Share:

Dr. Matthew J. Peterson (鈥01) and Dr. S. Adam Seagrave (鈥05)

Dr. Matthew J. Peterson (鈥01) and Dr. S. Adam Seagrave (鈥05)

The latest issue of the Claremont Review of Books features one Thomas Aquinas College alumnus writing about another: Dr. Matthew J. Peterson (鈥01), a visiting assistant professor of government at Claremont McKenna College, reviews , by Dr. S. Adam Seagrave (鈥05), an assistant professor of political science at Northern Illinois University.

鈥淚 wanted to title my review 鈥楴atural Law Photobombs Locke-ish Selfie: What Happens Next Will Shock Your Political Philosophy,鈥 jokes Mr. Peterson via Facebook. 鈥淏ut they went with . I guess I鈥檒l keep my day job.鈥

Alas, sans the Gawker-worthy headline, the review begins:

鈥淭he debate over what we mean when we speak of rights, especially in the American context, often concerns what John Locke understood them to mean. Locke鈥檚 ambiguity is a gift that keeps on giving to scholarly presses. In The Foundations of Natural Morality: On the Compatibility of Natural Rights and the Natural Law, S. Adam Seagrave, a self-identified Aristotelian-Thomist, mercifully refrains from attempting the definitive commentary on what he rightly calls Locke鈥檚 鈥榩roblematically vague and incomplete鈥 account of the basis of rights. Instead, he makes not a wholly Lockean but, as he says, a 鈥楲ocke-ish鈥 case for how natural rights arise from the very structure of human beings.鈥

After a thoughtful analysis of Dr. Seagrave鈥檚 book 鈥 mostly positive, albeit sprinkled with a few objections 鈥 Dr. Peterson concludes his review with praise:

鈥淸Dr. Seagrave] has eschewed the imposing vagaries of modern scholarship in favor of actually engaging in the act of philosophy rather than mere commentary or critique. True philosophic exploration of difficult questions is much like the art of negotiating a fair deal: if one side walks away in smug satisfaction, you鈥檙e probably not doing it right. Everyone will disagree with some chunk of S. Adam Seagrave鈥檚 provocative work, but his effort is a brave breath of fresh air in the stagnant, painfully insecure, and often comically compartmentalized world of academic books.鈥

The is available via the Claremont Review of Books.