Customer Reviews

The Doctrine of the Analogy of Being According to Thomas Aquinas (Marquette Studies in Philosophy)

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I just finished reading this book, and I was so impressed by the profound metaphysical insight of the author that I had to advertise it here. The Dominican priest who wrote this work achieved something particularly useful, especially in the climate of "existential thomism" that is dominant in some quarters. I confess that I myself was for a long time under the influence of this school of thought, not without some real benefit. However, I have grown disenchanted with the dead end of the quasi-mystical worship of "esse" and the fruitless tirades against "essentialism." I think that the recent translation of this 43-year old work from the French is a timely contribution to the thomistic movement.

Montagne delves deeply into the metaphysical question of the "analogy of being" and traces the development of Saint Thomas' doctrine over his writing career. He concludes that the proper way to interpret Aquinas' doctrine is to understand it as an "analogy of relation" (sometimes called the "analogy of intrinsic attribution") not as the "analogy of proportion" favored by Cajetan. Now there is no shortage of those who are ready to criticize Cajetan on behalf of Saint Thomas, and one suspects that the behavior has been over-indulged in order to prove one's (existential) thomistic credentials. Most of these criticisms are rather shallow, however, and take one into blind alleys. They are even polemical to the point of rudeness. Ralph McInerny's book on analogy, for example, manages to be both. Montagne, however, couples a deep capacity for metaphysical reflection with that gentleness which is the offspring of a true love of truth.

It would be impossible to summarize the work without doing Montagnes an injustice. So I will not attempt to do so. Those who appreciate this review will likely appreciate the book as well. I do however want to note one deficiency, not in the work itself, but in the translation. There are a reasonable number of instances in which typing errors occur and prepositions are left out. They do not hinder the overall understanding of the work, but they are an annoyance. It is surprising that in an age of word processors such things can be allowed to happen on so large a scale. The proof-reading was evidently sloppy and it detracts from what is otherwise a very professional work.