There's an interesting discussion of that question over at Right Reason. The post's author, Alexander Pruss, is certainly right to imply that love in the relevant sense, i.e. agape, cannot be merely a disposition. But neither do I think it right to say that agape entails no disposition to love, if indeed that's what is being said. I'd say that agape is fundamentally a kind of action which, when performed regularly, entails a non-necessitating habitus or disposition to act similarly.
A Swish of Common Sense: Sophie Cunningham Strikes Again
-
Given the cost one pays as a public figure for taking a principled position
against the prevailing zeitgeist, Sophie Cunningham's stance on women in
women'...
21 minutes ago












