Dan LeRoy

Alasdair MacIntyre has died. His classic After Virtue had a tremendous effect on me when I was an undergrad and still in my atheist days, greatly reinforcing the attraction to Aristotelian ethics I had even then. (The spine of the light mauve cover of my copy, like that of pretty much any copy printed in the 80s, has long since turned green.) It was, of course, part of a larger body of work which had a similarly great impact on so many people, in philosophy, theology, and beyond. RIP.

If the salvation of souls is the supreme law (as the Catholic Church teaches), then perhaps Immortal Souls: A Treatise on Human Nature is the most important thing I’ve written. From the back cover copy: Immortal Souls provides as ambitious and complete a defense of Aristotelian-Thomistic philosophical anthropology as is currently in print. Among the many topics covered are the reality and unity of the self, the immateriality of the intellect, the freedom of the will, the immortality of the soul, the critique of artificial intelligence, and the refutation of both Cartesian and materialist conceptions of human nature. Along the way, the main rival positions in contemporary philosophy and science are thoroughly engaged with and rebutted. “Edward Feser's book is a Summa of the nature of the human person: it is, therefore, both a rather long – but brilliant – monograph, and a valuable work for consultation. Each of the human faculties discussed is treated comprehensively, with a broad range of theories considered for and against, and, although Feser's conclusions are firmly Thomistic, one can derive great benefit from his discussions even if one is not a convinced hylomorphist. Every philosopher of mind would benefit from having this book within easy reach.” Howard Robinson, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy, Central European University “Feser defends the Aristotelian and Thomistic system, effectively bringing it into dialogue with recent debates and drawing on some of the best of both analytic (Kripke, Searle, BonJour, Fodor) and phenomenological (Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, Dreyfus) philosophy. He deftly rebuts objections to Thomism, both ancient and modern. Anyone working today on personal identity, the unity of the self, the semantics of cognition, free will, or qualia will need to engage with the analysis and arguments presented here.” Robert C. Koons, Professor of Philosophy, University of Texas at Austin Available at Amazon: a.co/d/bESI9Vi

I’ve found for decades that if you teach classic works in a way that simply presents them on their own terms, making clear what they are trying to accomplish and why so many have been drawn to them, young people are often fascinated by them. I’m sure this can be as true in literature as it is in philosophy. There is no need for some extra step of trying to make them “relevant,” and indeed that is counterproductive. For it typically involves either badmouthing older works as either bigoted or scientifically outdated (in which case, what’s the point of reading them?), or focusing on bits of them that seem to prefigure what people generally believe today anyway (in which case, again, what’s the point of reading them?). But the classics are most fascinating to young people when they reveal ways of looking at things which are both different from what people now take for granted, but also nevertheless intelligible and even reasonable. “Relevance” is boring because there is no challenge in it. Being challenged by older works is interesting – and indeed, for that very reason makes their true relevance clear.