Today I'm skimming Physics and Philosophy, by James A. McWilliams, S. J. (1945). It seems that Aquinas mentions in lecture 28 of his commentary on Book VIII of the Physics that the outermost or near-outermost sphere rotated every 36,000 years. McWilliams indirectly quotes St. Thomas as saying that the "very celestial pole itself, centered near the North Star, describes an [page3/page4] orbit every '36,000 years.' Although the present calculation is nearer to 26,000, it is enlightening to learn that St. Thomas was aware of the phenomenon." Aquinas's own commentary makes it clear that this sphere is supposed to be the one with the stars embedded on it. Okay. But why does the author say on page 5 that the actual time of rotation 25,800 years?
How about defining it as an instance of functional complexity? And treating the list of properties as following necessarily from this definition? Okay, this is very diamond-in-the-rough (or perhaps zirconium...) but here goes my thoughts on the matter: (Complexity) Many diverse parts (functional) acting for the sake of the whole I think I need to add something like "not as the instrument of another" or something like that. Given that they act together as one whole and given entropy, etc., the organism will need to posses more order than its surroundings (homeostasis). It will therefore need to take in energy (nutrition), which it will use to sustain its readiness to interact with its environment so as to preserve its own being (homeostasis again?), but which will eventually break down (death), so that in order for that life form to continue it will need to duplicate itself (reproduction), which, upon occurring, will involve both development (growth) to maturity and...
Comments