Question #1 :
Please discuss the political organization of the Greek city- states,
particularly Athenian democracy at the time of Pericles, Plato, and
Aristotle. Also discuss the backgrounds
of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle and the fate of the Greek city-states
historically.
During the time of Pericles, Plato, and
Aristotle, Greece was divided into city-states with a wide variety of
constitutions, ranging from Sparta's military dictatorship to Athens' direct
democracy.
Most city-states had about 300,000 people, each
divided into one of three classes : citizens, metics, or slaves. The citizens represented a total of one -
third the population. The members of
this class
participated directly with
politics in the various institutions, and decisions were derived by popular
vote, known as direct democracy. This
class was further divided into three councils : Assembly of Ecclesia, Council
of 500, and the Council of 50. The
largest council was the Assembly of Ecclesia, which was a body of all male
citizens over the age of twenty. The
Council of 500 consisted of 500 members, chosen from lottery and election from
the Assembly of Ecclesia. The Council of
50 was made up of 50 members chosen from the Council of 500. The second class of people in the city-states
was the Metics. This class was made up
of people that were not citizens, either because they were not born in the
city-state, or they were prevented from being citizens. The third class were the slaves. These people were captured from wars and
subject to serve the city-state without pay.
The interesting observation in the organization of the Greek city-state
is that only one-third the population had any power. The other two thirds (made up of metics and
slaves) were subject to the decisions derived by the citizens, and contained no
power nor voice in the political system.
Athenian Democracy had such a division of classes. This democracy had a minority who ruled over
the majority, each citizen participated directly in the affairs of the city. The Greek city-state contained a body of up
to 500 jurors who would try cases.
There also existed a body of ten elected
generals who would oversee foreign policy and war. One such elected general of Athens was a
political idealist, Pericles. Pericles
had singular control of the Athenian democracy and was involved in a war
against Sparta and its allies that was concluded in 446-445 B.C.. After peace
was declared, he tightened Athenian control of the empire. "He crushed
major rebellions, imposed democratic government, dispatched colonies of
Athenian citizens to strategic areas, and made tribute collection (the main
source of Athenian wealth) more efficient. Convinced of the inevitability of
war with Sparta and the Peloponnesians, Pericles made an alliance with Corinth's enemy, Corcyra ,
knowing that it could lead to armed hostilities. He refused Sparta's demand
that he revoke the Megarian decree, which denied Megara access to the harbors
of the empire. These actions led to the Peloponnesian War . Pericles, who was
relying on the fleet and the empire's resources, planned to avoid a pitched
battle with the Peloponnesians and to abandon the countryside to them. He fell
victim to the plague, however, never to know that the war he initiated would
result in the disastrous defeat of Athens. "(GME "PERICLES")
Socrates, was a Greek thinker whose work marked
a decisive turning point in the history of philosophy. He invented a method of
teaching by asking questions (the Socratic method), pioneered the search for
definitions, and turned philosophy away from a study of the way things are toward a consideration of virtue and the
health of the human soul. Socrates believed that to do wrong is to damage one's
soul, and that this is the worst thing one can do. From this it follows that it
is always worse to do wrong than to be wronged, and that one must never return
wrong for wrong. He was born in Athens
and lived all his life there, leaving only to serve as a soldier in the Peloponnesian
War. He attracted a number of prominent
disciples in his role as a teacher of wisdom. One such disciple was Plato.
Plato was born in Athens around 430 BC. Both
his parents were of distinguished Athenian families, and his stepfather, an
associate of Pericles, was an active participant in the political and cultural
life of Periclean Athens. Plato seems as a young man to have been destined for
an aristocratic political career. The excesses of Athenian political life,
however, both under the oligarchical rule (404-403) of the so-called Thirty
Tyrants and under the restored democracy, seem to have led him to give up these
ambitions. In particular, the execution of his friend and teacher Socrates had
a profound effect on his plans. Greatly influenced by Socrate's teachings, he founded the Academy, an institution devoted
to research and instruction in philosophy and the sciences.
A student of Plato at the Academy was
Aristotle. He was born in Stragira, a Greek colonial town on the Macedonia
coast. In 367, Aristotle went to Athens to join Plato's Academy, first as a
student, then as a teacher. He traveled
widely and spent several years as a tutor for Philip of Macedon's son,
Alexander.
The fate of the Greek city-states historically
is grim. The destructive conflict, the
Peloponnesian War, marked the end of the Greek way of life. The Spartans, now leaders of the Greeks, soon
aroused widespread enmity by their high-handed rule.
A monarchy in the
north soon arose to dictate the fortunes of the Greeks. The brilliant statesman and warrior Philip II
became regent of Macedonia in 359 and its king in 356. Under his leadership, this newly centralized kingdom gradually
overwhelmed the disunited land. By easy
stages Philip advanced into central Greece, winning control of Delphi as a result
of the Third Sacred War (355-47) against Phocis. In 338 he destroyed a Theban and Athenian
army on the field of Chaeronea. He imposed a short-lived federal union on the
Greeks and made himself their commander in chief in anticipation of a war
against Persia. He was assassinated in
336, however, before the war could be fought.
The defeat of the Greek city-states at
Chaeronea ended an era of Greek history.
Neither Sparta, Athens, nor any other city-state had proved capable of
uniting Greece under its leadership.
Intense mutual jealousies, sharpened by the egoistic abuse each polis
dealt the others whenever circumstances permitted, made unity a hopeless dream.
Question #2 :
Please compare and contrast the political thought of Plato and Aristotle, in
particular their competing conceptions of an ideal polity. Which do you prefer and why?
Central to Plato's thought is the power of
reason to reveal the intelligibility and order governing the changing world of
appearance and to create, at both the political and the individual level, a
harmonious and happy life. His ideal
society was outlined in the Republic.
The search for truth is predominant in his society. In order to find this truth, Plato divides
his society into three classes. The first class is the Guardians. These members are the political leaders of
the society, and live entirely different from the other classes. "The preparation of the rulers begins before
they are born, as the very pairing of the parents is arranged by a preconceived
plan that is to insure the highest physical and mental qualities of the
offspring to be bred. Nothing is left to
personal whim or accident from infancy on, and the process of education, both
theoretical and practical, continues until the age of fifty. Literature, music, physical and military
instruction, elementary and advanced mathematics, philosophy and metaphysics,
and subordinate military and civilian-service assignments are the stages of the
planned program of training philosopher-rulers."(E. & E. , pg 7) This class of people exclude individual
interests, such as private property, material possessions, and love. This class puts wisdom above all else, and
eventually this class will figure out what is the best way to run the society,
called by Plato as "the Truth."
The second class, called the Auxiliaries, are
in charge of keeping the peace militarily both internally and externally. They too exclude individual interests. They are to place courage first. The Auxiliaries are subject to the Guardians,
and are picked and trained by them. Some
of these members become Guardians.
The third class, called the Artisans, is the
largest class. They make up the working
population. Their primary concern is
appetite, and by working they satisfy that need. They do not participate in
politics. They are to run the society
economically as the Guardians and Auxiliaries run the society politically.
Another interesting aspect of Plato's Republic
is the use of a medicinal lie. In order
for the people to believe in the class system, Plato uses a fable. According to this fable, God put gold into
those who are fit to rule, silver into the auxiliaries, and iron and brass into
the farmers and craftsmen. This was to
make each class think of each other as "brothers born of the same
soil." Each element serves a
purpose and thus makes each class feel useful and necessary.
Aristotle, on the other hand, has a much
broader way of looking at things. He
traveled much thought the known world, and thus has seen other political
theories in action. He divides
government into three types : kingship, aristocracy, and constitutional
government. He prefers kingship, or
monarchy, as the best. He believes that
if a man is found "preeminent in virtue", then he should rule. Because of the superior virtue and political
capacity, it gives him that right. He
also believes that only people of leisure should participate in politics
because these people have the free time to study, learn, think, and thus are
better qualified. Unlike Plato, however,
he defends property rights. Aristotle
believes that owning property gives incentive and progress, pleasure that the
ownership gives, generosity, and has been a custom for ages. He defends slavery as well by stating that
some people were destined for certain things, one of which being slavery,
referred to as "a tool with a voice."
He believed that equality is justice.
He also divides the human race into two categories : Greeks and
Barbarians.
On the whole, I would have to agree with
Aristotle. Plato is excessively
skeptical about democracy, which I am a firm believer in, and also is too
idealistic. I don't believe that anyone
will swallow a medicinal lie. The people
are divided so harshly: one group is trained for politics, another for war, and
another for production. This is
wrong. This division will lead to
turmoil. The Guardians are so far
detached from the people that they will not be able to serve them justly. Maybe the Guardians would reach "the
Truth," that the people should have the right to decide their own
destinies, that no one should be classed and separated from the others. The people should have the right to own
property and to choose who they have sex with. A small aristocratic group with
the control over an army is not my idea of government. The Auxiliaries are nothing more than the
Guardians' dogs. That is why I would have to agree with Aristotle. He believed that equality is justice, that
constitutionalism is the way to go. I
want to have the right to own property and decide my own destiny.
Question #3 : In
two or three pages briefly describe the philosophies of Epicureanism and
Stoicism, especially in terms of how they vary from Plato and Aristotle's
conceptions of human behavior and ideal societies. Please explain what you find to be useful or
distasteful about Epicureanism and Stoicism and discuss the influence of
Stoicism on Christianity and Roman legal thought.
The Epicureans believed that the purpose of
government is to keep people from interfering with each other's "pursuit
of happiness." The major belief of
Epicureans was to remove worry to cultivate personal happiness. They disagreed with Plato's belief of public
satisfaction. They believed that there
is no satisfaction in politics, only in reason, friendship, and moderation of
material possessions. The most important
thing according to Epicureans was finding satisfaction in personal
relationships. Laws are only necessary
to avoid pain, worry and anxiety. The
laws should merely protect man and thus serves a purpose. This violates Plato's belief that only an
elite class of highly trained people should rule and decide what is best for
the people. This also violates
Aristotle's belief that only through a compromise of freedom and wealth can
justice be served.
The Epicureans also believed that absolute
justice is nonexistent and the only justice is legal convention. Plato and
Aristotle would disagree, that through reason one could reach "the
Truth," as Plato would put it, or that through reflection one may find
absolute justice, that equality is justice. Religion and superstition was
merely a dream and worried man unnecessarily.
This contradicts Plato's medicinal lie.
Death is nothing, and thus should not be dwelled upon.
Another words, let the people do what they want
as long as they don't hurt anybody else and follow a very limited set of
laws. Live life to it's fullest, enjoy
it, and don't worry about anything. This
philosophy is indeed different from Plato's Republic and Aristotle's
constitutional monarchy.
Stoicism divides mankind into two types : the
wise and the fools. The wise act
according to reason and self control while the fools do not. The Stoics believed that there was more to
life than just pursuing happiness. They
believed that man was predestined by a higher power to a role in society and
that man should not only accept his role, but also to partake in his role the
best he can. This belief encouraged
endurance, fortitude, and courage. The
Stoics believed that men are different in learning but equal in reason. Plato and Aristotle would argue that only
through education can one obtain reason.
We all have the ability of deciding what is right from wrong, regardless
of education. The Stoics also believed that
the law should be obeyed by the rulers and the ruled. Plato's Republic was just the opposite : the
Guardians decided how the artisians would live.
They believed that all of mankind were brothers and that we should love
all men as we love ourselves. Aristotle
believed that you were either a Greek or a Barbarian, thus there existed no
common brotherhood. Plato divided his
society so drastically that there is no way any Guardian could view a member of
the class of pigs as a brother. The Stoics believed that what goes on in the
world is because of some divine providence or a god. Plato would disagree stating that there is no
providence or god, only reason.
Aristotle would say that the state is the highest which only through
them can the highest good be obtained.
I would have to agree with the idea that
satisfaction is derived from the personal satisfaction of reason, friendships,
and moderation of material possessions.
I do not think that satisfaction is a public matter. I disagree with the Epicurean belief that
religion is a waste of time. Sure, some
people really get wrapped up in it, but I believe that there is something
better, that I am part of some plan, that I am here on earth to serve a
purpose. This conception gives me hope,
it gives me a sense of belonging, it makes me want to do what is right. I don't follow all of the strict rules and
regulations of my religion, but I still believe, I still have faith. I don't believe that religion is a waste of
time, rather, that religion is a method of learning to do the right thing, and
a way to tie all of mankind together. As
far as Legal convention is concerned, I agree.
What is Absolute Justice, anyway?
There is no absolute justice, only popular vote. If it hurts, it's wrong. Everyone has their own interpretation of what
is justice, but only by vote can a fair decision be drawn. What is right now may not be right twenty
years from now. This is because what
people think is just changes, hence, no Absolute justice exists.
For me, Stoicism sounds great. I believe that all of mankind are brothers(we
all have minds and blood), that we should all get along in order to provide a
better world in which to live. I disagree
with the idea of accepting things the way they are. I believe that if a person doesn't like the
way things are, that he should do what ever possible within reason to change it
for the better. If everybody accepted
things the way they were, then progress would cease to exist and the world
would become a stagnant pool of waste. It is human nature to want better things out
of life, and I think people should act on it.
It gives people hope, it gives them a goal, it gives them something to
work for. As far as knowing what is
right and what is wrong I must disagree with.
Reason is not a universal trait among mankind, rather, it is an
individual analysis of the world around them.
For example, one may feel it is right to help those in need. Another may feel that it is wrong to do so,
in that it destroys initiative of the those in need. The needy person will grow to depend on
others for help, and the needy person will never do anything for himself. Look at it this way : two children, each
brought up in different households are brought up in two distinct ways. Child A is given everything he wants and
never has to do anything for himself.
Child B is brought up with the idea that if he wants something, he must
work for it. Child B will appreciate
things more because his hard work shows results, while child A thinks that
everything can be handed to him without any effort on his part. Everyone is different, and everyone's
interpretation of what is right and wrong differs as well. I agree with the Stoic belief that one should
love man as they love themselves. We may
not be the same, but that isn't a reason to be at each other's throats. We should all appreciate another's ideas, and
work together for the good.
The influence of Stoicism on Christianity is
easily seen in the belief that one should love all men as we love
ourselves. The Christian version of this
same belief is the golden rule : "Do unto others as you would have them do
unto you." Also, the belief that
there existed something higher in life than mere pursing of pleasure. The Christians believe that heaven exist, which is something higher than
pursing pleasure. The Stoics often made
reference to a higher power, such as Pliny, "God is man's helping
hand." The ideal of Aurelius, "man
should depart from lying, hypocrisy, luxury and pride," is a shared belief
with Christians as well.
The influence of Stoicism on Roman legal
thought existed as well. The Roman legal
system under the influence of Stoicism placed much more emphasis on civic duty,
social responsibility, the importance of good law, and the equal basic rights
of all human beings.
Question #4 :
Please describe St. Augustine's background and his conception of the two city
states. Also, explain Plato's influence
on Augustine and provide your opinion of the philosophy of the most renowned of
the early Church fathers.
Augustine was born at Thagaste , a small town
in the Roman province of Numidia in North Africa. His mother was a devout
Christian, but his father never embraced the Christian faith. He received a classical education that both
schooled him in Latin literature and enabled him to escape from his provincial
upbringing. Trained at Carthage in rhetoric , which was a requisite for a legal
or political career in the Roman empire, he became a teacher of rhetoric in
Carthage, in Rome, and finally in Milan, a seat of imperial government at the
time. At Milan, in 386, Augustine underwent religious conversion. He retired from his public position, received
baptism from Ambrose, the bishop of Milan, and soon returned to North
Africa. In 391, he was ordained to the
priesthood in Hippo Regius and five
years later he became bishop.
After the fall of Rome and the pagan attacks
that blamed Christians for it, St. Augustine set out to meet the
challenge. In 413 he started the City of
God which was completed in 426,
twenty-two books later. In his books,
St. Augustine divides the human race into two parts, "the one consisting
of those who live according to man, the other of those who live according to
God. And these we also mystically call
the two cities, or the two communities of men, of which the one is predestined
to reign eternally with God, and the other to suffer eternal punishment with
the devil."(E & E pgs 117-118)
According to St. Augustine, there exists two
cities: the Earthly and the Heavenly city.
" two cities have been formed by two loves : the earthly by the
love of self, even to the contempt of God; the heavenly by the love of God,
even to the contempt of self." (E.E. pg 117) The heavenly city symbolically represents the
church, and the Earthly city represents the state.
St. Augustine sees value and function in the state in terms of
justice and reason. "But the
earthly city, which shall not be everlasting (for it will no longer be a ciy when
it has been committed to the extreme penalty), has its good in this world, and
rejoices in it with such joy as such things can afford." (E.E. pg
118). The state provides social
tranquility here on earth, but it is not as important as the tranquility that
awaits those in the heavenly city. He does
not see the Earthly city as evil. In
fact, he believes that the state is necessary for providing earthly
tranquility. However, St. Augustine
believes that this earthly peace is not nearly as important as the peace that
awaits those of the Earthly city. "But the things which this city desires
cannot justly be said to be evil, for it is itself, in its own kind, better
than all other human good." (E.E. pg 119).
The only real difference between these two cities is that the people of
the Earthly city "neglect the better things of the heavenly city, which
are secured by eternal victory and peace never-ending, and so inordinately
covet these present good things that they believe them to be the only desirable
things, or love them better than those things which are believed to be better-
if this is so, then it is necessary that misery follow and ever increase."
(E.E. 119).
Plato influenced St. Augustine, and can be seen
in his writings. For example, Plato
addresses the problem of the just society, that each individual has his own
version of what is just. Plato writes
that, " But in reality justice, though evidently analogous t this
principle, is not a matter of external behavior, but of the inward self and of
attending to all that is, in the fullest sense, a man's proper concern...
Justice is produced in the soul, like health in the body, by establishing the
elements concerned in their natural relations of control and
subordination..." (E.E. pgs 43-44) St. Augustine agrees with Plato's idea
that justice is an individual case and writes that, "all men desire peace
with their own circle whom they wish to govern as it suits themselves. For even those whom they make war against
they wish to make their own, and impose on them the laws of their own
peace." (E.E. pg 123)
On the whole, I admire St. Augustine for his
answer to the pagan charge that the fall of Rome was because of the
Christians. I don't think anyone could
have chosen a more tactical and impressive rebuttal than him. He felt that Rome fell because the people
running Rome lived in the earthly city.
That because the rulers ruled for themselves and not for God, that God
punished them. And to write twenty-two
books is simply amazing. I agree with
St. Augustine on the slavery issue. St.
Augustine felt that slavery is wrong, that God intended man to rule over the
beasts, not for man to rule over fellow man.
Slavery is a sin, and I agree with St. Augustine that every man in the
eyes of God is equal, that all men are of the same blood.
Question #5 :
Please review the various conceptions of the proper role of the relationship
between Church and State discussed in class.
Write a short explanation for why you agree or disagree with the various
conceptions.
The issue of the relationship between Church
and State has been a major issue that faced European man for centuries. Many theories and ideas have been presented,
with logical and illogical ideals to support them. To this day it is still a topic of
debate. Simplistically there exist four
possibilities : State over Church, Church over State, an even division of
Church and State, or a combination of Church and State together.
The doctrine of the relationship of church and state has undergone, and is
undergoing, constant modification. Its origins long predate the wars of
religion.
Plato and Aristotle argued that only through
reason and through politics can truth be found.
They preferred the State over religion.
The Epicureans saw no use in religion, arguing
that "man's belief in gods arises from dreams and the realization that
gods play no role in human affairs constitutes a human awakening."
(Manning)
Jesus Christ had made a clear focus on religion
above politics when he said, "My kingdom does not belong to this
world. If my kingdom did belong to this
world, my attendants would be fighting to keep me from being handed over to the
Jews. But as it is, my kingdom is not
here."(NAB pg 1163) Jesus also makes
a call for a separation of Church and State when he says, "Then repay to
Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God."(NAB pg
1126)
Saint Augustine considered all earthly
governments, regardless of their form, as representative of the fallen and
imperfect "city of man" or Earthly City. The state provided the "sword" to
discipline sinful man through law and education. The church, for Augustine,
represented the perfect and eternal "city of God,", or Heavenly City,
preserving the divine, otherworldly values of peace, hope, and charity. Church
and state were separate but related: they occupied different realms and held
different values, but both existed in this world. Not only does Augustine make
the clear division of Church and State, he also states that only those in the
Heavenly City shall be saved, thus preferring Church over State. He wrote,
" And therefore the wise men of the one city, living according to man,
have sought for profit to their own bodies or souls, or both, and those who
have known God 'glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful, but became
vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened; professing
themselves to be wise'- that is, glorying in their own wisdom, and being
possessed by pride - 'they became fools, and changed the glory of the
incorruptible God into an image made like the corruptible man...' " (E.E.
117)
Saint Thomas Aquinas defined the state as
author and executor of human law, whose charge is the punishment of vice and
encouragement of virtue. The church is the interpreter of divine law through
natural law, of which human law is an inferior part.For Aquinas, the church
properly advises the state on many matters, especially those relating to moral
legislation. He said, "The ministry of this kingdom of God is not in the
hands of earthly kings, but of priests, and- above all - the chief priest, the
successor of St. Peter, the Vicar of Christ, the Roman Pontiff, to whom all
kings are to be subject as to Christ himself." (E.E. pg 137) Aquinas thus makes a blend of Church and
State. Each serves its purpose, and both
are needed. The Church acts as a guide
for the State, allowing the State to make the correct decisions and to act
according to the will of God. Again,
Aquinas sees the Church superior to the State.
Saint Paul viewed the State as an obstruction
to the Church, and therefore the Church should be superior to the State. In one of many letters he wrote to the
Philippines, he wrote, "For many, as I have often told you and now tell
you even in tears, conduct themselves as enemies of the cross of Christ. Their end is destruction. Their God is their stomach; their glory in
their shame. Their minds are occupied
with earthly things. But our citizenship
is in heaven, and from it we also await a savior, the Lord Jesus Christ."
(NAB pg 1290) He makes the rulers of the
Earth and everything they have to offer insignificant to what awaits them in
heaven, and therefore the State is not important when compared to the Church.
Tertullian took a very radical view toward the
relationship between the Church and State.
He argued that the State was evil, and opposed to the ways of God. He
stated, "The fact that Christ rejected an earthly kingdom should be enough
to convince you that all secular powers and dignities are not merely alien
from, but hostile to, God." (Manning)
He believed that Christianity and philosophy were irreconcilable, that
"heresies are the result of philosophy, and that there was the danger of a
'mottled Christianity' of Platonic, Aristotelian, and Stoic
elements."(E.E. pg 132)
As a Christian, particularly a Roman Catholic,
I agree with the idea of a clear separation of Church and State. I believe that the purpose of the state is to
provide social order here on earth, and the purpose of the Church is to provide
certain guidelines for people to follow in order to have a peaceful, enjoyable
life. Christianity teaches morals and
helps those who are confused. It gives
people hope. The state provides a
similar set of guidelines for people to follow in order to have a peaceful,
enjoyable life. So to answer the
question as to where the two stand, I would have to argue that they are both
important and should be separated from each other. A person should have the right to decide
whether or not to believe in an after life, how to live there lives, or how to
go about doing things. Therefore, it is
the responsibility of the State to insure that that right is not obstructed nor
oppressed. History has shown us what
happens when one is above the other.
During the days before the fall of Rome, the State was above the
Church. Rome was corrupt, destructive of
other civilizations, and unmerciful.
During the Middle Ages the Church took control, and learning and
progress was slowed considerably. Thus,
I would have to agree with Aquinas' belief that through the guidance of the
Church, the State can provide the necessities of man kind. In our own country people have the right to
decide what religion to follow or to follow none at all, and it is working. Let the Pope handle spiritual matters and the
President handle politics. It is very
similar to the checks and balances theory.
Only together can the progress of mankind go on. The Church guides the State, but never should
one be superior to the other. A clear
separation but compromise between the Church and State seems to me the best and
safest route to take.
Question#6 :
Please describe the background of St. Thomas Aquinas and compare and contrast
his views with those of Augustine.
Discuss how Aquinas incorporates Aristotlianism into Catholicism.
Saint Thomas Aquinas, a Dominican theologian,
met the challenge posed to Christian faith by the philosophical achievements of
the Greeks and Arabs. He effected a
philosophical binding of faith and reason.
Thomas d'Aquino, the son of a count, was born
in his family's castle at Roccasecca, central Italy, in 1224. At about the age of five, Thomas was placed
by his parents in the Benedictine monastery at Monte Cassino. His uncle had been abbot of the monastery,
and his family had similar ambitions for Thomas. When Monte Cassino became the
scene of a battle between papal and imperial troops Thomas withdrew and
enrolled at the University of Naples.
There he came into contact with members of the Dominican order and,
against the violent opposition of his family, became a Dominican friar. He then went north to study at Paris and
Cologne under Albertus Magnus.
His
Summa contra Gentiles was written in 1258-60, and his greatest work, the Summa
Theologiae, occupied him from 1267 to 1273.
Thomas also wrote a series of commentaries on Aristotle and the Bible.
"Unlike many theologians, he welcomed the Latin translation of Aristotle's
complete writings, although he opposed the radical advocates of
Aristotelianism, the so-called Latin Aviarists. "(GME "Aquinas")
The views of Saint Thomas Aquinas are both
alike and different from those of Saint Augustine. Saint Augustine met the
allegations and challenges of the pagans and concerned mostly with the view of
Church and state as separate but related spheres: they occupied different
realms and held different values, but both exist in this world. Saint Aquinas reconceptualized the
relationship between faith and reason, and argued that "man is a social
animal and that the superior wisdom of the ruler makes legitimate his rulership."
(E.E. pg )
Augustine's thought was that through faith one
may attain an understanding. This concept is exposed when he said, "Seek
not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may
understand." (E.E. 132) He believed
that reasoning originates in the act of faith. He also believed that "
because of Original Sin, no one can entirely govern his own motivation and that
only the help of God's Grace makes it possible for persons to will and to do
good."(GME "Augustine").
Saint
Thomas Aquinas' thought embodied the conviction that faith and reason are
aspects of a single truth and cannot be in conflict with one another. According
to Aquinas, "people know something
when its truth is either immediately evident to them or can be made evident by
appeal to immediately evident truths."(GME "Aquinas"). They believe something when they accept its
truth on authority. Religious faith is
the acceptance of truths on the authority of what God tells them. Despite the fact that this seems to make knowledge
and faith two utterly distinct realms, Thomas held that some of the things God
has revealed are in fact knowable. He
called these "preambles of faith," including among them the existence
of God and certain of his attributes, the immortality of the human soul, and
some moral principles. The rest of what
has been revealed he called "mysteries of faith," for example, the
Trinity, the incarnation of God in Jesus Christ, the resurrection, and so on. He then argued that, "if some of the
things God has revealed can be known to be true, it is reasonable to accept the
mysteries as true."(GME "Aquinas").
Saint Thomas Aquinas incorporated
Aristotlianism into Catholicism. For
example, Aristotle classifies government into pure and perverted forms of government,
and from that makes a choice of the best type based on that classification. He
chose a monarchy as the best choice based on the fact that if a person is found
to be "preeminent in virtue," then that person is fit to rule.
Aquinas also classifies government into good and bad types and agrees that
monarchy is the best choice. However, he
"derives his preference for the monarchical form of government from his
religious view of the world."(E.E. pg 139)
Aristotle's philosophy that the end, or good, of
humankind is not merely to live, but to lead a good, flourishing life that
"manifests the rational nature of humanity and thus satisfies human
needs"(GME "Aristotle")
was incorporated by Aquinas and tied in with Christianity in his four
forms doctrine of law.
Aquinas distinguishes four forms of law :
eternal law, natural law, divine law, and human law. The pursuit of happiness
is a search for the good life, which is composed of virtuous actions and falls
under the realm of divine law.
Generosity consists in giving neither too little nor too much. Aristotle also describes intellectual virtue
and moral virtue, which correspond to the soul, or as Aquinas classified it,
part of the Eternal law. The effort to
perform virtuous acts creates the desire to do the right thing for its own sake
and also creates practical wisdom.
Because human beings are not purely rational a flourishing, happy, human
life demands the exercise of both the intellectual and the moral virtues, all
of which are interpreted by Aquinas and classified accordingly.
Works Cited
1.
(E.E.)Introduction to Political Thinkers William Ebenstien and Alan O.
Ebenstien Harcourt Brace College Publishers (c)1992 by Holt, Rinehart and
Winston, Inc.
2. (NAB) The New
American Bible for Catholics World Catholic Press (c)1970 by the Confraternity
of Christian Doctrine
3. (Manning) Dr.
Kerry James Manning
4. (GME) Grolier
Multimedia Encyclopedia (c)1995 by Grolier Electronic Publishing, Inc.
No comments:
Post a Comment