Comments Page

Hi Peter,

I like the time line you have put up on the site maybe you could put a summary / dictionary of philosophy terms and meanings as a reference point while listening to your podcast . As always I am enjoying this weeks podcast.

Regards

David

I love your podcast so much. So much that I needed to comment just to say that. Please keep up the subtle humor and thoughtful analysis.

Hello Prof Adamson

Many thanks for your excellent podcasts.

With my very best wishes and kind regards,

avi

I am interested in Maimonides and the Islamic Philosophy.

Peter,

I haven't reached the Neoplatonisms yet, but I just wanted to thank you for such interesting podcasts.

Actually, I skip some and I've only reached Aristotle. I guess I'll have to go back and read his ethics. Also Plato's Republic.

At this rate, it will take you years and years to reach the 21th century, which is too bad.

Maybe you could just cheat a bit and dash through the Middle Ages and begin again with Descartes.

I doubt that you will do that. You seem like a very conscientious person.

I prefer the Greeks myself. I have the theory that the Greeks lied to themselves less than we do today and much much less than the thinkers of the Middle Ages.

Peter,

I am on a mission to acquire all of the Platonic dialogues so I can ease my mind in between stressful bouts of MCAT studying this summer. What translations or collections do you recommend to get my collection started? Thanks much.

I listen to these on my iPhone on the drive to & from work.
They are the best thing since DebateGod.org
Thank you SO SO much for making them.
I can't tell you how much I look forward to my 25min drive now- I'm often gutted when I actually get home & end up sitting in the car outside my flat for 10mins till you've finished the episode! 8-D
THANK YOU.

Hello Peter, do you think you'll be taking on philosophers from different cultures? It would be trail-blazing if you did that via this podcast series.

Thanks so much for doing this podcast, it's been incredibly interesting and informative.

One question though - what do you think of Xenophon? I know you briefly address him in a Socrates episode, and you kind of write him off as a philosopher but say he's great for other things. But you never really address what that is! Anyhow, if you have any time to elaborate, that'd be great.

Thanks for the podcast series. I appreciate the time and effort you invest in each episode. Your exposition is clear and easy to follow. I very much appreciate the sly humor and puns that help to enliven the series.
I discovered your podcasts while searching for the subject of philosophy. I majored in philosophy many years ago. Your podcasts help to refresh my recollection.
Please keep up the great work. I hope to live long enough to listen to the entire series, which will no doubt total several hundred episodes. WOW! What a huge project to take on.
Best wishes,

Dave Macher

Thanks so much for these podcasts. It's been awesome learning about the history of philosophy, and the origins of a subject that I think is great. I was just curious because you said in the first episode concerning the sceptics that you'll finally be up to Descartes in five years. Will you actually continue up to Descartes, and how long would it take? I would love to hear a podcast on the more contemporary thinkers(relative to the ones being discussed), especially Kant.

Really so talented work,Thanks so much for your efforts,but can you make an episode just about the history of ancient Greek medicine?!
Thanks in advance!

Peter, would you happen to know where I can find any scholarly information on the Megarians? I've decided to reread the Theaetetus and I figured it might be helpful to know a little about them. The most information I have on them right now is from Cornford's commentary, but he doesn't have a lot to say about their doctrines. Or have their ideas more or less been lost in the mists of time?

Thank you so much for starting this series! I've been following since the beginning and have shared them with my fellow philosophers at Western Connecticut State University. I hope you can keep on going through the Medieval period, the Renaissance, and beyond.

I just wanted to say thank you so much for creating this fantastic resource; your podcasts are hugely enjoyable and informative!

Hi Peter. I'm looking forward to the interview with A. A. Long, and agree that there couldn't be a more impressive finale for a series of talks on Hellenistic philosophy. I must add however, that I enjoyed your podcasts on Plato more than those on Epictetus and Seneca, where you gave us little of their philosophy in their own words and instead spent the entire time summarizing. I felt we lost some insight into the personality and genius of both Hellenistic authors, as well as their lasting appeal over so many centuries. I'm also looking forward to your presentations of Arab philosophy, as it seems to be an area you know something about. Is this due to a focus on neo-Platonism? That continuity of thought seems important to you. This observation is based only on having heard you on both your own podcast and 'In Our Time', rather than looking at say, your published work, so perhaps it's misguided, but that's my sense anyway. Thanks for reading this far, and for a wonderful podcast. Not that it matters, but since you don't know what kind of audience your effort has attracted, I'll just mention I'm a currently unemployed cancer patient who is largely housebound (I'm sure my situation enhances my interest in Stoicism and Epictetus in particular), and your podcasts help me stay in an intellectually stimulating world rather than one filled with the drudgery of endless medical procedures, etc. Thanks for that. best wishes isaac dumiel (some yahoo formerly at large but now housebound in Seattle WA USA)

Hi Peter,
I wonder if Apuleius, author of "The Golden Ass" and "The God Of Socrates", would figure in your podcast as a "Middle" Platonist? I'm looking forward to your discussion of these intermediary figures, since most studies tend to skip over them in a quick, dismissive paragraph!

Hi Peter,
Just seen the timeline section. Thankyou for putting this up there I think it will be a great reference point. Enjoyed the last two episodes on Cicero very much.

Kind Regards

David

So, would I be correct in supposing that Middle Platonism/ Neo-Pythagoreanism is soon to follow upon the skepticism episodes?

Before my grandchildren are born and come of age to enjoy listening to the MP3s I've downloaded, I'm taking delight myself in your special style. Hopefully it won't sound void if I say that the world is a better place with you (and your podcast) around.

Now, I know what you're thinking (smiles): that I must be listening to them from time to time! Well no, actually I listen to an episode a day, and then again and again; and every time there's a new aspect, a new idea popping up from among the layers of your argumentative discourse: Antiquity revived.

Receive my most heartfelt thanks,

eugenia_dg

Hi Peter,
Thanks for the podcast. I can only imagine the amount effort you put into this project. Your work has rekindled my love of thinking.
Many thanks.
Ken

Dear Peter.

I am deep into your fascinating programs on Plato. Perusing in my library, we don't have the book you recommend, but instead A. E. Taylor, Plato: the Man and His Work. Has it been supersede or is it still a good introduction?

Thanks!

Cristina

This is a truly wonderful work you are doing. Thank you! Perhaps someone has already asked you this in the comments but supposing, despite your efforts, that you do find a gap or would like to add an interview that fills out the picture even more, do you have a way of adding new episodes that address topics treated at an earlier time? Thanks.

Matthew Miller

Hi Peter,

Thanks for these podcasts; I enjoy them on my long commute! One question though, can you ever post the last podcast? When does the history of philosophy end? Xeno may have his revenge after all!

Adam

Hi Peter,

I realize that, once again, I'm getting way ahead of things, but you seem to be the individual who'd know about the availability of Neoplatonist texts. I've read Plotinus, as well as the recent Paulist Press edition of the "pseudo"-Dionysius, but would very much like to move on to Proclus and later writers such as (in particular) Scotus Erigena. Problem: can't find texts! Or, at least, texts that aren't selling for $100+. 

Doing some web research, I discovered a site called The Thomas Taylor Trust, which is dedicated to republishing works of Proclus, Iamblichus, etc., which were translated by Thomas Taylor in the later 18th century. They seem to be priced relatively reasonably, and in excellent, leather bound edition as well. Question: have you ever come across any of these, and is the quality of translation adequate? I know that Stephen MacKenna famously disparaged Taylor's Plotinus translations, but this may well have been due to professional jealousy.

Any light you could shed on the matter would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.

Mark 

Hi Peter,

1) your podcasts are really great!!!

2) but I miss an introduction to the Presocratics. Their philosophy didn't emerge out of nothing. Is it possible to add something about the influences of their philosophy and perhaps something about the "Achsenzeit" (China, India, Greece). [There is place for the number 000  :) ]

Ulli

Dear Peter: 

I have just started listening to your series from the beginning, and I find all the podcast magnificent! Listening to the program on Heraclitus while doing the dishes really lights up that menial task. The program of Xenophanes was brilliant.

I am just perusing and downloading further episodes, and I see that you are currently with Marcus Aurelius (one of my favourites). But, what about Cicero? I know that many scholars do not regard him as a "true" philosopher, rather just a transmissor of knowledge from Greece to Rome, but many of his views are quite interesting, especially in that mixture of Roman customs and Greek philosophy.

Please, keep up this good work! And thanks!

Cristina

Hi Peter

I enoy your podcasts very much indeed. They are really well delivered, and without exception are both jam packed with information and at the same time you manage to prevent the whole thing from getting turgid. So congratulations, and thanks.

I am struggling a bit though, with the point of it all. I am (as you will clearly be able to tell) completely unversed in philosophy, but as far as I can tell we seem to be still struggling with the same questions as we were in the days of Plato (I am thinking here about the episode about whether truth is relative or absolute). have we solved any anything over the last few thousand years? Or am I asking the wrong question, and is philosophy a skill, how to think?

Anyway, whatever the answer to that is, the journey itself is fun, so thanks for all your time and effort, it's all worth it (or it is from my point of view anyway!)
David

Hi Peter,

Just listening  to an old in our time episode. Did yo miss out Zeno and spilt soup.

Looking foroward to Sundays Episode.

David

Have you read H. A. Wolfson's book on Spinoza? It's the best out there.

Hi Peter,

Your podcasts are magnificent and I look forward to every new one you post on your site..

I wanted to know if you recommend any specific author or work dedicated to the History of Philolosophy.  I apologize in advance if this question is inappropropriate to ask of a professor and scholar of ancient and medieval philosophy such as yourself, who has dedicated considerable time and effort in analazing the primary sources of ancient thought.  But have your read tomes such as Bertrand Russell's "The History of Western Philosophy" or Fr. Copleston's series?  Another popular one is Will Durant's "The Story of Philosophy".  Durant's monumental "The Story of Civilization", though a single man's rendition of the encycopedia of history, has so much energy and richness of prose, that it has increased my interest in the study of history as I have read it over many years.  In a lot of ways, your podcasts in philosophy remind me of this work, in your unwavering ability to make the subject riveting and fresh. I know these works are often not true "histories", but one person's interpretation of the ideas behind these ancient writers.  Listening to your podcasts piqued my interest in reading Russell's work,  though I find it again more an editorial than a true history.  In sum, I think you have done a far better job than Bertrand Russell at keeping your history podcasts unbiased, with many guest speakers to give additional points of view!

Lastly, I wanted to thank you for taking on the challenge of making this podcast one that will be "without any gaps."  I have listened to your talks on the internet about Averroes and I know you are a foremost scholar on Avicenna.  Being Persian myself, I have a particular fondness for this latter and can't wait until I hear your story.  I see so many echoes of Epicurus in poets like Omar Khayyam, and even Plato in Rumi.  I look forward to learning about all of these "gaps" that are all-too-frequently omitted from so many compendia and syllabi on the topic.

Best wishes,

Bahman

Hi Peter,

First of all, thanks for the fantastic podcast! I can't tell you how much I really appreciate your efforts. 

Second, without jumping too far ahead, when it comes to the age of Plotinus, Porphyry, Proclus, etc., will you be including all of these individuals in the podcast? Or will there be a distinction made in the case of some of these individuals (Pseduo-Dionysius springs to mind) between clear cut philosophy and the nebulous realm of theology? 

Hi Peter ,
I was wondering if you could put a time line of People and events so we can keep tabs of who is who and era's so us laymen can keep up and not get to confused.
Great podcast this week by the way.
Regards

David

Hi Peter - thanks for the excellently accessible podcasts - combined with Librivox audio versions of the primary texts they open up a whole new world.  All power to you. 

Hi Peter,

Thanks very much for your wonderful podcast.  It's very accessible.  I began listening to it with little interest of the subject, now I head straight to the philosophy section when I walk into a bookstore.  I've bought the 'The Presocratic Philosophers' as recommended and the 'Complete Works of Plato'.

Rather than read through Plato like a novel, my girlfriend and I are going to take a few hours out each week to dress up in togas and sandals and perform each dialogue in my flat, followed by a discussion of the dialogue.  Last week we did 'Euphythro' which was very successful, although we had no audience to confirm that.

My question is - are we historically accurate in wearing togas (white bedsheets), sandals and fake beards, if not can you recommend suitable alternative attire?

Many thanks,

Andrew

Dear Peter Adamson, I'm just messaging you to make sure not to forget Cicero!

Also, I'm just wondering whether you will later be giving any attention in future to Crescas and Gersonides?

Hi All

I thought it was time I made a posting to this forum. I have been listening for a year or more and I finally thought I should say something. The only thing is that I have had a few drinks, however I have heard that doing philosophy when you are drunk is the best time , yet I do remember a pre-socratic saying something along the lines of "if you are drunk your soul is going out and therefore not thinking straight." or something like that. (I have a feeling that it was Heraclitus - which is strange given the later part of this posting).

The more I listen to this podcast the more I am thinking that we don't have an answer to anything. Every time you think you are heading in the right direction it turns out that you were not. I am guessing the best example of this is "Frankenstein" ( I know this was not his name, but he was a philosopher who had a view early in his life and then did a 180 and thought he was wrong. In fact I think he is referred to as old and new Frankenstein.) Hopefully you know who I am talking about he lived sometime in the 1800 - 1900's.

Anyway as I said the more I listen to this podcast the more I am thinking that we don't have an answer to anything (you will notice that I don't say "I don't know anything") and I am starting to think the reason why I don't have any answer is because there is no one answer. Or more to the point there is no one answer which is standing still which I can learn. It just won't stand still like a2 + b2 = c2. It just seems to keep moving.

I want to know the answer but it looks like I will not because no one has in the last 3000 years so its not likely that I will find the answer. Why does this happen … could it be because things never stop changing …. including the answer (if in fact there is one …. or maybe there are many for each moment in time)? Maybe the whole thing is to listen to the Logos?

When I first listened to the early episode on Heraclitus I thought … yes the road up and down are one in the same (so what) and I also thought sea water is healthy for fish and poison for men (again so what) and finally yep the river has water flowing through it so what? However I am now thinking …… actually things are changing all the time and in fact no one can tell me or predict the direction of the flow, which is ok because all you have to do it listen to the logos. (By the way my example of Logos is that my wife sometimes knows thatI really need to talk and get things off my chest .... but now is not the time …. she knows that because she is listening to the logos.)

I suspect this is not making much sense mainly because of the level of vodka in my body, damping my soul. The point is that I wanted to say please keep this podcast going. I have never officially studied philosophy and this podcast is giving me a huge amount of joy (not in a strong hellenistic manner ) but please keep it going.

Thanks

Brad

Hi I'am a mexican student and I am excited with your blog¡

My english is no good but I want to ask you, do you have a place in the blog dedicated to the ancient scepticism? I think in Pirron, Enesidemo, Arcesilao, like instances of this philosophý view. I don't see it.

The best for you blog¡

Hi

Just to let everybody know in our time is doing a week long series on the wrttien word on BBC Radio 4 at 9 am Mon- Friday this week.

David

Dear Peter,

I have just started listening to your podcast and it is amazing. I have been meaning to systemacially go through philosophy and this is a great place to start. Thank you for taking the time and effort to do this podcast. I have just finished episode 4 about pythagoras and had a question if you don't mind.

I have encountered the idea that pythagoras believed in re-incarnation in a greek religion class I took in undergrad. Both the idea of re-incarnation and the fact that certain spiritual mystics possess memories of past life is central in hinduism, buddhism, and mysticism in general, as I am sure you are aware. I was wondering if you could comment on any similarities between pythagorianism and the hindu/buddhist ideas on re-incarnation? Also, was there any known contact between these regions at this period in time?

Thanks so much,

Abhinav

Wow - I've become a fan. HoP is comprehensive yet presented in a very listener friendly and pedagogical way (for even the more slow-witted of us). The permeating tone and the present day cultural references and allusions all makes for an attentive, non-elitist - albeit highly informative - and liberating listen.

Thank you! - ML

Dear Peter

This is the best rendition on a history of Philosophy "ever" especialy when you have someone in to sum up, and we all hear the questions you ask, that we would like to ask. We catch the unity of ideas It sort of puts it all togrther, I wish you could insert  a litle more of that, but I realize that might be asking a bit much.

I'v been a practioner of your methods for forty two years (history), but using books, as you can imagine I am unable to ask qustions, I am not a Philosopher but have reviewed many of the ancients you discuss, as a result the podcasts prortray a  splendid picture (fill in the gaps for me).

If it were up to me I'd have in on every nite, right after the shocking news we have to bear on TV.

Akolouthos of the ancients

Don

PS. Could I ask who is your favourite.

Hi Peter,

Just finished listening to in our time .Can not belive you left the story of how Heraclitus died out of your podcast, although if you were to include everything you would be doing a pod cast per day instead of per week. I too think you should go up to the present day. I think it is a good idea about the books though because most of the history of Philosophy books I have read or skimmed do seem a bit dry as apposed to your podcast which of cause is most definatly not. (include the death story in your book).

David

Have you read Stephen Greenblatt's book 'The Swerve: How the world became modern?'  It is the story of the discovery of a copy of Lucretius's 'On the Nature of Things,' by Poggio Bracciolini in 1417, and how that event helped changed the world.  Greenblatt is well know for his books on Shakespeare, and this new one is getting a lot of press here.  Just another cosmic coincidence as you take up Lucretius when he is perhaps more visible than he has been in decades.

For many years I have had a passing interest in the history of philosophy but I am afraid your podcasts have now got me well and truly hooked!  I have now started assembling as much reading material and the SEP articles for each period on my ebook reader and listening again to all the podcasts, doing the readings and getting right into the whole thing. 

Luckily my university library has a lot of material, most of which has been slumbering peacefully in the lower basement area for years and is now being taken out and actually read.  My home library is also getting a lot of additions.  

I just hope I last long enough to get to at least the 18th century!  

I'm loving this podcast and check iTunes way too much lo see if the next episode is in.

Is there any chance we can get access to the transcripts? I often want to quote you on Twittter but listening and typing/writing is too much like lecture note-taking which I am sworn against.

This is amazing! Thank you.

I can't wait until you get to Avicenna, and then Spinoza and Leibniz. Can you also do one on H.L. Mencken?

Thanks very much for these philosophical lectures addressed to the general reader. An excellent public service. I'll certainly be referring individuals to your site in the future. Best to you, Andrew

You are doing a great thing.

Thank you!

Hi Peter,

Thankyou for putting your lecture up for listening. I enjoyed it very much. Any chance of putting it on itunes as I like to relisten while I commute home from work.

Keep up the good work on the podcast it has become one of my highlights of the week along with the history of rome podcast.

David

I am a faithful listener, but I do not have the time or even the inclination to read all your suggested readings. I know this might be difficult, but how about giving one or maybe two essential readings for each of the major philosophers you cover? Maybe this recommendation could be part of the first podcast you give for each of the major figures you cover. Something like, if you can only read one book by or about Aristotle, read this one. I think that I could read one book by Plato, one by Aristotle, etc. This is less than an ideal way to understand the history of philosophy, but better than nothing.

Peter,
I enjoyed your teaser on the talk you gave any chance of posting the whole lecture for those of us who could not attend.

David

Dear Prof. Adamson,

I am a student from Germany (still in high school though) and luckily philosophy can be chosen as a bilingual subject at my school. So far, we have 'only' dealt with English philosophers, such as Bertrand Russell (no offense), and thus left out most of the ancient philosophers, who I do regard as very crucial to modern-day philosophy. With that being said, your podcast has saved me innumerable and exhausting hours in the library doing research on the roots of philosophy. Therefore, I am more than happy that you have put a lot of effort and time in creating this amaizing podcast and given me an equally amaizing train ride.

Best regards

Debora

This is an ambitious project, and it looks like it's well on its way to being successful in its goals. 

After browsing your website and reading your about section, I'm curious about what this project is trying to accomplish by emphasizing "without any gaps," especially since it is focusing on the "major" (Western) philosophers in history.

1) What does it mean to have no gaps when you've already truncated your project down to just Western philosophy and left out Eastern philosophy?

2) What does it mean to have no gaps when you're focusing on the "major" philosophers and off-handedly mention the lesser-known philosophers when it is precisely these 'lesser-known' ones that would be filling the gaps between the 'giants'?

3) What does it mean to have no gaps when there is no mention of filling the gaps left by the Western tradition itself insofar as it has drawn  from a narrow set of groups of people (mostly men of above average socio-economic status who are identified as or associated with being white (to cover the ancients))?

If you do address any of these points in your project, an expanded "about" section could be worthwhile since, as it stands, the non-mention of these issues suggests that they will not be addressed.

As a woman in philsophy myself, it's...hard to see the normal list of men in the past doing philosophy and to see this described as our tradition of philosophy "without any gaps." This implies that the lack of people who share my social idenity isn't a significant gap, which implies that my social group being discouraged or outright excluded from philosophy would not have a significant impact on the quality of philosophy, since it would not create any "gaps".  And since my social group is still systamtically discouraged from philosophy (http://beingawomaninphilosophy.wordpress.com/) this implies that I don't have anything too important to contribute to philosophy, since if lots of people like me were not in philosophy, our absence would leave no gap. 

I in no way mean to imply you intended to imply all this. The project probably was not thinking about what having "gaps" would mean in this context. So I encourage the project to consider the various historical and cultural ways in which the history of Western philosophy has "gaps". 

Hi Peter,

First of all I wanted to say what a pleasure it is to have access to your podcast – well done! Your focus, particular perspective, and delivery make the episodes both enjoyable and enlightening. I love the mix of erudition and humor and well as the inclusion of outside experts.

Secondly, I have a specific question for you and would love to hear your thoughts if you have a spare moment. I teach beginning design at University of Idaho. Recently, I have been thinking about and drawing upon Aristotle’s discussion of the five ways of knowing truth in the NicomacheanEthics as a means of encouraging students to envision a richer and more complex notion of thinking.  I do this in part to counteract what seems to be a common tendency among students to count linear logic alone as thought and the memorization of facts as knowledge. Not only are these tendencies problematic generally, but in design  specifically, where there is usually a wide range of  potential solutions to the single problem (i.e. there is no “answer”), it  becomes critical that young designers grasp other modes of processing, modes that will allow them to more effectively engage the inherent ambiguity of the design problem. One of the modes of processing that we talk about a lot is intuition. Herein lies my question: I have been wondering what (if anything) in Aristotle might be termed intuition? It seems that nous might be related, although from what you have said it seems a very particular means of grasping the universal in the particular—perhaps a bit like Husserl’s categorical intuition?  It also strikes me that there is something in Aristotle’s focus on ‘habits of excellence’ that might also draw upon intuitive capacities. If you have time, I would love to hear your thoughts about the notion/role of intuition in Aristotle.  

In any case, thanks again for all your work on the podcast – it is a fantastic resource.

Kind Regards,

Randall Teal

Went to this fabulous event yesterday: http://philosophytown.co.uk/events

Malmesbury is the birth place of Thomas Hobbes and residents have instigated an annual philosophy weekend.

This is about the 3rd year and my first visit. The talks were at varying levels from beginner to more scholarly and were all very well presented.

I got to meet Professor Angie Hobbs and and discuss reading material for 12 year old girls (since we each have one). Also, myself and another chap both mentioned that we listened to Peter's podcast and she was really pleased since apparently she knows Peter.

Stayed up till 2am talking with other amateur philosophers. Great fun!

For anybody in England or Wales this is an event that you should really visit if you can!

Dear Peter, 

Thank you for without any gaps. I'm glad I've only discovered your podcast now so that I don't (for a while, at least) wait a whole week for each podcast to be released! ;) I love the way you present this material. 

This isn't a question about philosophy, rather, what is that piece of music?? It's beautiful. Sorry if someone has already asked this question!

Shiloh

Dear Prof. Adamson,

I wanted to take a few minutes to write you and thank you for your wonderful podcast. I am listening every day during my long commutes in and out of Brooklyn (NY), and I couldn't think of a better way to start and end my days. 

Thank you for all your hard work!

Inés

Dear Professor Adamson,

I just want to say how grateful I am for the huge amount of work you are doing. I am a horticulturalist from Melburne and have been consuming your podcasts voraciously since I discovered them, at work and in the evenings. Having now "caught up", the pleasure wil be made more exquisate as I will have to wait for each new episode!

It has been a pleasure to follow your consice, comprehensive, accessible yet rigorous, and very often amusing lectures so far. To a lowly autodidact from the antipodes, you podcasts are pure gold. They exemplify that which I value most highly in "this whole internet thing": the wide dissemination of, and access to, education and culture. It is through the hard work and dedication of people such as yourself that this potentiality is realised.

Now if we can just get the animated version for children up and running.. Starring Haiwatha the giraffe, of course, with commentary(!) by Buster Keaton and soundtrack by James Brown.

My thanks also to King's College: you should give professor Adamson a pay rise!

Kind regards,

Bernard.

Professor Adamson,

Ive listened to your concise exposition of Ibn Sina's cosmological argument at Philosophy bites - thank you for summarising the proof and the counterarguments so clearly.  You note that one of the replies to the proof accuses it of comitting the fallacy of composition.  Do you know of any works that explore this further?  It seems to me (from a little reading and thinking) that the fallacy of composition only holds if the attribute predicated is relative, or in some way dependant on external factors for its instantiation.  For example, the following all commit this fallacy:

1. All parts of this object are small, therefore the whole object is small.  [Small is relative to some standard]

2. All parts of this object are colourless, therefore the whole is colourless.  [Being colourful is dependent on the power of sense perception of the observer - an external factor]

3.  All parts of this object are square, therefore the object is square.  [Being square depends on how the objects are arranged, and arrangement is an external factor]

On the otherhand, being contingent or necessary is not a relative matter, and is not dependent on external factors, but is purely a function of the entities intrinsic makeup.  As I say Ive only done a little reading on this, so Im probably missing something obvious... I'd be interested to read what others have thought about this. 

Many thanks,

Monte

ps, do you personally find the proof to have any weight?