I realize I’m a little late to this party (I see the posts on this topic were from about a year ago!). I just wanted to let you know that I am so excited to find an online conversation about such topics, particularly Newbigin and Polanyi. I have become quite interested in both authors recently, and believe that they are very important, though often overlooked, figures in the conversation about postmodernism and faith. I look forward to reading more information on your website as time allows.

Stephanie Miller

Newbigin’s take on Thomas didn’t come across to me as entirely negative, though I am sure that many Thomists would have issue with it. As I read Newbigin, I took him to make a distinction between what Thomas argued for–e.g. Thomas’ rejection of Avverroes’ notion of double truth and Thomas’ understanding of theology as a “higher discipline than philosophy” rather than the reverse–and what later Thomists held and the doctrines that they promoted. The idea being that Thomas’ contributions were positive, whereas the latter were not as careful as Thomas and took things too far (e.g. an overly rigid separation b/w faith and reason, paving the way for the rationalism that we see in the 17th century etc.).

Again, I think that some of Newbigin’s conclusions could be contested, but he didn’t strike me as being overly negative of St. Thomas’ own views.

Best wishes,
Cynthia

I was looking at Amazon reviews of Newbigin’s book and one of them (the first one when you go to the entry on amazon.com) states that Newbigin has a very negative view of the ‘Thomist Synthesis’. Is it quite that bad? As the criticisms the review relays seem to trade more on the sort of Neo-scholastic distortions of Aquinas so criticised by the ‘nouvelle theologie’ than Aquinas’ actual doctrine.

Regards,

David

I would highly recommend The Knower and the Known for an insight into her approach. There, she systematically critiques the Western tradition by interacting with central figures (Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Hume and Kant). Two caveats: 1) I had to get a used copy from New Zealand for $35, but every other used copy I found on the internet was over $100. So hopefully it’s in a library near you. 2) While you may be interested in her interactions with other philosophers, the real gold is found in the chapters that follow. I think all philosophy student should read this book.

I would not recommend her commentaries on major works as a first step simply because she has a peculiar approach and some of her commentary is heavily packed in the guise of simple phrases. For me, it’s a bit difficult to understand her cutting writing style without knowing the arc of her thought (even then I find it difficult from the little bit I have read). If you are a subject matter expert (or at least well-versed), then her commentaries may be more appealing.

I would love to hear how reading her affects you.

Bests,
Dru