CJ’s comment below led me to Edward Feser’s fine philosophy-centered blog . I’ve read things by Feser in passing, heard his name spoken of with respect, but never really registered his overall excellence. (No, the recent Hart-Feser dispute in FT about natural law did not kindle my interest, which tells you something about my limitations.) But Feser’s great, and you don’t want to miss the piece CJ linked to below, on his intellectual journey away from semi-libertarianism . My SoCal evangelical heart was particularly warmed by learning of Feser’s trips to the Fuller Seminary bookstore, even when an athiest, due to its excellent philosophy section.
My present interest in libertarianism is more political/American and less philosophical/abstract, even though I wouldn’t deny there is some benefit to be had, and plenty of philosophic entertainment, by reading Robert Nozick’s hyper-Lockean Anarchy, State, and Utopia . Feser is most interesting to me where he discusses libertarian-conservative “fusionism.” In fact, he makes me suspect that what I really need for my Five Conceptions of Liberty project (see below) are books or essays that discuss the relation between the “libertarian” con-law guys I mention, and such fusionism. Do chime in if you know.
I did notice that Feser had an interesting recent discussion of the relation of correct doctrine/theology to correct worship, prompted by this sentence by Peter Geach: If anybodys thoughts about God are sufficiently confused and erroneous, then he will fail to be thinking about the true and living God at all . . . Feser interrogates that adverb “sufficiently,” in a post that discusses, among other things, the Catholic teaching on Mormon baptisms, and the fairly recent evangelical attraction to “process” and “open theism” theology. So that’s the sort of stuff you’ll get from his blog.
So not for the first time, my thanks to CJ.