Thomas Aquinas: Philosophy in an Hour

Philosophers in 90 Minutes #25

by Paul Strathern

Philosophy for busy people. Read a succinct account of the philosophy of Aquinas in just one hour.

Thomas Aquinas remains the unacknowledged maestro of Scholasticism – the static, cumulative philosophy of the medieval period. More a method of learning than pure theology, Aquinas’ Scholasticism saw the careful synthesis of Christian doctrine with Greek rationalism – an amalgamation that came to define Catholic philosophy. Aquinas’ influence stretches far across the western world; much modern philosophy has been conceived as either a reaction against, or in accordance with, his original ideas.

Here is a concise, expert account of Thomas Aquinas’s life and philosophical ideas – entertainingly written and easy to understand. Also included are selections from Thomas Aquinas’s work, suggested further reading, and chronologies that place Aquinas in the context of the broader scheme of philosophy.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, History, Religion, Biography, Theology, Audiobook

94 pages, Kindle Edition

First published May 1, 1999

About the author

Paul Strathern (born 1940) is a English writer and academic. He was born in London, and studied at Trinity College, Dublin, after which he served in the Merchant Navy over a period of two years. He then lived on a Greek island. In 1966 he travelled overland to India and the Himalayas. His novel A Season in Abyssinia won a Somerset Maugham Award in 1972.

Besides five novels, he has also written numerous books on science, philosophy, history, literature, medicine and economics.

Reviews

[Maziyar Yf · Rating 3 out of 5]

شاید بتوان اهمیت توماس آکویناس ، فیلسوف ایتالیایی را در تلاش او برای تلفیق مسیحیت و اندیشه های ارسطو دانست ، فلسفه غرب و آنچه بعدها در فلسفه غرب حاصل شد را به نوعی می توان مدیون تلاشهای آکویناس دانست . مجاهدتهای او ثابت کرد که منافاتی میان عقل و ایمان وجود ندارد .به این ترتیب راه برای تفکر و اندیشه اندکی هموار شد . به داوری نویسنده ، پل استراترن ، آکویناس موفق شد میان مسیحیت و فلسفه ارسطو وحدتی به وجود آورد ، او فلسفه ارسطو را با انجیل یا به عبارتی دیگر عقل را با ایمان همراه کرد .
نویسنده در کتاب کوتاه خود پس از شمردن تلاشهای آکویناس برای شرح استدلالات عقلی ، به بررسی کار مهم تر او یعنی استفاده از استدلالات برای اثبات وجود خدا پرداخته . از نگاه استراترن آنچه از منظر فلسفی اهمیت داشته شرح و تصویری ایست که آکویناس از عقلانیت و وحی ترسیم می کند نه کاربرد نادرست آنها .
او در نظریه اثبات وجود خدا که در کتاب خلاصه استدلالات علیه بی دینان آمده اساسا از نظریه محرک اول ارسطو استفاده کرده . فلسفه اخلاقی آکویناس هم اقتباسی ایست از رویکرد مبتنی بر شعور همگانی ارسطو . آنها هر دو سعادت و خوشبختی انسان را هدف اصلی تمام فعالیتهای بشر در زندگی دنیوی می دانستند . از نگاه آکویناس حصول این سعادت از طریق دنبال کردن قوانین طبیعی میسر بود که عقل آنها را کشف می کرد بنابراین هر آنچه عقل یا قوانین طبیعی نادیده می گرفتند لاجرم غیراخلاقی بود .
نویسنده چهار صفت اصلی که قرار است انسان را به خیراخلاقی برسانند یعنی دوراندیشی ، عدالت ، شکیبایی و اعتدال را فضیلت های اصلی از نگاه آکویناس دانسته و دوراندیشی که شامل مفاهیمی چون خردورزی و توان مندی اجتماعی و فکری می شود را مهمترین صفات بر شمرده .
کتاب درحالی به پایان رسیده که آکویناس هدف غایی خلقت را حقیقت برشمرده و برای خردمند هیچ فریضه ای واجب تر از تعمق در حقیقت ندانسته است .

[Theo Logos · Rating 3 out of 5]

In his (Insert Thinker) In 90 Minutes series, Paul Strathern uses a formula. Present brief, biographical notes highlighting anything outrageous or odd, add a pithy presentation of the figures thought, and mix thoroughly with an irreverent, sometimes snarky wit to strip the almost sacred mystique that has accumulated around some of these guys. It can be entertaining, provided you aren’t among those who venerate said thinker and his ideas, in which case you write a scathing review of how terrible, awful, unfair Strathern and his work are.

Thomas Aquinas was a hard subject. What do you do with a brilliant thinker who is famous for being at the very pinnacle of Scholasticism, the most static and stupefying manifestation of Western philosophy? Whose greatest achievement was devising proofs for the existence of God? (All Douglas Adams fans insert Babel Fish reference here.) A guy who became the champion, must read philosopher of the Catholic Church, the same institution that is famous for putting the works of most other philosophers on its infamous Index Librorum Prohibitorum, a kinda No Fly list for ideas? A man so lacking in personal charm his contemporaries nicknamed him Dumb Ox?

The answer is, not much. Of course 90 minutes is laughably too little time to scratch the surface of complex philosophical works, but here there’s not much else to work with. Once you get past the story of Aquinas’s family kidnapping him and holding him prisoner in a tower for a year to prevent him from the socially catastrophic career choice of joining the Dominicans, there are precious few interesting personal details left to tell. And there’s hardly anything for Strathern’s snarky wit to latch on to. He tried, but the best shot he mustered was this, about Aquinas’s magnum opus, Summa Theologia:

”Although this work remained incomplete at Aquinas’s death, it is still considered the finest and most complete exposition of the medieval mind, sadly, a somewhat hollow achievement in modern eyes. Aquinas’s masterpiece attracts virtually no interest today, except among Catholics, who have to study it because it contains the truth about philosophy.”

[Stephen · Rating 1 out of 5]

While the 90 minute limit was met, precious little of Aquinas' philosophy was discussed. The author preferred to wax poetical about the ways in which the Catholic Church supposedly worked against progress rather than stick to the main subject material, Thomas. There was also a great deal of speculation and some downright misinformed and/or poorly researched sections which made this an unacceptable introduction to the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas, and an even worse introduction to the times in which he lived. I cannot emphasize enough how terrible this work is.

I cannot recommend this work to anyone because of glaring errors and an obvious slant against presenting Thomas as he understood himself.

[angelo | justamereinkling · Rating 1 out of 5]

TL;DR 1.0 out of 5.0, baby.

Some books are hit-or-miss. This one is a definitely all miss.

I've been on a glorious hiatus from writing reviews for the last few months, but thank you Mr. Strathern -- you've resurrected me from my solemn grave to write this review. You may even toggle me to start writing reviews on the regular.

Ah, how I've missed you, Goodreads editing window.

----

"Thomas Aquinas in 90 Minutes" Review in (Less Than) 9 Minutes

I've been on a blitz of a reading spree lately and currently within the realms of C.S. Lewis and G.K. Chesterton, two prominent British writers and lay theologians. Both were inspired by the teachings philosophies of Thomas Aquinas and Augustine, and so I decided it's time to formally indoctrinate myself with the lads Aquinas and Augustine. Browsing through Audible for some free books, I selected this one along with G.K. Chesterton's The Everlasting Man and Saint Thomas Aquinas. Sponsor me, Audible :(

I should have started and stuck with G.K. Chesterton from the get-go.

(You know the adage:
If it's free, it's for me!
Well, not all things in life that are free are good, sweety!)

The allure of this book is that it's advertised as a 90 minute snippet of a well-known philosopher, so you don't have to go through that painstaking pilgrimage emulating an undergraduate Freshman student writing a thesis paper for their 100 level philosophy class where they're mindthrobbingly scouring eight concurrent tabs open on said philosopher while playing a Youtube mix of some EDM music at 10 PM at night. Definitely wasn't me. Instead, you can ceremoniously look like a pompous ass intellectual who drinks his soy milk Frappuccino with his pinky up and gloat how you read Descartes and Aquinas to your friend group.

What got me to tap the DOWNLOAD button on my phone was to introduce myself to Aquinas in a podcastesque episode which would be manageable. However within a few minutes of listening to this, the material was something I was not liking. As a firm believer of giving the wondrous BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT especially to authors, I kept on listening to see if it could get better. Seeing myself reach halfway and visibly cringing at how unclassy the book was, my brain kept triggering the sunk-cost fallacy and decided to finish from cradle to grave.

If you've come here to read on a the topic of St. Thomas Aquinas and his writings, then you've come to the wrong place. This whole book is littered with snark and brash sarcasm. There's a degree of finesse and art to write with snark and sarcasm. Hit it right on the point and you've got spunk and personality *see Terry Pratchett and Kurt Vonnegut*, but miss it (which said author surely did) and you end up with 90 minutes/90 pages of misconstrued misrepresentations of one of philosophy's staple minds. It's all negativity from the author as if he's some sort of elitist within the Philosophy world where or anyone to do anything with Aquinas, the Catholic Church, Theism, or religion in general are shambolic dolts and deserved to be looked down upon.

One example just off the top of my head is how the author wrote that Aquinas's most famous writing, Summa Theologica, which is considered to be one of the most important works of classics within, not just Theology, but as Philosophy as a whole was nothing more than a work limited as it was written the medieval age for the Church. Downplay lines like this just makes me even question why write a book on Aquinas at all if the author just wanted to throw my poorly written jabs? It's more like a reflection on the author who paints himself like that atheist kid back in high school who would post on 4chan or reddit saying "Church bad" to farm internet points.

If anything, this book is 90% fluff of snide remarks taking a crap on Aquinas, St. Augustine, the Roman Catholic church, and Theism in general. What about the other 10%? Oh, actual substance of mostly Aquinas's biography and little sprinkle dust of his actually teachings in (lack of) detail. So when you do the math: you have 9 minutes out of 90 worth reading and the other 81 being "zingers" that are interesting for the first few minutes but quickly lose its novelty which does nothing to hide the negative tone the author has for his subject in Aquinas by discrediting him as nothing more than a simple wannabe philosopher in the Medieval Ages as if he was a total uneducated imbecile who was actively delaying the Enlightenment of Man and proper logical thinking.

Do not recommend.

I would rather read something that justly covers Thomas Aquinas -- whether it be his contributions to philosophical exegesis in lieu with Aristotelian philosophy within Christian fundamentals to even his sigma male grindset of rejecting women in favor of learning. I jest.

That's it. I'm promptly starting G.K. Chesterton's biography on Thomas Aquinas where the former surely properly honors the latter.

Now, back to my grave to rest.

[Aaron · Rating 3 out of 5]

I mean, it wasn’t the best explanation of Aquinas’ philosophy, and there was a lot of opinionated snide remarks about Aquinas in general. Even so, it was a starting place for getting introduced to such an influential person in the development of western thought. Definitely not the best work in the series

[Jimena · Rating 1 out of 5]

Mi problema con esta entrega es exactamente la misma antes expuesta respecto al tomo que explora a San Agustín. El autor se embarca más en una resumida biografía de la vida de los filósofos y de sus propias opiniones ante éstas que en una genuina exploración de los pensamientos o filosofías desarrolladas por dos de los grandes representantes de la filosofía medieval. Dicho esto, hay que reconocer que el libro respecto a Tomas sí incluye un poco más de abordaje filosófico pero difícilmente el suficiente para hacer de su lectura una auténtica fuente de conocimiento del tomismo o siquiera una introducción a éste. Fuera de que desafió el maniqueísmo y el argumento ontológico de San Anselmo, no aprendí nada.

[DeaFlourishment · Rating 4 out of 5]

Breve, pero funcional reseña de la biografía de Tomás de Aquino. Ilustra algunos puntos de contexto que facilitan la lectura directa del autor. Se echa de menos que existan más obras biográficas de él en tanto que filósofo. La bibliografía disponible en español suele redactarse como hagiografía.

[Latif Joneydi · Rating 4 out of 5]

خواندن درباره آکویناس در زمانه ای که عقایدِ او کهنه و رد شده است به نظر عجیب می آید اما به قولِ پُل استراترن در همین کتابِ آشنایی با آکویناس:" آنچه از آکویناس برای ما جالب است همانا شکل و فرم و چگونگی پیشبرد استدلالاتش است و نه لزوما استنتاج��ت او."ص۴۰
این گفته استراترن درباره غول هایی چون افلاطون و ارسطو و آگوستین هم کاربرد دارد که بسیاری از عقایدشان پوچ و اشتباه از کار درآمده اما هنوز شیوه هایِ اندیشه و استدلال و بینشِ آن ها درباره مسائل مختلف قابل بحث و گفت-و-گو است. این کتابِ استراترن را هم دوست داشتم.
انتخابِ درست بُرهه هایی از زندگیِ توماس و روایت گوشه هایی از زمینه تاریخی-سیاسی درگیری هایِ مذهبیِ قرن سیزدهم کتاب را برای خواننده در عینِ کوتاهی به فهمِ بهترِ دلیل اهمیتِ خواندنِ توماس راهگشا بود.
سپاس از استراترن.

[Kavanaugh Kohls · Rating 1 out of 5]

Title is a lie- readable in 37 minutes.

And that's not all. Strathern claims he'll forgo Aquinas' theology to analyze his philosophy. Instead, he presents little more a pithy biography of the man, punctuated by digs at Catholism and religion in general.

What's worse, he claims in the introduction that Aquinas' philosophy has value for the modern reader, but ends the body of his work by dismissing all philosophy prior to Descartes.

Spend your 37 minutes anywhere else.

[Matt · Rating 1 out of 5]

The authors open hostility towards anyone so stupid, ignorant or so uncultured so as to even entertain religious notions clouds his treatment of the subject. The venom with which he constantly attacks Catholicism and Christianity gets in the way of actually describing the works of Thomas Aquinas. Surely his works (besides the two treated in this text) provide more material that could be summarized. Instead, space in this rather compact text is given over to a seemingly constant flow of jabs that grow ever more tiresome (though there are one or two good "zingers" you have to admit, is this why I'm reading the book?). In the end, the book was as much about the author and his views as it was about Aquinas. For that reason, I view it as an utter failure.

[benebean · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is my first time listening/reading anything on Aquinas so I have no idea whether he was covered well or not. However, this seemed more like a summary of Aquinas's biography rather than a summary of his philosophy.

[Bcoghill Coghill · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very light and enjoyable reading. Don't expect to know all of Aquinas, that would take a lifetime but this will give you a quick overview or refresher.
The tone is irreverent but that is fine by me. If not you, there are many other fine biographies out there not so flippant.

[Kathleen]

I didn't care for the tone of the book. A bit snide. Off putting.

[Trice · Rating 4 out of 5]

fun as well as interesting to listen to - nice overview of historical and philosophical context of aquinas, as well as what he himself wrote/taught.

[David · Rating 2 out of 5]

Thirty minutes of substance and sixty of snark.

[Andrew Price · Rating 2 out of 5]

Just read Aquinas.

[Alex Shrugged · Rating 3 out of 5]

As with all such summaries, you are trusting the person summarizing. I've listened to several from this author and have been satisfied. It is a good start to the subject of such a famous theologian and philosopher.

I will probably listen to this audiobook again.

[Jennifer Flanagan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Listened to audio. Sometimes some Thomas Aquinas on repeat does more for a workout than a Big Bootie remix. 3 stars tho

[Basia · Rating 5 out of 5]

let it be my philosophical comeback

[Robert LoBretto · Rating 1 out of 5]

The author is snarky and sarcastic. He spent more time on his subject's bio than he did on any of his subject's writings. He spent more time and energy criticizing the Catholic church than analyzing St. Thomas' writings and thoughts. I would not recommend reading anything by this caustic writer. I would give him 1/32 of a star if I could

[Valerie Sherman · Rating 2 out of 5]

I agree with other reviews that the author, while witty, focused too much on the context and not enough on the substance of Aquinas's philosophy or perspective as a Middle-Ager.

[John Martindale · Rating 2 out of 5]

Strathern failed to conceal his contempt for Aquinas and for theism, he seemed to assume his audience to all be atheist, so there was this weird sense of his trying to justify why he sunk to such a low to write about this out-dated, ridiculous superstitious bumpkin who lived during the anti-reason, anti-science dark ages from which nothing good could come. His attempted at explain his decision to write about Auinas was done by his few brief reference to how Aquinas was actually a brilliant philosopher despite his deranged loony theology, but most of the book was to assure his fellow atheist by snide comments and misrepresenting the times Aquinas lived in. So his few words of praise for Aquinas seemed kind of like a "I love you and like you a lot" while at the same time turning the knife in the back.

Oh and I must comment on one thing that irks me, Strathern (though only briefly and in passing) gloats how science displaced the earth from the center of the universe (which seems conclusive proof that their is no God to the atheist). Strathern, as does most other authors, write as if the ancients thought the earth the center of the cosmos in the way that a narcissist thinks himself the center of the universe, and that if the earth isn't the center, then it's not privileged and there is therefore, no God. But this isn't the case for those in the middle ages, gee... for what I've heard, hell, for them was the center and earth was only one level up and the perfect unchanging spheres where far removed from the chaotic center. i think the medieval perspective was based on the genius speculations of the Greeks. So yes, Strathern, who surely knows about Aristotle and Ptolemy, seemed completely swept up in the secular mythology, completely allegorizing the discoveries of Copernicus and Galileo, to make it the foundation of their romantic confabulation of secular progress, science, evolution and reason triumphing over the evil church and it's anti-reason cohorts. David Bentley Hart and many others have shown the utter vacuity of their faith in the grand secular narrative, and how it bares no relation at all with a sober look at history.

[Andrea Zuvich · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sadly not the best of Strathern's philosophy in an hour books. I'm left knowing only a little more than I began with, which wasn't much, and I wish he spent less time with other philosophies and sciences (including modern ones i.e. Hawking) when all I wanted was to learn specifically about Aquinas.

[Paul Smith · Rating 1 out of 5]

I wish the author were as confident of Aquinas' brilliance as he is of his own. I'm wondering how much Aquinas he's actually read given that this book (to the limited extent it deals with Aquinas) is largely biographical along with historical context and a great deal of snark directed at those, including Aquinas, who the author feels superior to.

Don't waste your time.

[Wade Bearden · Rating 4 out of 5]

What do you know, it took about 90 minutes.

[Timothy McNeil · Rating 3 out of 5]

A fair amount of general history, and Strathern focuses a bit too much on the connective tissues between Aristotle and Aquinas (and not on Aquinas' work in its own right), but it was a good read.

[Ole]

I liked the use of sarcasm in this introductory!

[Ben · Rating 3 out of 5]

Another quick, witty, summary of a philosopher's life and work in this "90 minute series".

[Brandon · Rating 2 out of 5]

Better than Strathern's Augustine in 90 Minutes. Not as scornful in tone. But still pretty clearly written from a critical and arguably belittling perspective.

[Bells · Rating 2 out of 5]

Don’t recommend any of these