Published by the Center for the Study of The Great Ideas (founded in 1990 by Mortimer J. Adler and Max Weismann)
In association with the The Adler-Aquinas Institute and Aquinas School of Leadership
A Founding Member of the Alliance for Liberal Learning

Sunday, June 28, 2015

Temporal and Spiritual Empire: Rightly combining subsidiarity and solidarity in education and politics

Scheduled for 11:00am–12:30pm Eastern Time, Plenary Session presentations and panel discussion 14
Chair: Peter A. Redpath (Chair: Holy Apostles College and Seminary St. John Paul II Graduate Philosophy Concentration in Christian Wisdom)

Speaker: Jude P. Dougherty (Dean Emeritus, School of Philosophy, Catholic University of America): “Interpreting the middle ages”

How one views the Middle Ages is determined largely by the type of learning one brings to their assessment.  Literary students tend one way; those with a predominantly scientific interest tend another.  The last authoritative treatment of the period is undoubtedly that of the distinguished German Historian Johannes Fried, whose work, The Middle Ages, has recently been made available in English translation (Harvard University Press, 2015).  His perspective is difficult to categorize, save that as an interpreter of the period, he angrily addresses the “dark age myth.” which he attributes to the renaissance humanists.  Petrarch and his fellow humanists, Fried charges, dismissed the logic, science and art on which they drew, denigrating the scientific accomplishment that stood between them and an imaginary Rome and an idealized Antiquity. The “dark age myth,” he finds, persisted through the enlightenment at the hands of Kant and his followers, who, in Fried’s words, “simply ignored, knew nothing and did not see the need to know anything (of the period in question.”

Speaker: Peter L. P. Simpson (City University of NY): “Temporal and Spiritual Empire”

Two main principles of political life are solidarity and subsidiarity: uniting all into a supportive whole but having decisions made at the most local level possible. Both principles have been much taught and encouraged by Church teaching. How to achieve them? The first and chief means is a proper distinction between temporal and spiritual power, so that the spiritual power has public authority alongside and, if need be, over the temporal power. The Medieval settlement of Pope and Emperor, despite its faults, presents the idea in concrete form. Modern settlements introduce centralization, through national governments and supranational bodies like the UN and the EU, but destroy local autonomy. Something different is needed. Pope St. John Paul II gave helpful suggestions to the EU about the EU Constitution. They were ignored. One suggestion he made, which in my view is the best first step, at least in Europe and the First World generally, is to reintroduce Latin as a requirement in schools and universities. The rest will then come more easily. “Teach a child Latin by the time he’s seven, and he’ll be a Romanist for the rest of his life.”

Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

Next session scheduled for 1:30pm.

How far we have come and where we go from here

Scheduled for 9:00am–10:30am Eastern Time, Plenary session panel discussion 13
Chair: Michael B. Mangini (Adler-Aquinas Institute)

Moderators: William Mc Vey (Adler-Aquinas Institute) and Peter A. Redpath (Adler-Aquinas Institute/Aquinas School of Leadership) as part of 100th Anniversary Celebration of Founding of the Daughters of St. Paul

Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

Next session scheduled for 11:00am.

Saturday, June 27, 2015

Bach and Franck at the Seminary of the Immaculate Conception

Scheduled for 7:00pm–8:00pm Eastern Time, Organ recital
Performed by Peter Bayer (Catholic University of America)
1. Prelude, Fugue and Variation, Op. 18 - Cesar Franck (1822-1890)

2. Passacaglia and Fugue - Peter Bayer (b. 1996)

3. Wo soll ich fliehen hin, BWV 646 - J. S. Bach (1685-1750)

4. Hilf Gott, daß mir's gelinge, BWV 624 - Bach

5. Wer nur den lieben Gott lässt walten, BWV 647 - Bach

6. Meine Seele erhebt den Herren, BWV 648 - Bach

7. Herr Gott, nun schleuß den Himmel auf, BWV 617 - Bach

8. Wachet auf, ruft uns die Stimme, BWV 645 - Bach

9. Praeludium pedaliter in Organo Pleno, BWV 545 - Bach

Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

Recital followed by: After-dinner reception and birthday celebration for Frank Slade sponsored by the Holy Apostles College and Seminary Metropolitan Philosophy Roundtable and the International Étienne Gilson Society

Next session scheduled for tomorrow 9:00am.

Frankly speaking: Conversations with Frank Slade

Scheduled for 4:00pm–6:00pm Eastern Time, “Frankly speaking”: Conversations with Frank Slade and Award Presentation
Chair: Jim Maroosis (Maroosis Group)

Opening Remarks: Br. Owen Sadlier (St. Francis College)

Moderators: Mary Boland (Aquinas Leadership International) and Herb Hartmann (Catholic University of America)

Award Presentation to Francis (Frank) X. Slade of the “Aquinas Medal for Excellence in Christian Philosophy”: Peter A. Redpath (President, International Étienne Gilson Society)

Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

Next session scheduled for 7:00pm.

The reconstruction of philosophy: Will philosophy once again be able to bury its undertakers? If so, how?

Scheduled for 2:30 pm–4:00pm Eastern Time, Holy Apostles College and Seminary Metropolitan Philosophy Roundtable Inaugural Session
Chair: Marvin Peláez (University Abat Oliba/Adler-Aquinas Institute)

Speaker: Michael B. Mangini (Adler-Aquinas Institute), “Using justice to bury philosophy’s undertakers”

This paper focuses on the relation between particulars and universals in the order of human knowing and the order of human doing. In the order of knowing, the cogitative sense grasps the intentional content of the forms of particulars, which permits the intellectual activities of apprehension, judging, and reason and makes the connection between the particular sensed thing and its universal nature. Behind this process are the principles of contradiction and its corollaries. In the order of doing, practical reason begins with the principle of synderesis and what is known, and applies universal notions to particular situations. The virtue of prudence, which connects knowledge with action, discovers the means proper to the desired end. Justice is an organizational virtue that orders relations between and among human beings and contributes to Thomistic personalism, which balances biases toward individualism or communitarianism. The proper balance between these two contrary opposites encourages beneficial whole-part relations in human organizations. My desire is that by leveraging the natural human sense of justice into conversations about its metaphysical roots, philosophy, properly speaking, can once again bury its undertakers.

Speaker: Peter A. Redpath (Adler-Aquinas Institute/Aquinas School of Leadership), “Has philosophy ever really buried its undertakers? If not, what can?”

Anyone familiar with Étienne Gilson’s masterful monograph The Unity of Philosophical Experience likely remembers his famous claim therein that “the first law to be inferred from philosophical experience” is: “Philosophy always buries its undertakers.” While Gilson’s monograph catalogs a list of historical cases in which philosophy in the West apparently has buried its undertakers, in this talk I wish to consider the possibility of an alternative thesis consisting of two parts: (1) that while Gilson is right that, historically, many false understandings of philosophy have been intellectually buried in the West, philosophy did not bury them; and (2) in this work, Gilson chiefly used a more remote chief principle, not philosophy, to prove his case. Knowing precisely what this chief principle precisely was, I suggest, can help us understand how, in our time, we can use is to help intellectually to bury those who seek to bury philosophy.

Commentators: Mary Boland (Aquinas Leadership International), Eugene Callahan (Cardiff University, UK), Robert Delfino (St. John’s University, NY), Peter DeMarco (Priority Thinking Institute), Richard Fafara (Adler-Aquinas Institute), Herb Hartmann (Catholic University of America), Joseph Jordan (Aquinas Leadership International), Joseph Indelicato (Catholic Education Foundation/Caritas Consulting), Sebastian Mahfood (Holy Apostles College and Seminary), Alice Ramos (St. John’s University, NY), Br. Owen Sadlier (St. Francis College, NY), Frank Slade (Emeritus Professor, St. Francis College, NY)

Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

Next session scheduled for 4:00pm.

Scientist, heal thyself!

Scheduled for 1:00pm–2:00pm Eastern Time, Plenary Session presentations and panel discussion 12
Chair: Curtis L. Hancock (Rockhurst University)

Speaker: Peter DeMarco (Priority Thinking LLC): "The Moral Fox"

This presentation will cover the topic of ethics in business. In particular, the fundamental and fatal flaw in Jim Collins’ approach in his book, Good to Great. How would St Thomas Aquinas respond to Collins’ assertion that good is the enemy of the great? What is the result of this pursuit of greatness. An interactive polling presentation that explores the meaning of ethics.

Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

Next session scheduled for 2:30pm.

Using the cardinal moral virtues to build a moral culture of leadership excellence within organizations

Scheduled for 10:30am–Noon Eastern Time, Plenary Session presentations and panel discussion 11
Chair: Joseph Indelicato (Catholic Education Foundation/Caritas Consulting)

Speaker: Fulvio Di Blasi (Novareté) An exposition of the Novareté method for building and sustaining a moral culture within contemporary businesses

Many companies and institutions struggle to integrate social and environmental concerns into their strategies and operations. There is a strong need for new methods, tools, and models able to contribute to company performance and societal wellbeing, with positive economic impacts for all. Novareté is an innovative scalable digital platform, which shows the potential of effectively engaging users on ethical issues and to bring values and cultures to life in organizations. This platform has intrinsic value both for scholarly research and for the business world, where it can become a tool able to overcome the limits of traditional “products” and methods to implement business ethics and CSR, such as “codes of conduct”, “sustainability reports”, “workshops”, “consulting”, “benchmarks”, etc. By making ethics ‘come alive’, Novarete drives higher performance in companies and institutions, while also restoring trust and ethical credibility back to the market. Novareté runs on any organization’s “intranet”. Its complete package offers both low-tech and high-tech interactive tools to articulate and promote shared vision and values. The core of the system is a weekly ethical dilemma, with which users interact in several ways, all over digital media. The platform also offers features and functionality using the latest trends in digitalia – social media, gamification, and mobility solutions. Novareté panel presentation will include: (1) A power point presentation on the origin and current status of Novareté as a startup company; (2) A short video interview with a CEO whose company is currently using Novareté; (3) A short explanation of the ethical foundation of the system.

Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

Next session scheduled for 1:00pm.

Religious education, government, and the State

Scheduled for 9:00am–10:00am Eastern Time, Plenary Session presentations and panel discussion 10

Chair: Benjamin Block (Catholic University of America)

Speaker: Fr. Pawel Tarasiewicz (Adler-Aquinas Institute/ International Étienne Gilson Society):”State vs. God: On atheistic implications of European Statism”

The paper consists of three parts. First, it traces the idea of European statism back in the history of philosophy to show how the state was thought to struggle against God and replace His authority. Secondly, it raises the question of the actual status of statism in the contemporary West to detect its visible embodiments and impacts. Finally, it explores the words of Jesus Christ—‘Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s’—to formulate an argument against trading Christian faith for the empty promises of statism.

Speaker: Fr. Tomasz Kopiczko (Elk Seminary-Warmia and Mazury University, Poland): “Analyzing the ineffectiveness of catechesis in Poland”

“Catechesis” and “atheism” are two polarizing words. In relation to intuitive definitions, catechesis is meant to deepen one’s faith and strengthen the relation with God, while atheism entirely negates the existence of God. The purpose of this article is to show that, despite the fact that these two phenomena are so different, time and place existwhere they meet. In Polish reality it is through catechesis—colloquially called “religious instruction,” which is conducted at schools. This article aims at outlining ineffective elements of catechesis in its encounter with atheism. It does not mean, however, that the whole process of catechesis should be deemed ineffective and inefficacious. The main priority is to list those elements that are imperfect and make this aspect of the redemptive ministry of the Church falter. In addition to this, it is also vital to point at possible recommendations in order to run the catechesis process effectively and take more care of the faith and salvation of man.

Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

Next session scheduled for 10:30am.

Friday, June 26, 2015

Are the new atheism and contemporary moral psychology essentially connected?

Scheduled for 7:00pm–8:30pm Eastern Time, After-dinner paper and plenary session panel discussion 9
Chair: Sebastian Mahfood (Holy Apostles College and Seminary)

Speaker: Marvin Peláez (University Abat Oliba/Adler-Aquinas Institute): “The moral psychology of leadership: Not dog whispering”

Leadership is a professional and personal activity as well as an academic discipline.  The increased presence of leadership programs across universities and industry provide one way to gauge its importance in society.  Programs vary by emphasis placed on aspects of leadership. However, all are tied to some understanding of human nature. This paper chronicles an ongoing observational study of a team-based development and implementation of a pilot leadership program in a U.S. federal agency. It provides an account of “lessons learned” on the challenges, reactions, and acceptance on the incorporation of St. Thomas Aquinas’s philosophy of human nature on leadership and the philosophical doctrine of the one and the many.

Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

This session followed by: Cocktail reception sponsored by Holy Apostles College and Seminary and the International Étienne Gilson Society honoring the 25th anniversary of the establishment of the Center for the Study of The Great Ideas by Mortimer J. Adler and Max Weismann

Next session scheduled for tomorrow at 9:00am.

Some implications of classical and contemporary moral psychology on organizations and leadership

Scheduled for 3:30pm–5:30pm Eastern Time, Plenary Session papers and panel discussion 8
Chair: Fr. Ronald Hurl (Catholic University of America)

Speaker: Gregory Sadler (Marist College/Reason IO): “Dynamics of anger and the difficult good: Implications for organizations and leadership”

A common if not ubiquitous human emotional response, as certain ancient and medieval philosophers recognized, anger involves more than just a simple feeling. It functions as a nexus for emotion, bodily response, choice, action, cognition, and even habituation. As Aristotle already recognized, there is something not simply interpersonal but also social to how anger’s causation, desires, and reasoning, as well as how the angry person reasons, chooses, speaks, and acts. In fact, in the rhetoric, he singles it out as one of the seven fundamental causes of human action.

Thomistic moral psychology and moral theory builds upon Aristotle’s insights, synthesizing them with insights drawn from centuries of further reflection about anger, as well as from our own everyday experiences with the emotion and its effects. Two of his most important contributions are locating anger as emotion in the broader irascible appetite, and emphasizing that irascible emotions are oriented by the “difficult good”. He also provides us with an understanding of the workings of anger, the dangers and temptations this all-too-necessary emotion subjects us to, and means to distinguish what is good (and why) and what is bad (and why) in anger.

Are there useful implications for present-day leaders and organizations? There certainly are, and in this paper, I will discuss several at length and in detail, and simply note a number of others (providing links to online materials addressing those in fuller detail). Those I plan to focus on specifically are: 1) understanding common situations likely to produce anger among members of organizations, and what would really be required for resolution; 2) determining what “difficult goods” are, whether they are genuine goods, and why they are “difficult”; 3) risks involved employing anger as a motivational tool; and 4) leadership as involving adequate knowledge of, and dispositions in relation to, leaders’ anger.

Speaker: Joseph Jordan (Aquinas Leadership International): “Contemporary moral psychology and leadership: Science or alchemy?”

There is a growing problem of quantification in our society which is adversely impacting organizations and cheapening “leadership.” This may be seen in so many sectors, from schools to policing to the financial industry to government administration.  So many contemporary “psychologists” see their field as nothing more than a-historical mathematical studies in search of “validity.” So many political scientists today are concerned merely with abstract game theory. STEM education, for that matter, is all the rage these days, and certainly it can help our society’s material progress. But what is the cost to a paideia of the whole person? Are we on a path to groom mere technocrats with no souls? Are we replacing the government of men with the administration of things? Are we yet one step closer to what C.S. Lewis called the abolition of man? This problem of quantification seems to be the result of the unleashing  of a psychological type that can be called Neo-Pythagorean: a modern version of Pythagoreanism rooted in Descartes and fermented in the positivistic fantasies of the past two and a half hundred years. Like Pythagoras, Neo-Pythagoreans worship numbers and mathematics in a rather strange, cultic way, as the ultimate explanation of things. At base, Neo-Pythagoreanism is an attempt to overcome an inherent insecurity people have vis-à-vis an existence which is ultimately out of our control. Mathematics can lead people to think we actually have control over reality. Reified numbers become a new set of idols for contemporary man to worship. And yet, the hegemony of quantification and the maladjusted Neo-Pythagorean psychological type cause tremendous havoc, leading, for example, to shallow students, misused police forces, bankrupt companies and countries, and unnecessary wars. As this paper will argue, what is needed instead is a more qualitative approach to reality such as that which the classical medieval world understood and enjoyed, and which would be a good and necessary antidote for the current crop of numerologists, Neo-Pythagoreans, and assorted misfits in society today.

Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

Next session scheduled for 7:00pm.

God, philosophy, and science

Scheduled for 1:30pm–3:00pm Eastern Time, Plenary Session papers and panel discussion 7
Chair: Heather M. Erb (Great Books Academy/International Etienne Gilson Society)
There are a variety of reasons for the growing Catholic “identity crisis” (both within the Church, and in relation to the world), but it is the philosophical forces gathered in late nineteenth and early twentieth century Catholic modernism that have crystallized into theological views which permeate the antinomian atmosphere in the Church today. In this paper, I will briefly explain the ways in which Catholicism’s identity crisis is rooted in the rejection of the unity of wisdoms in Thomas Aquinas, and in the turning aside from Catholic philosophy in general.

In place of the perennial philosophy and its contemplative ideal, the Church has come to welcome the fruits of pragmatism, the incoherence of philosophical and theological pluralism, and the rhetoric of false dichotomies (justice/mercy; intellectual/pastoral, truth/charity, etc.). These problems are shown to rest on the false modernist notion of truth, and to introduce a misinterpretation of the evolution of dogma.

In response to the current theological and pastoral crisis, I propose the possibility (at least on a theoretical level) of a rehabilitation of Catholic identity, through drawing on tools from St. Thomas’s perennial philosophy and its interpreters. These include a robust sense of the speculative intellect, the unity of natural, revealed and mystical wisdoms, the retrieval the ideal of a unitary system of philosophy for theology, and reintegrating liturgical beauty and objective spirituality into Catholic formation.

Speaker: Richard Fafara (Adler-Aquinas Institute): “Is philosophical atheism possible?”

Étienne Gilson finds various types of atheism inadequate because none arrive at rational certainty that nothing (no ‘being’) answering to the word ‘God’ exists in reality.  For Gilson, the true problem is the origin of the notion of God. Gilson locates the notion of God in human thinking as the informing ground of intelligibility. As such, true atheism is impossible.

Speaker: Fr. Ronald Hurl (Catholic University of America): “God and philosophy as a way of life for Etienne Gilson”

Philosophy as a way of life is a crucial notion for understanding the life and works of Etienne Gilson. As seen in the works of Nietzsche, Henry Adams, Leo Strauss, and Pierre Hadot, a recent movement has sought to revive our understanding of philosophy as a way of life. By making the question of making philosophy a way of life open to faith and revelation,, Gilson holds a Catholic can answer this question. Gilson’s view of philosophy as a way of life can be demonstrated throughout his whole corpus. While Gilson’s project to revive the Catholic philosophical activity as a way of life can be seen especially in his early purely philosophical works published between 1913 to 1929 when he founded PIMS, he also shows his commitment to reviving philosophy in this fashion in his foundation of PIMS, which appears to be his version of a philosophical school on the ancient and Medieval model.  PIMS appears to be Gilson’s philosophical school. And considering PIMS as a Catholic School of philosophy is key to understanding Gilson’s life works and thought. In this paper I will focus on Gilson’s development of his vision of the Institute and his decision to found his Institute at St. Michael’s College, with a special focus on his correspondence with professors at Harvard.  This will show how Gilson saw philosophy as a way of life and PIMS as a school of philosophy for the Catholic philosophical life.

Speaker: Stacy Trasancos (Holy Apostles College and Seminary): “What did Stanley Jaki mean when he claimed science was born of Christianity?: How to tell the story and why telling it matters”

The story of how science was born of Christianity was one of the late Fr. Stanley L. Jaki’s most important teachings. Atheists and people of other religions often reject such a claim without further investigation because it seems offensive or divisive on its face, but even Catholic scholars have called the story a myth. What is missing in these discussions are the facts, mostly in the form of original quotes from ancient writers, Biblical texts, early Christian apologies, and the writings of Medieval scholars. Knowledge of the facts allows a communicator to tailor the language for different audiences. Telling this story matters to different audiences for different reasons. To atheists, it matters because the role Christian philosophy and theology played in the emergence of modern science should be defended when anyone claims Catholicism is opposed to science. The story matters in ecumenical discussions because it shows why the Incarnational and Trinitarian monotheism of Christianity intellectually purified the correct view of the universe. This history is pre-Protestant, it is therefore shared by all Christians, which means the story can be a discussion of unity among Christians. Finally, and arguably most importantly, the history should be taught to young Catholics maturing in a secular culture so they will know the truth when people tell them Christians cannot be good scientists. This story illuminates for them why Catholics not only have a legitimate role in modern science, but why they are needed in the sciences as intellectual and moral leaders now and in the future.

Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

Next session scheduled for 3:30pm.

The new atheism, pantheism, and modern science

Scheduled for 11:00am–12:30pm Eastern Time, Plenary Session papers and panel discussion 6
Chair: Richard Fafara (Adler-Aquinas Institute)

Speaker: Lois Eveleth (Salve Regina University): “The lure of pantheism”

In 1975 the Universal Pantheist Society was established, and in 1999 a break-away group, proudly calling itself the World Pantheist Movement, demonstrated that the number of pantheists was obviously increasing. Arguably, pantheists have always, or almost always, existed, but only with the existence of the internet and social media have many individuals been able to organize, communicate, and support each other, and, most importantly, spread the details of their world- view with a view to recruiting the like-minded. If we can think of pantheism as an answer to a question, I find it an intriguing task to identify the question to which it is an answer; or, more clearly, to identify the several questions that could have generated this broadly-understood world-view. Is pantheism an effort to replace theism? To attack it? Or is it more benign, viz. simply an effort to admire nature? Maybe pantheists wish to explore the concept of infinity, or seek to conceptualize an immanent God. I doubt, however, that the online versions of pantheistic doctrine can serve up very much in the way of an explanation of the genesis of that doctrine.

Accordingly, I have gone back to the beginning, or, at least, to earlier expositions of pantheism; specifically, to key expositors like Giordano Bruno, Benedict Spinoza, John Toland, and Ralph Waldo Emerson. Writings of these individual pantheists reveal discernible patterns, patterns which I outline.

Speaker: Sebastian Mahfood (Holy Apostles College and Seminary): “Mosquito Mating Habits and the New Atheism: An Investigation of How Dawkins’ ‘Memes’ are Shaping the Conversation”

In his 1976 book entitled The Selfish Gene, Richard Dawkins coined the term “meme,” identifying it as a kind of replicator "that conveys the idea of a unit of cultural transmission, or a unit of imitation" (p. 192, emphasis his), or, in short, an idea that replicates itself from one person to another within a culture. This paper will discuss Dawkins' efforts to systematically establish within the culture his own peculiar set of memes through an attack on a cultural foundations of belief and faith.

Speaker: Robert Delfino (St. John’s University): “The failure of new atheism morality”

New atheists, such as Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris, generally speaking, are committed to two main beliefs. The first is scientism, which is the view that only science can give us complete and reliable knowledge of reality. The second is metaphysical naturalism, which is the view that no supernatural entities exist. In this essay I shall focus on the metaphysical naturalism that new atheists espouse. I will examine their attempt to give morality a purely naturalistic foundation, and thereby eliminate the need for God and the role of religion in human life. Ultimately, I shall argue, and explain why, their project fails.

Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

Next session scheduled for 1:30pm.

Religious and philanthropic apologists and identity problems

Scheduled for 9:00am-10:30am Eastern Time, Plenary Session papers and panel discussion 5
Chair: Lois Eveleth (Salve Regina University)

Speaker: Curtis L. Hancock (Rockhurst University): “Apologetics and the new atheism”

To clarify the task of apologetics, a preliminary discussion of the relationship of faith and reason is in order. The principal alternative views on this relationship in the history of the philosophy of religion are fideism, rationalism, dualism, and “the overlapping view.” This last (awkwardly expressed) position states the position of Thomas Aquinas, whose view this presentation will defend. The first three positions will be defined and criticized, indicating by contrast why the Thomistic view is defensible. This presentation will especially discuss dualism, whose best known defender is Stephen Jay Gould. Dualism deserves attention because it is popular and a temptation to many theologians and scientists. Nonetheless, it is sophistical, as can be readily shown. With these clarifications and criticisms out of the way, this presentation will highlight some remarks by Richard Dawkins as representative of the new atheists. His remarks illustrate that the new atheists have degraded the debate in the philosophy of God and reveal that a twenty-first century apologist has nothing to fear from their flimsy attack on theism and religion in general.

Speaker: Heather M. Erb (Great Books Academy/International Étienne Gilson Society): “Modernism and the Christian identity problems. Some Thomistic reflections on possible solutions”

Speaker: Joseph Indelicato (Catholic Education Foundation/Caritas Consulting): “Was Satan the first philanthropist?: Charitable giving versus Enlightened philanthropy”

Aquinas and Chesterton are both noted for their keen "Common Sense." They both were acutely aware of the diabolical nature of the large institutions, and the destructive effect those institutions have on individuals and society. Chesterton identified Hudge and Gudge,(big government and big business) as the culprits. To these have been added big philanthropy. Equally coercive. We discuss specifically the destructive elements, along with methods to restore controls to individuals and small entities.

Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

Next session scheduled for 11:00am.

Thursday, June 25, 2015

Revisiting Mortimer Adler’s ‘God and the Professors’

Scheduled for 7:00pm–8:30pm Eastern Time, Plenary Session 4 After-dinner paper roundtable discussion

Chair: Peter A. Redpath (Adler-Aquinas Institute/Aquinas School of Leadership)

Roundtable discussion: “Revisiting Mortimer Adler’s ‘God and the Professors’: What, if anything, can we learn from it to help resolve current world problems?”

[Text of Adler's speech at Digital Text International]

Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

This session followed by: Cocktail reception sponsored by the Center for the Study of The Great Ideas

Next session scheduled for tomorrow at 9:00am.

The new atheism, the good atheist, and natural law

Scheduled for 4:00pm–5:30pm 4:30pm-6:00pm Eastern Time, Plenary Session papers and panel discussion 3
Chair: William Mc Vey (Adler-Aquinas Institute/Aquinas School of Leadership)

Speaker: Fulvio Di Blasi (Thomas International/Novareté): “The good atheist and natural law theory”

Can atheists be moral? Do ethics and natural law theory require God? Since my God and the Natural Law (1998 Italian/2003 English) I have maintained that the answer to the first question is “Yes and no”, while the answer to the second is “Definitely yes!” Of course, people can be bad in some things and good in others. From many respects, an atheist may be a much better person than a believer. But this does not make being an atheist a good thing. An important part of moral life and ethical experience of all human beings requires God. Some Catholic philosophers portray an “ethics without God” that is incompatible with Thomistic natural law theory. One of them in particular, Martin Rhonheimer, has often criticized me since I mentioned him in my book. Recently he claimed that I mix up natural law with natural law theory, as if I was neglecting real life experience in favor of some abstract metaphysical discussion. In this paper, I want to address this specific criticism, explaining that the grounds of my approach are quite the opposite. As a Catholic believer and as a moral philosopher, I have always found the attempt to relegate God solely to metaphysics a huge misunderstanding of authentic faith and moral experience. My faith and my ethical experience first guided me to my theoretical approach in God and the Natural Law. Aquinas was well aware that ethical obligations can be known through natural reason unaided by supernatural faith, but he also knew quite well that no true ethics can exist without God.

Speaker: Roberta Bayer (Patrick Henry College) “James Wilson: A Defense of the Aristotelian Tradition of Natural Law”

In his Lectures on Law written in 1790 and 1791, the Framer James Wilson set forth a natural law foundation for American democracy which reconciles the natural law teaching, associated with the Aristotelian tradition of philosophy, through Thomas Aquinas and Richard Hooker, with republican/democratic government.  Wilson was a leading mind at the American Founding, and one of the few who signed both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.  Why does he think that the American democracy must depend upon the idea of natural law which issued forth from Aristotle? 

This paper will give Wilson’s account of why aspects of modern (post-Cartesian) philosophy must be rejected. He states, for example, that the philosophy of Locke with its skeptical epistemology, cannot be a foundation for American legal philosophy. Law must be founded on truth, on theological knowledge of God, and this is lacking in the account of natural law (natural right) found in Locke. For Locke, natural right is known by the autonomous individual in a pre-social state of nature who has no recourse to philosophy, and consequently, natural right is a matter of innate intuition, not developed argument. Thus, in Wilson's opinion, Locke takes Law to be nothing but an expression of will, and legislation to be nothing more than an expression of the will of a majority. If law is nothing but a superior power laying down law for an inferior power, sheer power is the source of law rather than goodness and truth.  That is why Locke is simply wrong; law must have a foundation which lies in philosophical knowledge of truth and goodness, and so Wilson relies upon the philosophy of law found within the medieval tradition.

Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

Next session scheduled for 7:00pm.

Atheism and religion

Scheduled for 2:30pm–4:00pm Eastern Time, Plenary Session papers and panel discussion 2
Chair: Fr. Pawel Tarasiewicz (Adler-Aquinas Institute/ International Étienne Gilson Society)

Speaker: Benjamin Block (Catholic University of America): “Confirmation and the evidentialist objection against Christianity”

The evidentialist objection against Christianity, which concludes that one should not believe the truths of Christian faith, relies upon two powerful premises: (a) one should not believe what does not have sufficient evidence, and (b) Christian beliefs do not have sufficient evidence. The evidentialist objection is troubling, for the Christian defending his beliefs does not wish to say that they are founded upon mere human evidence; yet still, Christians generally also wish to affirm that “those who place their faith in this truth, for which human reason offers no experience, do not believe lightly, as those following unlearned fables” (SCG I.6).  In the midst of a vast plurality of religions, a Christian is committed to the proposition that only one religion is true and that it is certainly true, but if he does not wish to hold these beliefs lightly, then he must also have some reason why he believes what he does: a Christian must “always be prepared to make a defense to anyone who calls you to account for the hope that is in you” (2 Peter 3:15). St. Thomas Aquinas offers a unique and compelling solution to this objection, one which satisfies the Christian need to have faith be a gift from God, but which also respects the proper place of human reason within the believing life of men. In solving the evidentialist objection, it is especially helpful to focus on Aquinas’s teaching concerning the role of divine confirmation of revealed truths—for the nature of this confirmation and the extent to which it is necessary for Christian belief provides at least one important key to understanding the delicate balance between faith and reason within the Christian life.

Speaker: William McVey (Adler-Aquinas Institute) “Aquinas and Alcoholics Anonymous: ‘I-am-spiritual-but-not-religious’”

The paper examines the nature of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) as a program of recovery from the addiction to alcohol. AA was founded in 1935 by Bill Wilson and Doctor Bob Smith on the belief that alcoholism was an addiction of a spiritual, mental and physical nature. The basis of AA recovery is the following of a 12 step program which is entirely a process of spiritual transformation. Successful recovering alcoholics, who diligently follow the 12 step spiritual program, describe themselves as being spiritual but not religious. The paper explores the meaning of being a spiritual but not religious type of person. These individuals are extremely serious about their spiritual life because it sustains their sobriety on a daily basis. I argue the 12 step recovery program is primarily a journey of profound spiritual renewal that demands a continuous (one day at a time) moral transformation. This transformation is best understood from the perspective of a Thomistic ethics that is most observable in the 12 steps. I contend that organized religion should give careful attention to the Born-Again Thomistic teachings on moral character essential to the Alcoholics Anonymous method of spiritual healing and the possible appeal to the “I am spiritual but not religious” type of seekers.

Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

Next session scheduled for 4:00pm 4:30pm.

Are all religions equal?

Scheduled for 1:00pm–2:30pm Eastern Time, Plenary Session 1.
Welcome by Peter A. Redpath, President of the International Étienne Gilson Society and CEO of the Aquinas School of Leadership

Session Chair: Terrence Berres (The Center for the Study of The Great Ideas). Information about the Center for the Study of The Great Ideas and roundtable discussion: William F. Buckley Interview of Mortimer J. Adler: “Are all religions equal?"

(interview transcript at The Hoover Institution or at the Internet Archive)

Speaker: Curtis L. Hancock (Rockurst University): “Truth in Religion: Exclusivism, Pluralism, or Inclusivism?”

The expression, “truth in religion,” can mean many things. Arguably, the most sensitive question about truth in religion is whether salvation is through one religion (say, Christianity) or available through many, if not all. The question prompts consideration whether it is only a minority of religions who make salvation a central doctrine. Regardless, some religions profess to be salvific. Christianity, as traditionally interpreted, is conspicuous for its teachings on salvation. Christians cannot ignore Jesus’ declaration on the matter: “I am the way, the truth, and the life, and no one goes to the Father expect through me” (John 14:6). Accordingly, most Christians historically have judged that salvation belongs to Christianity alone. However, in a pluralistic, perhaps relativistic, age, people find such a view exclusionary and intolerant. Pluralists, like John Hick, propose that it is unenlightened to believe that non-Christian religions are not salvific. Pluralists propose that salvation is available through any religious communion. How does the Christian reply to Hick and the pluralists? One answer (often championed historically by Evangelicals) is exclusivism: the belief that someone in a non-Christian religious communion cannot be saved. This view is subject to clarification and criticism. Another answer (coherent with Catholic soteriology) is inclusivism: the belief that, since God is not bound by geography, culture, or history, his salvific grace can be extended to people whose allegiance is formally outside the Christian communion, even to those who do not know Jesus’ name, provided that their faith is motivated by a desire to know the one, true God, who is Jesus as the second person of the Trinity. This view has been advanced by Karl Rahner in his discussion of the “anonymous Christian.” The genius of inclusivism is that it coheres with God’s love and does not condemn people to be eternally separate from God because of sociological circumstances. It accomplishes this while maintaining the integrity of Catholic theology on the nature of salvation.

Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

Next session scheduled for 2:30pm.

Sunday, June 21, 2015

From the Center: Adler on natural needs and rights, life and death

Recent communications with members of the Center for the Study of The Great Ideas included:
  • Arthur Krystal on neuroscience and the humanities
  • Mortimer Adler on the relationship of natural needs and natural rights
  • John Kaag on the path to becoming a philosophy professor
  • Mortimer Adler on life and death as one of The Great Ideas
  • Online course on Christian Wisdom

Tuesday, June 16, 2015

Second Annual Aquinas Leadership International World Congress

For more information, see the conference brochure.

Update: Livestream of video from the Conference will be at the Holy Apostles College and Seminary YouTube Channel.

Tuesday, June 9, 2015

From the Center: Adler and Van Doren on wisdom, Mikics on Bloom

Recent communications with members of the Center for the Study of The Great Ideas included:
  • Mortimer Adler and Charles Van Doren on reading and wisdom
  • David Mikics on Harold Bloom

Sunday, May 31, 2015

From the Center: Adler on human existence, and on liberty

Recent communications with members of the Center for the Study of The Great Ideas included:
  • Mortimer Adler on what is meant by human existence, and
  • Mortimer Adler on liberty as one of the Great Ideas.

Thursday, May 28, 2015

Bound to last?

Lisa Newman reported in The Clarion Ledger (Jackson, MS) that 'Franklin Library books add class to collections'.

Or added.

"The Franklin Library of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, published some of the most beautiful leather bound books of the 20th century. In operation from the early 1970s until 2000, the press published collectible books in three styles: full genuine leather, imitation leather and quarter-bound genuine leather. The books were released in several series: The 100 Greatest Books of All Time, The Great Books of the Western World, Pulitzer Prize Classics and the Signed First Editions series."
Collectible here judging the book's edition by its cover, or binding.
"Franklin Library provided an affordable way to enhance a library’s look and feel. Besides being aesthetically pleasing to many collectors, the fine craftsmanship of the books ensure they can be handed down from generation to generation."
We might hope this is so when we think the content of the books particularly worthwhile. But doesn't Franklin Library ceasing publication of these high-end edition, and Great Books of the Western World going out of print, give reason to doubt it?

Tuesday, May 26, 2015

From the Center: Heitman on Montaigne; Adler on 'Six Great Ideas'

Recent communications with members of the Center for the Study of The Great Ideas included:
  • Mortimer Adler on Finding Truth in Faith
  • Danny Heitman on Montaigne and the essay
Here at the weblog, Tabletop Whale, "an original science illustration blog" by Eleanor Lutz, is added to the Books and Ideas Blogroll in the sidebar.

P.S. Links to various versions of Montaigne's Essays can be found at The Online Books Page.

Sunday, May 24, 2015

Did legal realism kill scholarship for judges?

Ann Lipton posted at the Business Law Prof Blog
"Judge Diane Wood of the [United States Court of Appeals for the] Seventh Circuit has published an essay in the Yale Law Journal that surveys citations to legal scholarship emerging from the Seventh Circuit. She argues that movements like Legal Realism and its descendants challenge the concept of 'judging' as a distinct activity from lawmaking, and as a result, scholarship that emerges from these traditions is not helpful to a sitting judge attempting to identify 'what the law is.' She further argues that within the academy, the effect is exacerbated by a norm that values theoretical scholarship over practical 'doctrinal' work, and hypothesizes that the type of doctrinal scholarship that judges are most likely to find useful is also more likely to be found in journals that carry less prestige."
Judge Wood's article is here.

(via Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals News)

Monday, May 18, 2015

The Best of All Games

John Rawls letter to Owen Fiss, April 18, 1981, published at the Boston Review. From Mr. Fiss's introduction,
"In the letter that follows, written in 1981, Rawls puts philosophy to the service of baseball and gives an account of the sport and its special appeal to the American people."

Tuesday, May 12, 2015

From the Center: Adler on War and Peace, and on Law;

Recent communications with members of the Center for the Study of The Great Ideas included:
  • Mortimer Adler on the meaning of peace, a three part series
  • Mortimer Adler on law as one of the Great Ideas
  • An online discussion of Natural Law vs Positive Law - At the start, participants overwhelmingly indicated belief in a natural right order, and by a large majority indicated capital punishment would be permitted under it.

Saturday, May 9, 2015

The St. John's Review Goes Digital

David Bahr at The Blog at The Weekly Standard
"The Review enjoys an almost fabled existence. Until somewhat recently, scholars and general readers alike had to track down hard copies of the publication because traditional academic databases did not carry the biannual publication.

"Current journal editor and St. John’s College (Annapolis) faculty member, William Pastille, has been working steadily to make the treasure trove of articles and poems available to the public."

Thursday, May 7, 2015

Adler Bibliography in GBWW 2nd

These works by Mortimer J. Adler are included in the Bibliography of Additional Readings in Great Books of the Western World (2nd Ed., 1990) [with the Great Ideas under which they were listed]
  • The Angels and Us (1982) [Angel]
  • Art and Prudence, a Study in Practical Philosophy (1937) [Art, Prudence]
  • The Common Sense of Politics (1971) [Government, State]
  • The Conditions of Philosophy (1965) [Philosophy, Science]
  • Dialectic (1927) [Dialectic]
  • A Dialectic of Morals, Towards the Foundations of Political Philosophy (1941) [Good and Evil, Happiness]
  • The Difference of Man and the Difference It Makes (1967) [Man]
  • How to Think About God (1980) [God]
  • How to Think About War and Peace (1944) [War and Peace]
  • The Idea of Freedom (1971; Vol. 1, 1958; Vol. 2, 1963) [Liberty]
  • Intellect: Mind over Matter (1990) [Mind]
  • The Paideia Program (1984) [Education]
  • The Paideia Proposal: An Educational Manifesto (1982) [Education]
  • Problems for Thomists: The Problem of Species (1940) [Evolution]
  • Reforming Education: The Opening of the American Mind (1988) [Education]
  • Six Great Ideas (1981) [Beauty, Good and Evil, Justice, Liberty, Truth]
  • Some Questions About Language (1976) [Language, Mind, Sign and Symbol]
  • The Time of Our LIves: The Ethics of Common Sense (1970) [Happiness, Virtue and Vice]
  • Truth in Religion (1990) [Religion]
  • A Vision of the Future: Twelve Ideas for a Better Life and a Better Society (1984) [Citizen, Democracy, Government, Habit, Happiness, Labor, State, Virtue and Vice, War and Peace, Wealth]
  • We Hold These Truths (1987) [Constitution, Democracy]
Art and Prudence, Dialectic, and A Dialectic of Morals were also included in the Bibliography of Additional Readings in Great Books of the Western World (1st Ed., 1952).

#MortimerAdler #GreatBooksOfTheWesternWorld #Syntopicon

Sunday, May 3, 2015

On the origin of Fox News

Jay Rosen at PressThink
"...Roger Ailes exploited a weakness in establishment journalism that in 1996 was dimly understood by its practitioners—or not understood at all. There was a submerged ideology in American newsrooms, populated as they were by people who were more cosmopolitan than 'country,' more secular than religious. Journalists in the U.S. were vaguely progressive in the sense of welcoming social change (up to a point) and identifying (up to a point) with those who had grievances against traditional authority. Certainly there weren’t many denizens of the American newsroom eager to 'stand athwart history, yelling Stop,' or who had supported the Vietnam War, or who saw Ronald Reagan as a cultural hero. And there weren’t many alert to the ideological undertow in a mission statement still popular among journalists: comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.

"Critics on the left are correct to say that if this is liberalism it is very weak tea. But critics on the right are correct to say that it sure isn’t neutral professionalism. Roger Ailes understood that the 'mainstream' journalists his network was built to attack had an ideology that they were unwilling to defend, because they had never recognized it as an ideology. Instead they used terms like 'news values.' They talked about standards and credibility and objectivity and being a good professional. They still do this."