This was a tough book for me to review, as it was difficult to read. I've been attempting to read more philosophy, including more difficult texts (although I still clear of some primary sources).
Oliver Keenan has a deep knowledge and understanding of the teachings of Thomas Aquinas, a medieval theologian, but even he argues that Aquinas is difficult. I'm not sure if this is why he quotes Aquinas so infrequently - Keenan instead takes on the role of interpreter and guide.
After a worthy introduction arguing why "Aquinas Matters Now", Keenan presents seven detailed chapters and a short 'postlude'. The first four outline Aquinas' worldview, in which Keenan explores the remarkable intellectual work that allows Aquinas to derive a number of principles from his observations of God and the biblical texts.
"To live a human life is, as Aquinas sees it, to perform a role in the conversation of the universe" (p. 4). This conversational aspect to existence is essential to Aquinas' thinking, placing 'man' into conversation and even a form of 'friendship' with God himself.
Reality 'speaks' to us, and from this point of view Keenan explores how Aquinas is able to interpret the structure of reality, including an exploration of the 'transcendentals', "properties that are co-extensive with reality" such as being, identity, truth and goodness (p. 50).
The 'radical contingency' of human life leads Thomas to refuse "to locate absolute power of authority within one person, community, structure" (p. 61), but since Thomas sees man as more 'doing' than 'being', this simply reinforces his vision of life as a recurring dialogue between man and God.
I struggled with these four chapters and their metaphysical abstractions. A weakness of Keenan's work here seems to be his limiting his explanation of why "Aquinas Matters NOW" to his introduction. Exploring the challenging, abstract concepts of the first half of the book in so far as they relate to the NOW would have helped my process this better.
Chapters five and six redeemed this work for me, as we get involved in a more focused look on moral human behaviour, and in the Aristotelian sense, an exploration of the values that one can pursue in order to live a moral life.
My primary interest in philosophy is ethical, but I also feel that these chapters are best at arguing for the NOW of the title. To Aquinas, emotions are morally neutral, meaning "the question is what we ought to do with these experiences, how can we live them in ways that integrate rather than fragment our personhood" (p. 114)?
Even anger is identified as positive, as long as it is deployed prudently. We look at the 'cardinal' virtues in chapter six, the intellectual virtue 'prudence' and the moral virtues of 'justice', 'temperance' and 'fortitude'. These virtues are what enable us to build the capacity to act morally 'when tested' and to deploy our 'neutral' emotions to 'just' ends.
Aquinas' theological belief that mans' freedom necessitates participating in the universe in good faith reminds me of Sartre's secular argument that man is "condemned to be free".
Keenan is clearly a Chrisian, and this text reads as theological first and foremost, the philosophy deployed in the name of articulating of vision of God that I, an atheist, cannot believe in. But the vitality of ideas that allow me to compare the worldview of a medieval theologian with a 20th century bohemian existentialist shines through the sometimes-dense ideas of Aquinas and prose of Keenan.
Hope, an intrinsically future-facing quality, "is fundamentally movement. It is both gift and discipline, in that it involves a systematic refusal to give up moving towards the hoped-for future" (p. 176). Hope is in opposition to the vices of despair and presumption, two "refusals to move".
Our "Postlude" argues that "we can only become fully human - fully alive - by taking responsibility for how we communicate with and to the world around us" (p. 198).
I personally found a great deal of moral and philosophical value in these final chapters.
Keenan argues that his book, and others like it, marks a good starting point for Aquinas. I can only imagine how difficult his primary sources might be, given my struggles reading this 'starting point'.
I recommend this book on that principle, as a starting point for a philosophical or Christian reader looking for an introduction to this wildly influential philosopher. I am glad I read it, but the ten days it took me to clear 200 pages is telling - this was challenging, rather than enjoyable.
Not recommended for 'casual' philosophers.