Talk it out

Time again for an open thread.   Now’s your chance to get that off-topic comment off your chest.  The burning philosophical or theological question you’ve been dying to raise?  That political rant you’ve been meaning to inflict on fellow readers of this blog?  Some tweet of mine that you wanted to complain about?  All fair game.  From real numbers to realpolitik, from That ‘70s Show to Kurtis Blow, from monads to gonads, there’s no limit to what you might talk about.  (Other, that is, than the demands of good taste and basic sanity.  So no trolling, please.)  Previous open threads archived here.

Solidarity

The ideal to strive for in international relations is what in the natural law tradition and Catholic social teaching is called solidarity. On the one hand, this entails respecting the independence of nations and their right to preserve their own identities, rather than absorbing them into a one-world blob; on the other hand, it entails promoting their cooperation and mutual assistance in what Pope Leo XIV calls the “family of peoples,” rather than a war of all against all in a Hobbesian state of nature.

Where economics is concerned, this entails rejecting, on the one hand, a globalism that dissolves national boundaries and pushes nations into a free trade dogmatism that is contrary to the interests of their citizens; but also, on the other hand, a mercantilism that walls nations off into mutually hostile camps and treats international economic relations as a zero-sum game. From the point of view of solidarity, neither free trade nor protectionism should be made into ideologies; free trade policies and protectionist policies are merely tools whose advisability can vary from case to case and require the judgment of prudence.

Where war and diplomacy are concerned, this vision entails rejecting, on the one hand, the liberal and neoconservative project of pushing all nations to incorporate themselves into the globalist blob by economic pressure, regime change, or the like; but also, on the other hand, a Hobbesian realpolitik that sees all other nations fundamentally as rivals rather than friends, and seeks to bully them into submission rather than cooperate to achieve what is in each nation’s mutual interest.

This solidarity-oriented vision is an alternative to the false choice between what might be called the “neoliberal” and “neo-Hobbesian” worldviews competing today – each of which pretends that the other is the only alternative to itself. It is the vision developed by thinkers in the Thomistic natural law tradition such as Luigi Taparelli in the nineteenth century and Johannes Messner in the twentieth, and which has informed modern Catholic social teaching.

The principle of solidarity is fairly well-known to be central to natural law and Catholic teaching about the internal affairs of nations (and famously gave a name to Polish trade union resistance to Communist oppression). But it ought to be better known as the ideal to pursue in relations between nations as well.

(From a post today at X/Twitter)

Preventive war and the U.S. attack on Iran

Last week I argued that the U.S. should stay out of Israel’s war with Iran.  America has now entered the war by bombing three facilities associated with Iran’s nuclear program.  Is this action morally justifiable in light of traditional just war doctrine? 

War aims?      

Let us note, first, that much depends on exactly what the U.S. intends to accomplish.  A week ago, before the attack, President Trump warned that Tehran should be evacuated, called for Iran’s unconditional surrender, and stated that the U.S. would not kill Iran’s Supreme Leader “for now” – thereby insinuating that it may yet do so at some future time.  Meanwhile, many prominent voices in the president’s party have been calling for regime change in Iran, and Trump himself this week has joined this chorus.  If we take all of this at face value, it gives the impression that the U.S. intends or is at least open to an ambitious and open-ended military commitment comparable to the American intervention in Iraq under President Bush. 

Shields on Aquinas on the Unmoved Mover

My review of Daniel Shields’ important recent book Nature and Nature’s God: A Philosophical and Scientific Defense of Aquinas’s Unmoved Mover Argument appears in the July 2025 issue of The Thomist.

The U.S. should stay out of Israel’s war with Iran (Updated)

Let me say at the outset that I agree with the view that it would be bad for the Iranian regime to acquire a nuclear weapon.  How close it is to actually acquiring one, I do not know.  I do know that the claim that such acquisition is imminent has been made for decades now, and yet it has still not happened.  In any event, it is Israel rather than the U.S. that would be threatened by such acquisition, and Israel has proven quite capable of taking care of itself.  There is no need for the U.S. to enter the war, and it is in neither the U.S.’s interests nor the interests of the rest of the region for it to do so.

Immortal Souls in Religion & Liberty

In the Summer 2025 issue of the Acton Institute’s Religion & Liberty, David Weinberger kindly reviews my book Immortal Souls: A Treatise on Human Nature.  From the review: “Feser combines… rigor with his talent for making difficult ideas digestible… An admirable feature of Feser’s treatise is how thoroughly he engages opposing positions.”

Riots should be suppressed swiftly and harshly

In an article at Postliberal Order, I argue that the Trump administration has the right under natural law to intervene to suppress riots of the kind seen in Los Angeles this week.

MacIntyre on Hegel on human action

Phrenology was the pseudoscience that aimed to link psychological traits to the morphology of the skull.  Physiognomy was the pseudoscience that aimed to link such traits to facial features.  In his Phenomenology of Spirit, Hegel critiques these pseudosciences.  Since they are now widely acknowledged to be pseudosciences, it might seem that Hegel’s critique can be of historical interest only.  But as the late Alasdair MacIntyre pointed out in his essay “Hegel: On Faces and Skulls,” Hegel’s main points can be applied to a critique of today’s fashionable attempts to predict psychological traits and human actions from physiological and genetic traits.  (The essay appears in the collection Philosophy Through Its Past, edited by Ted Honderich.)

Lamont on Trump, abortion, and Ukraine

In an article at One Peter Five, philosopher John Lamont warns his fellow Catholics and traditionalists that on issues such as abortion and Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine, Trump is not an ally and must be resisted.

What is ideology?

What does the pejorative use of “ideology” amount to, and what is it to be an “ideologue”?  I consider some common accounts before developing my own in my latest essay at Postliberal Order.

Alasdair MacIntyre (1929-2025)

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.

Pope Leo XIV on families and the family of nations

Yesterday, Pope Leo XIV delivered an address to the diplomatic corps at the Vatican.   It was brief and very simple, but elegant and deep and shows the influence of his namesake Leo XIII and of his theological guide St. Augustine.  The world, Leo says, is a “family of peoples.”  And essential to the wellbeing of nations and the family of nations, he says, are peace, justice, and truth, where peace has justice and truth as its preconditions.  The talk is devoted to elaborating on these three themes.  What follows are some comments on Leo’s remarks.

Greenland and the ethics of annexation

President Trump has repeatedly called for U.S. acquisition of Greenland.  The motivations have to do with Greenland’s strategic location and access to its mineral reserves.  Neither the government of Denmark (of which Greenland is a territory), nor the people of Greenland themselves, are in favor of the idea.  Not only is Trump undeterred by those facts, he has repeatedly refused to rule out the possibility of using military force to annex the island.  For example, in January, when asked whether he could assure the world that he would not resort to military coercion to get control of Greenland, Trump replied “No, I can’t assure you” and “I’m not going to commit to that.”  Asked this month about using military force to take Greenland, Trump said that “it could happen, something could happen with Greenland” and “I don’t rule it out.”

Pope Leo XIV

Let us pray for our new pope, Leo XIV.  His choices to take a traditional name and to appear in traditional papal garb (as Benedict XVI did and Francis did not) are small but encouraging signs of a man who subordinates himself to the papal office and understands the importance of continuity with the past.

The ethics of wealth and poverty

In my latest essay at Postliberal Order, I discuss what Christ, the Fathers of the Church, and Aristotle have to say about the moral hazards of riches.

Catholicism and immigration: Reply to Cory and Sweeney

Recently, my article “A Catholic Defense of Enforcing Immigration Laws” appeared at Public Discourse.  Both Therese Cory and Terence Sweeney have raised criticisms of the article.  In a new article at Public Discourse, I reply to them.

The pope’s first duty

Let us pray for the repose of the soul of Pope Francis.  We ought to pray no less fervently that God in His mercy will bless His Church with a new pope of the kind she most needs at this time in her history.  As the cardinals begin to think about a successor, it is appropriate for them, and for us, to recall that the first duty of any pope is to preserve undiluted the deposit of faith.  It concerns sound doctrine even more than sound practice, because practice can be sound only when doctrine is sound.  This is something those electing a new pope should always keep first and foremost in mind.  But reminders are especially important today, when the Church faces greater doctrinal confusion than perhaps at any previous time.

The two thieves

Christ was not crucified alone.  Of those who died with him, Luke’s Gospel tells us the following:

There were also two others, criminals, led with Him to be put to death.  And when they had come to the place called Calvary, there they crucified Him, and the criminals, one on the right hand and the other on the left… Then one of the criminals who were hanged blasphemed Him, saying, “If You are the Christ, save Yourself and us.”  But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying, “Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation?  And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong.”  Then he said to Jesus, “Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom.”  And Jesus said to him, “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise.” (Luke 23:32-33, 39-43, NKJV)

On the tariff crisis

Like many others across the political spectrum, I’ve been alarmed at the extreme tariff policy President Trump announced last week, which was met by a massive drop in the stock market.  As with almost everything else he does, the policy was nevertheless instantly embraced with enthusiasm by his most devoted followers, who have glibly dismissed all concerns and assured us that we are on the cusp of a golden age.  If this does not sound like the conclusion of careful and dispassionate reasoning, that is because it isn’t.  Whatever the outcome of Trump’s policy, the flippant boosterism with which it has been put forward and defended is contrary to reason.

On pride and vainglory

Pride, as Aquinas defines it in De Malo, is “the inordinate desire for pre-eminence” (Question 8, Article 2). With Augustine and the Christian tradition in general, he teaches that it is “the greatest sin” and indeed “the root and queen of all sins.” Its immediate effect is “vainglory,” which is the vice of habitually seeking to call attention to one’s own imagined excellence. And the daughters of vainglory, Aquinas tells us (Question 9, Article 3), are disobedience, boasting, hypocrisy (by which Aquinas means a tendency to magnify one’s glory by reference to “imaginary deeds”), contention, obstinacy, discord, and what he calls the “audacity for novelties” or predilection for bold actions that will call attention to oneself by bringing “astonishment” to others.

Scholastic regress arguments

Many are familiar with arguments to the effect that an infinite regress of causes is impossible, as Aquinas holds in several of his Five Ways of proving God’s existence.  Fewer correctly understand how the reasoning of such arguments is actually supposed to work in Scholastic writers like Aquinas.  Fewer still are aware that the basic structure of this sort of reasoning has parallels in other Scholastic regress arguments concerning the nature of mind, of knowledge, and of action.  Comparing these sorts of arguments can be illuminating.

Immortal Souls on the Classical Theism Podcast

Recently I was interviewed at some length by John DeRosa for the Classical Theism Podcast, about my book Immortal Souls: A Treatise on Human Nature. You can listen to the interview here.

Catholicism and immigration

My article “A Catholic Defense of Enforcing Immigration Laws” appears at Public Discourse.

Liberalism’s catastrophic spider

In my latest essay at Postliberal Order, I argue that, whatever Kant’s own intentions, the Kantian rhetoric of autonomy and respect for persons has allowed modern liberalism to cloak a radical subversion of natural law and Christian moral theology behind the veil of “human dignity.”

Life, Reproduction, and the Paradox of Evolution

My article “Life, Reproduction, and the Paradox of Evolution” appears in a special issue of the journal BioCosmos devoted to exploring the nature of life. (And fear not, dear reader, the articles are open access rather than behind a paywall.)

Mackie on Pascal’s Wager

I’ve never been a fan of Pascal’s Wager.  But there’s a bit more that one might say for it than is often supposed.  For example, the objections J. L. Mackie raises against it in his classic defense of atheism The Miracle of Theism, though important, are not fatal.  Let’s take a look at the argument, at Mackie’s objections, and at how a defender of Pascal might reply to them.

What proceeds from Hart (Updated)

Epilogue 2/22: As those who have read the updates to this post will have learned, David Bentley Hart has apologized for the offending remarks and has had them removed from the documentary.  He has also let me know that the interview was recorded years ago, that he did not remember that it included those remarks, and that he would not have allowed them to remain in it if he had remembered them.  Accordingly, I retract my statement that he "has no honor."  He has shown himself to be honorable indeed, and I happily accept and appreciate his apology.

Every time a truce between David Bentley Hart and me has been broken, it has been broken by him.  And more than once, friendly and fence-mending exchanges in private have been followed by a public shivving on his part.  The man has no honor.  In a new documentary, he casually remarks that “Feser… really is a person for whom Christianity is mostly about, you know, killing people or, or you know, it’s about beating them.”  The surrounding remarks are no less nasty.  (Readers who don’t want to watch the entire thing can fast forward to about 57 minutes into it.)

Immigration and academia on The Tom Woods Show

This week I appear on The Tom Woods Show to discuss the immigration debate, the state of academic philosophy, and other matters.

Trump’s Gaza proposal is gravely immoral

Today my critique of Trump’s Gaza proposal appears at the National Catholic Register.  Friends, whether you agree or disagree, I urge you to allow your opinions on this grave matter to be molded only by dispassionate reason and moral principle rather than anger and partisanship.

Just war principles and the Mexican drug cartels

In my latest article at Postliberal Order, I argue that under certain conditions, U.S. military intervention in Mexico against the drug cartels would be justifiable according to the principles of traditional just war theory.

Catholics and immigration on No Spin News (Updated)

Those who follow me on Twitter/X will know that I posted there heavily last week about the controversy over Catholicism and immigration.  This evening, I appear on Bill O’Reilly’s No Spin News program to discuss the controversy.  O'Reilly Premium Members can watch the segment here.

UPDATE 2/5: You can now watch the interview here.

More on Immortal Souls

The latest feedback on Immortal Souls: A Treatise on Human Nature.  At Twitter/X, theologian Ulrich Lehner writes: “A wonderful book. Sharply sharply argued, readable, and always illuminating.”  Szilvay Gergely kindly reviews the book in the Hungarian magazine Mandiner.  From the review: “Feser… can argue surprisingly effectively and convincingly… If you considered the immortality of the soul (and the whole person) to be an unsupported myth, then Feser shows that this is not the case.”

The ethics of invective

It’s often said that while sticks and stones can break our bones, words can never hurt us.  But it isn’t true.  Were we mere animals it would be true, but we’re not.  We are rational social animals.  Hence we can be harmed, not only in ways that injure the body, but also in ways that bring distress to the mind and damage our standing with our fellow human beings.  These harms are typically not as grave as those involving bodily trauma, but they are real harms all the same.  Indeed, mockery and the loss of one’s good name can even be felt by one who suffers them as worse than (at least some) bodily harms. 

A report from the Great Los Angeles Fire

On the extent, causes, and lessons of the disaster, in my latest article at Postliberal Order.

The thread you’ve been waiting for

Let’s close out 2024 and begin 2025 with a long overdue open thread.  Now’s your chance to get that otherwise off-topic comment posted at last.  From plate tectonics to Hooked on Phonics, from substance abuse to substance dualism, from Thomism to Tom Tom Club, everything is on-topic.  Trolls still not welcome, though, so keep it sane and civil.

Previous open threads archived here.

Boczar on Immortal Souls

At The Review of Metaphysics, philosopher Jack Boczar kindly reviews my book Immortal Souls: A Treatise on Human Nature.  From the review:

“The book's title is an homage to David Hume, and Feser has certainly taken Hume to task, giving cogent arguments for the reality of the self (chapter 2), freedom of the will (chapter 4), immateriality of the intellect (chapter 8), and more…

It is with contemporary developments in the philosophy of mind where Feser is at his best, and readers will not be disappointed with his critique of positions such as Buddhism's no-self doctrine (chapter 2)…

Feser again is at his best in cogently establishing the immateriality of the intellect.  He puts forth various arguments.  His most powerful argument is a modified version of James Ross's argument from the indeterminacy of the physical (chapter 8)… One of the unique contributions that Feser makes to contemporary literature is his defense of the immateriality of the intellect from its simplicity (chapter 8).  Readers should pay close attention to this powerful argument.”

Gilson on philosophy and its history

You might suppose from the title of Etienne Gilson’s The Unity of Philosophical Experience that it is a book about philosophy in general.  And ultimately it is.  But its bulk is devoted to detailed accounts of the ideas of thinkers Gilson regards as having gotten things badly wrong, such as Abelard, Ockham, Descartes, Malebranche, Kant, and Comte.  There is relatively little about thinkers Gilson regards as having gotten things largely right, such as Aristotle and Aquinas.  This might seem odd.  For the sympathetic reader might suppose that the experience of philosophers like Aristotle and Aquinas should surely count as least as much as (indeed, more than) that of more wayward thinkers, when elucidating the nature of philosophy.

Nicholson on Immortal Souls

At Catholic World Report, philosopher Sam Nicholson kindly reviews my book Immortal Souls: A Treatise on Human Nature.  From the review:

"As its title suggests, Immortal Souls by Edward Feser provides a robust philosophical defense of the immortality of the soul.  The scope of the book reaches far beyond this one topic, however, as Feser methodically exposits and defends the entire Aristotelian-Thomist metaphysics of the human person, addressing in depth such topics as personal identity, freedom of the will, perception and cognition, phenomenal consciousness, and artificial intelligence.  The result is an extraordinarily comprehensive and detailed sweep through contemporary philosophy of mind, addressing nearly every major topic of interest.  Feser makes a forceful case that Thomism remains a live option, able to resolve many seemingly intractable problems at the intersection of philosophy and the sciences of cognition…

Full interview on Pints with Aquinas

My recent three-hour interview with Matt Fradd on Pints with Aquinas is now available in its entirety at YouTube.  The discussion is wide-ranging, covering the current state of the Catholic Church, papal history, contemporary U.S. politics, atheism and theism, the sexual revolution and its transformation of the Western world, philosophical skepticism, artificial intelligence, integralism, and much else.

Pints with Aquinas interview (Updated)

Recently Matt Fradd kindly had me on Pints with Aquinas for a wide-ranging three-hour interview. At the moment, the full interview is available to members but an excerpt has been posted today at YouTube, wherein Matt and I discuss the current state of the Catholic Church.

UPDATE 12/3: Today a second excerpt has been posted at YouTube, wherein Matt and I discuss the question of what would falsify Catholicism.