After the Natural Law

The subtitle of this book states positively what the contents analyze in thorough detail. As the author suggests at several points, our civilization is teetering on the brink. We live by values that are increasingly incoherent in their meaning and their foundation. It's quite possible that within a generation we may enter a nightmarish dystopia or a new renaissance of understanding of our nature and purpose in existence. Hill's book clarifies the primary philosophical challenges that presage the former and stand in the way of the latter. Two challenges, in particular, stand before us who regard ourselves as educated members of an Abrahamic faith: (1) to give a coherent account of the physical and spiritual nature of the human person that does not rely upon the outdated formulation that St. Thomas Acquinas derived from Aristotle's hylomorphic theory and (2) to give a coherent account of Natural Law, and its foundations in a faith and science enlightened anthropology. Hill's answer, in my opinion, relies too heavily on hylomorphic theory. Nevertheless, his scholarship and clarity of argument, combined with his frank honesty about the difficulty of the challenges, together with the challenge an author faces in presenting a popular work on so vast and difficult a subject earn this book, I believe, 5 stars.Just as Democritus' atomic theory has been replaced by atomic physics, hylomorphic theory is obviated by the molecular sciences, biology and genetics, with one remaining challenge: how to understand the nature of a human being with a body and a soul. Of course the body, being physical, is increasingly well understood by science. Science, confined to the study of physical reality, is still attempting to construct viable models of consciousness and the moral decision process, with limited success, at best. And, as Hill makes clear, no purely scientific model can explain the reality of free moral agency.Prior to the dawn of 20th century physics, the possibility of free will was considered a closed subject, with the answer that it didn't exist. Even if we do have a soul, it was thought, there is no conceivable way the soul could influence the decision mechanisms in the brain without violating physical laws. Even with the discovery of quantum mechanics, with its curious phenomena, such as quantum entanglement and the curious relationship between quantum uncertainty and scientific observation (dramatically highlighted in Schroedinger's Cat Experiment), there are still no clear answers as to how the soul might interact with the body, only, at best, hopeful speculations. [The question of the reality of miracles also hangs on this problem.]. The scientific believer is left with the reality of his or her own ignorance in the face of this challenge, albeit possibly with a fervent hope based upon one's own experience of conscious moral choices and grace.In spite of the roadblocks, Hill makes it abundantly clear that obtaining new answers to questions the professions of philosophy and theology have largely given up on (or a reawakening of faith consistent with reason and science with a humble acknowledgment of ignorance in the face of the deepest questions) are essential to the survival of a civilization worthy to be called "advanced."

I wonder how to review a book by an author who has more books in his bibliography than I have read and who is more learned in the subject addressed in the title of his writing. The title makes clear what he is attempting to accomplish. The body of the book demonstrates to the impartial why the subject is important and how our current society is impacted adversely to human flourishing by the neglect of learning. At times, the book reads as a junior edition of Copleston’s History of Philosophy which is not to be critical as the author selects and explains the thinkers to an audience most likely not acquainted with either the subject of philosophy, the various philosophers or even the idea that one can think clearly and logically to ascertain objective truth. I hope irenic is the right word for our author’s lack of preaching. Terms familiar to students of philosophy are not assumed to be in the reader’s vocabulary and are patiently explained in a fair manner. The author is well acquainted with Aquinas and his method of being good at stating the best side of an opponent’s case and usually improving it before presenting his own reasoning. The author is well read in matters not only of Natural Law but the various flavors of it as taken from numerous other excellent authors. A good place to begin this book is on page 275, the Bibliography. Educated people will be very familiar with a great number of the works consulted and may profit by acquiring cited works with which they are unfamiliar. It would be the work of a lifetime to read all of them but there will be gems that ought not be passed up. So, this book is a good book in my view and a very extended argument that points the reader, really, to fields of inquiry relatively unplowed in this day and age. We are such neophilics (sp) that we often pass over ancient truths that stare at us like upturned nuggets of gold. Several books are quoted from Liberty Fund in Indianapolis, IN where the author teaches at the IU Law School there. They have recently published some of the works of Francisco Suarez, a little known towering intellect of the late 1600’s whose writings have heavily influenced a number of the writers our author identifies. Suarez is a difficult read, I am told, and his Scholasticism is better viewed thru the lenses of those who adopted his views either in toto or in part. People who would like inexpensive primary material books will find Liberty Fund very useful and with many books, obviously, related to Liberty, Freedom, Moral and Political Values such as are examined in Professor Hill’s book. The book is a reliable guide. The subject is important. The stakes are high and we need to get right with our authentic human nature.

Excellent