Customer Reviews

Thomas Aquinas on Human Nature: A Philosophical Study of Summa Theologiae, 1a 75-89

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

 

 

This book was difficult to rate--the three stars I gave it were generous, because it does contain a great deal of interesting information, accessibly written. However, I should say at once that this is NOT the book for beginning students of Aquinas's anthropology (view of human nature) or metaphysics. This is not due to the book's difficulty, but rather to its tendentiousness. My other inclination was to give it one or two stars. When the reviews say that Pasnau is being "provocative" or that he will "irritate to distraction Aquinas's more possessive followers," what that really means is that he presents a great many of his own philosophical views and argues that they are Aquinas's views as well. Aquinas's "more possessive" followers are also quite a bit more accurate and true to their source (although Pasnau claims the contrary). So for beginning students, Pasnau can be quite misleading on a number of points. Just for examples: Pasnau argues that Aquinas was a compatibilist on the subject of free will (if anything, he was a libertarian, as writers such as Eleonore Stump have argued extensively). Pasnau also argues that, given Aquinas's Aristotelian conception of the intellectual soul being infused into the embryo after several weeks of development, that Aquinas would today be pro-choice on abortion (Pasnau refers to the pro-life view as the "noxious" agenda of the Catholic Church). However, since Aquinas's scientific information, as he himself writes, is empirically based rather than metaphysical in nature, Aquinas today would certainly take advantage of the knowledge of the physical self-organization of genetics to push the infusion of the soul back to the time of conception. Another example: Pasnau argues that to be human is to have "a God-given soul." No, according to Aquinas, to be human is to have a God-given soul AND a body--both are necessary conditions for humanity, but neither is a sufficient condition by itself. Pasnau does argue for this position, as well--in such instances he is somewhat self-contradictory. For a better book on Thomas's view of human nature, I would recommend the older classic "Thomistic Psychology" by Brennan, or the new "Aquinas" by Stump.

(August 10, 2009 REVISION) Upon re-reading the book, I've decided I was a bit too hard on Pasnau. I still think he is wrong on compatibilism and abortion (and on what Aquinas's bioethical views would be today). However, Pasnau's discussion of Aquinas on the soul / body relationship is quite long and careful, and much more valuable than I was giving him credit for. I still would not recommend the book for beginning students of Aquinas, but it is helpful even if because it brings about a re-thinking of Aquinas's anthropology. Maybe that was the author's goal.