• PhilPapers
  • PhilPeople
  • PhilArchive
  • PhilEvents
  • PhilJobs
  • Sign in
PhilPeople
 
  • Sign in
  • News Feed
  • Find Philosophers
  • Departments
  • Radar
  • Help
 
profile-cover
Drag to reposition
profile picture

Caleb Cohoe

Metropolitan State University of Denver
  •  Home
  •  Publications
    34
    • Most Recent
    • Most Downloaded
    • Topics
  •  Recommended
    5
  •  Public Boomarks
    5
  •  Events
    6
  •  News and Updates
    28
  •  Philosophical Views

 More details
  • Metropolitan State University of Denver
    Department of Philosophy
    Professor
Princeton University
Department of Philosophy
PhD, 2012
CV
Homepage
Denver, Colorado, United States of America
0000-0002-8063-2950
Areas of Specialization
Philosophy of Religion
Ancient Greek and Roman Philosophy
Medieval and Renaissance Philosophy
Areas of Interest
Epistemology
Metaphysics
Philosophy of Mind
Philosophy of Religion
Ancient Greek and Roman Philosophy
Medieval and Renaissance Philosophy
Social Epistemology
2 more
PhilPapers Editorships
Aristotle
Aristotle: Natural Science
Aristotle: Matter and Elements
Aristotle: Time
Aristotle: Place
Aristotle: Philosophy of Mind
Aristotle: Soul
Aristotle: Perception
Aristotle: Active/Passive Intellect
Aristotle: Philosophy of Mind, Misc
5 more
  • All publications (34)
  •  807
    Review of "Alexander of Aphrodisias on the Soul, Part I,” Trans. Victor Caston" (review)
    Journal of the History of Philosophy 52 (1): 163-164. 2014.
    Aristotle: SoulAlexander of Aphrodisias
  •  2999
    Why the Intellect Cannot Have a Bodily Organ: De Anima 3.4
    Phronesis 58 (4): 347-377. 2013.
    I reconstruct Aristotle’s reasons for thinking that the intellect cannot have a bodily organ. I present Aristotle’s account of the aboutness or intentionality of cognitive states, both perceptual and intellectual. On my interpretation, Aristotle’s account is based around the notion of cognitive powers taking on forms in a special preservative way. Based on this account, Aristotle argues that no physical structure could enable a bodily part or combination of bodily parts to produce or determine t…Read more
    I reconstruct Aristotle’s reasons for thinking that the intellect cannot have a bodily organ. I present Aristotle’s account of the aboutness or intentionality of cognitive states, both perceptual and intellectual. On my interpretation, Aristotle’s account is based around the notion of cognitive powers taking on forms in a special preservative way. Based on this account, Aristotle argues that no physical structure could enable a bodily part or combination of bodily parts to produce or determine the full range of forms that the human intellect can understand. For Aristotle, cognitive powers with bodily organs are always spatiotemporally limited, but the understanding is not. Aristotle claims that our understanding applies to all instances of the thing understood wherever and whenever they exist. On Aristotle’s own account the intellect in its nature is only “potential,” it does not actually possess any form. Thus nothing prevents it from possessing all forms.
    Philosophy of Mind, MiscIntentionality, MiscAristotle: SoulAristotle: PerceptionAristotle: Active/Pa…Read more
    Philosophy of Mind, MiscIntentionality, MiscAristotle: SoulAristotle: PerceptionAristotle: Active/Passive IntellectAristotle: Theoretical WisdomAristotle: Matter and Material Change
  •  18067
    There Must Be A First: Why Thomas Aquinas Rejects Infinite, Essentially Ordered, Causal Series
    British Journal for the History of Philosophy 21 (5): 838-856. 2013.
    Several of Thomas Aquinas's proofs for the existence of God rely on the claim that causal series cannot proceed in infinitum. I argue that Aquinas has good reason to hold this claim given his conception of causation. Because he holds that effects are ontologically dependent on their causes, he holds that the relevant causal series are wholly derivative: the later members of such series serve as causes only insofar as they have been caused by and are effects of the earlier members. Because the in…Read more
    Several of Thomas Aquinas's proofs for the existence of God rely on the claim that causal series cannot proceed in infinitum. I argue that Aquinas has good reason to hold this claim given his conception of causation. Because he holds that effects are ontologically dependent on their causes, he holds that the relevant causal series are wholly derivative: the later members of such series serve as causes only insofar as they have been caused by and are effects of the earlier members. Because the intermediate causes in such series possess causal powers only by deriving them from all the preceding causes, they need a first and non-derivative cause to serve as the source of their causal powers.
    Thomas AquinasCosmological Arguments from Regress
  •  152
    Review of The Powers of Aristotle's Soul, Thomas Kjeller Johansen (review)
    Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. 2013.
    Aristotle: Actuality and PotentialityAristotle: SoulAristotle: Philosophical Method, MiscAristotle: …Read more
    Aristotle: Actuality and PotentialityAristotle: SoulAristotle: Philosophical Method, MiscAristotle: PerceptionAristotle: Active/Passive Intellect
  • Prev.
  • 1
  • 2
  • Next
PhilPeople logo

On this site

  • Find a philosopher
  • Find a department
  • The Radar
  • Index of professional philosophers
  • Index of departments
  • Help
  • Acknowledgments
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Terms and conditions

Brought to you by

  • The PhilPapers Foundation
  • The American Philosophical Association
  • Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University
PhilPeople is currently in Beta Sponsored by the PhilPapers Foundation and the American Philosophical Association
Feedback