We spoke earlier of the "University"—the institution invented by the Church to explore the Unity of the Universe. But walk through a modern campus today. What do you find? You find a "Multiversity." The Biologist does not speak to the Ethicist. The Sociologist does not speak to the Theologian. Each department is a silo, operating with its own internal logic, unaware of the others.

Why has this happened? Because the "Keystone" has been removed.

In the Aristotelian-Thomistic framework, all knowledge converged on the Transcendent. We studied the stars, the plants, and the human body because they were clues pointing to the Creator. The "Good" was the destination of all study.

The Paradox of the "Woke" Academy

The modern university has rejected this Keystone. It claims that the Transcendent is "unscientific" or "religious." It insists on a strictly materialist view of reality.

And yet—here is the great contradiction—the modern university is more "moralistic" than a Puritan convent. It is obsessed with justice, with victimhood, with the "right side of history." It excommunicates (cancels) heretics with a zeal that would make an Inquisitor blush.

But on what foundation does this moralism rest?

If I attend a class on Evolutionary Biology, I am taught that the strong dominate the weak and that survival is the only law. If I then walk across the quad to the Sociology department, I am taught that "oppression" is evil and that we must protect the weak.

Do you see the schizophrenia? The Science says, "Might makes Right." The Humanities say, "Might is Wrong." Without the Transcendent—without a God who is both the Author of Nature and the Standard of Justice—there is no way to resolve this conflict.

The Challenge: Defending the Indefensible

So, here is my challenge to the Leftist academic: Defend your outrage.

You are angry about racism? Good. You should be. But why is racism wrong if there is no Transcendent? * Is it wrong because it is "inefficient"? (The Nazis claimed slavery was efficient). * Is it wrong because it "hurts feelings"? (What if the racist doesn't care about feelings?) * Is it wrong because it violates "Human Rights"? (Where do these rights come from? Biology? No. The State? The State wrote the Jim Crow laws.)

You can only condemn racism absolutely if you believe that every human being has a sacred dignity that transcends biology and the State. But that is a theological claim. You are borrowing the moral capital of Christianity—the Imago Dei—while trying to burn down the Church that issued the currency.

From "Critical Thinking" to "Critical Will"

Because the university has rejected the Transcendent, it has stopped teaching "Critical Thinking" (the search for Truth) and started teaching "Critical Theory" (the search for Power).

If there is no Truth to be found, then education is not about conforming the mind to Reality. It is about learning how to manipulate Reality to fit your desires. This is the "Freedom of Indifference" enshrined in the syllabus. The student is not taught to ask, "What is the Good?" He is taught to ask, "Who has the Power?"

Recovering the Roof

We need the Aristotelian-Thomistic framework because it puts the roof back on the house. It allows the Biologist to say, "This is how the hand works," and the Ethicist to say, "This is what the hand is for."

Without this unity, the university is just a collection of smart people wandering in the dark, holding candles that burn with moral passion, but illuminating nothing but their own confusion. You cannot have a University without a Universe, and you cannot have a Universe without a God.