Phil 417: Aquinas on God

Phil 417: Aquinas on God

Freddoso

Malloy 304/631-7327

E-mail: afreddos@nd.edu

Home page: http://www.nd.edu/~afreddos

Purpose----Texts----Requirements---- Syllabus----The Presentation----Term Paper ----Online Handouts----Presentation Assignments

Purpose of Course: A close reading of the first 43 questions of the first book of the Summa Theologiae in a new and dazzling (well .... at least adequate) translation by the instructor. These questions, which deal both with the divine nature or essence and with the three divine persons, provide as comprehensive a survey of St. Thomas's metaphysics, philosophy of language, and philosophical psychology as one could hope for, along with lots of enticing tidbits about logic (including modal logic), space and time, causality, numbers, and a whole host of minor topics that figure in the Christian understanding of God. But, more importantly, they exhibit how St. Thomas uses an impressive array of philosophical and theological tools in fashioning the central element of the Christian claim to wisdom.

Texts:

A course book with Summa Theologiae 1, qq. 1-43 that can be purchased for a modest fee at the Decio Copy Center.
For those interested, the Latin text is available online at Index Corporis Thomistici, which is maintained by Prof. Enrique Alarcon of the University of Navarre, Spain. An alternate (though, needless to say, inferior) translation is available at the New Advent Website.
In addition, I am providing some supplementary material, along with class notes as available, on the course handout page.

Requirements:

Presentations. During the course of the semester each student will be expected to prepare one brief (5-6 page) class presentation. A copy should be provided electronically for each student by noon of the day before the presentation is to be given. See below for more details.

Class Participation (25% of course grade).
Term Paper. You are required to write a 12-15 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 6; the paper itself is to be handed in on or before the last class day, April 28. See below for more details.
Before the course begins, you are required to read parts 1.1, 1.2, and 2 (all) of my "Suarez on Metaphysical Inquiry, Efficient Causality, and Divine Action," as well as my classnotes on Aristotle, Faith and Reason, and St. Thomas's metaphysics from Phil 301.
Final Exam. If I determine that it is necessary, there will be a final exam on 5/3 at 10:30. If this dreadful possibility is realized, I will readjust the above percentages accordingly.

Syllabus:

1/13: Lecture on q. 1

1/15 and 1/20 and 1/22 and 1/27: Lectures on qq. 2, 3, and 4

1/29: Presentation #1 on qq. 5-6 and Presentation #2 on qq. 7-8

2/3: Presentation #3 on qq. 9-10 and Presentation #4 on q. 11

2/5 and 2/10 and 2/12: Lecture on q. 12 and 13
2/17 and 2/19: Lecture on qq. 14 and 15

2/24: Presentation #5 on qq. 16-17 and Presentation #6 on q. 17-18

2/26: Lecture on q. 19

3/2: Presentation # 7 on q. 20 and Presentation #8 on q. 21
3/4: Lecture on qq. 22 and 23 and 24
3/16: Lecture on qq. 25 and 26
3/18 and 3/23: Lecture on q. 27
3/25: Lecture on q. 28
3/30: Lecture on q. 29

4/1: Presentation #9 on q. 30 and Presentation #10 on q. 31

4/6: Presentation #11 on q. 32 and Lecture on q. 33

4/8: Presentation #12 on q. 34 and Lecture on q. 35

4/13: Presentation #13 on q. 36 and Presentation #14 on q. 37-38

4/15: Lecture on q. 39

4/20: Lecture on q. 40
4/22: Lecture on q. 41
4/27: Lecture on q. 42 and q. 43

The Presentation

Each presentation will occupy one-half of a class period, i.e., 37.5 minutes (give or take a few seconds). The paper you write for the presentation should be 5-6 pages, double-spaced in a 12 pt. font with one-inch margins. This paper must be distributed to the instructor and the class by at least 12:00 noon on the day before the presentation is scheduled. During the class time devoted to your presentation, you may use no more than 20 minutes to present your paper. Even though you have a right to assume that everyone has read both the material from St. Thomas and your paper, you may nonetheless simply read your paper. Other options are just to point out the highlights or points you find interesting or problematic or obscure, etc. You are in charge of the class during your 37.5 minutes (give or take a few seconds). How you do this is up to you, though you are obligated to take and answer (or try to answer) questions from others in the seminar.

As for the content of the paper, you are not obligated to discuss every point St. Thomas makes in the material you are presenting. However, you are expected to cover the important points. You do not have to present the material in the exact order in which St. Thomas presents it. In fact, you should try to find ways of re-ordering the material so as to make the big picture more evident to others in the seminar -- who have, of course, already read the material (and your paper) with extreme care.

The Term Paper

The main project for this course is a 12-15 page paper which is to be submitted on or before the last class day (April 28); a 2-3 page proposal is due on or before April 6. 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:

The topic of the paper should be connected in some fairly recognizable way with our readings and discussions. You may try a deeper discussion of some point discussed in class. You might pick out another work of St. Thomas's (e.g., a question or article from one of the disputed questions such as Summa Contra Gentiles or De Veritate or De Malo or De Potentia Dei) and zero in on some topic that is prominent in that work, as long as we have touched upon it in class. There may be other possibilities as well.

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.

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:

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. 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.

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.