I have a handout going around that's pictures.

So I think neoplatonism requires a lot of visual aids,

especially when explaining different theories.

20th century scholarship on Thomas Aquinas brought with it a great sensitivity

to the platonic and neoplatonic aspects of the angelic doctor's philosophical thought.

Unfortunately, this has also resulted in internal debates about which adjutival label

best characterizes Aquinas, whether he can be called an Aristotelian truly or whether he

ought to be referred to as some variety of platonist. I believe it's far more constructive following the language of Cornelio Fabro to insist that

the philosophy of Aquinas is an emergent synthesis.

A synthesis that cannot merely be reduced to one of its constituent parts,

a synthesis that's much greater than even the sum total of its parts. And certain passages make it

especially clear that Aquinas did not feel bound by our typical assessment of what constitutes

Aristotelianism or Platonism. And for me, the passage that I love to share to illustrate this point

and kind of crystallizes Aquinas' flexibility in misregard and reveals his own

audacity in his own project. This quote from the Treatise on Separate Substances illustrates this,

where Aquinas highlights the congruence between Plato and Aristotle. And in virtually the same

breath, Aquinas talks about Plato's doctrine of potency and act

and Aristotle's doctrine of participation.

That's the kind of thing where you read and then you have to read again.

There's a double take.

Did you misspeak?

So there's a very flexible synthesis that he's comfortable with. So I offer that tiny

...