Publication Type: Proceeding
Abstract: I propose to assess Aquinas’s understanding of natural law by way of a response to what has become one of the most influential critiques of Aquinas in the past century, that of Leo Strauss in Natural Right and History. Strauss argues that Thomas Aquinas’s natural law doctrine is not based on nature and reason, but instead expresses a concealed dogmatism that presents doctrines drawn from revelation as if they were insights of reason. Further, according to Strauss, Aquinas supposedly transformed a moderate and flexible classic natural right teaching into an inflexible doctrine of natural law, a set of dogmatic rules which imposed imprudent constraints on sensible statesmanship. Aquinas made these errors, Strauss implies, because he confused reason with revelation.

Contrary to Strauss, I will argue that Aquinas’s doctrine of natural law is in fact a deliberate adaptation of the teaching of classical natural right to fit the circumstances of medieval Christendom, and that Aquinas fully understands the difference between reason and revelation as guides to human conduct. I also argue that Aquinas de-emphasizes or conceals some of the more radical implications of that difference for perfectly good reasons, namely, because of the limits imposed on Aquinas by the bulk of his very dogmatic readership. I will conclude by explaining why the defects of twentieth-century Thomism probably led Strauss quite reasonably to exaggerate his differences with Aquinas by painting a picture of him that was in fact closer to neo-Thomism than to Aquinas himself. If I am right, Strauss would probably have agreed with much of my argument against him.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The abolition of slavery in the British West Indies in 1834 led to a debate over the future of those colonies in which Thomas Carlyle, John Stuart Mill, Anthony Trollope, Charles Kingsley, and James Anthony Froude provided justifications for colonial rule based either on a historical or racial claim to dominance or on notions of trusteeship. John Jacob Thomas, a Trinidadian schoolteacher, was the first black West Indian to respond to this discourse in his rebuttal of Froude’s Bow of Ulysses. The writings of Carlyle, Trollope, Kingsley and Froude present a negrophobic vision of the political future. Mill’s more negrophile approach still contains patronising assumptions. Thomas stands out as a precursor to twentieth century Creole Nationalist ideas in the West Indies.

Publication Type: Invited Paper
Abstract: Questions regarding the evolution and impact of historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) long have drawn the interest of historians and other scholars. Perhaps most prominently, famed civil rights activist, educator, historian, and sociologist W.E.B. Du Bois highlighted the crucial importance of higher education for African Americans. Himself a teacher at an HBCU, Du Bois popularized at the twentieth century’s dawn what Henry L. Morehouse earlier had called the “Talented Tenth” concept. Morehouse, an associate of the American Baptist Home Missionary Society, felt that the purpose of education should be the development of strong minds. Furthermore, he believed that talented intellectuals, “a talented tenth,” could lead the masses. From this theory, Du Bois argued a need for at least 10 percent of the black population to obtain some type of academic or liberal arts training in preparation for leadership positions. Not surprisingly, he maintained as well that “Negro” colleges should play a major role in developing these future leaders.

While this debate continued to flourish at the dawn of the twentieth century, the United States entered a stage of new racial and political discourse concerning race relations in the South. This new discussion was centered on the famous question of liberal arts versus vocational education for African Americans in the new century. While this argument flourished well into the mid-twentieth century, the underlying structure for this debate was misdiagnosed as accommodationist versus militancy. Individuals that accepted Booker T. Washington’s approach to race relations and education were viewed as accommodationist, while individuals that supported W.E.B. Du Bois’ approach to race relations and education were perceived as militant or radical. This essay will attempt to explain how one publicly funded HBCU, Florida State Normal and Industrial School for Coloreds (predecessor to Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University), fit into this debate by analyzing the role of its first president, Thomas DeSalle Tucker. Furthermore, this work will reveal tactics that Tucker used to insure funding and other forms of support for this young institution, while giving a clear definition of Tucker and his strategies.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper compares Thomas Paine’s and John Locke’s opinions of the proper relationship between the Christian churches and liberal society.