Rowman and
Littlefield has just published the anthology
Dissident
Philosophers: Voices Against the Political Current of the Academy,
edited by T. Allan Hillman and Tully Borland.
(The hardcover version is expensive, but
the
publisher’s website indicates that there is also a cheaper eBook version.) My article “The Metaphysical Foundations of
Conservatism” appears in the volume. The
other contributors are Francis J. Beckwith, John Bickle, Marica Bernstein,
Daniel Bonevac, Jason Brennan, Rafael De Clercq, Dan Demetriou, Michael Huemer,
Eric Mack, J. P. Moreland, Jan Narveson, Michael Pakaluk, Neven Sesardić, Steven
C. Skultety, William F. Vallicella, and Robert Westmoreland. In his blurb for the book, Prof. Thomas Kelly
of Princeton University writes: “An interesting and at times fascinating
glimpse into the thought of a group of heterodox intellectuals. In addition to the clear presentation of
well-developed philosophical views that challenge left-wing orthodoxies, their
personal experiences and reflections on what is involved in being a
professional philosopher who dissents from those orthodoxies makes for
compelling reading.”
Michael Huemer, a libertarian and no Thomist, is a very bright guy who on his blog "Fake Nous" does provide intelligent commentary. I recently asked him his opinion of Prof. Feser. He said that he hadn't heard of him. Maybe now he will read him.
ReplyDeleteI've been waiting for this!
ReplyDeleteIt's good to defy the zombies.
ReplyDelete“The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice. ” -- GK Chesterton
I love that an orthodox Catholic philosopher can be described as "heterodox."
ReplyDeleteProfessor Feser, from a reader in Brazil. I haven't found anything on this blog about Liberation Theology and, considering this is still a very strong line in Latin American Christianity (and in my family in particular), I'd really love to read your views on it. Just a friendly request and perhaps an idea for a future post - the title "Dissident Philosophers" from this one made me wonder. Keep up the good work
ReplyDeleteProfessor Feser has written a great deal about socialism and how it is unequivocally condemned in the writings of the popes. Is that not sufficient?
DeleteThanks! Found some entries searching for socialism now. Anyhow, it was just a suggestion. I'd still enjoy reading Ed Feser on the specifics of Liberation Theology though
DeleteHow does Liberation Theology differ from other attempts to reconcile Christianity and socialism that the popes condemned?
DeleteBeing american, i doubt Dr. Feser knows Liberation Theology well. Good for him. But Pope Benedict XVI did write about it before becoming pope. Take a look: https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19840806_theology-liberation_po.html
Delete(It is in portuguese)
But the best cure of this type of pathology is understanding well the catholic social teaching. Dr. Feser writed about it before several times on his political takes.
Thank you, Talmid! That piece was very helpful!
DeleteYou are welcome! Now that i have a Bible translated by people probably influenced by these guys, their notes don't lie, and sometimes get annoyed by their focus on material condition this is pretty much a personal thing for me.
DeleteLooks like the e-book version is available on Nook from Barnes and Noble.
ReplyDeleteSorry to say, $45 for an e-book is pretty darn steep - I'll either have to try for inter-library loan, or (most probably) do without.
ReplyDeleteAbout books in general: the whole world knows that the inner world of books crafted and published for college courses is a world of extortion and gross injustice, not least being the issuance of upwards of 8 or 10 editions of the same basic text, forcing those who might have gotten used, earlier (cheaper) printings for a class to be unable to do so. It's a racket, and it's vile, disgusting, dirty racket. That racket - and the prices that it has encouraged - spills over into other books that (probably) are not meant for college courses. Which has the effect of not getting said such works, and the ideas in them, conveyed from authors to readers, doing both of them a disservice. Copyright (on what is, in principle, a common good) is supposed to be a mechanism for getting MORE good created and available to others. When actual practice defeats that objective, it tends to undermine the whole system.
@Tony: I thought copyright is a mechanism for protecting claims to intellectual property so as to control monetization of said property. You are against capitalism and private property? /s
ReplyDeleteI hear ya about multiple editions of textbooks.
Yep. Against private property. Except when I ain't.
DeleteTextbook choice is centrally controlled by the professor and is not a market.
Delete