Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Greetings Everyone.

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

I assume you mean Aquinas? A few months ago, I read the first 40 pages or so of Aquinas's Summa Theologica. I was impressed by the style, but definitely not by the content. For a person of his times, I reckon it was a huge leap, to try to formulate an argument in such logical terms; also, I admire the honest way in which he puts forth opposing objections and then replies to them.

If I lived in his times, I would have considered his book worth a read. However, I stopped reading when I realized that it is essentially only of historical importance. The content was nothing that modern man need take seriously.

Actually I was referring to Aristotle, whom the Catholic Church and particularly Aquinas refers to as "The Philosopher". Aquinas did not refer to himself as a philosopher, and most literature dedicated him refer to him as "The Angelic Doctor" or more plainly, he was an important Theologian. Theology and Philosophy are not the same thing, and I try to make regular distinctions between the two, although occasionally I accidentally refer to Aquinas as a Philosopher, mostly because of his writings on the nature of man. The two can serve each other, especially when a person of reason makes speculations of entities not yet experienced by the sensations.

One of the declarations of the "Neo-Scholastic" movement in the Catholic Church, which models itself after Aquinas' appeal to reason in arguing scripture, is that Aquinas' movement must be adapted to the times. I myself am working on trying to make a much needed adaptation, which is to offer modifications to the current system of Catholic Ethics. Laissez Faire capitalism, in it's pure non-interfered with form has proven to be the only benevolent system out there. People are allowed to prosper without plundering each other or nations making war with each other, freedom of communication between people is established, and acts of charity are strong because of the wealth built out of self-interest motivated business.

One of the parts of Catholic Ethics that is in dire need of changing is the supposed dichotomy between self-love and love of others, it doesn't exist in a rational thinking society, and as a creed is more befitting of enemies of the church such as Comte and Saint-Simon, whom think that the means of benevolence and charity can magically fall from the sky like mana and yet simultaneously believe that God doesn't exist. Adam Smith was a brilliant thinker who was way ahead of us in terms of solving the issue of human suffering, and his work "The Wealth of Nations" is one that I regularly study.

Edited by dark_unicorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...