Analytical Thomism

The Thomist 63 (1999): 125-37 ANALYTICAL THOMISM BRIAN J. SHANLEY, 0.P. The Catholic University ofAmerica Washington, D.C. NALYTIC PHILOSOPHERS have become increasingly nterested in the thought of Thomas Aquinas. Several actors help to explain this phenomenon. A remote cause is the work of Peter Geach, who both modeled and validated serious analytic study of Thomas; many of those writing in the analytic tradition today owe an obvious debt to Geach. Another remote cause has been the renewed interest in medieval philosophy among analytic philosophers. More proximately, the emergence of philosophy of religion as an accepted analytic speciality has also spurred interest in Thomas. As a result, Aquinas is now taken seriously as a philosopher by many trained within the Anglo-American tradition that previously would have been inclined to consign him to the pre-Frege dustbin of benighted thinking. Indeed, analytic interest in Aquinas has now reached the point where some writing in this vein consider themselves to be "Analytic Thomists." A recent issue of The Monist (vol. 80, no. 4 [October 1997]) is entirely devoted to Analytical Thomism and a forthcoming volume in the Oxford Companion to Philosophy series will explore the same topic. While Thomists of every stripe should be glad to see Aquinas get his analytical due, many traditional readers of Aquinas will doubtless wonder whether "Analytical Thomism" is oxymoronic in the same way that "Transcendental Thomism" seemed so. Can one really be both a Thomistand an analytic philosopher? Are the basic philosophical commitments of the one compatible with those of the other? A 125 126 BRIANJ.SHAN"LEY close look at The Monist volume, which is the purpose of this essay, will hopefully shed some light on this topic. The obvious first question to be considered regarding Analytical Thomism is Quid sit? The advisory editor, John Haldane, offers the only definition in the volume: Analytical Thomism is not concerned to appropriate St. Thomas for the advancement of any particular set of doctrines. Equally, it is not a movement of pious exegesis. Instead, it seeks to deploy the methods and ideas of twentieth-century philosophy-of the sort dominant within the English-speaking world-in connection with the broad framework of ideas introduced and developed by Aquinas. Form, matter, existence, individuation, concepts, mental utterances, good and evil all get some treatment in the pages that follow. Each of Haldane's sentences raises some important questions. Right off the bat the negative contrasts make it clear that Analytical Thomism understands itself to be offering some kind of alternative or nontraditional reading ofAquinas; no names are named, but it is clear that Analytical Thomists have some problems with nonanalytical Thomists. First, it is claimed that Analytical Thomism is not committed to "the advancement of any particular set of doctrines." What does this mean? Are the doctrines in question religious or philosophical? How could one possibly identify oneself as a Thomist and not thereby be committed to certain particular doctrines of St. Thomas himself? Are there no basic doctrines ingredient in Thomism of any kind? Second, Analytical Thomism does not involve "pious exegesis." Is this meant to exclude piety and exegesis or just the former? Can there be a Thomism without at least some intellectual piety? Can one be a Thomist without the ability to do textual exegesis informed by a knowledge of medieval philosophy and theology? Third, is Analytical Thomism a methodological approach to Aquinas or is it rather an attempt to reinterpret Aquinas in the light of the leading ideas of analytic philosophy? Fourth, is it enough to be a Thomist that one discuss some interesting central concepts in Aquinas? Haldane does not provide answers to these questions and it is not at all clear that the other contributors to the volume would agree on a common answer. ANALITICAL THOMISM 127 Hilary Putnam opens the volume with "Thoughts Addressed to an Analytical Thomist." Putnam acknowledges that he is not an Analytical Thomist because he is outside the Roman Catholic tradition and because he has a different approach to philosophy; the former reason is noteworthy as an example of how Thomism is perceived by some to entail a religious commitment. Putnam's remarks are offered as...