Antonia Fitzpatrick argues clearly throughout Thomas Aquinas on Bodily Identity that the Dominican saint never consistently achieves a coherent, unified understanding of the nature of the continuity of bodily matter across the human lifespan, death, and future resurrection. This inconsistency stems largely from Aquinas relying partly on Aristotle and partly on Averroes’ commentary on the ancient philosopher without ever committing to either, the author comes to conclude. Divided into four large chapters, Thomas Aquinas on Bodily Identity, provides a detailed foundation in Aristotle’s thinking on matter, body, and soul before turning to Aquinas. This division of these two philosophers, as well as the inclusion of Averroes’ influence on St. Thomas, enables the reader to see the interplay of these thinkers as well as the theological demands of the thirteenth century that drove St. Thomas to attempt a completely new anthropology in the first place. In the Introduction, Fitzpatrick sums things up:

中文翻译：

---

托马斯·阿奎那关于身体身份。作者：安东尼娅·菲茨帕特里克 英国牛津：牛津大学出版社，2017 年。Pp。x + 203。精装本，80.00 美元。

安东尼娅·菲茨帕特里克 (Antonia Fitzpatrick) 在托马斯·阿奎那 (Thomas Aquinas) 关于身体身份的全文中明确指出，多米尼加圣人从未始终如一地对人体生命、死亡和未来复活中身体连续性的本质达成一致、统一的理解。作者得出结论，这种不一致很大程度上源于阿奎那部分依赖亚里士多德，部分依赖阿威罗伊斯对这位古代哲学家的评论，但从未承诺过任何一个。托马斯·阿奎那关于身体同一性分为四个大章节，为亚里士多德在转向阿奎那之前对物质、身体和灵魂的思考提供了详细的基础。这两位哲学家的划分，以及阿威罗伊对圣托马斯的影响，使读者能够看到这些思想家的相互作用以及 13 世纪驱使圣托马斯首先尝试全新人类学的神学要求。在引言中，Fitzpatrick 总结道：