Thursday Thoughts: Tariff-ic?

I suppose I have a few ‘go-to guys’ that I like to consult on various topics, whom I’m always interested in finding out what they have to say. Peter Kreeft (academia and imagination) is one, Jimmy Akin (theology and cryptozoology, ufology, and other odd corners) is another, and I like to know what Michael Knowles (politics and culture) knows about a subject. What my ‘counsellors’ have in common is that they are all Catholic thinkers, and happen to be alive (G. K. Chesterton and C. S. Lewis are great, but they don't always say anything about contemporary events). But I really pause and reflect on what Edward Feser (moral philosopher, also a Catholic) has said about a few subjects much in the news lately. He is a serious, sober thinker not given to spouting mere party opinions, and I always think he is worth consideration.

Here is a post from X:  “A neglected aspect of the tariff debate is the grave harm the new policy potentially poses to poor countries. A protectionist policy that is necessary to preserve American industries and the local communities they support can be good. A protectionist policy that simply needlessly harms a poor nation is wrong, as the Catholic Church teaches (see the passage below from the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church). And the foolish notion that a trade imbalance is somehow in every case bad yields such policies, as in the case of the crippling 50% tariff threatened against Lesotho, a poor country incapable of buying as much from the U.S. as the U.S. buys from it. “America first” should never entail a “to hell with everyone else” attitude, which is not true patriotism but a jingoistic corruption of patriotism, and evil.”

The subject is more deeply covered here:

http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2025/04/on-tariff-crisis.html#more

And here is an article he wrote on immigration law:

https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2025/03/97452/

“Yet while progressive Catholics conclude that Vance and other Catholic defenders of administration policy are flatly at odds with Church teaching on immigration, I will argue that that is not the case. In fact, the progressives rely on simplistic platitudes and selective quotations from authoritative documents. But when the entirety of the Church’s teaching is taken into account, it is clear that—within certain clearly defined boundaries—there can be reasonable disagreement about the contours of immigration policy among faithful Catholics. Indeed, it is clear that Vice President Vance is not only well within those boundaries, but is in fact on much stronger ground than those who advocate a virtually “open borders” position in the name of Catholicism.”

The whole article is well worth reading.

So, what do I think? I think I’m still thinking about it. And I also think that Edward Feser looks a little like Sean Astin.

Five Proofs of the Existence of God

 

Five Proofs for the Existence of God (2017), by Edward Feser

This book provides a detailed, updated exposition and defense of five of the historically most important (but in recent years largely neglected) philosophical proofs of God’s existence: the Aristotelian, the Neo-Platonic, the Augustinian, the Thomistic, and the Rationalist.

It also offers a thorough treatment of each of the key divine attributes—unity, simplicity, eternity, omnipotence, omniscience, perfect goodness, and so forth—showing that they must be possessed by the God whose existence is demonstrated by the proofs.  Finally, it answers at length all of the objections that have been leveled against these proofs. 

This work provides as ambitious and complete a defense of traditional natural theology as is currently in print.  Its aim is to vindicate the view of the greatest philosophers of the past— thinkers like Aristotle, Plotinus, Augustine, Aquinas, Leibniz, and many others— that the existence of God can be established with certainty by way of purely rational arguments.  It thereby serves as a refutation both of atheism and of the fideism that gives aid and comfort to atheism.  - from the back cover.

 

“Fideism is an epistemological theory which maintains that faith is independent of reason, or that reason and faith are hostile to each other, and faith is superior at arriving at particular truths. The word fideism comes from fides, the Latin word for faith, and literally means "faith-ism". 

“Catholic doctrine rejects fideism. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, representing Catholicism's great regard for Thomism, the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas, affirms that it is a Catholic doctrine that God's existence can indeed be demonstrated by reason.” – Wikipedia.

Wanted to get this for a long time. It promises to be a work that will involve a long and close reading. Feser has an engaging way of explaining philosophical arguments, though, and is a long way from the emotional "God said it, I believe it, and that settles it" mindset of Evangelical churches. 

The Last Superstition

The Last Superstition: A Refutation of the New Atheism, by Edward Feser.

“The central contention of the “New Atheism” of Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens is that there has for several centuries been a war between science and religion, that religion has been steadily losing that war, and that at this point in human history a completely secular scientific account of the world has been worked out in such thorough and convincing detail that there is no longer any reason why a rational and educated person should find the claims of any religion the least bit worthy of attention. 

But as Edward Feser argues in The Last Superstition, in fact there is not, and never has been, any war between science and religion at all. There has instead been a conflict between two entirely philosophical conceptions of the natural order: on the one hand, the classical “teleological” vision of Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, and Aquinas, on which purpose or goal-directedness is as inherent a feature of the physical world as mass or electric charge; and the modern “mechanical” vision of Descartes, Hobbes, Locke, and Hume, according to which the physical world is comprised of nothing more than purposeless, meaningless particles in motion. As it happens, on the classical teleological picture, the existence of God, the immortality of the soul, and the natural-law conception of morality are rationally unavoidable. Modern atheism and secularism have thus always crucially depended for their rational credentials on the insinuation that the modern, mechanical picture of the world has somehow been established by science. 

Yet this modern “mechanical” picture has never been established by science, and cannot be, for it is not a scientific theory in the first place but merely a philosophical interpretation of science. Moreover, as Feser shows, the philosophical arguments in its favor given by the early modern philosophers were notable only for being surprisingly weak. The true reasons for its popularity were then, and are now, primarily political: It was a tool by which the intellectual foundations of ecclesiastical authority could be undermined and the way opened toward a new secular and liberal social order oriented toward commerce and technology. So as to further these political ends, it was simply stipulated, by fiat as it were, that no theory inconsistent with the mechanical picture of the world would be allowed to count as “scientific.” As the centuries have worn on and historical memory has dimmed, this act of dogmatic stipulation has falsely come to be remembered as a “discovery.” However, not only is this modern philosophical picture rationally unfounded, it is demonstrably false. For the “mechanical” conception of the natural world, when worked out consistently, absurdly entails that rationality, and indeed the human mind itself, are illusory. The so-called “scientific worldview” championed by the New Atheists thus inevitably undermines its own rational foundations; and into the bargain (and contrary to the moralistic posturing of the New Atheists) it undermines the foundations of any possible morality as well. 

By contrast, and as The Last Superstition demonstrates, the classical teleological picture of nature can be seen to find powerful confirmation in developments from contemporary philosophy, biology, and physics; moreover, morality and reason itself cannot possibly be made sense of apart from it. The teleological vision of the ancients and medievals is thereby rationally vindicated – and with it the religious worldview they based upon it.” – Amazon. This book, a philosophical argument, rather than a religious one, is a real eye-opener. Feser is a philosophy professor who went from atheism to faith by examining the real claims of theologists rather than the straw men that secular society has been setting up for decades. I wish I could buy all his books.

Ranking: Essential.

File Code: Religion. Atheism. Philosophy. Softcover.

Items from the Wish List: Feser and Lennox

 

Five Proofs of the Existence of God by Edward Feser  (Author)

This book provides a detailed, updated exposition and defense of five of the historically most important (but in recent years largely neglected) philosophical proofs of God’s existence: the Aristotelian, the Neo-Platonic, the Augustinian, the Thomistic, and the Rationalist.

It also offers a thorough treatment of each of the key divine attributes―unity, simplicity,  eternity, omnipotence, omniscience, perfect goodness, and so forth―showing that they  must be possessed by the God whose existence is demonstrated by the proofs.  Finally, it answers at length all of the objections that have been leveled against these proofs. 

This work provides as ambitious and complete a defense of traditional natural theology as is currently in print.  Its aim is to vindicate the view of the greatest philosophers of the past― thinkers like Aristotle, Plotinus, Augustine, Aquinas, Leibniz, and many others― that the existence of God can be established with certainty by way of purely rational arguments.  It thereby serves as a refutation both of atheism and of the fideism that gives aid and comfort to atheism. – Amazon.

By Man Shall His Blood Be Shed: A Catholic Defense of Capital Punishment by Edward Feser (Author), Joseph Bessette (Author)

The Catholic Church has in recent decades been associated with political efforts to eliminate the death penalty. It was not always so. This timely work reviews and explains the Catholic Tradition regarding the death penalty, demonstrating that it is not inherently evil and that it can be reserved as a just form of punishment in certain cases. 

Drawing upon a wealth of philosophical, scriptural, theological, and social scientific arguments, the authors explain the perennial  teaching of the Church that capital punishment can in principle be legitimate―not only to protect society from immediate physical danger, but also to administer retributive justice and to deter capital crimes. The authors also show how some recent statements of Church leaders in opposition to the death penalty are prudential judgments rather than dogma. They reaffirm that Catholics may, in good conscience, disagree about the application of the death penalty.

Some arguments against the death penalty falsely suggest that there has been a rupture in the Church's traditional teaching and thereby inadvertently cast doubt on the reliability of the Magisterium.  Yet, as the authors demonstrate, the Church's traditional teaching is a safeguard to society, because the just use of the death penalty can be used to protect the lives of the innocent, inculcate a horror of murder, and affirm the dignity of human beings as free and rational creatures who must be held responsible for their actions.

By Man Shall His Blood Be Shed challenges contemporary Catholics to engage with Scripture, Tradition, natural law, and the actual social scientific evidence in order to undertake a thoughtful analysis of the current debate about the death penalty. – Amazon.

Aristotle’s Revenge: The Metaphysical Foundations of Physical and Biological Science by Edward Feser  (Author)

Actuality and potentiality, substantial form and prime matter, efficient causality and teleology are among the fundamental concepts of Aristotelian philosophy of nature. Aristotle's Revenge argues that these concepts are not only compatible with modern science, but are implicitly presupposed by modern science.

Among the many topics covered are:

• The metaphysical presuppositions of scientific method.

• The status of scientific realism
• The metaphysics of space and time.
• The metaphysics of quantum mechanics.
• Reductionism in chemistry and biology.
• The metaphysics of evolution.
• Neuroscientific reductionism.

The book interacts heavily with the literature on these issues in contemporary analytic metaphysics and philosophy of science, so as to bring contemporary philosophy and science into dialogue with the Aristotelian tradition. – Amazon.

God's Undertaker: Has Science Buried God? by John C Lennox  (Author)

Evaluates the evidence of modern science in relation to the debate between the atheistic and theistic interpretations of the universe, and provides a fresh basis for discussion. The book has grown out of the author's lengthy experience of lecturing and debating on this subject in the UK, USA, Germany and Russia, and has been written in response to endless requests for the argumentation in written form. Chapters: War of the worldviews The scope and limits of science Gods, gaps and goblins Designer universe Designer biosphere The nature and scope of evolution The origin of life The genetic code and its origin Matters of information Taming chance without intelligence The origin of information. – Amazon.

God and Stephen Hawking: Whose Design Is It Anyway? by John C Lennox  (Author) 

'The Grand Design', by eminent scientist Stephen Hawking, is the latest blockbusting contribution to the so-called New Atheist debate, and claims that the laws of physics themselves brought the Universe into being, rather than God. In this swift and forthright reply, John Lennox, Oxford mathematician and author of 'God's Undertaker', exposes the flaws in Hawking's logic. In lively, layman's terms, Lennox guides us through the key points in Hawking's arguments - with clear explanations of the latest scientific and philosophical methods and theories - and demonstrates that far from disproving a Creator God, they make his existence seem all the more probable. – Amazon.

Gunning for God: Why the New Atheists are Missing the Target by John C Lennox  (Author)

Atheism is on the march in the western world, and its enemy is God. Religion, the "New Atheists" claim, "is dangerous", it "kills" or "poisons everything". And if religion is the problem with the world, their answer is simple: get rid of it. But are things really so straightforward? Tackling the likes of Richard Dawkins, Stephen Hawking, Christopher Hitchens, and Daniel Dennett head on, John Lennox highlights the fallacies in the their approach, arguing that their irrational and unscientific methodology leaves them guilty of the same obstinate foolishness of which they accuse dogmatic religious folks. Erudite and wide-ranging, Gunning for God packs some debilitating punches. It also puts forward new ideas about the nature of God and Christianity that will give the 'New Atheists' best friends and worst enemies alike some stimulating food for thought. – Amazon.