[benpbenp]

It is a joke based on Aquinas' style of answering questions. He begins with a handful of "objections" that take the opposite position to the one he eventually lands on. To take a random example, "Whether a man is bound to give thanks to every benefactor?" (https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~ST.II-II.Q106.A3)

[throw0101a]

> It is a joke based on Aquinas' style of answering questions.

This wasn't particular to Aquinas, but fairly common among Scholastics:

* https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/41999/what-is-th...

In some ways you're trying to steel man (as opposed to straw man) the opposing arguments. It was a reflection of the oral debating style used in universities at the time.

[guerrilla]

Strange that that answer doesn't include the fact that they were heavily influenced by Aristotle (who had just been rediscovered by Europeans) who explicitely recommended doing this.

[gjm11]

My reading of the joke was that it wasn't about Aquinas's question/answers/objections/resolution style, but just suggesting that Aquinas got a lot of things wrong but got them wrong very clearly, making him a useful person to argue against in order to develop better answers to his questions.

[guerrilla]

I read it that way. He was so methodical and echaustive (as well as orthodox in many ways) that he became the perfect starting point to rebel against.