Christian philosophy or the implications of metaphysics for theological study.
I like philosophy and have a high tolerance for abstraction and philosophical speculation, but metaphysics is not a field of strong interest for me, and I am sympathetic to people/arguments that the whole field smells fishy. I really appreciated the chapter on modality and modal logic though. One of the weaknesses with this series is that it tends to include too much apologetics content and weigh the presentation in favor of traditional Christian views rather than giving an even handed introduction that uses concepts familiar to Christians to help them understand new and opposing views.
Excellent introduction to metaphysics. Inman's broadly sympathetic to Aristotelian approaches, with some exceptions. Unsuprisingly, I think his positions are weakest when they depart from Aristotle (e.g. on substratum theory).