Aquinas: A Beginner's Guide

This is an excellent primer on the philosophy and theology of Aquinas, as well as an excellent introduction to the Aristotelian metaphysical framework upon which Aquinas built his philosophical views. The book covers some biographical information about Aquinas, discusses Aristotelian-Thomistic metaphysics, briefly defends the natural theology built from such metaphysics, and describes Aquinas's thoughts on intellect, will, and morality. The text provides a thorough description of the meaning behind key terms that can be easily confused with quite different concepts due to their similarity to words used in more contemporary parlance -- even a word as simple as "motion" can be understood to mean something different to Aquinas than it does to a modern audience. In particular, I found the discussions on act and potency, form and matter (specifically, as it regards the soul), the convertibility of the transcendentals, the five ways, the intellect and the will, and on morality to be quite valuable. Overall, the book is more of an overview than it is a thorough defense of every aspect Aquinas. That said, it's thorough enough if you're unfamiliar with the subject. If you've heard about Aquinas and want to understand his thinking and his arguments in a broader sense, this is an excellent book to pick up. I highly recommend it. It is relatively short and very clear and concise, but it may be difficult to understand for those not already somewhat versed in philosophy or familiar with the Aristotelian-Thomistic view. I speak as a bit of a dabbler, myself. I listened to this book twice a couple of years ago as an audio book, and I could only understand it in bits and pieces - as though I was catching only glimpses of some scenic view through the gaps between trees as I sped along a wooded road. After spending some time perusing Edward Feser's blog [...] I eventually built up enough of an understanding to really glean a lot of substance from this text. In addition to recommending this book, I'd also recommend a review of some of Feser's posts on Aquinas as a supplement.

I've had the works of Aquinas on my list of things to study for some time. A few months ago, I found myself mid-discussion in an atheist forum online and was challenged by arguments against Intelligent Design and "First Cause". I turned to YouTube where a random comment mentioned Ed Feser for anyone interested in actually understanding Aquinas. After lurking on his blog for a few months, I decided I needed to buy his book for a fuller understanding. I have had no theology or philosophy training, but I do learn well on the fly and the book was written in a more casual format which made it easier for me to grasp. It certainly aided my discussions online. I've had two agnostics now tell me that they have more in common with Aquinas than they thought, and one who was particularly prone to ridicule even asked what I was reading so he could look more into it. It certainly helped absorbed the content quicker to put it into discussion right away. Forced me to really think about the causes in different specific examples to get a better handle on it. It's great to see the response to so many common objections, and I particularly liked learning about the difference between immanent and extrinsic teleology. Was glad to put Paley behind me! And I felt like I was watching a disappearing magic trick when he said on page 14, "Matter by itself without anything else (including any form) would just be non-existent." Great book, great arguments, and supports all those observations you made when you were a kid playing outside without a care in the world.

In this book, Dr. Feser does a superb job of introducing readers to the Scholastic techniques and terminology used by St. Thomas Aquinas (and nearly every other philosopher in Europe between Augustine and Descartes). He also clearly describes the pitfalls that arise from trying to tackle Aquinas with the assumptions and metaphysical baggage of modern philosophers. Those modern philosophers -- I agree with Feser here -- are generally a menace. Most of them, of course, lived too soon to take Einstein's advice, `Make things as simple as possible, but not simpler.' But they had the excellent examples of Euclid and Aristotle, not to mention Aquinas himself, teaching the same lesson, and ignored it. Too many modern philosophers try to reduce everything to one simple principle, and it is always too simple to explain the complexity and variety of reality. Everything is evolution (Spencer), or everything is bundles of sensation (Hume), or everything is economic conditioning (Marx), or everything is will (Nietzsche), or, most commonly, everything is the instrumentally measurable properties of matter (too many materialist philosophers to count). It is as if a beginning physics student should complain because Newton had three laws of motion: why couldn't he keep it simple and make do with one? In fact, learning physics takes a good deal of study, because it is dealing with complex things, and you have to know the methods and the terminology. And so it is with philosophy. Feser does a grand job of outlining the methods and defining the principal terms used by Aquinas. By the end of the book, we can at least see that Scholastic philosophy is appropriately complex; that it could not be simpler and still have the power to explain things. And we have some idea what counts as an explanation in Scholastic terms, and what counts as a proof (which is not the same thing). It is a philosophy with an admirable disdain for bafflegab and bullroar. It's a pity, once he has done this, that Feser gets hardly any further with Aquinas's work. The rest of the book is taken up with an analysis of the `Five Ways', Aquinas's celebrated arguments for the existence of God. This analysis is good in itself, and it clears up many of the ill-founded objections to those arguments, but it hardly gets you off the first page of the Summa Theologiae. Far too early in the journey, the guide packs up and goes home, leaving you with some very sheer cliffs to climb before you even get up into the mountains. I would have liked the book better if it had gone some distance further into the Summa, pointing out some of the difficulties in the climb (so to speak) and interesting sights along the way. As it is, we are left with the seeming assumption that God has nothing better to do but sit around existing and having his existence proven. I know from reading Dr. Feser's blog that he does not agree with this assumption at all. It's too bad that this book leaves the opposite impression.

This is an amazing introduction to the teaching of Aquinas. Feser's main thesis is that most people do not understand Aquinas because they are beginning with different metaphysical assumptions than Aquinas. In other words, all of these bad caricatures of the five ways of Aquinas are based on fundamental misunderstandings and not looking at the metaphysical assumptions that Aquinas held to. Feser begins to remedy this problem by introducing us to Aquinas' view of the four causes (material formal, efficient, final) as well as his teaching on being and essence. Feser argues that the rejection of the four causes is not based on any sort of good reason, but an unhealthy skepticism. Once we understand Aquinas' metaphysics, we are in a position to look at his 5 ways or proofs for the existence of God. Feser notes that while most people quote Aquinas' 5 ways from his Summa, the Summa was meant as a beginners guide to theology. Hence the demonstrations for God's existence are not meant for skeptics but for those who already believe in God and need to organize their ideas about God's existence. Feser mentions that the Aqunas' full and thorough proofs for God's existence worked out in detail may be found in Aquinas' Summa Contra Gentiles. Feser then spends several pages on each of the five ways. It is quite interesting because I too, unfortunately, had bought into the modern mindset that Aquinas' 5 ways were just sort of old hat, similar to intelligent design, not too deep, and all more or less the same. Nothing could be further from eh truth. I was amazed at how careful and rigorous the proof from motion is when given in its full detail with all the necessray metaphysical background in place. This requires understanding of what Aquinas meant by motion, potentiality, action, and several other concepts. It was rewarding to spend some time pondering this proof because I realized how shallow much of my metaphysics really is. Feser was also able to explain how Aquinas argued that even if the universe could have existed for an infinite amount of time, it would still require a first cause. This idea had always bothered me, but Feser gave an excellent illustration and the idea is now quite clear in my mind. In discussing the 5 ways, Feser mentions how the 5 ways are all different from each other. Many people will blow off the first 3 ways, claiming that they are basically the same. Yet Feser looks a wide range of Aquinas' writings on these ways and argues that he had different things in mind and different properties of God that the arguments would deduce. Feser also distinguishes between Aquinas' argument by design and Paley's argument from design. These are nothing alike and should not be confused, which is another common error. After the discussion of the five ways, Feser discusses the nature of man (psychology) and explains Aquinas' view, in particular, of the soul. Again, here is a place where many people do not know what Aquinas taught. Aquinas did not think of the soul as an invisible ether that permeates the body or as some other kind of invisible entity. Rather, the soul is the form of the body; that which animates the body. This can be summed up in Aquinas' theory of hylomorphism. Again, Aquinas' metaphysics are crucial to understanding this concept. One particularly attractive aspect of Aquinas' view of the human soul is that it does fall victim to the objection about "how does the soul (immaterial) interact with the body (material)?" often posed by skeptics. This question simply makes no sense on Aquinas' hylomporphic view. This book is amazing. It is short, but one can spend hours upon hours pondering it, rereading the same passages to take in all the information and understand the metaphysics of Aquinas. The method of Aquinas was sanctioned in the encyclical Humani Generis and thus Aquinas' teaching is well worth the time of any serious Catholic who wishes to be of one mind with the Church.

E. Feser's introduction to Aquinas' thought was exactly what I was looking for: a clear, contemporary introduction (and defense!) of Aquinas' thought which interacts with modern objections. Having read introductions by Ralph McInerny, Henri Renard, F. Copleston, Jacques Maritain, and A. Sertillanges, I can say that Feser's book is better than all of them. First of all, Feser is faithful to Aquinas' thought. In content, Feser's philosophy is aligned with something, say, Garrigou-Lagrange might write, the difference only being style. If you think Garrigou-Lagrange understood Aquinas, then you will think Feser has, too. Most of the authors I mentioned above more or less understand Aquinas adequately, so far as I can tell. Like them, Feser won't give you any surprises by departing from the tradition (like, say, E. Stump might). Second, Feser's book is better because it is clearer. There are plenty of thinkers who understand Aquinas decently enough---one thinks of Maritain or Renard, for example. But anyone who has tried to read these thinkers is painfully aware that their prose is not always clear. Feser has given us a book which is in a class by itself for clarity. If you are puzzled by 'matter', 'form', 'act', 'potency', and so on, then this is the book for you. Third, Feser's book is better because it understands modern thinkers and their objections to Aquinas. Feser admirably defends the existence of God, the classical attributes of God (including divine simplicity), the immortality of the soul, Aquinas' ethical theory, and so on. Not only this, but he shows why objectors to Aquinas usually have not understood him properly. He treats older objectors like Locke, but also newer ones like Dawkins (and many analytical philosophers, too). It is especially its mastery of analytical philosophy and the issues it brings up which makes this book relevant to modern concerns. Fourth, Feser has a list of recommended reading which is very, very useful. And to top it all off, this book has one of the best discussions of causality, especially final causality, which I have encountered. So, if you're shopping for one book to start with in studying Aquinas, you've found it. Or if you've read many introductions but still feel lost, this is the book for you, too. Feser brings the clarity of analytical philosophy, the relevance of modern issues, and the content of classical Thomism all together in this volume.

An excellent introduction to Thomism. Feser's familiarity with modern analytical philosophy allows him to respond to the most common, and probably the best objections, raised against Thomistic metaphysics and Thomism in general. An important caution: this is not a "beginner's guide" in the sense that it is for those who have absolutely no prior exposure to philosophy or rigorous argument. I can say this because, prior to this book, I myself had no prior exposure to philosophy or rigorous argument. I had many questions and had to get answers elsewhere. This is no fault of Feser; my questions did not have to do with the validity of his reasoning or the clarity of his terms – I simply was not well acquainted with philosophy, having never even taking philosophy 101 in college. For anyone else who is in my position, you are in luck! Feser runs an excellent blog at edwardfeser.blogspot.com. I picked up a habit of googling "Edward Feser [insert topic of confusion]" and it's allowed to me better grasp the content of this book. The chapter on metaphysics is difficult but critical and it sets up the rest of the book. If you're not getting it, moving on is, in my humble opinion, futile. Once you do get it, however, the rest of the book will not be as difficult. For atheists, the chapter on Natural Theology will be of most interest. Again, if you are unfamiliar with Aristotletian or Thomistic metaphysics, you won't do yourself any favors by jumping into the chapter on Natural Theology. This isn't pop philosophy a la Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens, or Dennett; you have to actually do intellectual work to meet Aquinas and Thomism halfway. If you do do this work, this chapter just may change your life (who needs self-help books when you have a disciplined pursuit of Truth?). Feser goes through Aquinas' 5 Ways to proving the existence of God and defends them rather exhaustively against various objections. The remaining two chapters, on Psychology and on Ethics, are also excellent. The section on natural law, while short, is deep. My only criticism of the book is that I wish Feser dwelt more on the objections of many naturalist philosophers to the claim that biological inquiry rests on a teleological foundation. I did not come away convinced by Feser's argument from this book, but after reading Feser's other work on teleology, I was convinced of Feser's argument. In the book, however, the section is too short. My last comment is on the quality of writing. When I was an atheist, I thought nobody could write better than Christopher Hitchens (you can tell I am very well read). I was wrong. Edward Feser writes better than Christopher Hitchens. Far better. Not only that, unlike Hitchens, Feser isn't mostly flash; his arguments have bite and depth to them.

Those who are "initiated" into Thomism or Scholastic and Medieval philosophy in general, know that there are entire libraries filled not only with the work of Thomas but several authors who have commented on his work and continued it (sometimes merging it with other philosophical traditions, for example Analytical Thomism). However for those who briefly heard of Aquinas, often far to dismissively, from philosophy professors, internet websites and pop-atheist books often finds Aquinas either unjustly misrepresented or too complex to approach. Indeed to enter the world of medieval philosophy or even just Thomas Aquinas work can be an overwhelming and daunting task. Understanding Thomas' work, without a proper working knowledge of Latin and the works of Plato, Aristotle and some medieval Aristotelians like Avicenna is an impossible task. Here's where Feser's book comes in. This book is short but to the point, clear and accessible. It explains in plain English the core elements of Thomas Aquinas thought and Thomism. It explores 5 basic topics (divided in chapters): A brief biography of Thomas Thomas Metaphysics (explaining concepts such as Being, Act and Potency, the Four Causes, etc) Thomas Metaphysics in relation to Natural Theology (with a particular attention to the famous "Five ways") Thomas Psychology (intended here more as the theory of the mind and the soul) Thomas Morality (and Natural Law Theory). Feser also explores the main criticism of Thomas works and in my opinion does a very good job defending Thomism. --- Some reviewers complained it is a "tough read". This is partly true.... but the reason is that the subject itself is very tough. It's like trying to learn relativistic quantum mechanics: no matter how you simplify it, it remains a tough subject... and the same applies to Thomism (sans the math) Thomas Aquinas and Scholasticism in general applies a system of though that is quite alien to us "post-moderns", hence to understand his ideas one has to step back from the modern and post-modern philosophies that influence contemporary thinking and open his or her mind to new shores. I think Feser does a very good job in explaining a difficult subject in a concise and simple manner. I reccomend this book to anyone who is curious and I am sure that many will be drawn into exploring Thomism and Scholasticism further.

There are two questions which any Christian who has struggled with doubt and who cares about having an intellectually rigorous worldview will have asked: 1. What is the scope of fundamental Christian convictions? 2. How confident can we be in the truth of those convictions? It seems that in our time the answers most commonly given to those questions are 'very small' and 'not very'. To elaborate, many Christians seem to accept that modern science has unique, nearly exclusive authority to describe the world we live in and that scientific reasoning is the gold standard of rationality. It follows that theology is more a matter of hope than knowledge and that the best we can do is show that at least some, often greatly truncated, Christian truth claims are compatible with modern science. Modern Christian theology is an asthmatic, 90 pound weakling with heart trouble in the boxing ring of truth. Enter the doctor: Edward Feser's Aquinas (and by extension Aquinas himself) is a blast of fresh air in those wheezing lungs, a jolt of current through that palpitating heart, and an injection of growth hormone into those wimpy muscles. Starting in Chapter 2 with an exposition of basic Aristotelian and Thomistic metaphysical concepts, including act and potency, form and matter, the four causes, essence and existence, and the nature of the transcendentals (like being, truth and goodness), Feser painstakingly demonstrates how these concepts explain the world we inhabit remarkably well, and remain plausible and defensible despite their development alongside erroneous scientific views. Not only that, but since science in any age rests upon (sometimes unexamined) metaphysical foundations (see the classic The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Science ), Aquinas' metaphysics presents itself as a particularly attractive set of foundations for the contemporary study of nature. Up to this point, the book would be of interest not just to readers interested in the history of ideas but also readers interested in formulating a comprehensive philosophy of nature. But the implications of this philosophy of nature for theology are astounding: as Dr. Feser shows in chapter 3, the observed reality of change, the distinction between essence and existence in contingent objects and the reality of final causation all inescapably imply the existence of God as understood by the great philosophical minds of all the major theistic religious traditions: the absolutely unique, simple, unconditioned, omnipotent Reality that grounds the existence and intelligibility of the world of our experience, and is itself perfect goodness, beauty and truth. Contrary to popular perception, Aquinas' Five Ways of demonstrating God's existence are sound and compelling once placed in their proper context of Aristotelian metaphysics, and once their conclusions are thoroughly analyzed they are seen to imply the attributes classically attributed to God. Since the reality of change, final causation and the distinction between essence and existence are readily observable, even to unbelievers, the existence and nature of God (at least to a certain extent) can be inferred on non-religious grounds, making Aquinas' project a particularly compelling example of natural theology. In the remaining two chapters Dr. Feser explicates Thomistic views of human nature and ethics, which again are fairly straightforward applications of the Aristotelian metaphysical principles laid out in chapter 2. The Thomistic understanding of the soul is an alternative to both Cartesian dualism, which posits the existence of two distinct substances to explain mind-body interactions, and materialism, which reduces all mental activity to brain physiology. Thomistic ethics is premised upon human beings have a real nature, which identifies the good for humans as those actions which fulfil the ends intrinsic to that nature. When I reviewed Dr. Feser's The Last Superstition: A Refutation of the New Atheism , I remarked that his exposition had almost persuaded me to become a Thomist, but that I still had some reservations. Aquinas has now pushed me all the way into that camp. I am now convinced that Thomism is the most promising metaphysical system for articulating the rationality of the Christian worldview, and that it gets the furniture of the world more nearly right than any other system. I look forward to digging deeper into Aquinas' thought, to fill in the details of my newfound worldview.