Monday, August 29, 2011


A.  Placement of hypens in these titles is open to revision.  If you have some sort of authoritative advice on the matter, please let me know.

B.  I've been reading Wippel's The Metaphysical Thought of Thomas Aquinas and I find the author's writing a little too slow.  Plus he's inherited the anti-essentialist paranoia of Gilson and company.  If all goes well, look forward to a defense in later posts of the Thomistic axiom (which Gilson and the "existential Thomist" tradition reject) that being is the first thing known by the intellect.

C.  This is all rather obscure.


  1. Not at all obscure. I'm not sure what's really at stake in this disagreement, but it seems clear to me that the wannabe-existentialists have the worse of it. I look forward to seeing your take on it.

  2. Who is included in Gilson and "company"? Maritan?, Copelston? Feser? Who is in the other camp besides yourself? A little more background could help.

  3. It's all intrathomistic squabbling, Joe. There are some actual issues at the heart of it, but mostly it's just cranky old men rooting for one team or another. I have only slight criticisms of Gilson, for instance, but his disciples drive me up the wall.

  4. The "other side" is made up of the old-school commentatorial tradition: John of St. Thomas, Thomas Cajetan, Capreolus, etc. But there are multiple "sides" in the world of Thomism. For a summary, read Fr. Romanus Cessario's book "A Short History of Thomism".