On a Complex Theory of a Simple God: An Investigation in Aquinas' Philosophical Theology (Cornell Studies in the Philosophy of Religion) [Hardcover]

Christopher Hughes (Author)

Book Description

Series: Cornell Studies in the Philosophy of Religion | Publication Date: March 1990

Hughes discusses Aquinus' work regarding the apparently irreconcilable theses of natural and revealed theology, and he argues that Aquinas fails in his attempt to reconcile absolute simplicity with the doctrines of the Trinity and the Incarnation. Hughes also offers a provocative account of divine simplicity and explores its implications for the Thomistic doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation.

Product Details

• Hardcover: 336 pages
• Publisher: Cornell Univ Pr (March 1990)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0801417597
• ISBN-13: 978-0801417597
• Product Dimensions: 9.1 x 5.9 x 1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.2 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,291,496 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A Wonderful Exploration of Divine Simplicity, July 14, 2010

By 

Joseph Wartick - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: On a Complex Theory of a Simple God: An Investigation in Aquinas' Philosophical Theology (Cornell Studies in the Philosophy of Religion) (Hardcover)

"On a Complex Theory of a Simple God" (hereafter CTSG) mostly focuses on Thomistic Philosophy, but it specifically highlights St. Thomas Aquinas' arguments for Divine Simplicity and his discussions of the Trinity and the Incarnation.

Hughes' analysis and critique of the arguments for Divine Simplicity are fantastic. His capabilities in discerning and detailing the complexities involved in Thomistic Philosophy are spectacular. It is his unbiased analysis, however, which most characterizes CTSG. Throughout pages 28-57, he destroys (in my opinion) Aquinas' arguments for Divine Simplicity. Then, he argues that God cannot be identical to His insular attributes, which counters the argument in defense of Divine Simplicity that, roughly, `omnipotence and omniscience may appear to be different, but perfection of either quality shows that they are actually the same' (60-68).

Yet despite his rather convincing arguments against Divine Simplicity as drawn out by most proponents, Hughes also outlines a possibility for a defense for that very idea. For if 1) God exists necessarily in the logical sense, and 2) if all things are contingent upon God's existence (two premises Hughes disagrees with, but does not offer an argument to refute per se--instead he refers to Humean thinking as a reason not to accept 1)), then

"[b]y 2), any individual substance in world w distinct from B exists there only at the sufferance of B, and would not have existed if B had exercised its will in a way it might have. By 1), we know that there is an individual substance--the individual in our world which is (a) God--which exists in w, and does not exist at the sufferance of B, that is, could not have failed to exist through any possible exercise of B's will. It follows that the individual who is a God in our world is identical to B. Since B and w were chosen arbitrarily, we may conclude that nothing actual or possible could have the specific nature Deity without also being the very same individual as God. In other words, God's individual essence is no different from His specific essence" (99).

This allows the defender of Divine Simplicity a "way out," if you will. For she can hold that 1) and 2) are both true, and then argue (though, as Hughes notes, in "a flavor more Leibnizian than Thomistic" [100]) that God exists and his specific and individual essence must be identical. This allows for a modification of Divine Simplicity which avoids the downfalls Hughes points out in the other formulations.

The rest of CTSG is made up of Hughes analyzing Aquinas' view of the Trinity and the Incarnation. This covers approximately half the work, but I feel the need to sum up Hughes wonderful analysis simply by saying that it seems he has shown there are serious problems with Aquinas' formulation of the Trinity, granting Aquinas' presuppositions about identity, simplicity, etc., but it seems that Hughes "way out" for the defender of Divine Simplicity outlined above could potentially be a "way out" for those desiring to defend the Trinity and the Incarnation on a modified account. Hughes himself offers possibilities for defending each of these doctrines which may not necessarily require abandoning Simplicity (cf. 251-253 for one example). As it stands, however, it seems that Aquinas himself has not provided an adequate defense of the propositions he wishes to claim as "compossible." Rather, defenders of Thomistic philosophy must turn outside of that realm-towards analytic or Liebniz-to reconcile those doctrines which Aquinas wishes to defend.

Hughes does a simply fantastic job of outlining Aquinas' arguments, analyzing them, critiquing them, supplementing them, and then providing a final analysis. Hughes remains fair and, I would say, unbiased throughout his work. He allows for the possibilities that central theses of Aquinas' "philosophical theology" are indeed correct, granting formulations Hughes himself does not share. I, however, do share many of the premises of those who can defend Divine Simplicity, and therefore continue to find it a "bruised, not beaten" doctrine. Hughes' insightful work should command a place of care on any philosopher of religion's bookshelf, as he has not only written a wonderfully compelling investigation into Aquinas' philosophical theology, he has also contributed to modern Thomistic and analytic philosophy, but most of all he demonstrated a willingness to concede possibilities on the "other side" of the debate and a rigorous approach to analytic philosophy of religion which one can only hope will be emulated.

--This review has been edited for length. See the full review on my site [...].