Saint Thomas Aquinas

>>10017618
>On a side note, has anyone on this board actually read the entire summa?
lol

>>10017618
I think Leo Strauss talks about Aquinas from time to time, he never dedicates an entire work to him, but he is definitely in the periphery in some of his works, even if it is minor.

File: ariddle.jpg (2MB, 2700x6826px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2700x6826px

>>10017633
Honest question, I wouldn't be surprised if someone actually did. I have seen posts by extremely well-read individuals on /lit/.

Also, bumping the thread with interesting debate material (pic related).

>>10017633
Isn't it just 3500 pages?

>>10017638
Could you name some of those works please?

>>10017652
>I have seen posts by extremely well-read individuals on /lit/.
You're just not well-read enough to spot poseurs.

Proof: you've seen someone synthetizing the most famous Aquina's proof, and you've immediatly assumed that this means that someone has actually read the entire Summa (3000 pages of extremely complex theology, which would take decades to study at a very superficial level).

>>10017665
3500 pages of Aquina are about 12m pages of fiction literature (or 4000 pages of Kant)

>>10017682
Harry Potter is 4100 pages and I read that in a month

>>10017676
>you're just not well-read enough to spot poseurs
>proof: you've seen someone...
I haven't read much of Aquinas, but never did I claim that I am well-read in that regard nor did I say that I have noticed posters with profound knowledge of Aquinas. I was talking in general terms; there are certain, albeit rare well-read individuals on /lit/.

Also, you are more than welcome to contribute to the thread in a more meaningful way than insulting me.

>>10017694
I have not insulted you, I have just told you the truth. No one here has read the Summa, and no one here is well-read enough to be able to approach It in its entirety.
Generally, you should use /lit/ only for basic advices, for example if you're interested in Aesthetics ask about it, and someone will regurgitate the same 4 or 5 books, which may still be a good starting point. Everything beyond that is a waste of time.
It's for your benefit, really: either you listen to me now, or in a few years from now you'll have an epiphany and you'll realize that everyone here is full of shit. It's 4chan, after all.

>>10017708
Fair enough, although my original question demands close to zero knowledge of Aquinas. It was a general question (the kind you deem appropriate for /lit/, and I agree) if my impression that Aquinas is largely overlooked is correct or not. The second part of that question is regarding any recommendations on contemporary Aquinas scholars.

I have asked whether someone has read the summa or not out of sheer curiosity. And my post with the reconstruction of Thomas' famous argument was just an attempt at bumping the thread.

>>10017708
Fuck off crossposter

File: 1505254641190.jpg (35KB, 400x291px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 400x291px

>>10017618
Thomism is love, Thomism is life.

What's a good book of his work shortened if I don't wanna read the entire summa?

>>10017905
This is the wrong approach

>no one here is well-read enough to be able to approach It in its entirety.

"The end of my labors has come. All that I have written appears to be as so much straw after the things that have been revealed to me."

To be "well-read" in regards to God, is to experience the divine revelation firsthand. All strictly philosophical and theological interpretations are inherently limited, incomplete and thus total trash in comparison.

This higher and true understanding does not, and will never come from being "well-read." Divine revelation comes from divine grace, which in turn only comes about from total devotion and attention towards that eternal principle, to the exclusion of all else.

>>10017902
>>10017928
Christlarping is so 2013

File: 1451963350992.jpg (55KB, 900x777px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 900x777px

>>10017989
>2013
Has it really been that long

>>10017993
This is the only response I did not expect.

It may be bigger now but that is when it was actually cool and worth something. Nowadays christlarpers don't even understand what you talk about and just refer to WLC in all questions

>>10017668
I think, if I remember correctly, he mentions him in the titular essay in "What is Political Philosophy" it's a very subtle reference but it is worth looking into if it was indeed this essay.

>>10017989
Living in ignorance and darkness is so tribulation

>>10018023
Case and point

>>10018035
exactly. the ignorant attack the messenger when they can't attack the message. same story throughout history.

>>10017618
Leibnitz builds on Aquinas quite a bit actually, he often refers to him. Spinoza probably never read him, alongside most others you listed, or at least not in depth so their counter points to Aquinas for the most part miss the point. The study of Aquinas was rather stale from the 17th to the late 19th century, meaning only with the start of the 20th century we get a massive upsurge of thomism, first in France, then in the English speaking world, with rather uninteresting incarnations of synthesis of Aquinas with either Kant or Husserl in Poland and Germany.
With the revival of Thomism there has been a number of big names, some of which are still relatively young. You should look to the following:
Reginald Garrigou Larange (the most important figure of the neo-scholastic movement and a personal favourite, incredibly hard headed and systematic offering a magnificent defense of classical metaphysics from everything up untill, including Hegel, sadly ignored most contemporary developments so never wrote on WIttgenstein)
Jaques Maritain (democratic thomist, a very mid line thinker who never goes into extremes)
Etienne Gilson (original interpreter)
Frederick Copleston (a fantastic historian of philosophy)
Anthony Kenny (not a thomist, but wrote a lot about him)
Alasdair MacIntyre (easily the most iteresting figure in ethics and political philosophy, as well as being the reason for a revival of aristotelian philosophy within the academia)
GEM Anscombe (a student of Wittgenstein and his friend, the only woman in the academia he respected, notable for her ethics and writings on her teacher)
Peter Geach (not a thomist per se as well)
Edward Feser (the best contemporary figure when it comes to educating people about Aquinas and defending him)
david Oderberg (very important in epistemics and ontology as well as ethics)

>read the entire summa
There are twi Summas, I've completed Contra Gentiles and have been reading other things since, will start Theologica soon (read selected works as far as this one goes).

>>10018188
Thank you very much for this post.