Conservative Metaphysics

My education in the classics is woefully wanting, which is why I so much appreciate a clear and thoughtful essay such as this one by Edward Feser. Yes, it's an old link. It's been on my reading pile since January. But it was well worth the wait.

[A] consideration of metaphysical issues of the sort Weaver addressed would, I maintain, do much to clarify the nature of conservatism, and of the disputes that constantly break out among conservatives of different stripes. For there is no one as dogmatically beholden to a metaphysic as the man who denies that he has one; and it is rare that a disagreement gets as fierce as the intramural fights among conservatives have sometimes been, if it doesn't ultimately trace back to some difference in metaphysical first principles. It will be useful, then, to have a survey of the kinds of metaphysical assumptions that underlie the thinking of various people classified as "conservative."

In the article he identifies three types of "conservatives", explaining the metaphysical system of each. He then comes to a conclusion I happen to share. We simple-minded types respond well to Ayn Rand's synthesis of "A=A". (For someone as loquacious as she, at times she was marvelously succinct.) It's nice to have a more solid grounding.

If you've ever said, "Well, duh" to the statement, "ideas have consequences", you owe it to yourself to read the essay.