Skip to main content
Matthew J Peterson

Matthew J Peterson

Research Interests:
Do we even have a rough conception of what the common or public good, as opposed to a private good, entails? To ask the question is to suggest that the underlying problem of our analysis of the founding generation and our own political... more
Do we even have a rough conception of what the common or public good, as opposed to a private good, entails? To ask the question is to suggest that the underlying problem of our analysis of the founding generation and our own political system may be that our ignorance of the philosophic concept of the common or public good obscures or warps the entire framework by which we view the form of our regime and the words of our founders.
https://www.facebook.com/notes/matthew-j-peterson/introduction-notes-on-the-common-good-part-16/10154061274325931
Research Interests:
A review of "The Foundations of Natural Morality: On the Compatibility of Natural Rights and the Natural Law," by S. Adam Seagrave.
Research Interests:
The dissertation examines the meaning of the public or common good considered as an end or purpose of government in the public debate over the adoption of the U.S. Constitution. Federalists and Anti-Federalists assert that the purpose of... more
The dissertation examines the meaning of the public or common good considered as an end or purpose of government in the public debate over the adoption of the U.S. Constitution. Federalists and Anti-Federalists assert that the purpose of government is to both promote the public good and protect individual rights. What did they mean by the “public good” and related phrases? An extended commentary and textual analysis of the published writings of five Federalists (John Dickinson, Oliver Ellsworth, Noah Webster, Tench Coxe, and James Wilson) and five Anti-Federalists (Agrippa, Centinel, Federal Farmer, Impartial Examiner,and Brutus), the dissertation examines the way in which the notion of the public good played a significant part within the larger themes of federalism, representation, liberty versus licentiousness, and union during the ratification period.

Neither side’s understanding of the protection of individual rights as the purpose of government completely forecloses the notion of the promotion of the public good. The uniquely federal nature of the Constitution obscures the deeper understanding of the public good of Anti-Federalists and Federalists alike, but both sides—especially the Federalists—provide plenty of evidence. The Anti-Federalist view of representation emphasizes that the public good must be truly public without making clear how the public good differs from majority will; the Federalists emphasize the public good must be truly good, the product of sound deliberation. The Federalist argument includes the explicit claim that liberty is not license, but tied to a common notion of virtue, or what is truly good for all. The Federalists argue that there is a public good for all the states combined and thus the federal government must have supreme power over matters relating to commerce—and commerce is spoken of as intrinsically connected to morality and virtue—for the sake of this national public good. Although the Federalist notion of the public good is severely limited in scope, remaining in some way open as to the final purpose of human beings or the ultimate questions about what is truly good, it is nonetheless much more than the notion of an interdependent collection of private goods.
My senior thesis, written in order to graduate from Thomas Aquinas College, on the relation between Thomas Aquinas’s notion of beauty to art and knowledge. Passed written examination and oral defense “With Distinction” - highest honors... more
My senior thesis, written in order to graduate from Thomas Aquinas College, on the relation between Thomas Aquinas’s notion of beauty to art and knowledge. Passed written examination and oral defense “With Distinction” - highest honors possible.
Research Interests: