So I want to address three questions. Our general topic is the distinction of essence and existence.

And what I first want to talk about is, are some arguments for the distinction between essence and

existence being a real distinction, as opposed to merely a linguistic distinction or distinction in

thoughts, say. And along the way, of course, I'll explain exactly what the distinction is.

Secondly, that leads in Aquinas, and this is the topic Aquinas famously addresses in the Deente.

This leads Aquinas to a famous argument for God's existence as the first cause of existence.

I don't want to say too much about that because Fred Ferdoso and Steve Longer are going to be addressing natural theology tomorrow, so I don't want to say too much about that because Fred Ferdoso and Steve Long are to be addressing

natural theology tomorrow, so I don't want to preempt anything they have to say.

But I'll say a little bit about that because it's really hard to avoid that once you introduce

Aquinas' distinction and the use he wants to make of it and the significance he thinks it has

metaphysically.

And then third, I want to address some common

objections to arguments for the real distinction that you see in Aquinas and in later Thomas

writers and of the use that's made of that distinction. All right. So let me get right into it then

with our first topic, arguments for the real distinction of which there are

three main arguments that I want to address today but first let's talk about what the distinction is

itself the world of our experience contains stones trees dogs human beings and a wide variety of other

things we know that what these things are and we know that they are part of reality outside our minds.

Notice that what we thereby know about them are two distinct things.

First, we know, again, what they are.

You know, for instance, that what a human being is is a rational animal.

That is the nature or essence of a human being.

...