Abstract
Recent scholarship has called into question Thomas Aquinas’s teaching on politics, specifically focusing on the foundations of his teaching on natural law. While some scholars have contended that natural law relies on the assumption that a god with creative agency exists, others have contended that the very method through which Aquinas argues is misguided. These latter scholars contend that dialectic rather than demonstration must be the first inroad to studying politics, since only the theologian begins the study of politics with demonstrative proofs. By reexamining the roots of Aquinas’s arguments for God, this study challenges both the claims that natural law simply assumes the existence of a creative God and that the foundations of natural law are incompatible or wholly separate from a dialectic.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
