How do I get into Aquinas? Any study guides (not only for him,

I'm a girl btw

>>8777906
Any contribution to my question?

>>8777906
haha

>>8777902
Feser>Fredrick Copleston>Plato>Aristotle>Augustine>Boethius>Aquinas

>>8777902
just read the summa

>>8777913
That's the most retarded thing he could do.

>>8777912
I already knew Copleston. Feser is new to me though. Thank you.

>>8777906

Hi

>>8777913

That's how everyone else did it.
Don't say it's retarded just because you're a retard who needs to be spoon-fed by secondary lit.

>>8777902

https://www.amazon.com/Shorter-Summa-Essential-Philosophical-Theologica/dp/0898704383

https://www.amazon.com/Aquinas-Beginners-Guide-Edward-Feser/dp/1851686908/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1480413011&sr=1-3&keywords=thomas+aquinas

This is a great volume that doesn't focus so heavily on the Summa, but many of Aquinas' other works:

https://www.amazon.com/Selected-Philosophical-Writings-Oxford-Classics/dp/0199540276/ref=sr_1_13?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1480413066&sr=1-13&keywords=thomas+aquinas

>>8778110

You should also figure Aristotle out before you really dig into Aquinas.

Is there a good epub of Aquinas complete works somewhere? I have only Metaphysics left before my preparation for him is complete and I'll devote the next year mostly to him and other thomists.

>>8778153

In the Latin.

http://www.corpusthomisticum.org/wintroen.html

In English.

http://dhspriory.org/thomas/

>>8778179
Thanks. Latin doesn't mean much yet, but maybe I'll study it one day.

Bumping so it doesn't go 404 before I come home to dl.

>>8778110
>>8778111
>>8778179

OP here. Thank you very much.

>>8778610
One more recommendation, God, Philosophy Universities by Alasdair MacIntyre to provide insight into Catholic intellectual tradition in general and put Aquinas in a better understood context.

>>8778622
Thanks bro, I'll look it up.

>>8778610

Hey, definitely, definitely get this book:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0895550814

It is essential for Aquinas studies. It's basically a summary of every single answer in the Summa, which makes reading the actual Summa a lot easier.

I think if you have this book and a good scholastic dictionary (or Catholic dictionary that defines scholastic terms, like https://www.amazon.com/Catholic-Dictionary-Abridged-Updated-Modern/dp/0307886344) you'd be all set.

>>8777902
Chesterton's bio could be a fun entry point.

>>8781303
Oh, I got A Tour of The Summa a few weeks ago! It's amazing indeed. Thanks!

>>8777913
actually do this, Aquinas isn't like Aristotle--no hard exegitical work is needed to make sense of what he's saying. The Summa is written really exceptionally clearly; the method it exemplifies is one of his greatest contributions to philosophy. Just dive in.

>>8781762
*exegetical

>>8781762
Is it okay if I start with the summa then? No previous work by Aquinas that I should read?

>>8781840
>Is it okay if I start with the summa then?
No.
>No previous work by Aquinas that I should read?
Summa Comtra Gentiles if you want.

>>8781840
yes, I just said that

>>8781917
>>8781912
Mmm...

>>8781936
Unless you rule over Aristotle and understand the basic mindset completely different to the liberal one you will get lost a lot.
Kant seriously fucked up his reading of Aquinas and don't assume you'll out of the blue read him better than Kant.

>>8781938
One could argue Kant fucked up his reading of Aquinas because he came to Aquinas having already read Aristotle and so, wrongly, tried to read Aquinas in light of his own interpretation of Aristotle.
Aquinas is a teacher; if you're a clean slate, and use him as a means for jumping into Aristotle and Averroes and whatever, you might get more out of his writing than you otherwise would have

>>8781947
No, I think his misreading is directly linked to not having the mindset of a medieval Christian. Hence, introductory literature tries to explain how Aquinas thinks so you can see what he wrote in the way he intended it, not as a liberal materialist.

>>8781949
Right, so your idea is that Summa Contra Gentiles, since it was written for non-Christians, would be a better intro to his way of thinking--makes sense.

>>8781955
It wasn't written for non Christians, it was written against non Christians. A missionary who needed to argue with Muslims, Jews and heretics was the target audience.
And my idea was that it's the best into Aquinas after introductory texts discussed earlier.

>>8781963
I see, thanks for clearing it up

bump
i like this thread

>>8782083
it's run its course, the question was answered

Kreeft's Summa of the Summa is good, tries to replicate how you would read the book in a class with a professor

File: stock-photo-close-up-photo-of-face-of-an-handsome-indian-man-having-cautious-and-suspicious-look-139378238.jpg (633KB, 1101x1600px) Image search: [Google]

633KB, 1101x1600px

>>8782425
>Kreeft
>Philosophy 101 by Socrates
>Socrates Meets Marx
>Socrates Meets Machiavelli

>>8782688
Yeah he writes introductory apologetics for wide audiences.

>>8777902

Just go to Edward Fraser who is his biggest fan.

>>8784269
Feser

what do i read in order to best defend the christian faith

>>8777906
Tits or gtfo

>>8784332
Catechism > Bible > Chesterton/C.S. Lewis/others >Christian classical authors (Aquinas, Augustine etc)

If you're a protestant, just skip the first step.

>>8784332
It's an absolutely massive subject and you'll need to be much more specific. In which area do you want to defend it?

>>8777902
This >>8777912 is the only correct answer.

>>8784356
w-which ever the most important ones are

>>8784356
idk maybe the it's place in the modern world or "why do you believe in god if he's not real lmao" kind of things

>>8784332
Just remember Pascal's wager and you'll be fine.
Just remember, no one was ever argued into christianity, leastways no one I can think of.

>>8784860
how do i defend my beliefs from atheists on the internet tho

>>8784867
You don't.

>>8785164
how do i defend myself irl

>>8785205
Accept chaos.

>>8784834
Depends on what you do. I'm a law student so my primary interest is ethics and politics, so metaphysics, history and theology are something I can't fully focus on.
>>8784840
So it's arguing with retards? The best thing to do is ignore them and avoid throwing pearls before pigs, but The Last Superstition is kind of the go to basic epistemology against fedoras.
>>8784860
The wager is fallacious and can only be understood as his personal fight with disbelief.
I know of plenty who became Christians through argumentation, Edith Stein, Gene Wolfe and Alasdair MacIntyre come into mind immediately. Aquinas and Chesterton do their job good enough.

>>8786306
You don't study law in the US, do you?

>>8786491
No. Very, very far from the US, in fact all philosophy here is absent from law. Ex socialist shithole.

>>8786559
Latin America/eastern europe?

>>8786565
Europe. Not very far east.

File: aaaaaaaaaaaaah.png (3MB, 2560x2739px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2560x2739px

what I plan on doing:
>read the greeks while reading KJVBible (Have read Mythology > Theogony > Iliad > Odissey > article on Presocratics and Sophists. Starting Plato today and currently on first book of Samuel on the Bible)
>read all of those books in the 'Theology' section of pic related, closing it with Aquinas and Augustine
rate

>>8786794
Shit routine honestly.
This chart is not very good as far as systematic reading goes.