Phil 405: Aquinas on Love and Justice Freddoso Decio 324/631-7327 E-mail: Alfred.J.Freddoso.1@nd.edu Home page: http://www.nd.edu/~afreddos Purpose Texts Tentative Syllabus Requirements Term Paper Assignments for Class Presentations Notes on the Prima Secundae Notes on the cardinal virtues Notes on love as a passion (incomplete) Notes on charity (incomplete) Notes on Justice Taxonomy of potential parts of justice Purpose of Course: A part-lecture/part-discussion course for philosophy majors, the purpose of which is to provide the student with an opportunity to come to understand in some depth St. Thomas's general account of virtue and his detailed treatments of the two central virtues of the will, viz., love (charity) and justice. After perusing the treatise on virtue and the treatment of the passion of love from the First Part of the Second Part of the Summa Theologiae (the Prima Secundae), we will spend the bulk of the semester examining questions 23-46 (the treatise on charity) and 57-122 (the treatise on justice) of the Second Part of the Second Part (the Secunda Secundae). Texts: The texts for the course are (i) the general treatment of the passions and the treatment of love in the Treatise on the Passions (Prima Secundae, questions 22-29), (ii) the Treatise on Virtue (Prima Secundae, questions 49-70, Oesterle translation--Notre Dame Press) and (iii) questions 23-46 and 57-122 of the Secunda Secundae itself. Background material is available on my web site under Phil 406 and Phil 301. The other tracts are available on the world wide web or from the library. Also, you will find Wordperfect 6/7/8 files for the discussion of love as a passion, the treatise on charity, and the treatise on justice at http://www.nd.edu/~afreddos/summa. The relevant files are "st12amor.wpd," "st22char.wpd," and the six whose names are of the form "st12just*.wpd". There are mistakes in these files, but they're usable. I suggest that you download and print up no more than one at a time if you're using a cluster computer. Requirements: Class presentations. During the course of the semester each student will be expected to make a class presentation (30 minutes reading time -- approximately 10 pages) on an assigned question or set of questions. (Click here for the list of assignments.) This presentation will survey the material in question and serve as the basis for that day's class discussion. In general, the presentations will deal with certain specialized questions which St. Thomas takes up in the his discussions of love and justice. As such, they are meant to supplement the instructor's lectures on the more general aspects of the treatises. The idea is that you will be an 'expert' on the questions you present. A copy of the presentation should be provided for each student. You can either have them copied at the department's expense and bring them to class or e-mail them to the others at least by noon of the day preceding the presentation. (Class participation + summary = 50% of course grade) Term Paper. You are required to write a 15-20 page paper, worth 50% of the course grade. A 2-3 page proposal, plus outline, is to be submitted for approval on or before April 8; the paper itself is to be handed in on or before the last class day. (Warning: These deadlines are absolutely non-negotiable). See below for more details. Tentative Syllabus I. Introduction 1/12: Lecture: Introduction to Summa Theologiae 2 and key elements of the treatise on action from Summa Theologiae 1-2. Reading: Notes on Treatise on Happiness and Notes on the Treatise on Action II. Treatise on virtue in general (See Notes on Treatise on Virtue) 1/14: Lecture: Habit in general Reading: Treatise on Virtue, Summa Theologiae 1-2, questions 49-54 1/19: Lecture: Moral and intellectual virtue in general Reading: Treatise on Virtue, Summa Theologiae 1-2, questions 55-60 1/21: Lecture: Introduction to the cardinal and theological virtues Reading: Treatise on Virtue, Summa Theologiae 1-2, questions 61-67 III. Love (amor) as a passion (Also see Notes on Treatise on the Passions) 1/26: Lecture: Love in itself Reading: Summa Theologiae 1-2, question 26 1/28: Lecture: The causes of love Reading: Summa Theologiae 1-2, question 27 2/2: Lecture: The effects of love, and the passion of hate Reading: Summa Theologiae 1-2, questions 28-29 IV. Treatise on Charity 2/4: Lecture: Charity in itself Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, question 23 2/9: Lecture: The subject of charity Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, question 24 2/11: Lecture: The object of charity Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, question 25 2/16: Lecture: The order of charity, along with the precepts of charity and the gift of wisdom Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, questions 26 and 44-46 2/18: Lecture: The primary act of charity: dilectio Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, question 27 2/23: Discussion: The interior effects of charity: joy, peace mercy Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, questions 28-30 2/25: Discussion: The exterior effects of charity: doing good to others, almsgiving, fraternal correction Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, questions 31-33 3/2: Discussion: The sins against charity and against joy: hatred, acedia, envy Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, questions 34-36 3/4: Discussion: The sins of the heart and mouth against peace, and sins against beneficence: discord, contention, scandal Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, question 37-38 and 43 3/16: Discussion: The sins of deed against peace: schism, war, strife, sedition Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, questions 39-42 V. Treatise on Justice 3/18: Lecture: Right, justice, injustice, and judgment Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, questions 57-60 3/23: Lecture: The subjective parts of justice (commutative and distributive), the act of commutative justice (restitution), and the vice opposed to distributive justice (favoritism) Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, questions 61-63 3/25: Discussion: Vices opposed to commutative justice through deeds: homicide, mutilation, theft, robbery Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, questions 64-66 3/30: Discussion: Vices opposed to commutative justice through words used in court: unjust judgment, unjust accusation, sins on the part of the accused, sins on the part of witnesses, sins on the part of advocates Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, questions 67-71 4/1: Discussion: Vices opposed to commutative justice through words used outside of court: contumely, detraction, malicious gossip, derision, malediction Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, questions 72-76 4/6: Discussion: Vices opposed to commutative justice through commerce (fraud, usury), and the integral parts of justice Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, questions 77-79 4/8: Discussion: The potential parts of justice: religion and its interior acts: devotion and prayer Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, questions 81-83 4/13: Discussion: The potential parts of justice: some exterior acts of religion, viz., vows and oaths Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, questions 88-89 4/15: Discussion: The potential parts of justice: some vices opposed to religion, viz., superstition, idolatry, tempting God, perjury, sacrilege Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, questions 92, 94, and 97-99 4/20: Discussion: The potential parts of justice: piety and the gift of piety, respectfulness, gratitude, and vindication Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, questions 101-108 & 121 4/22: Discussion: The potential parts of justice: truthfulness Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, questions 109-113 4/27: Discussion: The potential parts of justice: friendliness, liberality, and equity, and the precepts pertaining to justice Reading: Summa Theologiae 2-2, questions 114-119 & 122 The Term Paper The main project for this course is a 15-20 page paper which is to be submitted on or before the last class day; a 2-3 page proposal is due on or before April 8. In what follows I will try to give you some clear indication of what I am looking for in both the paper and the proposal. Comments about the paper: a. The paper is meant to be a 'philosophical' paper rather than a 'research' paper. You might, for example, articulate a thesis, whether positive or negative, and defend it by replying to objections. Alternatively, you might do a mainly interpretive paper which delves into issues that are not obvious on a first reading of St. Thomas's text or which brings together material from diverse sections of the Secunda Secundae. (In other words, I expect you to do more than simply repeat what is in the text.) There may, of course, be some piece of secondary literature on St. Thomas that you want to incorporate into your discussion. So in this sense some research may be called for. b. The topic of the paper should be connected in some fairly recognizable way with our readings and discussions. That is, it should focus on some issue or small set of issues that come up in the readings for the course. Moreover, it should be a manageable topic which will allow you to delve more deeply into specific arguments and objections. This, of course, is easier said than done, but I am here to help you do it. c. The paper is a fairly long one, and so you will have to plan it carefully. I expect the paper to move forward at well-marked junctures instead of merely talking around one or another point in order to fill space. I especially do not want a paper consisting primarily of loosely connected observations about some topic. Further, every paper must begin with an introduction that tells the reader exactly what you mean to do in the paper and how each section of the paper is related in general to your topic. d. I expect the paper to be stylistically and grammatically beyond reproach. I will take off for sloppy sentence-structure, misspellings, dangling participles, etc. Proofreading is absolutely essential. Comments about the proposal: a. The proposal should contain two parts, viz., a narrative and an outline. The narrative should be a two-page (or so) description of the thesis or interpretation you wish to defend and of the steps by which you will defend it. (The thesis may of course be primarily negative--you may want to show, say, that what St. Thomas says about, say, lying, is dead wrong.) In order to write this sort of narrative you already have to have a fairly detailed idea of what you want to do and the series of steps by which you propose to do it. In general, your strategy must be to construct a logical sequence of steps which will correspond to the main divisions of the paper. Here is one possible example of what I have in mind: (i) exposition of St. Thomas's view on such-and-such, (ii) three criticisms, (iii) objections to the criticisms, (iv) reply to the objections. There are other possibilities as well; the main thing is to order your paper in a coherent and logical sequence. b. The outline that accompanies the narrative should make graphically clear the main divisions and subdivisions in the text. This outline should include more than just the three or four main headings; I want to see some subheadings within each of those main divisions, so that I will have a reasonably clear idea of how the paper is supposed to progress. I encourage you to try your ideas out on one another and I also encourage you to consult with me before the proposal deadline if you think it will be helpful--either after class or by making an appointment to see me at some other time.