University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Towards A Metaphysics Of Value: A Critical Study Of The Axiological Implications Of The Metaphysics Of Saint Thomas Aquinas

(USC Thesis Other)

Towards A Metaphysics Of Value: A Critical Study Of The Axiological Implications Of The Metaphysics Of Saint Thomas Aquinas

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 6 7 -4 1 5 M ORGAN, John D an iel, 1933- TOWARDS A M ETAPHYSICS OF VA LU E: A C R IT IC A L STUDY OF TH E A XIO LO G IC A L IM P LIC A TIO N S OF TH E M ETAPHYSICS O F SAINT THOMAS AQUINAS. U n iv ersity of Southern C a lifo rn ia , P h .D ., 1966 Philosophy University Microfilms. Inc., Ann Arbor. Michigan TOWARDS A METAPHYSICS OF VALUE: A C r i t i c a l S t u d y of t h e A x i o l o g i c a l I m p l i c a t i o n s of T he M e t a p h y s i c s of S a i n t T ho m a s A q u i n a s by J ohn Da n i e l Mo r g a n A D i s s e r t a t i o n P r e s e n t e d to t h e FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA I n P a r t i a l F u l f i l l m e n t of t h e R e q u i r e m e n t s f o r t h e D e g r e e DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY ( P h i l o s o p h y ) J u n e , 1 9 6 6 U N IV E R S ITY O F S O U TH E R N C A LIFO R N IA T H E GRADUATE SCHO OL U N IV E R S IT Y PARK LOS AN G ELES, C A L IF O R N IA 9 0 0 0 7 This dissertation, written by ..........................J 0 HN JDAN I EL MOR GA N......... under the direction of hi.S....Dissertation Com mittee, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by the Graduate School, in partial fulfillm ent of requirements fo r the degree of D O C T O R O F P H IL O S O P H Y Dean Date......... DISSERTATION COMMITTEE Chairman | TOWARDS A METAPHYSICS OF VALUE ; OUTLINE I I n t r o d u c t i o n | A , P u r p o s e a nd S c o p e | B. St , Thomas a nd P h i l o s o p h y C. Ma n n e r of P r e s e n t a t i o n C h a p t e r On e —- T he M e t a p h y s i c a l F o u n d a t i o n s o f A x i o l o g y i i A . T h e H y l e m o r p h i c T h e o r y B. F o r m as t h e S o u r c e o f O p e r a t i o n C . F o r m , P e r f e c t i o n a n d A c t D. K n o w l e d g e a n d t h e H y l e m o r p h i c T h e o r y E . R e s u m e o f t h e s e Me t a p h y s i c P r i n c i p l e s I C h a p t e r T wo— -Th e G oo d or V a l u e i | A , N a t u r e o f V a l u e i n G e n e r a l — S a t i s f a c t i on of | D e s i r e B. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f V a l u e 1 . U n i v e r s a l i t y o f V a l u e 2 . I n h e r e n c e i n T h i n g s 3 - G ood i s s e l f - d i f f u s i v e 4 . S i m p l e v s . R e l a t i v e V a l u e s C. On t o l o g i c a l L e v e l o f V a l u e 1 . D i s t i n c t i o n B e t w e e n t h e O n t o l o g i c a l a n d A x i o l o g i c a l L e v e l s o f V a l u e ! 2 . T y p e s of A x i o l o g i c a l V a l u e A. BONUM HONESTUM b . PM.U.K, ,VT 1-L5. C. BONUM DEL_E.C_T.A-B_I L.E D . T h e H i e r a r c h y o f V a l u e s 1 . N a t u r a l V a l u e 2 . V e g e t a t i v e V a l u e 3 . S e n s i t i v e V a l u e 4 . R a t i o n a l V a l u e ! Ch a p t e r T h r e e — E v i l or D i s v a l u e A . N a t u r e of D i s v a l u e i n G e n e r a l 1 . F r u s t r a t i o n o f D e s i r e 2 . E v i l n e v e r d e s i r e d o f i t s e l f B. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f D i s v a l u e 1 . U n i v e r s a l i t y 2 . N e c e s s i t y 3 . P o we r o f E v i l 4 . C a u s e of E v i l i i C h a p t e r F o u r — N a t u r a l , V e g e t a t i v e , S e n s i t i v e a n d i R a t i o n a l V a l u e s I I A . T h e N a t u r a l L e v e l o f A x i o l o g i c a l V a l u e j 1 . D i s t i n c t i o n A m o n g t h e T y p e s o f B e i n g s j | a . S u b s t a n c e a n d A c c i d e n t j b . L i v i n g a n d n o n - l i v i n g j 2 . T y p e s o f N a t u r a l V a l u e B. S e n t i e n t L e v e l o f A x i o l o g i c a l V a l u e j 1 . D i s t i n c t i o n o f I n t e l l e c t a n d S e n s e 2 . D i s t i n c t i o n o f I n t e r n a l a n d E x t e r n a l S e n s e s j C . R a t i o n a l V a l u e s 1 . I n G e n e r a l ! 2 . A e s t h e t i c V a l u e s 3 . Mo r a l V a l u e s 4 . S o c i e t a l V a l u e s ; 5 * T h e o l o g i c a l V a l u e C h a p t e r F i v e — Mo r a l V a l u e A . D i s t i n c t i o n o f Mo r a l a n d O t h e r G o o d s B . T h e N a t u r a l L aw C . A G o o d W i l l D . T h e Mo r a l O u g h t E . Mo r a l D i s v a l u e or E v i l F . Mo r a l i t y a s t h e F u l f i l l m e n t of M a n ' s E s s e n c e C h a p t e r S i x — T he G o o d o f S o c i e t y or T h e C o m m o n G o o d A . T h e O r d e r o f t h e U n i v e r s e B . Man i s N a t u r a l l y S o c i a l C . P u r p o s e o f Go v e r n m e n t D . T h e C o m m o n Go o d i s a Go o d o f t h e I n d i v i d u a l C h a p t e r S e v e n — T h e U l t i m a t e or T h e o l o g i c a l V a l u e A . E x i s t e n c e of t h e U l t i m a t e G ood 1 . G i v e s C a u s a l F o r c e t o a l l O t h e r Go o d s B. T h e r e i s o n e u l t i m a t e g o a l f o r a l l m e n C . G od i s l o v e d i n a l l T h i n g s C h a p t e r E i g h t — V a l u e a s C o n s t i t u t i v e of t h e H u m a n P e r s o n A . S u m m a r y o f t h e T h o m i s t i c V a l u e T h e o r y B. C r i t i q u e o f C e r t a i n A s p e c t s of t h e T h o m i s t i c N o t i o n o f t h e G ood C . C o n c l u s i o n i i i TOWARDS A METAPHYSICS OF VALUE: A C R I T I C A L STUDY OF THE A X I O L O G I C A L I M P L I C A T I O N S OF THE M E T A P H Y S IC S OF S A I N T THOMAS A Q U IN A S A. P u r p o s e a n d S c o p e o f t h i s D i s s e r t a t i o n T h e p u r p o s e o f t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n i s to e x a m i n e s o m e STATEMENTS OF S T . THOMAS A QUIN AS ( 1 2 2 5 —“ 1 2 7 4 0 CONCERNING GOOD AND E V I L ; TO PRESENT THEM IN THE FORM OF A CONTEM PORARY VALUE THEORY; AND TO C R I T I C I Z E THEM IN THE L I G H T OF CONTEMPORARY W R I T I N G S IN T H I S A REA. A l t h o u g h m o s t p h i l o s o p h e r s f r o m S o c r a t e s to t h e PRESENT HAVE D IS C U S S E D THE PROBLEM OF HUMAN V A L U A T I O N , V a l u e T h e o r y , as we k no w i t t o d a y , d a t e s o n l y t o t h e M ei n o n g - E h r e n f e l s c o n t r o v e r s y o f t h e t u r n o f t h e c e n t u r y . C o n t e m p o r a r y v a l u e t h e o r y i s d i f f e r e n t i a t e d f r o m t h e t r a d i t i o n a l q u e s t i o n s a b o u t g o o d or e v i l , i n t h a t , f o r THE MOST PART, T R A D I T I O N A L P HIL O S O PHY SAW AXIOLOGY AS A RESULT O F , OR A DEDUCTION FROM, M E T A P H Y S IC S OR E P I S T - e m o l o g y . C o n t e m p o r a r y v a l u e t h e o r y s e e s i t s e l f as t h e P R E L I M I N A R Y GROUND FOR ALL OTHER P H I L O S O P H I C A L Q U E S T I O N S . 1 J u s t as D e s c a r t e s i n i t i a t e d a new e r a i n p h i l o s o p h y b y MAKING EPISTEMOLOGY P R E L I M I N A R Y TO M E T A P H Y S I C S , SO SOME CONTEMPORARY AUTHORS MAKE VALUE THEORY P R E L I M I N A R Y TO OTHER P H IL O S O P H IC A L PROBLEMS. |T IS NOT OUR PURPOSE TO MAKE S T . THOMAS INTO A 2 0 t h C e n t u r y a u t h o r a n d to r e v e r s e h i s o r d e r of p h i l o s o p h i z i n g , BUT WE WI LL ATTEMPT TO SHOW THAT CER TAIN OF H I S MET APHYSIC AL P O S I T I O N S CAN SHED L I G H T ON THE PROBLEMS WHICH A VALUE T H E O R IS T MUST FACE. I B E L I E V E THAT T H I S WIL L BE AN O R I G I N A L C O N T R I BUTION TO THE L I T E R A T U R E ON THE S U B JE C T. W H IL E MANY AUTHORS HAVE DISCUSS ED THE T H O M I S T I C P R I N C I P L E S OF A E S T H E T I C S , P O L I T I C S , AND E T H I C S , M IN E WI LL BE BROADER IN SCOPE IN THAT I T WIL L TREAT OF V A L U E - I N - G E N E R A L . 1 WILL NOT L I M I T MYSELF TO QUESTIONS OF MORAL, A E S T H E T I C , OR P O L I T I C A L E V A L U A T I O N , BUT W IL L ATTEMPT TO DISCUSS THOSE P R I N C I P L E S IN T H O M I S T I C PH ILOSOPHY WHICH ARE AP PL IC A B L E TO ANY VALUE S I T U A T I O N . A D I S C U S S I O N OF V A L U E - I N - G E N E R A L I S , BY IT S VERY NATURE, ABSTRACT. ALTHOUGH I N D I V I D U A L VALUES , AND I N D I V I D U A L VALUE S I T U A T I O N S E X I S T , IF WE ARE TO A R RIVE AT A VALUE " T H E O R Y , " THAT I S , A SY STEM A TIC UNDERSTANDING OF THE B A SIS OF ALL V A L U A T I O N , OUR D IS C U S S I O N MUST PRESCIND FROM THE UNIQUENESS OF I N D I V I D U A L VA LU E . THE ABSTRACT CHARACTER OF THE D I S S E R T A T I O N WI LL BE COMPLICATED BY THE 3 FACT THAT THE T H O M I S T I C THEORY OF THE GOOD, OR VA L U E , IS A PART OF AND M EA N IN G L ESS O U T S ID E O F , T H O M I S T I C M E T A - i p h y s i c s . T h u s , I w i l l be f o u n d t o e x p l a i n a t s o m e l e n g t h i i IC E R T A IN M E T A P H Y S IC A L P O S I T I O N S WHICH ARE NOT THEMSELVES i CENTRAL TO THE T H E S I S , BUT ARE NECESSARY FOR AN ADEQUATE ; UNDERSTAND ING OF THE T H O M I S T I C VALUE T HEORY. MY F I R S T ! ^CHAPTER W I L L BE A PR E S EN T A T IO N OF C E R T A IN GENERAL META P H Y S I C A L N O T I O N S . AS W I L L BE SEEN IN THE F I R S T CHAPTER, T H O M I S T I C PHIL O SO PHY COMES UNDER THE GENERAL C L A S S I F I C A T I O N OF A ; "REAL I ST I C 11 P H I L O S O P H I E S . MY PR E SE N T A T IO N OF T H I S PHIL O SO PHY W I L L BE SOMEWHAT DETER MINED BY THE REALIS M OF THE P H I L O S O P H Y . S l N C E , IN A R E A L I S T I C P H I L O S O P H Y , KNOW LED G E , AND HENCE V A L U A T I O N , IS ALWAYS MEASURED BY THE THING I T S E L F , OUR EM PHASIS MUST BE ON THE OBJECT OF V A L U A TIO N RATHER THAN ON THE ACT OF V A L U A T I O N . VALUE JUDGMENTS W I L L BE D I S C U S S E D BUT ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT T H I S D I S C U S S I O N W I L L C O NTRIBUTE TO OUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE VALUE I T S E L F . I t M IG H T BE WELL TO P O IN T OUT THAT BY 1 I t i s o i f f i c u l t to d i s c u s s a p o s i t i o n i n t h e H IS T O R Y OF P HIL O SO PHY WITHOUT USING SOME OF THE " L O A D E D 1* TERMS, SUCH AS " R E A L I S M , " " I D E A L I S M , " " S U B J E C T I V I S M , " " O B J E C T I V I S M , " AND SO FORTH. I AM AWARE OF THE DANGERS PRESENT IN T H I S " L A B E L I N G " BUT AM FORCED TO USE THE TERM " R E A L I S T I C " AT LEAST FOR INTRODUCTORY PURPO SES. 4 "VALUE JUDGE MENT" I REFER TO THE MENTAL ACT WHICH PRE CEDES THE L I N G U I S T I C E X P R E S S I O N . As IN T E R E S T I N G AS L I N G U I S T I C ANALYSES ARE, THEY ARE NOT APROPOS TO OUR WORK. ; i | A VALUE THEORY IN A R E A L I S T I C PHILOSOPHY IS THEN j i ; i THE STUDY OF THE AWARENESS OF VALUES THAT A MAN MAKES | ! BECAUSE THE VALUES E X I S T SOMEWHAT INDEP EN DE NTLY OF A MAN'S ACT OF V A L U A T I O N . S l N C E A R I S T O T L E AND S T . THOMAS : ’ i [ BOTH REJECT ANY PL A T O N IC REALM OF ABSTRACT IDEAS AND I VALUES , VALUE E X I S T S ONLY IN THE I N D I V I D U A L , CONCRETE j S I T U A T I ON; AND OUR KNOWLEDGE OF VALUE E X I S T S ONLY IN THE 2 I N D I V I D U A L , HUMAN S I T U A T I O N . S l N C E TH IN G S ARE MORE FUNDAMENTAL THAN THE ACTS OF KNOWLEDGE BY WHICH WE KNOW THEM, VALUE MUST BE MORE FUNDAMENTAL THAN THE MENTAL ACT OF V A L U I N G . B . S t . T h o m a s a n d P h i l o s o p h y B e f o r e p r o c e e d i n g i n t o t h e m a i n t a s k of t h i s T H E S I S , IT SEEMS NECESSARY to DIS C U SS THE TEXTS UPON WHICH T H I S I N T E R P R E T A T I O N IS BASED. THE C H I E F SOURCES 2 T h i s d i s t i n c t i o n i s m a d e b e c a u s e i t w i l l be s h o w n THAT VALUES R E S I D E U L T I M A T E L Y IN GOD, THUS NOT ALL VALUES ARE IN THE HUMAN S I T U A T I O N . HOWEVER, S I N C E GOD IS KNOWN ONLY THROUGH CORPOREAL AND E S P E C I A L L Y HUMAN M A N I F E S T A T I O N S THE KNOWLEDGE OF VA LU E, EVEN GOD AS THE U L T I M A T E V A L U E , OCCURS IN THE HUMAN S I T U A T I O N . T H I S WIL L BE D I S CUSSED AT GREATER LENGTH IN SUBSEQUENT CHAPTERS. ARE THE SUMMA T H E O L O G I A E f THE $ V<MMA T.fl A -S .E N T E $■» THE D e V e r i t a t e . t h e D e Ma l o . a n d t h e C.ffMMEHTARI.VM IN. .Q.UA.T„ftR. i I L i b r o s S e n t e n t i a r u m . N o n e o f t h e s e w o r k s i s s t r i c t l y P H I L O S O P H I C A L , E I T H E R IN OUR PRESENT DAY USAGE OF THAT t e r m o r in T h o m a s ' s own u s a g e . ^ A c c o r d i n g t o St . T h o m a s , PHILOS OPHY IS THE STUDY OF THOSE AREAS OF KNOWLEDGE WHICH MAN CAN A T T A I N BY THE USE OF H I S REASON A LO N E. THEO LOG Y, j HOWEVER, IS THE STUDY OF THOSE T H I N G S WHICH ARE BEYOND THE NATURAL POWERS OF HUMAN REASON AND ARE KNOWN BECAUSE 4 THEY HAVE BEEN REVEA LED . THOMAS WAS A THEOLOG IA N AND, EXCEPT FOR H I S COMMENTARIES ON THE W R I T I N G S OF A R I S T O T L E , THE INT EN T OF H I S WORKS WAS T H E O L O G I C A L . A l t h o u g h t h e r e i s a p h i l o s o p h y i n t h e w r i t i n g s of T h o m a s A q u i n a s , s o m e of i t o r i g i n a l a n d n o n - A r i s t o t e l e a n , 5 I T APPEARS ONLY AS A TOOL TO TEACH T H EO L O G IC AL TRUTH J ^ A n t o n C . P e g i s , S a i n t T h o m a s a n d P h i l o s o p h y ( M i l w a u k e e , 1 9 6 4 ) , p. 1 9 - V i d e : E t i e n n e G i l s o n , T h e S p i r i t o f M e d i e v a l P h i l o s o .pji.Y- T r a n s . . A .H .C . D o w n e s ( N ew Y o r k , 1 9 4 0 V . T h e . .Ch r i s t i an P h i l o s o p h y o f S t . T.h .o m a s . A q u i n a s T r a n s . L . K. S h o o k ( N ew Y o r k , 1 9 5 6 ) . 4 T h o m a s A q u i n a s , S u m m a C o n t r a G e n t .e s . 1 , 1 0 5 , p a s s i m . 5 E t i e n n e G i l s o n , T h e S p i r i t o f M e d i e v a l P h i l o s o p h y . ( N ew Y o r k , 1 9 5 6 ) , c h a p t e r s 1 a n d 2 , p a s s m . AND I T I S VERY D I F F I C U L T TO DIS C E RN IN H I S W R I T I N G S JUS T WHAT IS P H I L O S O P H I C A L AND WHAT IS T H E O L O G I C A L . HOWEVER, | i I T MUST BE REMEMBERED THAT WHATEVER PH I L O S O P H I C A L TH IN KING ] i i THERE I S , IS THERE AS PART OF A THEOLOG IC AL S Y N T H E S I S I r AND, ABSTRACTED FROM THE WHOLE, DOES NOT N E C E S S A R IL Y HAVE j THE SAME MEANING AS IT DOES W I T H I N THE WHOLE. THAT IS TO S A Y , A LATER READER OF THOMAS A Q U IN A S MAY F I N D AND USE A S T R I C T L Y P H I L O S O P H I C A L I N S I G H T IN THE T H I R T E E N T H CENTURY T H E O L O G I A N ' S WORK, BUT THE I N S I G H T TAKEN OUT OF I T S TH EO LO G IC AL CONTEXT MAY NOT BE Q U I T E THE SAME FOR A LATER READER AS IT WAS FOR THOMAS. FOR EX AMPLE, THE T h o m i s t i c c o n c e p t o f " e s s e " — to b e — as a d y n a m i c a c t o f E X I S T E N C E OCCURRED TO THOMAS BECAUSE OF THE C H R I S T I A N R E V E L A T I O N . IT WAS A P H I L O S O P H I C A L I N S I G H T BASED ON AND USED FOR THEOLOG Y. A T W E N T I E T H CENTURY T h O M I S T CAN CLAIM TO FOLLOW A P H IL O S O PH Y OF ” EX I S T E N C E " BASED ON THE w r i t i n g s o f T h o m a s , b u t h i s i s no d o u b t an e x i s t e n t i a l i s m FOREIGN TO THE M IN D OF THOMAS H I M S E L F . WE SEE A S I M I L A R s i t u a t i o n i n c e r t a i n p e r s o n a l i s t s who c l a i m K a n t ' s CATEGORIC AL I M P E R A T I V E AS T H E I R F O U N D A T IO N . A n y PH I L O S O P H I c a l t r e a t i s e w h i c h c l a i m s t o be T h o m i s t i c i s a u t o m a t i c a l l y a f i a t . I t i s t h e a l m o s t A R T I F I C I A L S Y N T H E S I Z I N G OF P O S I T I O N S INTO A WHOLE. I SAY " A R T I F I C I A L " BEC AUSE, ALTHOUGH THERE IS A WHOLE TO St . T h o m a s ' s t h o u g h t , i t i s a t h e o l o g i c a l w h o l e , a n d a n y OTHER TYPE WHICH CLAIMS TO BE T H O M I S T I C IS N E C E S S A R IL Y | ART I F I C I A L . I t i s t h e p u r p o s e o f t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n t o be a j i PH I L O S O P H I C A L PRESENTATI ON. THAT I S , I SHALL L I M I T M Y - i SELF TO THOSE IDEAS W H I C H , | B E L I E V E , ST. THOMAS THOUGHT WERE DISCOV ER ABLE BY HUMAN REASON, WITHOUT THE HELP OF D I V I N E REVEL AT I ON. : C . Ma n n e r qf_ _Pr e s e n t a t i on T h e r e a r e two e s s e n t i a l l y d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of v a l u e D I S C U S S I O N UNDER C O N S I D E R A T I O N . THE F I R S T L E V E L , D I S CUSSED i n C h a p t e r T w o , i s t h e m o s t g e n e r a l a n d a b s t r a c t , AND IN VO LV ES VALUE AND D I S V A L U E IN GENE RAL. SUBSEQUENT & CHAPTERS W I L L DEAL WITH S P E C I F I C TYPES OF V A L U E . THESE CHAPTERS W I L L BE SO ARRANGED THAT THEY W I L L C O N S T I T U T E A C L A S S I F I C A T I O N OF TH'E LEVEL S OF V A L U E , IN IN C R EA SIN G ORDER OF IMPORTANCE. THE LAST CHAPTER W I L L BE A SUMMARY AND AN ATTEMPT TO SHOW THAT ONE C O N S T IT U T E S H I M S E L F AS A B E L I E V E THAT T H I S D I S T I N C T I O N AGREES WITH WERK- M E I S T E R ' S SECOND AND T H I R D LEVELS OF &ORAL DJ.SCOURSE R E S P E C T I V E L Y . ^ T H E O R I E S OF E T H I C S . Z L i NCOLJ*/, P. 4 - 1 0 ) . I AGREE WITH PROFESSOR WERKMEIST ER THAT THERE IS A PRIOR LEVEL OF MORAL AND VALUE DISCOU RSE WHICH COULD BE CALLED THE P R A C T I C A L , BUT AS WITH H I S OWN W R I T I N G S , T H I S MATTER DOES NOT IM M E D I A T E L Y CONCERN US. PERSON THROUGH H I S VALUE CO M M IT M EN T S. S l N C E THE EA R L IER CHAPTERS W I L L BE MERELY AN E X E G E S IS OF T H O M A S 'S THOUGHT, T H I S LAST CHAPTER W IL L BE A C R I T I C I S M OF C E R T A IN I N A D E - | QUACIES I HAVE FOUND IN H I S THOUGHT. J F or t h e m o s t p a r t I w i l l r e t a i n t h e t e r m s " g o o d " j I AND " E V I L ” RATHER THAN " V A L U E " AND " D I S V A L U E . " THE FORMER ARE THE TERMS USED BY S T . THOMAS AND MOST CONTEM - ! PORARY T h O M I S T S . MUCH CON FUSION WOULD RESULT IF A T R A N S - ; L A T I O N INTO OTHER TERMS WERE A TTE MP TED . F i n a l l y , a w o r d a b o u t t h e m a n n e r o f m a k i n g r e f e r e n c e s . T h e t r e n d i n s c h o l a r l y p u b l i c a t i o n s t o d a y i s t o MAKE CO NCISE REFERENCES W I T H I N THE TEXT I T S E L F . S l N C E SO MANY OF THE REFERENCES W I L L CON TAIN LONG QUOT ATIONS IN L a t i n , i t h a s b e e n d e c i d e d t h a t , f o r t h e s a k e o f c o n s i s t e n c y , ALL REFERENCES W I L L BE MADE IN FOOTNOTES , RATHER THAN SOME IN FOOTNOTES AND OTHERS W I T H I N THE T E X T . T h e 1 9 4 -9 p h o t o g r a p h i c r e p r o d u c t i o n o f t h e P a r m a E D I T I O N OF THE WORKS OF ST. THOMAS HAS BEEN USED. R E F E R ENCES TO H I S W R I T I N G S W I L L BE TO T H I S E D I T I O N . UNLESS AN AUTHOR IS S P E C I F I C A L L Y NAMED, IT I S TO BE ASSUMED THAT THE AUTHOR IS ST. THOMAS A Q U I N A S . UNLESS A T R AN S LA T IO N IS S P E C I F I C A L L Y M E N T I O N E D , IT IS TO BE ASSUMED THAT THE TRAN SLA TIO N IS M I N E . CHAPTER .ONE THE METAPHYSICAL FOUNDATIONS OF AXLOLflfiE A . T he H y l e m o r p h i c T h e o r y Wh e t h e r c h a n g e i s an i l l u s i o n , a s P a r m e n i d e s A SUGGESTS, OR THE FOUNDATION OF ALL THAT I S , AS H e R A - 2 C L I T U S HOLDS, IT IS ONE OF THE F I R S T PROBLEMS DEALT w i t h i n t h e H i s t o r y of P h i l o s o p h y . I t i s t h e p r o b l e m w i t h w h i c h A r i s t o t l e b e g i n s h i s m e t a p h y s i c a l i n q u i r y . S i n c e S t . T h o m a s i s i n d e b t e d to A r i s t o t l e f o r t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f h i s m e t a p h y s i c a l s y s t e m , t h i s p r o b l e m o f c h a n g e i s f u n d a m e n t a l to T h o m i s t i c m e t a p h y s i c s . Mo r e o v e r , t h e p r o b l e m o f c h a n g e i s b a s i c to e v e r y p h i l o s o p h e r who h a s V l EVER W R I T T E N . H EG E L IS C E R T A IN LY AN EXAMPLE OF A A P a r m e n i d e s , “ O n Na t u r e , " t r a n s . T h o m a s D a v i d s o n , as c i t e d i n C h a r l e s M. Ba k e w e l l , S o u r c e B ook i n A n c i e n t P h i l o s o p h y . ( C h i c a g o , 1 9 3 9 ) » p . 1 1 - 2 0 . p As c i t e d in Ed L. M i l l e r , F r a g m e n t s . . ( L os A n g e l e s , 1 9 6 2 ) , p . 1 4 - 2 5 . ^ A r i s t o t l e , P h y s i c s t B ook 1 , C h a p t e r 1 , 1 8 4 B1 5 . ^"Ge o r g W. F . H e g e l , " P h i l o s o p h i c a l P r o p a d e u t i c s , “ t r a n s . W i l l i a m T . H a r r i s , a s c i t e d i n J a c o b L o e w e n b e r g , ( e d ) H e g e l S e l e c _t_i.o.n ( N ew Y o r k , 1 9 2 9 ) , p . 1 0 4 . PHILOSOPHER FOR WHOM THE NOTION OF CHANGE IS Q UITE IM PORTANT, L e i b n i z ' s q u e r y " why s o m e t h i n g r a t h e r t h a n N O T H I N G ? " ^ IS AT IT S ROOT A QUESTION OF THE PROBLEM OF g c h a n g e . C o n t e m p o r a r y p h i l o s o p h y , f r o m B e r g s o n ' s n o t i o n OF PUREE TO DE B E A U V O I R ' S " A M B I G U I T Y , " ' 7 IS IN ITS MOST FUNDAMENTAL PRESENTATIO N A C O N T IN U A T IO N OF THE "D IA LOG UE b e t w e e n H e r a c l i t u s a n d P a r m e n i d e s . P r o f e s s i o n a l p h i l o s o p h y a s i d e , a s o l u t i o n t o t h e PROBLEM OF CHANGE IS THE B EG I N N IN G OF EACH MAN'S UNDER STANDING OF H IM S E L F AND H I S WORLD. THE QUESTIONS OF PER SONAL I D E N T I T Y , MEANING AND PURPOSE OF L I F E , AND POSS1BI L I T Y OF S I G N I F I C A N T KNOWLEDGE ARE UNANSWERABLE WITHOUT AT LEAST A RUDIMENTARY PHILOSOPHY OF CHANGE. I n ITS S I M P L E S T E X P R E S S I O N , TO CHANGE i s to c e a s e BEING ONE THING AND TO BECOME ANOTHER T H I N G . SOMETIMES THESE CHANGES ARE FUNDAMENTAL, P R IM A R Y — AS, FOR EXAMPLE, THE CHANGE FROM L I F E TO DEATH, THE CHANGE OF PAPER TO ASHES, THE CHANGE OF HYDROGEN TO WATER. AT OTHER T IM E S ^ G o t t f r i e d W i l h e l m L e i b n i z , T h e o r la Mo t u s A b s t r - A C J J „ , as c i t e d i n P h i l i p P . W i e n e r , L e i b n i z S e l e c t i o n s . ( N ew Y o r k , 1 9 5 1 ) , p . 9 3 - g H e n r i B e r g s o n , A n I n t r o d u c t i o n to Me t a p h y s i c s , t r a n s . T . E . H u l m e , ( N ew Y o r k . I Q ^ S 1 ) . p a s s i m . 7 S i m o n e d e B e a u v o i r , T h e E t h i c s of A m b i g u i t y , t r a n s . B e r n a r d F r e c h t m a n , ( N ew Y o r k , 1 9 6 2 ) , c h a p t e r 1 , ■EA$.?in. THESE CHANGES ARE LESS FUNDAMENTAL, SECONDARY AS FOR EXA MPLE, THE CHANGE OF UNLEARNED TO LEA RNED , FROM W H IT E TO GREY , FROM YOUNG TO OLD. T H E S E EXAMPLES ARE MERELY MEANT TO I N D I C A T E THAT CHANGE IN THE SENSE I AM USING THE TERM IS A T R A N S I T I O N FROM ANY ONE ASPECT OF EX PE R IENCE TO A N O T H E R .^ T he A r i s t o t e l e a n - T h o m i s t i c t h e o r y o f c h a n g e r e j e c t s THE NOTIO N THAT CHANGE CAN BE E X P L A IN E D BY ONE P R I N C I - Q - I f ) p l e . ’ T h i s i s t h e e s s e n t i a l d i f f i c u l t y w i t h t h e p o s i t i o n o f P a r m e n i d e s , T h a l e s a n d o t h e r s , who h e l d t h a t THE WORLD COULD BE E X P L A I N E D IN TERMS OF ONE SOURCE. IF THERE IS ONLY ONE SOURCE OF B E I N G , ONE CAN DRAW AN IMMED IATE CONCLUSION T H A T , I F ANY CHANGES WERE TO OCCUR, THEY WOULD ALL BE SECONDARY, NON-FUNDAMEN TAL; I . E . , THEY WOULD BE A C C I D E N T A L , IN THE T R A D I T I O N A L T E R M IN O L O G Y . A C T U A L L Y , O T h i s i s n o t m e a n t t o i m p l y t h a t u n e x p e r i e n c e d CHANGE DOES NOT E X I S T . THE EX PR ES S IO N "ASPE CT OF EXPE R I E N C E " WAS CHOSEN TO REFER TO THE WID EST P O S S I B L E DENO T A T I O N , WHICH WOULD P O S S I B L Y NOT BE PRESENT WITH OTHER WORDS, SUCH AS! T H I N G , PHENOMENON, R E A L I T Y , E T C . ^THER E IS AN UNFORTUNATE A M B I G U I T Y IN THE WORD " P R I N C I P L E . " IT MEANS B A S IC A L L Y " S O U R C E , " BUT WILL SOMETIMES REFER TO A SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE, AT OTHER T I M E S A SOURCE OF B E I N G . IT IS HOPED THAT THE CONTEXT W I L L MAKE THE CONNOTATION CLEAR. •'IQ A r i s t o t l e , P h y s i c s . B ook 1 , C h . 5. p a s s i m . 12 CHANGE WOULD BE AN I M P O S S I B I L I T Y , BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE NO " t e n s i o n " to c a u s e c h a n g e . F or e x a m p l e , i f we w e r e to h o l d w i t h T h a l e s t h a t a l l i s ' w a t e r , we c o u l d n o t e x p l a i n ! WHY WATER PRESENTS I T S E L F TO US AT SOME T IM E IN ONE WAY j I ( T R E E S , FOR EX AMPLE) AND AT OTHER T I M E S IN OTHER WAYS I (ASHES FROM THE BURNT t r e e s ) . I f BOTH F IR E AND TREES ARE jWATER, WHY DOES F I R E CAUSE TREES TO BECOME ASHES? CHANGE j WOULD BE AN I M P O S S I B I L I T Y , AN I L L U S I O N . A t LEAST A SECOND P R I N C I P L E OF CHANGE WOULD BE NECESSARY TO E X P L A IN NOT ONLY THE FACT OF CHANGE IN OUR EX P E RIEN CE BUT ALSO j THE CONSISTENCY OF OUR E X P E R I E N C E . FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN WE BURN A T REE, THE TREE BECOMES ASHES, SOMETHING THAT IT WAS NOT P R E V I O U S L Y . HOWEVER, SOMETHING DOES R E M A IN . C h a n g e d o e s n o t s e e m to b e a s l e i g h t - o f - h a n d t r i c k p l a y e d on u s . T he t r e e d o e s n o t s i m p l y d i s a p p e a r a n d a s h e s APPEAR FROM NOWHERE. OUR EXPERIEN CE IS THAT TREES BECOME ASHES, NOT THAT THEY ARE REPLACED BY ASHES. THEREFORE, IT WOULD SEEM THAT WE NEED AT LEAST TWO SOURCES OF CHANGE, THE D ET ER M IN A TING OR D I S T I N G U I S H I N G P R I N C I P L E , AND THE DETERMINED OR UNDE RLYING P R I N C I P L E ; THE P R I N C I P L E WHICH CAUSES CONSISTEN CY AND THE P R I N C I P L E WHICH CAUSES D I F F E R ENCE. H o w e v e r , t h e r e a r e s t i l l d i f f i c u l t i e s i n v o l v e d . F or i f t h e r e w e r e m e r e l y two p r i n c i p l e s of c h a n g e , t h e DETERMINED AND THE D E T E R M I N I N G , WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO EX P L A IN THE D I R E C T I O N OF CHANGE. We WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO E X P L A IN WHY THE TREE BECAME ASHES RATHER THAN AN APPLE OR WATER OR A SPACE S H I P . A r i s t o t l e c o n c l u d e s t h a t t h e r e m u s t be t h r e e p r i n c i p l e s of c h a n g e ; t h e d e t e r m i n e d , t h e d e t e r m i n i n g a n d THE P R E D I S P O S I T I O N IN THE PRIOR BEING TOWARDS A CER TAIN 12 TYPE OF NEW B E I N G . T H I S P R E D I S P O S I T I ON IN THE OLDER BEING IS A CERTAIN APTNESS TO BECOME T H I S PARTICULAR NEW b e i n g . A r i s t o t l e c a l l s t h e s e t h r e e p r i n c i p l e s o f c h a n g e : MATTER (T H E D E T E R M I N E D ) , FORM ( T H E D E T E R M I N I N G ) AND POT E N T I A L I T Y ( T H E APTNESS FOR A PARTICULAR C H A N G E ) . ^ TO SUMMARIZE: A TREE CHANGES TO ASHES BECAUSE A TREE IS NOT MERELY A TREE; IT IS MATTER ORGANIZED BY FORM TO HAVE THE C H A R A C T E R IS T IC S WHICH WE ASS OCIA TE WITH WHAT WE CALL t r e e s . W i t h i n t h e m a t t e r o f t h e t r e e i s a c a p a b i l i t y of BEING DETERMINED IN ANOTHER WAY. WHEN AN AGENT ( E F F I C IENT CAUSE; IN T H I S CASE, F I R E ) ACTS ON THE T R E E , IT " E D U C E S , 11 BRINGS OUT, THESE PO SS IBL E C H A R A C T E R IS T IC S W I T H I N THE MATTER AND THUS CAUSES THE TREE TO BECOME 1 1 A r i s t o t l e , P h y s i c s . B ook 1 , c h . 6 & 7 . p a s s i m . 12 R A r i s t o t l e , P h y s i c s . B ook 1 , c h . 8 , 1 9 1 1 8 . 14 SOMETHING ELSE ( i N T H I S CASE, A S H E S ) . i | A l t h o u g h t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f c h a n g e a r e t h r e e , t h e i i | P R I N C I P L E S OF M A T E R I A L S U B S T A N T IA L BEING ARE ONLY TWO. | A r i s t o t l e h o l d s t h a t m a t t e r i s i n i t s e l f p o t e n c y . T h u s , ALTHOUGH POTENCY TO FORM IS AN IMPORTANT ASPECT OF OUR ; E X PLANATIO N OF CHANGE, I T DOES NOT PLAY A ROLE IN OUR EX PLANATIO N OF B E I N G . THE M A T E R I A L SUBSTANCES WHICH WE ! ENCOUNTER IN OUR L I V E S ARE COMPOSED OF TWO P R I N C I P L E S OF b e i n g ; m a t t e r a n d f o r m . Ma t t e r i s u n d e r s t o o d a s " t h a t 1 4 OUT OF WHICH ALL T H IN G S ARE M A D E 1 1 AND FORM IS UNDER STOOD AS "THAT WHICH MAKES A T H IN G TO BE WHAT I T I S . " ^ F orm i s to be u n d e r s t o o d i n a n a l o g y t o s h a p e b u t m e a n s m u c h -i o r e . J u s t as t h e s h a p e or f o r m o f o n e ' s f i s t i s a D E T E R M IN A T I O N OF THE MATTER OF O N E 'S HAND, SO FORM, IN IT S M E T A P H Y S IC A L SE N SE, IS TO BE UNDERSTOOD AS THE DE T E R M I N A T I O N OF MATTER ( W H I C H BY I T S E L F IS PURE I N D E T E R M I N A C Y , PURE POTE NCY ) TO BE A P A R T IC U LA R TYPE OF B E I N G . Ma t t e r a n d f o r m a r e p r i n c i p l e s o f b e i n g s , n o t b e i n g s i n THEM SEL V E S. THAT I S AND T H I S IS MOST FUNDAMENTAL TO A f i I S T O T E L E A N - T H O M I ST IC P H I L O S O P H Y N E I T H E R MATTER NOR FORM CAN E X I S T IN DEPENDENTLY OF THE OTHER. 1 4 A A r i s t o t l e , P h y s i c s t B o o k i , c h . 7» 1 9 1 1 3 - 2 1 . AS M EN T IO N ED E A R L I E R , WE ARE AWARE OF TWO TYPES OF CHANGES: FUNDAMENTAL CHANGES AND SECONDARY CHANGES. IN A FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE, THE B EIN G CHANGES P R I M A R I L Y (F O R j EXA MPLE, IN NO FUNDAMENTAL SENSE I S A TREE THE SAME AS i AN ASH, NOR A L I V I N G BODY THE SAME AS A DEAD O N E ) . T H E S E | FUNDAMENTAL CHANGES ARE C O N S T IT U T E D BY THE PRIMARY DETER M I N A T I O N OF MATTER TO BE A PA R T IC U LA R TYPE OF B E I N G . S u c h p r i m a r y d e t e r m i n a t i o n s a r e c a l l e d s u b s t a n t i a l f o r m s BECAUSE THEY C O N S T I T U T E MATTER TO BE A P A R T IC U LA R S U B - / | g STANCE OR IN DEP EN DENT E X I S T E N T . ONCE MATTER HAS THE PRIMARY D E T E R M I N A T I O N WHICH C O N S T I T U T E S IT AS A S P E C I F I C T H I N G , IT R E C E I V E S FURTHER D E T E R M I N A T I O N S WHICH CONS T I T U T E IT S SECONDARY C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S . THE SECONDARY "17 D E T E R M IN A T I O N S ARE CALLED A C CIDE NT A L FORMS. 1 THAT WHICH CAUSES MATTER TO BE A TREE IS IT S S U B S T A N T IA L f o r m . T h a t w h i c h c a u s e i t t o b e a g r e e n t r e e , or a t a l l T R E E , OR A REDWOOD, E T C . , ARE IT S A C C IDE NT A L FORMS. "16 I n d e p e n d e n t h e r e d o e s n o t m e a n s e l f - c a u s e d . T h i s i s t h e e s s e n t i a l d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n A r i s t o t l e a n d T h o m a s on o n e h a n d , a n d S p i n o z a on t h e o t h e r . ^ A c c i d e n t a l d o e s n o t h e r e m e a n u n w a n t e d or u n c a u s e d . I t c o n n o t e s t h a t w h i c h " h a p p e n s t o " ( a d - c a d o ) A SUBSTANCE. 16 B . F o r m a s t h e S o u r c e o f O p e r a t i o n | I ' A c c o r d i n g to t h e h y l e m o r p h i c t h e o r y , a s u b s t a n c e i ! ] IS d e t e r m i n e d t o be t h e p a r t i c u l a r t y p e o f b e i n g t h a t i t I IS BY ITS PRIMARY OR S U B S T A N T IA L FORM. S l N C E A THING I CAN OPERATE ONLY TO THE EXTENT AND IN THE MANNER IN WHICHj ; I ; IT E X I S T S , THE FORM WHICH CAUSES A SUBSTANCE TO BE IN A | | PA RTICULAR MANNER IS ALSO THE SOURCE OF THAT SU BSTANCE'S t DETERMINATE A C T I V I T I E S . AGERE SEQUITUR ESSE. I A THING ACTS IN THE MANNER IN WHICH IT E X I S T S . A CAN-OPENER ACTS L I K E A CAN-OPENER BECAUSE IT IS A CAN-OPENER. A TREE ACTS L I K E A TREE BECAUSE I T IS A T R E E . S l N C E THE ACCIDENTAL FORM OF CAN-OPENER OR THE SUB ST A N T IA L FORM OF TREE MAKE THESE BEINGS TO £ £. IN T H EIR DETERMINATE MANNER, WE CAN DRAW THE CONCLUSION THAT T H E IR FORMS CAUSE THESE BEINGS TO ACT IN T H E I R R E S P E C T IV E DETERMINATE MANNERS. F orm i s t h e r e f o r e s e e n a s a s o u r c e of a c t i v i t y or SOURCE OF TENDENCY. I F THE FORM OF A TREE CAUSES THE TREE TO ACT IN A TREE MANNER, THE TREE-FORM IS THE SOURCE OF THE T E N D EN C IE S WHICH E X I S T IN THE T R E E . WHAT WE CALL A TREE IS A SUBSTANCE, THAT IS AN INDEPENDENT B E I N G , WHICH ACTS IN CERTAIN C O N S IS T EN T MANNERS. I T GROWS TO A CERTAIN H E I G H T , P E R I O D I C A L L Y PRODUCES LEAVES AND F R U I T , REPAIRS I T S CUTS , AND SO FORTH. To STATE THE SAME THING IN ANOTHER WAY, A TREE IS A SUBSTANCE WHICH HAS A T E N - DENCY TO GROW, REPRODUCE, HEAL, AND SO F O R TH. I MERELY MEAN HERE TO I N D I C A T E WHAT I MEAN WHEN I SAY THAT THE FORM IS THE SOURCE OF THE B E I N G ' S A C T I V I T I E S , BUT S I N C E | A C T I V I T I E S ARE THE PRODUCTS OF T E N D E N C I E S , THE FORM THAT I IS THE SOURCE OF THE B E I N G ' S A C T I V I T I E S IS ALSO THE | SOURCE OF THE B E I N G 1 S T E N D E N C I E S . j I t IS IN T H I S SENSE THAT FORM IS THE NATURE OF THE i B E I N G . T h e TERM "N A T U R E" IS HERE USED TO CONNOTE THE TYPE OF A C T I V I T I E S IN WHICH THE B EIN G ENGAGES. T H U S , IF I SAY THAT IT IS THE NATURE OF A CERTAIN TREE TO BEAR F R U I T , I MEAN THAT IT S FORM OR SOURCE OF A C T I V I T I E S CAUSES IT TO PRODUCE T H I S F R U I T . NATURE I S HERE FORM SEEN AS SOURCE OF A C T I V I T I E S . S l N C E THERE ARE PRIMARY AND SECONDARY FORMS, THERE ARE PRIMARY AND SECONDARY NATURES. FOR EXAMPLE, THE PRIMARY FORM OF A TREE IS THAT BASIC O R G A N IZ A T I O N OF THE MATTER OF THE TREE WHICH CAUSES IT TO BE A T R EE ; THAT I S , WHICH CAUSES I T TO GROW, RE PRODUCE, AND N O U R IS H . HOWEVER, THERE ARE SECONDARY FORMS WHICH ORGANIZE THE MATTER TO FURTHER S P E C I F I C D E T E R M I N A T IO N S SUCH AS BEING A P E A C H - T R E E , BL0 S S O M -B E A R IN G , S I X FOOT T A L L , AND SO FOR TH. To CARRY T H IS THOUGHT FURTHER , I WOULD SAY THAT THE PRIMARY NATURE OF THE TREE IS TO GROW, REPRODUCE, N O U R I S H , E T C . j BUT ITS SECONDARY NATURE WOULD BE TO PRODUCE A PEACH, OR A PEACH BLOSSOM, TO AFFECT A PHOTOGRAPHIC PLATE IN A " S I X - F O O T n MANNER AND D I S T I N G U I S H FROM HOW A FOUR-FOOT TREE WOULD SO AF FE C T, AND SO FORTH. i c. F o r m . P e r f e c t i o n , and. A c t | F orm i s t h e c a u s e o f t h e b e i n g ' s t e n d e n c y to be a n d ! ACT IN A PARTICULAR WAY. THE COMPLETION OF THE TENDENCY I IS CALLED THE PERFECTION OF A TENDENCY OR THE PERFECTION OF THE FORM. IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THE WORD " P E R F E C T I O N " IS UNDERSTOOD IN IT S BASIC ETYMOLOGICAL SENSE OF F U L F I L L M E N T , OR "CARRYING THRO UG H." THE CONNOTATION OF PE RFE CTI ON THAT I AM USING HERE IS BEST UNDERSTOOD IN THE L I T E R A L TRANSLATION OF THE L A T I N WORD P.ERF 1C E R E . FACERE MEANS TO DO, AND PERFI CERE WOULD MEAN TO DO TO C O M P L E T IO N , TO S A T I S F Y . NO DIREC T REFERENCE IS MADE TO ANY R E L I G I O U S OR MORAL NOT I ON OF P E R F E C T I O N . ONE CAN R EA D IL Y SEE HOW THE ETYMOLOGICAL B A S IS OF " P E R F E C T I O N " CAME TO IMPLY A R E L I G I O U S P E R F E C T I O N — A COMPLETE F U L F IL L M E N T OF MAN'S TENDENCY TO SEEK UNION W IT H GOD'S W I L L — BUT T H IS MEANING OF PE RFE CTION IS BROADER AND WILL CAUSE A CER TAIN A M B I G U I T Y IN A SUBSEQUENT CHAPTER WHEN I SPEAK OF MORAL E V I L . I WI LL HAVE TO ADMIT THAT MORAL E V I L IS SOMETIMES A PERFECT I ON BECAUSE IT F U L F I L L S A P A RTIC ULAR NEED OR TENDENCY; BUT I T IS A MORAL E V I L BECAUSE I T FRUSTRATES OR HINDERS THE PE RFE CTION OF MAN*S 19 A Q " v o c a t i o n a l ” t e n d e n c i e s , or m a n a s a w h o l e . T h e m o r e t r a d i t i o n a l w a y o f e x p r e s s i n g t e n d e n c y i s ! TO USE THE WORD POTE NCY . POTENCY FOR MY PURPOSE W I L L | |OENOTE TWO B A S I C USAGES. I WI LL REFER TO THE POTENCY OF |MATTER TO FORM— THAT I S , I W I L L REFER TO THE FUNDAMENTAL j .IN T E R C O N N E C T E D N E S S OF MATTER AND FORM; BUT I WILL ALSO I REFER TO POTENCY IN THE SENSE OF POWER. I W I L L E X P L A I N I T H I S LATTER USAGE F I R S T . On c e a b e i n g e x i s t s , i t e x i s t s w i t h c e r t a i n a b i l i t i e s ( a T R E E ' S A B I L I T Y TO GROW, N O U R I S H , E T C . ) . THESE P O T E N C I E S OR A B I L I T I E S ARE THE RESULT OF THE FORM DETER M I N I N G THE MATTER TO A PA RTIC ULAR TYPE OF E X I S T E N C E . BY " P O T E N C Y ” IN T H I S CASE, I MEAN THE TENDENCY OF A BEIN G TO ACT IN A P A R T IC U LA R MANNER. T he m o r e f u n d a m e n t a l u s a g e o f p o t e n c y i n t h e HYLEMORPHIC THEORY IS THE POTENCY OF MATTER TO FORM. S i n c e A r i s t o t l e a n d T h o m a s m a i n t a i n t h a t o n l y i n d i v i d u a l SUBSTANCES E X I S T , MATTER AND FORM ARE " P R I N C I P L E S " ( S O U R C E S ) OF B E IN G RATHER THAN B E IN G S IN T H E M S E L V E S . IN /IQ " V o c a t i o n " i s h e r e u s e d i n t h e s e n s e o f J o s e O r t e g a y Ga s s e t a n d o t h e r e x i s t e n t i a l i s t s w h o s p e a k of m o r a l i t y a s t h e f u l f i l l m e n t o f a v o c a t i o n o r l i f e p l a n . " I n S e a r c h o f Go e t h e fr o m W i t h i n , " T he D e h u m a n i z a t i o n of A r t a n d O t h e r Wr i t i n g s on. A r t a n d C u l t u r _ e . ( G a r d e n C i t y , 1 9 3 6 ) , p . 1 3 0 . OTHER WORDS, N E IT H E R MATTER NOR FORM E X I S T INDEPENDENTLY OF ONE ANOTHER. THE I M P L I C A T I O N OF T H I S WHICH I WISH TO POINT OUT IS THAT IN ANY CHANGE, S I N C E FORM IS THE D E T E R - j M I NATE OF THE CHANGE, MATTER MUST BE THE P O TE N TIAL P R I N C IP L E OF THE CHANGE. THAT IS TO SAY, WHEN A TREE CHANGES j TO ASHES, THE TREE-FORM CAUSED THE MATTER OF THE TREE TO j BE WHAT IT WAS, AND THE CARB O N -RE SID U E-FO R M ( A S H E S ) NOW i CAUSES THE SAME MATTER TO BE WHAT IT I S . T H U S , I DEDUCE THAT IN THE MATTER WHICH WAS A TREE THERE WAS A POTENCY j A TENDENCY TO BECOME A SH ES. POTENCY IN T H I S CASE REFERS TO THE FUNDAMENTAL TENDENCY OF MATTER TO CHANGE. S l N C E WE ARE AWARE OF A M U L T I P L I C I T Y OF CHANGES PO SSIBLE FROM A SING LE O R I G I N A L SUBSTANCE (TRE E BECOMES ASHES , BECOMES S O I L , BECOMES GRASS, BECOMES COW, BECOMES ST EAK, BECOMES MAN, E T C . ) , I INFER THAT MATTER J J j. POTENCY. IN OTHER WORDS, I T IS THE VERY NATURE OF MATTER TO UNDERGO CHANGE. Ma t t e r t h u s , d o e s n o t h a v e p o t e n c y ; i t j l s . p o t e n c y . I a m , o f c o u r s e , h e r e s p e a k i n g o f A r i s t o t l e ' s p r i m e m a t t e r ( i . e . , u n f o r m e d , u n s p e c i f i c m a t t e r ) , an d n o t s p e c i f i c , s e c o n d m a t t e r ( i . e . , d e t e r m i n e d , s p e c i f i c m a t t e r ) . I n t h e l i g h t of t h e a b o v e , I INFER t h a t t h e f u l f i l l m e n t , or p e r f e c t i o n o f a p o t e n c y , i s a c t . T h a t i s , j u s t as we can d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n a p o t e n t i a l an d an ACTUAL S I T U A T I O N , SO WE CAN D I S T I N G U I S H BETWEEN THE PO TE NTIAL AND ACTUAL BEING OR C H A R A C T E R IS T IC OF A T H I N G . T h e h y l e m o r p h i c t h e o r y i m p l i e s t h a t a l l f u l f i l l m e n t i s A C T U A L I Z A T I O N OR ACT. T HUS, 1 CONCLUDE THAT THE FORM j |WHICH CAUSES THE BEING TO BE WHAT IT IS IS THE " F I R S T ” i 1 9 ! ACT ' OR PERFECTION OR F U L F I L L M E N T OF THE TENDENCY OF |MATTER TO BE THAT PARTICULAR T H I N G . HOWEVER, S I N C E THE |NEW FORM OR F I R S T ACT CAUSES THE BEING TO HAVE MORE T E N - j O E N C I E S , THE F U L F I L L M E N T OF THESE TEN DENCIES PRODUCES i |SECOND ACTS. AS POTENCY IS TO ACT AND AS MATTER IS TO FORM, SO ESSENCE IS TO E X I S T E N C E . IN I T S FUNDAMENTAL PRESENTATION THE HYLEMORPHIC THEORY HOLDS THAT PRIME MATTER HAS A TENDENCY TO FORM. T H I S FUNDAMENTAL R E L A T I O N S H I P IS BROADENED TO SAY THAT POTENCY TENDS TO A C T U A L I Z A T I O N . A ct i s s e e n a s t h a t w h i c h i s , a d e t e r m i n a t e r e a l i t y . A SEED IS a PO TE NTIAL PLA N T. WHEN THE SEED GROWS AND TAKES ROOTS IT BECOMES AN ACTUAL PLANT. IT BEGINS TO E X IS T AS A PL A N T . P R E V I O U S L Y , I T E X IS T E D AS S E ED , NOW IT E X I S T S AS A PLA N T. I AM TRYING TO POINT OUT THE ID EN T I F I C A T I O N OF ACT AND E X I S T E N C E . As ACT IS THE F U L F I L L MENT OF POTENCY, SO E X IS T E N C E I S THE F U L F I L L M E N T OF ESSENCE. ^ ^ c f . A r i s t o t l e D e A n i m a . Book I I , 1 , 4 -1 2 A2 8 : " T h e f i r s t a c t u a l i t y o f a b o d y c a p a b l e o f v i t a l a c t i v i t i e s . " 22 A D I F F I C U L T Y R I S E S I M M E D I A T E L Y . ONE CAN SAY THAT POTENCY IS ORDERED TO ACT BECAUSE POTENCY E X I S T S IN THAT WHICH ALREADY E X I S T S IN A C T . FOR EXAMPLE AN OVUM IS A | POTE NTIAL FOETUS BUT AN ACTUAL OVUM. IN T H I S CASE, THERE i i I IS A POTENCY OF THE OVUM TO BE A F O E T U S , BUT THE POTENCY i E X IS T S IN AN ALREADY A C T U A L IZ E D B E I N G , NAMELY THE OVUM. i H o w e v e r , i t i s n o t as e a s y to say t h a t e s s e n c e ha s a I • # j TENDENCY TO E X IS T E N C E BECAUSE THERE ARE NO ESSENCES EXCEPT IN E X I S T I N G T H I N G S . THE POTENCY OF MATTER TO I : | FORM E X I S T S IN INFORMED M ATTER, BUT ESSENCE AS SUCH E X I S T S n o w h e r e . T h e r e f o r e , w h e n 1 u s e t h e e x p r e s s i o n " t h e t e n d e n c y OF ESSENCE TO E X I S T E N C E , " I MEAN TO USE IT AS A "SHORT-H AND" STATEMENT OF THE TENDENCY OF A POTENCY IN AN E X I S T I N G BEING TO BECOME ANOTHER B E I N G . FOR EXAMPLE, I WILL SAY THAT ALL E X I S T I N G THINGS ARE GOOD BECAUSE ALL THINGS THAT E X I S T S A T I S F Y AT LEAST E S S E N C E 'S TENDENCY TO e x i s t e n c e . S t a t e d m o r e c o m p l e t e l y , t h i s m e a n s t h a t a l l THINGS WHICH E X I S T ARE A S A T I S F A C T I O N OF A TENDENCY WHICH EX IS TED IN A PRIOR BEING TO BECOME A LATER B E I N G . T h e r e i s a n o t h e r p o s s i b l e m e a n i n g of " e s s e n c e ' s TENDENCY TO E X I S T E N C E . " ONCE ONE GRANTS THAT THE U N I VERSE IS THE PRODUCT OF A CREA TIVE I N T E L L I G E N C E , AS DO b o t h A r i s t o t l e a n d S t . T h o m a s , one c a n d e d u c e t h a t t h e ETERNAL " I D E A S " OF T H IN G S P R E - E X I S T IN THE M I N D OF GOD. 23 T h i s i s , o f c o u r s e , an a n t h r o p o m o r p h i s m . T h o m i s t p h i l o - 20 SOPHY WOULD HOLD T H A T , S I N C E GOD I S A S I M P L E B E I N G , THERE IS IN H lM NO D I S T I N C T I O N BETWEEN H l M S E L F AND H l S i d e a s . B ut T h o m a s d o e s s a y t h a t t h e k n o w l e d g e o f G od IS THE CAUSE OF T H I N G S : B u t IT MUST BE c o n s i d e r e d t h a t a n a t u r a l FORM, INASMUCH AS I T IS A FORM R E M A I N I N G IN THAT TO WHICH I T G IV E S E X I S T E N C E , IS NOT CALLED A SOURCE OF A C T I O N ; BUT I N A S MUCH AS I T HAS A TENDENCY TO AN A F F E C T . IN THE SAME WAY, AN I N T E L L I G I B L E FORM IS NOT CALLED A SOURCE OF AC TIO N BECAUSE IT IS A FORM IN THE UNDERSTANDING UNLESS AN I N C L I N A T I O N TO AN EFFECT WHICH OCCURS IF THE WI LL IS ADDED TO I T . . . | T IS NECESSARY THEN THAT GOD CAUSE T H IN G S THROUGH HlS I N T E L L E C T , BECAUSE THERE IS NO D I S T I N C T I O N b e t w e e n H i m s e l f a n d H i s i n t e l l e c t . 2 2 S i n c e t h e " m i n d ” o f G od i s t h e c a u s e o f a l l t h i n g s , t h e ESSENCES OF ALL T H I N G S COULD BE S A I D TO E X I S T ETERNALLY 20 S t . T h o m a s , S u m m a T h e o l q .g i a e .. I , 3 , 7 - 2 1 S u m m a T h e q l o g IA E -. I , 1 4 , 4 . 22 SE D CONS I DERANDUM EST QUOD FORMA NATURAL I S , INQUANTUM EST FORMA MANENS IN EO CUI DAT E S S E , NON NOMINAT P R I N C I P I U M A C T I O N I S ; SED SECUNDUM QUOD HABET I I N C L I NAT IONEM AD E F F E C T U M . E t S I M I L I T E R FORMA I N T E L L I — G I L I S NON NOMINAT P R I N C I P I U M A C T I O N I S SECUNDUM QUOD EST TANTUM IN I NTELL I G E N T E , N I S I ADJUNGATUR E| I N C H N A T I O AD E F F E C T U M , QUAE EST PER VOLUNTATE M. . . .MAN IFESTUM EST AUTEM QUOD DEUS PER IN TEL LEC TUM SUUM CAUSAT R ES , CUM SUUM ESSE S I T SUUM I N T E L L I G E R E . S t . THOMAS, SUMMA T H E O L O G I A E . I , 1 4 , 8 . 24- i n THE MIND OF GOD. T H U S , ANY ACTUAL E X I S T E N T IS THE F U LF I LL M E N T OF AN ESSENCE WHICH E X I S T S IN THE M IND OF Go d . i I To s u m m a r i z e : p o t e n c y , m a t t e r or e s s e n c e c a n be I i s e e n a s t e n d e n c i e s to c o m p l e t i o n . A c t , f o r m , a n d e x i s t e n c e CAN BE SEEN AS THE COMPLETION I T S E L F . j D. KN 0 WLE DGE— A NO THE HYLEMORPHIC THEORY | i W h e n one k n o w s , he o p e n s h i m s e l f up t o t h e o t h e r . ; K n o w l e d g e i s .t h e a w a r e n e s s o f t h e o t h e r as t h e o t h e r . Wh e n o n e k n o w s , h e b e c o m e s t h e o t h e r i n an i n t e n t i o n a l , N O N -P H YSIC A L MANNER. THAT I S , TO KNOW IS TO "B RIN G INTO THE S E L F " THE C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S OF THE N O N - S E L F . ANOTHER WAY OF SAYING T H I S IS THAT KNOWLEDGE IS THE RECEP TION OF THE FORM OF THE OTHER. S l N C E FORM IS THAT WHICH MAKES A THING TO BE WHAT IT I S , WHEN ONE SEES THE GREEN OF A WALL, H I S SENSE OF SIG H T IS DETERMINED BY THE SAME GREEN- DET ER MIN ATION OR FORM WHICH CAUSES THE GREEN WALL TO BE GREEN. Wh e n t h e h u m a n m i n d p r o d u c e s t h e i d e a o f g r e e n , i t a b s t r a c t s f r o m s e n s e e x p e r i e n c e s t h a t d e t e r m i n a t i o n OR FORM WHICH CH AR A C TE R IZ E S ALL EX PE RIEN CE S OF GREEN. 2 5 A r i s t o t l e , D e A n i m a . 4 1 7 a 2 3 - 4 - 1 7 * 2 25 T h i s n o t i o n o f k n o w l e d g e i s i m p o r t a n t fo r o u r p u r p o s e s BECAUSE, SIN C E FORM IS THE SOURCE OF TENDENCY AND KNOWLEDGE I S THE REC EP TION OF FORM, KNOWLEDGE IS THE 2 4 SOURCE OF T E N D E N C IE S IN A S E N T I E N T OR RATION AL B E I N G . I WILL ATTEMPT TO SHOW THAT " A C Q U IR E D " TASTES AND VALUES, AS OPPOSED TO "NATURAL" ONES, ARE THE RESULT OF KNOWLEDGE. E . R e s u m e o f t h e s e Me t a p h y s i c a l P r i n c i p l .e s .. O n E * S A N A L Y S IS OF CHANGE IS A DETERMINANT OF H IS TOTAL PH IL O S O P H IC A L P O S I T I O N . IF ONE HOLDS THAT ALL TH IN G S ARE IN A CONSTANT STATE OF F L U X , OR THAT CHANGE IS I N E X P L I C A B L E , THEN ONE WOULD HOLD THAT KNOWLEDGE AND VALUATION IS I M P O S S I B L E . | F A PHILOSOPHER HOLDS THAT NOTHING CHANGES, HE MUST HOLD THAT ALL KNOWLEDGE AND VALUES ARE " E T E R N A L . " THE A R I S T O T E L E A N - T h OMI ST IC HYLE~ MORPHIC THEORY IS A MID DLE P O S I T I O N BETWEEN THE CHAOTIC 2 4 QUAEDAM VERA ULTERI US MOVENT S E I P S A , NON SOLUM HA BITO RESPECTU AD EXECUTIONEM MOTUS, SED ETIAM QUANTUM AD FORMAM QUAE EST P R I N C I P I U M MOTUS, QUAM PER SE A C Q U I V - E N T . ET HUJUSMODI SUNT A N I M A L I A , QUORUM MOTUS P R I N C I P IUM EST FORMA NON A NATURA IND I TOR, SED PER SENS I AM ACC- E P T A . . . SED QUAMVIS HUJUSMODI A N I M A L I A FORMAM QUAE EST P R I N C I P I U M MOTUS, PER SENSUM A C C I P I A N T , NON TAMEN PER S E IP S A PRAE ST IT UUNT S I B I FIN EM SUAE O P E R A T I O N I S . VEL SUI MOTUS; SED EST E I S 1NDIT US A NATURA, CUJUS I N S T I N C T U AD A L I Q U I D AGENDUM MOVENTUR PER FORMAM SENSU APPREHENSAM. UNDI SUPRA T A L I A A N I M A L I A SUNT ILLA QUAE MOVENT S E I P S A , ETIAM H A B I T A RESPECTU AD F I N E M , QUAE S I B I P R A E S T I T U U N T . S umma T h e o l o g i a e . I , 1 8 , 5* w o r l d o f H e r a c l i t u s a n d t h e s t a t i c w o r l o o f P a r m e n i d e s . As A RESULT OF THE " M I D D L E " IN T E R P R E T A T IO N OF CHANGE, T H O M I S T I C AXIOLO GY OPENS I T S E L F TO BOTH T R AN S IT O R Y AND ETERNAL V A L U E S . F o r m i s t h e d e t e r m i n i n g f a c t o r a n d , t h u s , t h e u l t i m a t e I N T R I N S I C ^ E X PL A N AT IO N OF SUBSTANCES. FORM IS THEN THE FOUNDATION OF V A L U E . S l N C E KNOWLEDGE AS WELL AS GENERATION IS A SOURCE OF FORM, E S P E C I A L L Y IN THE HUMAN S I T U A T I O N , KNOWLEDGE IS AN IMPORTANT SOURCE OF VA LUE. IN F A C T , MOST VALUES ARE BASED ON KNOWLEDGE. F or m i s r e l a t e d to a c t a n d e x i s t e n c e . I t h u s e n d MY M E T A P H Y S IC A L I N Q U I R Y WIT H WHAT W I L L BE THE F IB S T PART OF MY CHAPTER ON V A L U E . THAT I S , VALUE IS I D E N T I C A L W IT H BEING BECAUSE THE PRIMARY OR S U B ST A N T IA L FORM CAUSES THE AGENT TO A C T , B U T, IN A C T I N G , THE AGENT TAKES ON TO H I M SELF A NEW LEVEL OF B E I N G . FORM I S THE SOURCE OF B E IN G IN AT L EA ST THREE WAYS. I T IS THE U L T I M A T E I N T R I N S I C SOURCE OF BEING AND A C T I V I T Y W I T H I N THE AGENT; IT IS THE CAUSE OF T E N D E N C I E S THEREFORE THE CAUSE OF PERFECTED T E N DENCIES OR NEW L E V E L S OF B E I N G ; AND IT IS THE CAUSE OF KNOWLEDGE, THEREFORE THE CAUSE OF NEW T E N D E N C IE S AND NEW LEVELS OF B E I N G . 25 ^AS OPPOSED TO AN U L T I M A T E E X T R I N S I C E X PL A N AT IO N s u c h as G o d . I ................................... | CHAPTER JWQ THE Q Q Q P QR .VALUE j t ! A . X he N a t u r e of V a l u e i n G e n e r a l T h e f u n d a m e n t a l m e a n i n g o f g o o d or v a l u e a c c o r d i n g t o T h o m i s t i c p h i l o s o p h y i s e n d or a i m . T h e g o o d , a c c o r d - < i i ng to A r i s t o t l e , i s t h a t at w h i c h a l l t h i n g s a i m . S t . T h o m a s d e v e l o p s t h i s n o t i o n b o t h p o s i t i v e l y a n d n e g a t i v e l y . N e g a t i v e l y , h e s a y s t h a t t h e r e a r e no i n s t a n c e s o f 2 a n y t h i n g s e e k i n g e v i l or d i s v a l u e . O f c o u r s e , one d o e s n o t a l w a y s a c t fo r h i s b e s t i n t e r e s t s , b u t w h e n e v e r o n e CHOOSES, ONE DOES SO IN THE L I G H T OF THE GOOD IN VO LVED, RATHER THAN ANY E V I L . FOR EXAMPLE, I F A D I A B E T I C D E C ID E S TO EAT IC E - C R E A M , HE OOES SO BECAUSE OF THE PLEAS8RT T A S T E , THE REFRESHING COOLNESS, OR EVEN PERHAPS THE S A T IS F A C T IO N OF A NEUROTIC WISH TO BE I L L , BUT NOT BECAUSE ICE-CREAM I S A DANGER TO H I S HEA LTH. I n THOMAS, ALL NOTIONS OF A P P E T I T E ANO VOLUNTARINESS IMPLY A TENDENCY TO ^ A r i s t o t l e , N i c h o m a c h e an E t.h i c s . 1 0 9 4 A2 . 2 NEC EST I N S T A N T I A DE Q U IB U S D A M , QUI APPETUNT MAL UM. Q u i a n o n a p p e t u n t m a l u s n i s i s u b r a t i o n e b o n i , i n q u a n t u m S C I L I C E T EX I ST I MANT IL L U D SON UM. IN D e CEM L I BROS E t h l c q r u m A r i s t o t e l i s A d N i c h q m a c h u m Expa_s_ixa. L i b e r I , L e c t i o i , # 1 0 . 27 ! A GOOD AS KNOWN.^ THERE ARE D I F F E R E N T ACTS OF THE W I L L , SUCH AS I N T E N T I O N , C H O I C E , OR E X E C U T I O N , P R E C I S E L Y B E - | CAUSE THERE ARE D I F F E R E N T WAYS IN WHICH THE GOOD CAN BE 4- ; KNOWN. P o s i t i v e l y , T h o m a s s h o w s t h a t s i n c e f o r m i s t h e SOURCE OF B EIN G AND A C T I V I T Y , IF ACTIONS WERE NOT D E S - 5 T I N E D FOR AN EN D, NO ACTION WOULD EVER TAKE PL ACE. E v e r y a g e n t a c t s f o r an e n d . T h i s e n d , a c c o r d i n g t o g T h o m a s , i s i d e n t i f i a b l e w i t h a g o o d . E v e r y e n d i s g o o d b e c a u s e a b e i n g w o u l d a c t f o r o n l y an e n d w h i c h i s s o m e h ow a p p r o p r i a t e to i t , e i t h e r r e a l l y or b y i m a g i n a t i o n . As we saw i n t h e p r i o r c h a p t e r , f o r m c a u s e s a b e i n g to ^ A g e n s a u t e m p e r i n t e l l e c t u m n o n d e t e r m i n a t S I B I F IN E M N I S I SUB R A TIO N S BON I , QUOD EST OBJECTUM VOLUN T A T I S ; ERGO ET AGENS PER NATURAM NON MOVETUR NEQUE AG I T PROPTER ALIQUEM FIN EM N I S I SECUNDUM QUOD EST BONUM. Summa C o n t r a G e n t e s . I l l , 3 . 4 Summa T h e o l o g i a n . I - I I , 8 - 1 7 , £ A § L S J J 1 * ^ I T E M , SI AGENS NON CONDERET AO ALIQUEM EFFECTUM DETERM I N A T U M , OMNES EF FEC TUS ESSENT El I N D I F F E R E N T E S . Q u o d a u t e m i n d i f f e r e n t e r s e h a b e t ad m u l t a n o n m a g i s UNUM EORUM OPERANTUS QUAM A L I U D ; UNDE A CONTIN GEN TE AD UTRUMQUE NON S E Q U IT U R A L I Q U I S EFFEC TUS N I S I PER A L I Q U I O QUOD DETERM I NETUR AD UNUM. I M P O S S I B I L E I G I T U R ESSET QUOD AGENT. SUMMA CONTRA G E N T E S . I l l , 2 . g B o n u m c o m m u n i t e r s u m p t u m . I n D e c e m L i b r q s E t h i s o r a m A r i s t o t e l i s ad N i c o m a c h u m E x p osi_TJ_q. L i b e r I , L e c t i o 1 , ‘1 1 . A C T . I n o t h e r w o r d s , f o r m " p r o d u c e s ” i n a b e i n g c e r t a i n T E N D E N C IE S TO BE F U L F I L L E D . THE F U L F I L L M E N T OF THESE T E N D E N C I E S IS THE PERFECTION*^ OF THE AGENT. THAT IS TO S A Y , THE AGENT I S MADE MORE C OMPL ET E, MORE IDEAL THAN IT WOULD BE HAD I T NOT AC TE D . ALL A C T I O N S , T H E N , ARE D I R ECTED TOWARD THE GOOD OR F U L F I L L M E N T OF THE ONE WHO A C T S . IN SUM, TO ACT IS TO ACT FOR A PURPOSE, AND TO ACT FOR A PURPOSE IS TO ACT FOR A GOOD. T h e m e t a p h y s i c a l r e a s o n w h y g o o d or v a l u e i s i d e n t i f i a b l e WITH END OR PURPOSE I S T H A T , M E T A P H Y S I C A L L Y , THE Q MEANING OF GOOD IS nKHAT WHICH S A T I S F I E S A D E S I R E . " D e s i r e i s u s e d h e r e t o c o v e r t h e s e v e r a l m e a n i n g s o f w o r d s s u c h a s " i n c l i n a t i o n , " " t e n d e n c y , " " a p p e t i t e , " " w i l l , " " h u n g e r , " " t a s t e , " a n d so f o r t h . T h a t w h i c h S A T I S F I E S ANY TENDENCY OF ANY SORT IS A GOOD. THE T E N D EN C IE S CAN BE N A TU R A L , SUCH AS P H Y S IC A L OR CHEMICAL ^ P e r f e c t i o n i s h e r e u s e d i n i t s e t y m o l o g i c a l s e n s e OF "THAT WHICH I S DONE C O M P L E T E L Y . " I t DOES NOT N E C E S S A R I L Y IMPLY ANY MORAL OR R E L I G I O U S SENSE OF P E R F E C T I O N . Q ' S u m m a T m e q l o g i a e t I , 8 0 , 2 . I s h a l l h e n c e f o r t h USE THE NOTION OF A S A T I S F A C T I O N OF A TENDENCY RATHER THAN THE S A T I S F A C T I O N OF A D E S I R E . THE TERM " D E S I R E " I M P L I E S TO US A CON SC IOUSNESS OF WHICH THE M EDIE VAL AUTHOR WAS UNAWARE. IT IS VERY STRANGE FOR US TO READ i n t h e S um m a T h e q l o g i a e t h a t f i r e h a s a d e s i r e to r i s e ( I , 8 0 , 1 ) BUT D E S I R E OR A P P E T I T E IS USED HERE BY S t . T h o m a s t o m e a n a n y i n c l i n a t i o n o r t e n d e n c y , n a t u r a l OR O T H E R W I S E . 50 CHANGES, D E S I R E S FOR FOOD, D R I N K , SE X, AND SO FORTH; OR THEY CAN BE E L I C I T E D OR A C Q U IR E D , SUCH AS THE T A S T E FOR L l E B F R A U M I L C H , O N E ' S I N T E R E S T IN P H IL O S O P H Y OR PREFERENCE f o r Mo z a r t o v e r T s c h a i k o w s k y . C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h e r e a r e GOODS WHICH ARE NATURAL BECAUSE THEY ARE THE S A T I S F A C T IO N S OF NATURAL T E N D E N C I E S , ANO THERE ARE GOODS THAT ARE A R T I F I C I A L L Y GOOD, BECAUSE THEY S A T I S F Y LEARNED OR E L I C I T E D T E N D E N C I E S . To UNDERSTAND T H I S , ONE MUST RECALL WHAT HAS BEEN S A I D IN OUR F I R S T CHAP TER : FORM IS THE SOURCE OF BEING AND THUS OF A C T I V I T Y . THERE ARE n N A T U - Q R A L " 7 FORMS OR SOURCES OF A C T I V I T I E S THAT ARE PART OF THE A G E N T 'S M A K E - U P . THERE ARE ALSO FORMS THAT ARE ACQUIRED E I T H E R THROUGH SENSE OR THROUGH I N T E L L E C T U A L AWARENESS. THE FORMS TOGETHER C O N S T I T U T E THE SOURCE OF E I T H E R THE NATURAL OR ACQUIRED T E N D E N C I E S M EN TIO N ED ABOVE. T h e S A T I S F A C T I O N OF a NATURAL TENDENCY I S CALLED A NATURAL GOOD; THAT OF AN ACQU IRED TEN DEN CY, AN ACQUIRED GOOD. T h o m a s w a s a s y s t e m b u i l d e r . By t h i s I m e a n t h a t HE WAS NOT S A T I S F I E D TO D IS C U S S ISO LATED P H I L O S O P H I C A L PROBLEMS BUT ATTEMPTED AN O V E R -A L L AND IN T ER C O N N EC T IN G SYSTEM OF I D E A S . PART OF THE TH O MA S TIC SYSTEM IS THE NOTIO N THAT THE U N I V E R S E , AND THUS ALL OBJECTS OF 31 V A L U A T I O N , ARE PRODUCTS OF A D I V I N E P L A N . I T FOLLOWS THEREFORE THAT THE D I V I N E PLAN DET ERMIN ES THE VALUE THAT E X I S T S IN T H I N G S . S l N C E GOD CAUSES ALL THIN GS TO E X I S T AND ACT, HE THEREFORE CAUSES THEM TO ACT TOWARD S P E C I F I C 10 GOALS. 11 V a l u e r e s i d e s i n t h e o b j e c t . Wh a t we c o n s i d e r to BE THE STRONGEST C O N T R I B U T I O N OF T H O M I S T I C M E T A P H Y S IC S TO VALUE THEORY IS THE COMMITMENT TO THE I N T R I N S I C INHERENCE OF VALUE IN AN O B J E C T . GOOD IS I N T R I N S I C TO THE O B J E C T . A M P L I U S , MANIFESTUM EST QUOD OMNIS A C T I O QUAE NON POTEST PERMANERE, CESSANTE I M P R E S S IO N E A L IC U J U S AGENT I S , EST AB I L L E AGENTE• . • • SI CUT AUTEM DEUS NON SOLUM D E D I T ESSE REBUS QUUM P R IM A ESSE IN E I S C A U S A T , I T A , NON SOLUM QUUM RES PR IM AE C O N D IT AE S U N T , E I S V IR T U T E S O P E R A T I V A S I N D I D I T SED SEMPER EAS IN REBUS CAUSAJ?; UNDE CESSANTE I N F L U E N T I A D I V I N A , OMNIS O PERATIO C ES S A RE T . SUMMA CONTRA G e n t e s . I I I , 6 7 . 11 OBJECT IS USED HERE IN THE T E C H N IC A L SENSE OF "THAT WHICH COMPLETES OR S A T I S F I E S A POWER." I T SHOULD NOT BE I D E N T I F I E D W I T H " T H I N G . " An OBJECT CAN BE ANY SORT OF R E A L I T Y OR ASPECT OF E X P E R I E N C E , E X I S T I N G OR NOT. A C A T , IF L O V E D , IS AN OBJECT OF L O V E . " S A L V A T I O N ” WHEN S T R I V E N FOR, IS AN O B JEC T. PERHAPS I T IS A F A I L U R E TO RECOGNIZE T H I S P A R T IC U LA R USAGE OF " O B J E C T " WHICH CAUSED G . E . Mo o r e t o c a r r y h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e n a t u r a l i s t i c FALLACY TO SUCH EXTREMES. WE A D M I T THAT NO " T H I N G " CAN BE I D E N T I F I E D W I T H THE GOOD, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE CANNOT USE A NEUTRAL TERM WHICH DOES NOT COMMIT US TO I D E N T I F Y I N G VALUE WITH A S P E C I F I C T H I N G . I BE L I E V E THAT T H I S N O T IO N OF OBJECT IS WHAT C ER TA IN CONTEM PORARY PH IL OS OPHE RS REFER TO BY " E X P E R I E N C E " WHEN THEY I N S I S T THAT VALUES R E S I D E IN E X P E R I E N C E . S E E : W l L L I A M H. W e r k m e i s t e r , " P r o l e g o m m e n a t o V a l u e T h e o r y , " P h i l q s o - PHY_ AND PHENOMENOLOGICAL R ES EA R C H f XIV, 3, 1 9 5 ^ , P • 2 9 5 - r ~ ~ " ' " ....................... .............................. .............~ 5 2 ‘ T h i s m e a n s t h a t t h e r e i s s o m e t h i n g a b o u t t h e v e r y n a t u r e i I !o f t h e o b j e c t t h a t m a k e s i t c a p a b l e o f s a t i s f y i n g t h e 1 ' I j I t e n d e n c i e s o f t h e s u b j e c t . I n a o o i t i o n t o g o o o n e s s b e i n g ; i n t r i n s i c t o t h e o b j e c t , i t m a y a l s o b e a s c r i b e d t o t h e j O B J E C T , B U T , FUNDAMENTALLY, GOODNESS IS ASC R IB ED TO AN OBJECT BY A MAN BECAUSE THE GOODNESS IS ALREADY THER E. T he DICHOTOMY BETWEEN THE I N T R I N S I C GOOONESS OF AN OBJECT AND I T S A SC R IB ED GOODNESS IS DUE TO THE FACT THAT MAN IS A L I M I T E D B E I N G . I f A MAN HAD PERFECT KNOWLEDGE THERE WOULD BE NO D I F F E R E N C E BETWEEN THE WAY THAT THINGS ARE AND THE WAY THAT THEY APP EA R, THE VALUE THAT IS IN AN OBJECT AND THE VALUE THAT IS A T T R I B U T E D TO AN O B J E C T . A l t h o u g h T h o m i s t i c r e a l i s m h o l d s t h a t t h e r e i s a u n i t y BETWEEN KNOWLEDGE AND R E A L I T Y , T H I S U N I T Y IS AN IDEAL TO BE STRIV EN FOR. MAN I S A L I M I T E D KNOWER AND AS SUCH WILL NEVER HAVE A PERFECT GRASP OF THE VALUE IN AN O B J E C T . S i n c e t h i s i s s o , t h e v a l u e t h a t h e a s c r i b e s t o a n o b j e c t W I L L D IF F E R FROM THE VALUE THAT IS I N T R I N S I C TO AN OBJECT. I d e a l l y , v a l u e m i g h t b e t h e s a m e f o r a l l s i t u a t i o n s b u t S I N C E MAN I S L I M I T E D , THE AWARENESS OF VALUE AS I N T R I N S I C TO AN OBJECT WILL D I F F E R FROM THAT OF THE VALUE AS AS C R IB E D TO AN OBJECT. TO G I V E AN EXAMPLE: I D E A L L Y THERE WOULD BE NO C O N F L I C T BETWEEN THE COMMON GOOD OF THE COM M U N I T Y AND THE PERSONAL GOOD OF THE I N D I V I D U A L IN THE c o m m u n i t y . H o w e v e r , s i n c e no i n d i v i d u a l i s w i s e e n o u g h 33 TO SEE AT ALL T I M E S THAT HE I S MADE PERSONALLY BETTER BY THE B E T T E R I N G OF THE COM MUNIT Y, THAT THE COMMON GOOO IS \ TRULY H I S PERSONAL GOOD, A VALUE C O N F L I C T CAN AND DOES A R I S E . THE I N D I V I D U A L WANTS ONE T H IN G BUT THE COMMUNITY NEEDS ANOTHER. T H I S C O N F L I C T IS DUE TO THE FACT THAT THERE ARE TWO L EVELS OF V A L U A TIO N AT WORK H E R E . THERE : IS THE I N T R I N S I C VALUE OF WHAT IS GOOO FOR THE C O M MU N IT Y, AND THEREFORE GOOD FOR THE I N D I V I D U A L IN THE CO M MUNIT Y; AND THERE IS THE A SC R IB ED VALUE OF WHAT IS A PERSONAL GOOD FOR THE I N D I V I D U A L . I W I L L CALL VALUE AS IT I S ASC R IB ED TO AN OBJECT " A X I O L O G I C A L V A L U E ” AND VALUE AS i 2 I T IS I N T R I N S I C TO THE OBJECT "ONTO LOGIC AL V A L U E . " T h e OBJECT OF THESE T E N D E N C IE S MAY BE A PERSON, A T H I N G , A PL A C E, AN A C T I O N , OR AN I D E A . THE STEAK WNICH S A T I S F I E S O N E ' S HUNGER IS A GOOD. THE BELOVED WHO S A T I S F I E S O N E 'S NEED TO LOVE AND NEED TO BE LOVED I S A GOOD. T h e V I R T U O U S ACT AND t h e v i r t u e I T S E L F ARE GOODS BECAUSE THEY S A T I S F Y O N E ' S TENDENCY TO UNION WITH GOD. THE 12 I R E A L I Z E THAT THE TERM " A X I O L O G I C A L VA LUE" I S REDUNDANT TO MODERN READERS, AS IS "O N T O L O G IC A L V A L U E" TO ' ONE T R A I N E D IN M E D IE V A L P H IL O S O P H Y . WHAT I AM A T TE M P T IN G TO CONVEY BY THESE TERMS IS THAT SOME VALUES SEEM TO BE THERE BECAUSE THE OBJECT IS VALUED ( A X I O L O G I C A L V A L U E ) W HIL E OTHER VALUES ARE THERE BECAUSE THE OBJECT I S . A X I O L O G I C A L VALUE REFERS TO THE RESULT OF THE V A L U A T I O N THAT A MAN PLACES ON AN O B J E C T . ONTOLOGICAL VALUE I S THE VALUE THAT IS I N T R I N S I C TO THE OBJECT AND THE CAUSE OF THE A G E N T 'S AWARENESS, THUS A X I O L O G I C A L V A L U E . | 34- m u s i c a l C O M PO S IT IO N S A T I S F I E S THE A R T I S T ' S TENDENCY TO ' # ! |SELF —EXPRESS I ON AND THUS IS A GOOD. WATER AS A S A T I S F A C T I O N OF T H I R S T IS A GOOD, AS IS THE ACT OF D R IN KING STHE WATER BECAUSE IT IS A MEANS TO THE S A T I S F A C T I O N OF i I jT HIRST AND R EC E I V E S IT S GOODNESS FROM THE GOODNESS OF THE WATER. THE F A L L I N G OF A ROCK IS A GOOD BECAUSE IT IS THE COMPLETION OR THE PE RFECTION OF A TENDENCY. A n i m p o r t a n t p o i n t i s to be m a d e h e r e . T h e g ood i s ! i i | " P E R F E C T I V E OF B E I N G , " OR THAT WHICH PERFECTS B E I N G . T H I S j jMEANS THAT THE GOOD " F I L L S UP" B E I N G . EACH BEING COMES INTO THE U N IV E RSE PERFECT IN IT S S P E C I E S , BUT NOT COMPLETE | IN ITS O P E R A T I O N . THAT I S , A DOG OR A MAN OR A STAR IS |TRULY A DOG OR MAN OR STAR FROM THE F I R S T MOMENT OF IT S i jEX I S T E N C E . IT IS COMPLETE IN IT S BEING OR WHAT S t . THOMAS | CALLS THE END OF B IR T H OR PR ODUCTION. BUT IT MAY NOT BE j ! [COMPLETE IN ITS OPERATION FOR SOME T I M E . A STAR IS COM- I j i 1PLETE IN I T S OPERATION WHEN IT NOT ONLY IS ALL THAT STARS j i (SHOULD B E, BUT ALSO WHEN IT DOES ALL THAT STARS SHOULD DO. I 7 I jWlTH IN A N IM A T E OBJECTS, SUCH AS A STAR, THE T I M E - L A P S E (BETWEEN PE R FE C TIO N OF BEING AND PE RFE CTI ON OF OPERATION ! ! 1 t I i I S I N F I N I T E S I M A L . PE R FE C TIO N OF BEING AND PERFECTION OF ! I i i ! [OPERATION ARE ALMOST INSTANTANEOUS. HOWEVER, THE CASE j i I !1S D I F F E R E N T WITH AN ANIMATE OBJECT. THE DOG IS PERFECT I ! ' ; I IN BEING AT THE F I R S T MOMENT OF ITS CONCEPTI 0 N - - T H A T IS j TO SAY, IT HAS THE DOG NATURE OR SOURCE OF A C T I V I T I E S . ! H o w e v e r , t h e d o g i s n o t p e r f e c t i n o p e r a t i o n u n t i l t h e ! PERIOD OF GEST ATION I S COMPLETED AND IT HAS LEARNED ALL j THOSE THINGS THAT IT MUST 0 0 . A MAN I S PERFECT IN S P E C IE S I OR NATURE OR B E IN G AT THE MOMENT OF H I S CONCEPTION; BUT HE IS NOT PERFECT IN OPERATION U N T I L ALL THE P O T E N T I A L I T I E S OF HIS VERY COMPLEX NATURE HAVE BEEN S A T I S F I E D . [Wh e n I s a y t h a t a go o d i s p e r f e c t i v e o f b e i n g , I m e a n THAT CER TAIN O B J E C T S , BE THEY ACTION S OR T H I N G S , CAN CAUSE THE F U L F I L L M E N T OF THE TENDEN CIES WHICH ARE NATURALLY IN THE AGENT. T h I S IS THOMAS'S D I S T I N C T I O N BETWEEN END OF NATURE AND END OF O PERATIO N. F or s i n c e good h a s t h e f u n d a m e n t a l m e a n i n g OF PERFECTION AND END, A DOUBLE GOODNESS ACCOMPANIES THE DOUBLE P E R FE C TIO N AND END OF A CREATURE. THERE IS A C E R TA IN PERFECTION OF A CREATURE ACCORDING TO WHICH I T P E R S I S T S IN ITS NATURE; AND T H I S IS THE END OF B IR T H OR PRODUCTION. HOWEVER, THERE IS ANOTHER PE RFE CTION WHICH FOLLOWS FROM I T S MOTION OR OPERATION AND T H I S IS THE END OF I T S MOTION OR O P E R A TIO N . 1 3 C um e n i m b o n u m h a b e t r a t i o n e m p e r f e c t i o n i s et F I N I S , SECUNDUM DUPLICEM PERFECT IONEM ET FINEM CREATURAS ATTE N DITU R DUPLEX EJUS B O N I T A S . A T T E N D I T U R EN IM QUAEDAM CREATURAE PE R FE C TIO SECUNDUM QUOD IN SUA NATURA P E R S I - S T I T , ET HAEC EST GENERATIO F I N I S AUT FACT I ON IS I P S I U S . A l i o m o d o , p e r f e c t i o i p s i u s a t t e n d i t u r , quam c o n s e q u i t u r PER SUUM MOTUM VEL OPERAT IONEM ET HAEC EST F I N I S MOTUS VEL OPERAT I ON I S I P S I U S . COMPENDIUM T h EQLOGIAE.. C I X . I WILL ATTEMPT TO E X P L A IN BY AN EXAMPLE. WHEN A MAN IS BORN, HE I S A COMPLETE HUMAN B EIN G IN THAT HE HAS ALL OF H I S HUMAN NATURE (SOURCE OF HUMAN POWER). HOWEVER, HE DOES NOT YET ACT IN THE WAYS WHICH WE A SSOCIA TE W IT H A MAN. IN OTHER WORDS, H I S POWERS MUST BE F U L F I L L E D . THE F U L F I L L M E N T OF THESE POWERS BY AN A C T I V I T Y OR IN ANOTHER PERSON OR IN A T H I N G , MAKES HIM **M ORE" OF A MAN IN THAT 14 HE COMES CLOSER TO ACTING AS A F U LL MAN. THOSE BEINGS WHICH E X I S T WITHOUT A D I S T I N C T I O N BETWEEN T H E I R END OF NATURE AND END OF MOTION ARE CALLED " S I M P L Y " GOOD. THE T erm " s i m p l y " h e r e m e a n s " a b s o l u t e l y " g o o d . Mo s t i n a n i m a t e OBJECTS ARE SIMP LY GOOD FROM THE B E G I N N I N G OF T H E IR e x i s t e n c e . Ho w e v e r , s i n c e o t h e r g o o d s c a n b e a s c r i b e d t o t h e m w h i c h t h e y m u s t b e m a d e to s e r v e , t h e y a r e n o t as SIMPLY GOOD AS a BEING WHO AT ALL TIM ES I S ALL THAT IT p o s s i b l y c a n b e . T h i s l a t t e r i s T h o m a s ' s n o t i o n o f t h e GOODNESS OF GOD. H e IS S I M P L Y , THAT IS TO SAY, I D E A L L Y , UNEQUIVOCALLY GOOD, AT ALL TIM ES AND UNDER ALL C IR C U M STANCES. S i n c e t h e g o o d i s p e r f e c t i v e of b e i n g , a g o o d OBJECT I S ANYTHING WHICH BRINGS ANY BEING TO ANY DEGREE OF PERFECTION OR F U L F I L L M E N T . THERE IS NO D IF F E R E N C E 1 4 PERFECTUM ENIM ET TOTUM, AUT SUNT ID EM , AUT FERE IDEM S I G N I F I C A N T . COMMENTARIUM IN OUQDECEM L lB R O S M e t a p h y s i c o r u m A r i s t o t e l i s S t a g i r i t a e . V. 18. BETWEEN A '" GOOD” AND AN n EN Dn OR PURPO SE. NATURE G I V E S 1 5 TO EVERY BEING A DYNAMISM ^ TO SEEK I T S OWN P E R F E C T I O N , WHICH ACTS CONSC IOUSLY OR U N C O N S C I O U SL Y . HERE IS A D IF F E R E N C E BETWEEN ONTOLOGICAL AND A X I O L O G I C A L VA LUE. IN THE CASE OF A X I O L O G I C A L OR A SC R IB E D V A L U E S , THE SUBJECT SEEKS AFTER IT S PE R FE C TI O N C O N S C I O U S L Y , IF NOT V O L U N T A R I L Y . HOWEVER, THE ONTOLOGICAL OR I N T R I N S I C VALUES CAN BE SOUGHT AFTER E I T H E R CONSC IOUSLY OR UN C O N S C IO U S L Y . St . T h o m a s s e e s n a t u r e a c t i n g in t w o d i f f e r e n t m a n n e r s . N a t u r e d i r e c t s a s u b j e g t t o s e e k a f t e r A GOOD THROUGH THE SUBJECT IT S E L F ( C O N S C I O U S L Y ) SUCH AS WHEN A MAN G U ID E S H I S OWN ACTION S AND C H O I C E S . A MAN R E A L I Z E S THAT A C ER T A IN FOOD IS GOOD FOR HIM AND VO LUN T A R I L Y S T R I V E S FOR I T . A DOG IS CON SCIOUS THAT A GOOD IS GOOD AND S T R I V E S FOR I T BECAUSE OF C O M PU L SIO N . THESE INST ANCES AGREE IN THAT IN BOTH CASES THE SUBJECT IS CONSCIOUS OF THE GOODNESS OF THE O B J E C T . HOWEVER, NATURE ALSO D IR E C T S A SUBJECT TO ACT U N C O N S C I O U SL Y . FOR EXAM PLE, A BABY W I L L CRY WHEN HE IS IN P A I N , BUT AT LEAST A VERY YOUNG BABY I S NOT YET AWARE THAT CRYING IS A MEANS OF A T T A I N I N G H E L P . T H I S IS A " B U I L T - I N ” TENDENCY TOWARDS a g o o d . I n a n i m a t e , v e g e t a t i v e , s e n s i t i v e a n d r a t i o n a l SUBJECTS ALL HAVE NATURAL DRIVES FOR THE GOOD THAT ARE ^ H e n r i R e n a r d , m£ t r e e t A g i r b y J o s e p h d e F i n a n c e , .EfoP.EAN Sfi.H.Q.PU1AN,, XXIV, 3, 1 9 4 ? , p . 1 7 3 . u n c o n s c i o u s . S e n s i t i v e s u b j e c t s i n a d d i t i o n h a v e o b j e c t s ! THAT ARE CONSCIOUSLY KNOWN AS GOOD AND RATIONAL SUBJECTS : IN ADDITION VOLUNTARILY STRIVE FOR THE CONSCIOUSLY KNOWN i iGOOD OR OBJECTS. T H IS IS THE TELEOLOGY THAT THOMAS TOOK f r o m A r i s t o t l e . A l l t h i n g s s t r i v e fo r a p u r p o s e b e c a u s e I ALL THINGS HAVE TENDENCIES THAT NEED TO BE S A T I S F I E D . A l l BEINGS TEND TO AN END I M P L I C I T L Y , BUT ONLY CONSCIOUS 1 6 BEINGS TEND TO AN END E X P L I C I T L Y . T h e r e i s a d o u b l e n o t i o n o f g o o d n e s s on t h e p a r t of A SUBJECT— THE PERFECTION OR GOODNESS OF ITS GENERATION OR EXISTENCE AND THE PERFECTION OR GOODNESS OF ITS MOTION OR A C T I V I T I E S ; SO THERE IS A TR IP L E NOTION OF GOODNESS ON THE PART OF THE OBJECT. An OBJECT IS GOOD FROM THREE POINTS OF VIE W . IT IS PR IM ARILY GOOD BECAUSE IT E X IS T S ; THAT I S , THERE IS A GOODNESS INHERENT IN IT BECAUSE IT S A T I S F I E S ITS OWN TENDENCY TO E XIST AS A CERTAIN TYPE OF B E IN G . IT IS SECONDARILY GOOD BECAUSE IT HAS REACHED A A £L Q uo d a u t e m d i c i t " Q u o d o m n i a a p p e t u n t " no n e s t INTELLIGENDUM SOLUM SI HABENTI BUS COGNITIONEM, QUAE AP- PREHENDUNT BONUM, SED ETIAM DE REBUS CARENTI BUS COGNI T I O N S , QUAE NATURAL I APPETITUS TENDUNT IN BONUM, NON QUASI COGNOSCANT BONUM, SED QUID AB ALIO COGNOSCENTI MOVENTUR AD BONUM, S C I L I C E T EX ORDI NAT I ONE D I V I N I IN T EL — ^ LECTUS. I N PEC EM L I BROS E.T H I C.Q.R.UM _Ar I STQTEL I S-.-AJ2. N i c h q m a c h u m E x p o s i t i q . L i b e r I , L e c t i o 1 , # 1 1 . 59 LEVEL OF OPERATION OF I T S OWN POWERS; AND IT IS T H I R D L Y GOOO BECAUSE I T PERFECTS ANOTHER S U B JE C T. IN OTHER WORDS, ANY E X I S T I N G T H I N G CAN BE LOOKED AT AS E I T H E R A SUBJECT OR AN OBJECT. IF WE TAKE IT AS A SU B JE C T, IT HAS TWO LEVELS OF GOODNESS, THE GOOD OF E X IS T E N C E AND OF THE PE RFE CTION OF IT S POWERS. TAKEN AS AN O B JE C T , T H I S SAME T H IN G ACQUIRES A T H IR D LEVEL OF GOODNESS, AN ASC RIB ED GOODNESS, BECAUSE IT PERFECTS THE POWERS OF ANOTHER SU B JE C T. FOR EXAMPLE, A CHILD E X I S T S ; I T THUS HAS ONTOLOGICAL GOODNESS. He GROWS INTO A MAN AND ACQUIRES THE POWERS THAT A MAN SHOULD HAVE; AND AS EACH OF THESE POWERS IS PERFECTED HE ACQUIRES A NEW LEVEL OF GOODNESS, B u t WHEN a WOMAN FALLS IN LOVE WITH H I M , HE NOW HAS A T H I R D TYPE OF GOODNESS. |N A D D I T I O N TO THE GOOONESS OF B I R T H AND E X I S T E N C E , THE GOODNESS OF THE PERFE CTION OF POWERS, HE NOW ALSO HAS A GOODNESS ASCRIBED TO HIM BY THE WOMAN. HE HAS BECOME AN OBJECT OF HER LOVE. An OBJECT IS DESIR ED OR LOVED IN I T S FUNCTION OF PERFE CTING THE SU B JEC T. S i n c e t h e good i s i d e n t i f i e d w i t h f u l f i l l m e n t of P O T E N C I E S , I T CAN BE I D E N T I F I E D WITH E X IS T E N C E OR ACT. NOW ALL THIN GS DES IR E TO BE IN ACT ACCORDING TO T H E I R MODE! WHICH IS EV ID EN T FROM THE FACT THAT EV ERYTHING BY IT S NATURE SHRINKS 40 FROM COR R UPTIO N , WHEREFORE THE E S S E N T IA L MEANING OF THE GOOO IS THAT WHICH IS IN A CT• ; T h i s m e a n s t h a t i n e a c h t h i n g w h i c h e x i s t s n a t u r e s u p - i p l i e s c e r t a i n p o t e n c i e s . T h e a c t u a l i z a t i o n o f t h e s e POTENCIES IS A GOOD, HERE WE SEE THE I N T R I N S I C RELAT I O N S H I P BETWEEN THE GOOONESS OF THE OBJECT AND OF THE SUB JECT. AN OBJECT IS GOOD BECAUSE THE SUBJECT ASCRIBES i GOODNESS TO I T ; AS THE OBJECT PERFECTS THE POWERS OF THE SU BJE CT, THE SUBJECT IS I T S E L F MADE BETTER, OR GIVEN A NEW LEVEL OF E X IS T E N C E OR ACT. LET ME STATE T H I S IN ANOTHER WAY. A MAN COMES INTO THE WORLD COMPLETE IN NATURE (SOURCE OF A C T I V I T I E S ) BUT INCOMPLETE IN H I S USE OF THESE A C T I V I T I E S , OR INCOMPLETE IN O P E R A T I O N . H e HAS A CERTAIN LEVEL OF GOODNESS ALREADY, BECAUSE OF H IS EX IS TE NC E AND BECAUSE OF THE POWERS THAT HE HAS ALREADY PERFECTED. H e SEES THAT G E TTING A COLLEGE DEGREE CAN FURTHER PERFECT H I M ; THUS HE A T TR IB U T ES TO THE COLLEGE DEGREE A GOODNESS. AFTER HE HAS A T T A IN E D THE DEGREE, H E, H I M S E L F , NOW HAS H I S OWN NEW INCREASED LEVEL OF GOODNESS BY VI R T U E OF THE FACT THAT HE HAS A T TA IN E D H I S GOAL. ^ O M N I A AUTEM APPETUNT ESSE ACTU, SECUNDUM MODUM SUUM; QUOD PATET EX HOC, QUOD UNUMQUODQUE SECUNDUM NATURAM SUAN REPUGNAT C O R R U P T I O N ). ESSE I G I T U R ACTU BONI RAT IONEM C O N S T I T U I T . SUMMA CONTRA G E N T E S . I , 5 7 - j * K l | B . T h e C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o r V a l u e i T h e f i r s t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f v a l u e t h a t we w i l l ; d i s c u s s i s i t s u n i v e r s a l i t y . U n i v e r s a l i t y i s a c o n s e q u e n c e OF THE ONTOLOGICAL VA LUE. I HAVE S A I D PRE VIOUSLY THAT ACT IS SYNONYMOUS WITH GOOD; AND SINCE ALL THINGS THAT E X I S T ARE IN A C T , ALL TH IN G S THAT E X I S T ARE g o o d . T h i s r a d i c a l o p t i m i s m o f T h o m i s t i c m e t a p h y s i c s I M P L I E S THAT NO MATTER HOW MUCH E V I L IS CAUSED BY AN 8 r“ OBJECT, IT IS S T I L L B A S IC A L LY GOOD. EVEN THE D E V I L , IF HE E X I S T S , IS 0 N T 0 L 0 G I C A L L Y GOOD. THAT IS WHAT CAN BE CALLED ONE OF THE PARADOXES OF V A L U A T I O N , NAMELY THAT A THING WHICH IS B A S IC A L L Y GOOD HAS E V I L WITH I T . OTHER THAN G od THERE IS NO P E R FE C TL Y , THAT I S , ABSOLUTELY, GOOD b e i n g . O n l y God i s c o m p l e t e , t h a t i s , w i t h o u t p o t e n c i e s TO BE P E R F E C T E D . ^ T H I S I M P L I E S THAT ALL OTHER T H IN G S HAVE SOME DEGREE OF FRUSTRATION OR E V I L IN V O L V E D . BUT EVERYTHING TO THE EXTENT THAT IT E X I S T S CONTAINS SOME g o o d . As S t . T h o m a s s a y s , g o o d n e s s a d d s n o t h i n g to BEING IN R E A L I T Y . A CAR BECOMES NO MORE REAL BY BEING Om n e e n i m e n s , i n q u a n t u m e s t ENS, EST IN ACTU, ET QUODAMMODO PERFECTUM, Q U IA OMNIS ACTUS P E R FE C TIO q u a e d a m e s t . . . . U n d e s e q u i t u r o m n i s e n s , i n q u a n t u m H UJUSM O DI, BONUM E S T . SUMMA T h E Q L O G I A E . I , 3 - 1 % M U 1 A ■ -Tas.ft.u0 ,9 I AS., 1 , 6 , 3 - DESIRED BY A PR OS PECTIV E BUYER. An UNDERSTANDING OF T H IS PO IN T IS E S S E N T I A L TO THE UNDERSTANDING OF T H O M I S T I C VALUE TH EORY. THERE IS A D IF F E R E N C E IN THE WAY WE CON C E IV E THE GOOD IN AN OBJECT. WE CAN CONCEIVE OF THE GOOD IN THE OBJECT AS I N T R I N S I C A L L Y THERE OR I T I S THERE BECAUSE I T IS A S C R I B E D , BUT THERE IS NO D IF F ER EN C E IN THE GOOD I T S E L F . iN OTHER WORDS, A CAR IS GOOD, WHETHER OR NOT SOMEONE RECOGNIZES THE GOODNESS OF I T . AFTER SOMEONE DOES RECOGNIZE THAT GOODNESS BOTH LEVELS OF VALUE ARE R EC O G N IZ E D, BUT AS SA ID IN THE B E G I N N I N G , THE D I S T I N C T I O N BETWEEN THESE LEVELS OF VALUE IS DUE TO THE WEAKNESS OF OUR KNOWLEDGE. ONE OF THE C H I E F MIS U N D ER STA ND IN G S OF T H O M I S T I C MORAL THEORY IS DUE TO THE F A IL U R E TO GRASP T H I S p o i n t . Wh e n i t i s h e l d t h a t l y i n g , for e x a m p l e , i s e v i l , WHAT IS MEANT IS THAT L Y IN G BY IT S VERY NATURE FRUSTRATES THE TEN D EN C IE S OF MAN. A n I N D I V I D U A L MAN MAY NOT BE AWARE OF T H I S FRUS TRATION BUT IT IS S T I L L TH ER E . THE SAME HOLDS TRUE FOR THE GOOD. U L T I M A T E L Y THERE IS ONLY ONLY ONE TYPE OF GOOD, THE I N T R I N S I C GOOD, OR WHAT I HAVE CALLED THE ONTOLOGICAL V A L U E. BUT BECAUSE WE CANNOT ALWAYS SEE THE GOOD IN AN OBJECT, ! D I S T I N G U I S H BETWEEN THE GOOD AS IT IS IN THE OBJECT AND THE GOOD AS WE ASC RIBE I T TO THE OBJECT. T h i s u n i v e r s a l i t y of t h e g o o d i s b a s e d on w h a t i s CALLED THE TRANSCENDENTAL NOTION OF THE GOOD* THE " T R A N - SC ENDENTALS" ARE THE WAYS THAT BEING OR E X I S T I N G T H I N G S , PRESENT THEMSELVES TO U S . WHEN THINGS ARE PRESENTED AS REAL, THAT I S , AS OTHER THAN T H E I R CAUSES, AND OTHER THAN N O T H I N G , BEING IS KNOWN UNDER THE TRANSCENDENTAL OF “ t h i n g . ” Wh e n t h i s t h i n g i s p r e s e n t e d i n i t s u n i q u e n e s s , ITS OTHERNESS FROM OTHER T H I N G S , WE KNOW IT UNDER THE TRANSCENDENTAL OF “ S O M E T H I N G . " WHEN BEING PRESENTS IT S E L F TO US IN SUCH A WAY THAT WE ARE CONSCIOUS OF ITS KNOWABIL I T Y , WE KNOW I T UNDER THE TRANSCENDENTAL NOTION of " t r u e . " F i n a l l y , w h e n b e i n g i s p r e s e n t e d to us as D E S I R A B L E , OR P E R F E C T I V E , WE KNOW IT AS " G O O D . " THE GOOD I S THEN B E I N G PRESENTED OR RECEIVED IN A NON- 20 C0GN0SC I T I V E WAY. T H I S SEEMING CONTRADIC TIO N MEANS THAT WE ARE AWARE OF THE R E A L I T Y PERFECTING US AND WE ARE AWARE OF I T P R E C I S E L Y IN I T S CAPACITY OF PE RFECTING US. | N OTHER WORDS, THERE IS A REFLEX AC TIO N HERE. WE ARE PERFECTED BY THE GOOD, THEN WE ARE AWARE OF THE GOOD AS P E R F E C T I V E RATHER THAN AS MERELY COGN0 S C I T I V E . TO SAY THE SAME T H I N G IN ANOTHER WAY, THE TRANSCENDENTAL NOTION OF TRUE REFERS TO A BEING WHICH PERFECTS THE 20 E l i z a b e t h G. S a l m o n , T h e Good i n E x i s t e n t i a l MEIAE.H.X.SLI,.C.$»i ( M i l w a u k e e , 1 9 5 3 ) , p - 7 3 . SPEC U LATIV E I N T E L L E C T WHICH SEEKS AN AWARENESS OF THE OTHER FOR IT S OWN SAKE. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE TRAN SCENDENTAL NOTION OF THE GOOD REFERS TO THE P E R FE C TIO N OF THE PR ACTICAL I N T E L L E C T WHICH DEALS WITH AN AWARENESS OF THE OTHER FOR THE SAME OF USE. S l N C E ANY BEING CAN BE PRESENTED TO THE M IN D AS D E S I R A B L E , ANY BEING CAN BE PRESENTED TO THE M IND AS GOOD. H e r e we h a v e a r a d i c a l s u b j e c t i v i s m . A l l t h i n g s ARE GOOD BECAUSE THEY ARE PRESENTED TO THE MIND AS d e s i r a b l e . H a p p i l y , t h i s s u b j e c t i v i s m i s t e m p e r e d b y THE ONTOLOGICAL NOTION OF THE GOOD. THE P O S I T I O N COMES TO T H I S : EVERYT HING IN E X IS T E N C E I S GOOD. I T IS GOOD FOR TWO REASONS. THERE I S THE PRIMARY GOOD WHICH COMES WITH E X IS T E N C E WHICH WE HAVE CALLED THE ONTOLOGICAL LEVEL OF VA LU E. IN A D D I T I O N , THERE IS ANOTHER SORT OF GOODNESS THAT COMES BECAUSE GOODNESS IS ASC RIBED TO THE OBJECT, OR BECAUSE THE M IN D SEES IT AS GOOD. T H I S ASC RIBED GOODNESS DOES NOT O B L IT E R A T E THE E X IS T E N C E OF O B J E C T IV E VALUES. T h e r e a r e o b j e c t i v e v a l u e s b e c a u s e t h e r e a r e o b j e c t i v e NATURES TO BE PERFECTED; BUT VALUES ARE ALSO S U B J E C T I V E BECAUSE THE L I M I T A T I O N OF OUR KNOWLEDGE DOES NOT ALWAYS ALLOW US TO BE AWARE OF WHAT REALLY PERFECTS OUR NATURES, OR EVEN WHAT OUR NATURES TRULY ARE. S i n c e t h e o b j e c t i v i t y o f v a l u e i s s u c h a f u n d a m e n t a l N O T I O N , I WOULD L I K E TO REPEAT I T . ALL VALUES ARE O B J EC T IV E BECAUSE ALL THINGS ARE GOOD. NOT ONLY DO ALL T H IN G S HAVE THE GOODNESS OF GE NERATION BUT ALL THINGS ARE GOOD AS OBJECTS TO PERFECT POWERS. HOWEVER, AND T H I S IS THE IMPORTANT P O I N T , THE P E R F E C T I B I L I T Y WHICH AN OBJECT HAS, IS THERE BECAUSE I T WAS DESIGNED IN SUCH A WAY AS TO PERFECT A POWER. U L T I M A T E L Y , A X I O L O G I C A L VALUE DEPENDS ON ONTOLOGICAL VA LU E. To LOOK AT THE N O T IO N OF THE U N I V E R S A L I T Y OF THE GOOD MORE M E T A P H Y S I C A L L Y , WE MUST EXAMINE THE R E L A T I O N S H I P BETWEEN ESSENCE AND E X I S TEN CE. T h e r e i s a b a s i c r e a l i s t i c c o m m i t m e n t i n T h o m i - s t i c m e t a p h y s i c s . F or t h i s r e a s o n t h e n o t i o n s o f e s s e n c e AND E X I S T E N C E , JUST AS MATTER AND FORM, MUST BE C O N S I DERED C O R R E L A T I V E L Y . ANY ATTEMPT TO D IS CUSS THE ONE APART FROM THE OTHER IS AT BEST A M I S I N T E R P R E T A T I O N , AT WORST A R A TI O N A L IS M OR A S C E P T I C I S M . To CONSIDER ESSEN CES APART FROM E X I S T I N G THIN GS LEADS TO CARTESI AN I S M , AND TO CONSIDER EX IS T E N C E APART FROM ESSENCE LEADS TO THE ABSURDITY OF CER TAIN E X I S T E N T I A L I S T S . E s s e n c e i s t h a t w h i c h m a k e s a t h i n g to be w h a t i t I S . So T HAT, ESSENCE APART FROM E X I S T E N C E IS A CONTRA D I C T I O N — A THAT WHICH I S , BUT IS NOT. S l N C E ESSENCE IS THAT WHICH MAKES A THING BE, ANY E X I S T I N G THING IS A PERFECTED ESSENCE. THAT I S , THE NOTION OF ESSENCE INCLUDES THE NOT ION OF A TENDENCY TO E X IS T E N C E SO THAT WHEN THE BEING ACTUALLY DOES E X I S T , T H I S TENDENCY IS 4 6 I i ; i PERFECTED AND E S S E N C E 'S TENDENCY TO BE A D E F I N I T E THIN G IS COMPLETED OR PERFECTE D. THEREFORE EVERY E X I S T I N G THING IS GOOD. I T IS IMPORTANT HERE TO REMEMBER THAT WE ARE SPEAKING OF PRIMARY OR ONTOLOGICAL GOODNESS. A S I N FUL MAN I S A GOOD MAN INASMUCH AS HE E X I S T S . HE HAS ONTOLOGICAL GOODNESS, BUT HE DOES NOT POSSESS A SECONDARY VOLUNTARY GOODNESS, NAMELY MORAL GOODNESS. I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o c o n s i d e r T H I S U N I V E R S A L I T Y OF GOODNESS ON THE ANALOGY OF A R T I F A C T S . A DOG HOUSE IS A GOOD DOG HOUSE I F I T CORRESPONDS TO THE IDEAL PLAN OF THE DOG HOUSE IN THE B U I L D E R ' S M I N D . THE COMPLETED DOG HOUSE ( E X I ST ING ‘ ES SENCE) HAS PERFECTED THE PLAN ( E S S E N C E ) IN THE M I N D OF THE B U I L D E R , AND IS THUS GOOD. IT IS A M IX T U R E OF GOOD AND E V I L TO THE EXTENT THAT I T FALLS SHORT OF CORRESPONDING TO THE B U I L D E R ' S DES IGNS AND TO THE EXTENT THAT THE BUILDER WAS H I M S E L F D E F I C I E N T IN H I S D E S I G N S . AS IS WELL KNOW S t . THOMAS THINKS THAT THE E X IS T E NC E OF GOD I S A P H I L O S O P H I C A L L Y PROVEN FACT. H e THUS E X P L A IN S THE U N I V E R S A L I T Y OF GOODNESS ON T H I S PLANE a l s o , E v e r y e x i s t i n g t h i n g i s g ood t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t I T CORRESPONDS TO THE D I V I N E PLAN FOR THAT T H I N G , OR TO THE EXTENT THAT IT A C TI V A T E S THE ESSENCE OR FORM OF THAT THING IN THE MIND OF GOD. A FREE CREATURE SUCH AS A MAN IS CAPABLE OF PERFE CTING H I M S E L F THROUGH MORAL A C T I V I T Y . L i v i n g b e i n g s o t h e r t h a n m a n p e r f e c t t h e m s e l v e s by GROWTH, IN A N I M A T E OBJECTS 00 NOT BECOME ANY MORE PERFECT j THAN THEY ARE AT THE T I M E OF T H E I R PRODUCTIO N. S l N C E EVERYTHING THAT E X I S T S WAS CREATED EITH E R D IR E C T L Y OR I N D I R E C T L Y BY GOD, EV ERYTHIN G THAT E X I S T S IS A F U L F I L L MENT OF A D I V I N E PLAN OR ESSENCE, AND THUS IS A GOOD. T h i s u n i v e r s a l i t y o f g o o d n e s s d o e s n o t i m p l y t h a t ALL THINGS ARE MORALLY GOOD OR EVEN B E N E F I C I A L TO MAN. T h e w i n d s a n d r a i n w h i c h m a k e u p a h u r r i c a n e a r e g o o d , BUT NOT VERY B E N E F I C I A L TO THE PEOPLE WHOSE HOMES HAPPEN TO BE IN IT S PATH. EVERY PERSON THAT E X I S T S AND EVERY POWER OF EVERY PERSON, AND EVERY A C T U A L I Z A T I O N OF EVERY POWER, IS GOOD; BUT SOMETIMES THE A C T U A L I Z A T I O N S OF CER TAIN POWERS CAN BE MORALLY BAD. FOR EXAMPLE, A MAN I S GOOD AND H I S STRENGTH OF HAND IS GOOD, BUT USING H I S STRENGTH OF HAND TO K I L L ANOTHER MAN IS MORALLY E V I L . T h e ACT I T S E L F IS A S A T I S F A C T I O N OF CERTAIN TENDENCfE S OF THE MUSCLES IN H I S ARM, AND THUS IS GOOD. THE A C T , PERHAPS, IS ALSO A S A T I S F A C T I O N OF A CERTAIN PSYCHOLO G IC A L TENDENCY TO "GET R ID 0 F n AN ENEMY, AND THUS IS A g o o d . Ho w e v e r , t h e a c t i s a l s o a f r u s t r a t i o n of t h e v i c t i m ' s TENDENCY TO PERSEVERE IN L I F E , AND THUS IS AN e v i l . T he a c t i s a l s o a f r u s t r a t i o n of t h e m u r d e r e r ' s TENDENCY TO UN LON WITH GOO, AND THUS IS A MORAL E V I L . E v i l i s h e r e c o n s i d e r e d as a f r u s t r a t i o n or a p r i v a t i o n of a p o s s i b l e g o o d . A l l t h i n g s i n a s m u c h as t h e y e x i s t ARE GOOD, BUT SINCE THE TENDENCIES OF ONE MAN CONFLICT WITH THE TENDENCIES OF ANOTHER MAN, AND S IN C E , IN FACT, TWO LEVELS OF TENDENCIES W IT H I N THE SAME MAN C O N F L IC T , WE HAVE A MIXTURE OF GOOD AND E V I L . T H I S IS WHY ONE CONTEMPORARY WRITER SEES TRAGEDY AS THE BASIC ART FORM. IT EXPRESSES THE COMMON HUMAN S IT U A T IO N OF CONFLICT BETWEEN GOOD AND E V IL AND, WHAT IS EVEN MORE COMMON BUT METAPHYSICALLY THE SAME, THE CONFLICT BETWEEN LEVELS OF GOODS OR VALUES. The SECOND CH ARACTERISTIC OF VALUE IS IT S INHERENCE IN T H IN G S . L e t US RECALL THE T H O M IS T IC NOTION OF AN OBJECT. AN OBJECT IS THAT WHICH PERFECTS OR COMPLETES A POWER OF A SUBJECT. THUS, A CAT IS AN OBJECT OF A KNOWING ONLY WHEN SOME KNOWER ACTUALLY SENSES, REMEMBERS, IMAGINES OR THINKS OF A CAT. ICE-CREAM IS AN OBJECT OF HUNGER ONLY WHEN AN A P P E T I T I V E BEING ACTUALLY DESIRES ICE-CREAM. AT THIS P O I N T , IT SHOULD BE OBVIOUS JUST WHAT THE P O SIT IO N CONCERNING THE GOOD IS . GOOD E X IS T S IN THE OBJECT, BUT EX IST S IN THE OBJECT ONLY BECAUSE THE OBJECT IS CAPABLE OF S A T I S F Y I N G , OR ACTUALLY DOES S A T I S F Y , SOME TENDENCY IN A SUBJECT. In F A C T , THERE IS A "TENSION*1 IN THE A P P E T I T I V E S I T U A T I O N . THE D I S T I N C T I O N BETWEEN ONTOLOGICAL AND A X IO L O G IC A L VALUES TEACHES US THAT THE VALUE IS IN THE OBJECT AT ALL TIM ES BUT IS THERE BECAUSE THERE IS SOME C H A R A C T E R IS T IC ABOUT THE OBJECT THAT MAKES IT CAPABLE OF A TTRACTIN G A SUBJECT TO DESIR E I T . T H I S SOUNDS STRANGELY L I K E A TAUTOLOGY, BUT IT IS NOT; VALUE 2 1 IS IN AN OBJECT BECAUSE THE OBJECT IS D E S IR A B L E . BUT THERE IS SOME Q U A L I T Y ALREADY IN THE OBJECT WHICH MAKES IT CAPABLE OF BEING D E S I R E D . WHEN A SUBJECT COMES INTO CONTACT WITH I T , THE SUBJECT REC OGNIZES THE DESIRABLEN ES S OF T H I S Q U A L I T Y , THEN ASC R IB ES VALUE TO THE OBJECT. T he o b j e c t i v i s m o f v a l u a t i o n d e p e n d s u l t i m a t e l y on THE FACT THAT THOMAS HOLDS A " R E A L I S T I C 15 V IEW OF KNOW- 22 LEDGE. TO KNOW IS TO BECOME THE OT HER . S l N C E THE MIND CAN BECOME AWARE OF OBJECTS AS THEY REALLY ARE, THE WIL L CAN TEND TOWARDS THE REAL GOODNESS IN THE OBJECT. We c a n a p p r o a c h t h e INHERENCE OF VALUE i n OBJECTS BY C O N SID E RING THE MATTER DISCUSSED IN THE PREVIOUS S E C T I O N , NAMELY, THAT ALL T H IN G S ARE GOOD. I F ALL TH IN G S 2 1 CommENTAR I UM IN QuATOR LLBROS. S E .N T.E N.T. I AR.UM.. 1 , X I X , 5 , 1 AD 2 . ?p C um a u t e m o p e r a n s o p o r t e a t a l i q u o m o d o c o n j u n g i SUO OBJECTO CIRCA QUOD OPERATUR, NECESSE EST EXTRINSECAM REM, QUAE EST OBJECTUM O P E R A T I O N IS A N IM A E , SECUNDUM D U P- LICEM RAT IONEM AD ANIMAM COMPARARI• UNO MODO SECUNDUM QUOD NOTA EST ANIMAE CONJUNGI ET IN ANIMA ESSE PER SUAM S I M I L I T U D I N E M . SUMMA THEOLOGIAE.. li , 7 3 , 1 . I 5 0 : ARE 6 00 0 , THEN ONLY AN E X IS T IN G ESSENCE IS REALLY GOOD, ! j : AND A POTENTIALLY E X IS T IN G ESSENCE IS POTENTIALLY GOOD. : O n l y a r e a l l y e x i s t i n g t h i n g or t h a t w h i c h h a s s o m e h o p e : o r e x i s t i n g c a n b e a r e a l o b j e c t o p d e s i r e . T h e r e i s no p u r p o s e or f i n a l i t y e x c e p t w i t h r e s p e c t to r e a l l y e x i s t i n g t h i n g s or w i t h r e s p e c t to t h i n g s c o n c e i v e d of a s REAL OR AT LEAST POSSIBLY REAL. EVEN GOO, WHOM THOMAS HOLDS AS THE HIGHEST GOOD AND THE GOAL OR END FOR ALL MEN CANNOT REALLY MOVE ONE TO ACT UNTIL H e IS CONCEIVED OF AS REAL AND PROPORTIONATE TO ONE'S D ES IR E, THAT I S , THOUGHT OF AS CAPABLE OF REALLY S A T IS F Y IN G THE S U B JEC T .2 ^ T h e r e i s no r e a l m o f v a l u e s t h a t e x i s t s i n d e p e n d e n t l y of o b j e c t s w h i c h s a t i s f y t e n d e n c i e s . T h e r e i s no c o n t r a d i c t i o n b e t w e e n s a y i n g t h a t VALUE IS THE OBJECT OF DESIRE AND SAYING THAT VALUE INHERES IN THE OBJECT I T S E L F , EVEN INDEPENDENTLY OF ANY ACTUAL D ESIR E. PUT IN TERMS OF THE ARISTOTELEAN CATE GORIES, WE COULD SAY THAT WATER (CATEGORY OF SUBSTANCE) HAS CERTAIN PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS (CATEGORY OF QUALITY) WHICH COULD S A T IS F Y A MAN'S T H IR S T . WHEN THE MAN R E A L IZ E S , CONSCIOUSLY OR UNCONSCIOUSLY, THAT WATER 2 ? C o m m e n t a r i u m IN T r e s L I BROS A r i s t q t e l i s D e M lU A , # 8 2 7 . CAN SATISFY H IS T H I R S T , THE WATER THEN BECOMES AN OBJECT OF DESIRE (CATEGORY OF R EL A T IO N ). AS A CONSEQUENCE OF T H I S NOTION OF VALUE, THAT THERE IS A TENSION BETWEEN THE VALUE IN THE OBJECT AND j ' I THE VALUE AS AN OBJECT OF D E S IR E , IT SHOULD BE OBVIOUS THAT A QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF VALUE IS OUT OF PLACE. I i S e u l e m e n t , on n e PEUT A S S IM IL E R , la COMPAR- I ISON DES VALEURS X UNE OPERATION A R IT H E T IQ U E . ! LES VALEURS NE SONT PAS HOMOG&NES. I l - Y - A PLUS D'ETRE DANS L ' E S P R I T QUE DANS LE CHAIR , ET POURTANT, CE QUE JE SACRIF IE EN RENONCANT X LA CHAIR, JE NE RETROUVE PAS DANS LES BIENS DE L ' E S P R I T , COMME JE RETROUVE LE CAPITAL ENGAGE DANS UNE OPERATION LUCRATIVE. I_A DIVERS I TE DES fiTRES ET DES VALEURS EST DE L'ORDRE DE LA Q U A L I T E . 2 4 V a l u e i s a q u a l i t y of the o b j e c t , a r e l a t i o n to t h e s u b j e c t . I f v a l u e w e r e q u a n t i t a t i v e , t h e g a i n i n g of a HIGHER VALUE WOULD ALWAYS COMPENSATE FOR THE LOSS OF A LOWER VALUE. HOWEVER, OFTEN THIS IS NOT THE CASE. A GIRL MAY ABSTAIN FROM EATING ICE-CREAM TO GAIN A T I T L E IN A BEAUTY CONTEST. SHE IS OVERJOYED TO WIN THE CON T EST, BUT SHE STILL IS NOT COMPLETELY COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF THE ICE-CREAM. THERE ARE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF VALUE HERE. THE G I R L ' S DESIRE TO BE A BEAUTY QUEEN HAS BEEN S A T IS F IE D BUT HER DESIRE FOR ICE-CREAM WAS NOT. 2 4 J o s e p h de F i n a n c e , E x i s t e n c e e t L i b e r t e . ( P a r i s , 1 9 5 5 ) , p . 1 5 - 52 P e r h a p s h e r p e r s o n a l i t y as a whole was s a t i s f i e d , b u t HER TASTE FOR ICE-CREAM WAS NOT. FRUSTRATION IS A NECESSARY PART OF THE VALUE S I T U A T I O N . To RECEIVE ONE GOOD IS TO BE DEPRIVED OF ANOTHER. St . T h o m a s ’ s a p p r o a c h t o t h e q u e s t i o n o f v a l u e ’ s INHERENCE IN AN OBJECT IS MOST ABSTRACT. He HOLDS THAT A RELATIONSHIP EXIS TS BETWEEN A SUBJECT AND AN OBJECT, WHETHER IT IS THE RELATIONSHIP OF KNOWLEDGE OR THAT OF a p p e t i t e . Ho w e v e r , t h e r e , i s a p r i m a r y and a s e c o n d a r y TERM IN EVERY R E L A T IO N S H IP . THE PRIMARY TERM, OR POINT OF REFERENCE, OCCURS WHEREVER THE ACTION TERMINATES. T he act of k n o w l e d g e t e r m i n a t e s in t h e m i n d ; t h e r e f o r e , THE QUALITY OF TRUTH IS PRIMARILY IN THE MIND AND SECONDARILY IN T H IN G S . ON THE OTHER HAND, THE RELATION SHIP OF APPETITE TERMINATES IN THE THING DESIRED; THERE FORE, THE QUALITY OF GOOD IS PRIMARILY IN TH IN GS. AS THE GOOD DENOTES THAT TOWARD WHICH THE APPETITE TENDS, SO THE TRUE DENOTES THAT TOWARD WHICH THE INTELLECT TENDS. NOW THERE IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE APPETITE AND THE IN TELLECT, OR ANY KNOWLEDGE WHATSOEVER, THAT KNOWLEDGE IS ACCORDING AS THE THING KNOWN IS IN THE KNOWER, WHILE APPETITE IS ACCORDING AS THE DESIRER TENDS TOWARD THE THING d e s i r e d . T hus t h e g o a l of t h e a p p e t i t e , NAMELY GOOD, IS IN THE OBJECT DESIRABLE AND THE GOAL OF THE INTELLECT, NAMELY TRUE, IS IN THE INTELLECT I T S E L F . ^ 5 T h e t h i r d and m o s t i m p o r t a n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of t h e GOOD IN T H O M I S T I C VALUE THEORY IS THE NOTION THAT THE 26 T GOOD IS S E L F - D I F F U S I V E . THE MEANING OF T H I S NOTION IS HARD TO EXPRESS BUT IT IS HOPED THAT THE FOLLOWING W I L L BRING OUT AT LEAST THE CENTRAL MEANING OF I T . S l N C E THE UNIV ERSE COMES FROM GOD BECAUSE OF G O D 'S GOODNESS, THE UNIVERSE S T R I V E S TO BECOME R E - U N I T E D WITH GOO. T H I S IS THE A R IS T O T E L E A N NOTION THAT THE F I R S T AND THE F I N A L CAUSES ARE THE SAME. T H I S DES IR E FOR UNION WITH GOD EXPRESSES IT S E L F NOT ONLY IN A VAGUE AWARENESS FOR A UNION WITH G o d , BUT ALSO IN A TENDENCY TO U N I T E WITH OTHER CREATURES. T H I S IS SO BECAUSE THE GOODNESS, THE PURPOSEFULNESS OF ANY BEING SHARES IN THE GOODNESS, THE 2 6 ^O M NE BONUM NOMINAT ID IN QUOD TENDIT APP ETITU S , ITA VERUM NOMINAT ID IN QUOD TENDIT INTELLECTUS. HOC AUTEM DISTAT INTER APPETITUM ET INTELLECTUM, SIVE QUAM- CUMQUE COGNITIONEM, QUIA COGNITIO EST SECUNDUM QUOD COGNITUM EST IN COGNOSCENTE; APPETITUS AUTEM EST SECUN DUM QUOD APPETENS INCLINATUR IN IPSAM REM APPETI TAM. ET S I C TERMINUS A P P E T I T U S , QUOD EST BONUM, EST IN RE A P P E T I B I L E ; SED TER MINUS C O G N I T I O N I S , QUOD EST VERUM, EST IN IP SE I N T E L L E C T U . SUMMA T H E O L O G I A E . I , 1 6 , 1 ; c f . a l s o De V e r i t a t e . I , 2 and XXI, 1. 26 BONUM EST SUI D I F U S I V U M . SUMMA T H E O L O G I A E , | 21, 1. F I N A L I T Y OF GOD. MAN, THROUGH KNOWLEDGE, BECOMES I N T E N T I O N A L L Y ^ U N IT E D WITH THE OTHER. THERE I S A UNION IN THE M I N D , BUT AS YET THERE IS NO REAL U N I O N . T H I S T E N DENCY TOWARD A REAL UNION IS WHAT IS KNOWN AS A P P E T I T E . T he RESPONSE ON THE PART OF THE OTHER, THE O B J E C T , WHICH ALLOWS MAN TO ENTER INTO A REAL UNION WITH I T , IS WHAT 2 8 IS MEANT BY SA YIN G THAT THE GOOD IS S E L F - D I F F U S I V E . T h a t i s , t h e o b j e c t t e n d e d t o w a r d s h a r e s i t s a c t o f E X IS T E N C E WITH THE EV ALUATING SU B JEC T. T h e r e i s a r e a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e s u b j e c t AND THE OBJECT. THROUGH KNOWLEDGE, THE SUBJECT TAKES ON, IN AN A C CIDENTAL MANNER, THE FORM, THE C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S OF THE O B J E C T . THE SUBJECT "SEES** T H I S COMMUNICATION OF FORMS AND TENDS TO HAVE A REAL OR EXACT COMMUNICATION OF FORM, OR TENDS TO A REAL U N I O N . T H I S IS THE RESPONSE OF OQ A P P E T I T E . 7 T h i s u n i o n IS n e v e r COMPLETE. A THIN G ACTS ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT THE DYNAMISM OF E X I S T E N C E OPERATES THROUGH FORM. T H I S DYNAMISM SEEKS 2 7 r I N T E N T I O N A L I T Y IS USED HERE IN THE SENSE KNOWN IN CONTEMPORARY W R I T I N G THROUGH FRANZ BRENTANO. 2 8 D e Ma l o , V I I I , 3 . 2 9 S umma THEOLQG I AE« . i , 4 , 3- A ONION WIT H S I M I L A R L Y FORMED B E I N G S . T h I S S I M I L A R I T Y OF FORMS MAY BE NATURAL, AS I S THE CASE OF TWO MOLECULES OF WATER, IN WHICH CASE THEY BOTH HAVE nWATERNESS, " OR IT MAY BE A R T I F I C I A L , A C Q U IR ED , AS IN THE CASE OF KNOWLEDGE WHENCE THE KNOWER HAS THE S I M I L A R I T Y OF FORMS WITH WATER BECAUSE HE HAS ABSTRACTED THE FORM OF WATER FROM THE 30 REAL WAT E R • B e f o r e p r o c e e d i n g to a d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e v a r i o u s LEVELS OF VA LUE, ONE POINT MUST BE MADE. We MUST NOW D I S T I N G U I S H BETWEEN THE R E L A T I V E GOOD AND THE SI MPLE g o o d . B y t h e t e r m " s i m p l e g o o d " ( bonum s i h p l i c i t e r ) i s MEANT THE F U L F I L L M E N T OF ALL PO TENCIES THAT A BEING HAS. Wh e n a b e i n g i s s i m p l y g o o d , a l l o f t h e p o t e n c i e s o f i t s NATURE HAVE BEEN COMPLETELY A C T U A L I Z E D . T H I S BEING CANNOT GET ANY B E T T E R . I t IS WELL TO REMEMBER AT T H I S PO IN T T H A T , AS P R E VIO U S LY P O IN T E D OUT, THERE ARE THREE ASPECTS OF GOOD ON THE PART OF THE OB JECT. ONE IS THE ^ N l H I L A G IT N I S I SECUNDUM QUOD EST IN ACTU; N I H I L AUTEM EST IN ACTU N I S I SECUNDUM QUOD FORMAM VEL P E R F E C T I - ONEM ALIQUAM HABET; UNDE OPORTET QUOD OMNE QUOD A G I T , A G IT INQUANTUM PERFECTUM E S T , ET ITA INQUANTUM EST BONUM, CUM OMNE PERFECTUM INQUANTUM HUJU SMODI, BONUM S I T . COMMENTUM IN _Qu.AT.0-R. Ll B.RO.S SELHTENT I ARUM. I I , XXXIV, 1, 3- GOOD BY WHICH IT REACHES E X I S T E N C E , THE SECOND IS THE GOOD BY WHICH ITS OWN PO TENCIES ARE A C T U A L I Z E D , AND THE T H I R D IS THE GOOD BY WHICH IT A C TU A L IZ E S THE PO TE NCIES OF ANOTHER. WHEN A BEING IS S IMP LY GOOD, I REFER TO THE SECOND OF THESE ASPECTS* T H U S , THERE I S A D I F F E R E N C E , AT LEAST IN THEORY, BETWEEN THE SIMPLE GOOD AND THE " U L T I M A T E " GOOD. A n U L TI M A T E GOOD IS ONE THAT WOULD BE PERFECT IN THE THIRD OF THESE ASPECTS, THAT I S , AN ULTIMA TE GOOD IS ONE THAT WOULD COMPLETELY PERFECT ALL OTHER T H I N G S , IN A D D I T I O N TO BEING PERFECT I T S E L F . I S A I D " I N THEORY" THERE IS NO I D E N T I F I C A T I O N ; IN R E A L I T Y , ONLY G od I S ABSOLUTELY SI MP LE AND AT THE SAME TIM E GOD IS THE U L TIM A T E GOOD. HOWEVER, THE NOTION OF THE S I M P LE GOOD IS USED LOOSELY TO MEAN THE FINAL ( L A S T ) STAGE OF PE RFE CTION THAT ANY CREATURE ACTUALLY DOES A T T A I N , THE SECOND OF THE ABOVE STAGES. T H U S , A T R E E , AT THE MOMENT OF I T S G E R M I N A T I O N , IS PERFECT IN ITS S P E C I E S ; AT THE MOMENT OF I T S F R U I T I O N - - T H A T I S , WHEN THE TREE HAS REACHED THE DEVELOPMENT OF ALL IT S POWERS——IT IS PERFECT IN THE PERFE CTION OF IT S POWERS AND THUS, LOOSELY S P E A K IN G , I T IS S I M P L Y GOOD. ON THE OTHER HAND, OPPOSED TO THE S I M P L E GOOD IS THE R E L A T I V E GOOD (BONUM S ECUNDUM Q U I D ^). T H I S MEANS T H A T , U N T I L A BEING ACTUALLY DOES REACH THE PERFECTION OF WHICH IT IS CAPABLE, THE PERFECTION THAT IT DOES 57 : HAVE IS ONLY R E L A T I V E . A t THE MOMENT OF B I R T H , A C H I L D “ I S " S I M P L Y ; THAT I S , HE IS a SUBST ANCE , AND ANY FURTHER M O D I F I C A T I O N S OF H I S B EIN G W I L L BE A C C I D E N T A L . HOWEVER, HE HAS ONLY AN A C C I D E N T A L GOODNESS ( R E L A T I V E TO P O S S I B I L I T I E S ) , AND ONLY WHEN HE HAS A T T A I N E D H I S DUE P E R - F E C T I O N W I L L HE HAVE GOODNESS S I M P L Y • I T IS IMPORTANT HERE TO AVOID A C O N F U S IO N . R E L A T I V E GOODNESS IS NOT TO BE IN T E R PR E TE D AS A " R E L A T I V I S M " OR " S U B J E C T I V I S M . " To SAY THAT THE GOOD IS R E L A T I V E IS NOT TO SAY THAT THERE ARE NO ABSOLUTE V A L U ES , MORAL, A E S T H E T I C OR O T H E R W I S E . AS PO IN TE D OUT P R E V IO U S L Y ALL VALUE IS ROOTED IN THE B E I N G OF THE OBJECT AND IS IN T H I S SENSE ABSOLUTE. C . T he O n t o l o g i c a l L e v e l o f V a l u e P i s t i n g u i s h E-P. F rom t h e A x i o l q g i c a l L e v e l s . SO FAR WE HAVE BEEN SP EAKIN G FOR THE MOST PART OF WHAT CAN BE CALLED THE " O N T O L O G I C A L " LEVEL OF V A L U E . T h e ONTOLOGICAL LEVEL OF VALUE HOLDS THAT ALL T H IN G S ARE GOOD S I M P L Y BECAUSE THEY ARE. T H I S GOODNESS WHICH ANY I N D I V I D U A L THIN G HAS IS INDEP EN DE NT OF ANY A P P E T I T E OR TENDENCY (O T H E R THAN THE TENDENCY OF ESSENCE TO E X I S T IN A D E T E R M IN A T E M A N N E R ) . IN OTHER WORDS, THE T h e q l o g i a e . I , 5 , 1 ad 1 I 58 ONTOLOGICAL LEVEL OF VALUE IS THERE BECAUSE T H I S BEING IS PERFECT IN S P E C I E S . I F , IN A D D I T I O N TO BEING PERFECT IN IT S S P E C I E S , A BEING ALSO PERFECTS ANOTHER, THEN T H I S BEING TAKES ON AN " A X I O L O G I C A L " LEVEL OF GOODNESS. THE ONTOLOGICAL LEVEL OF GOODNESS COMES WITH E X I S T E N C E ; THE AX IOLOGIC AL LEVEL OF VALUE COMES WITH THE ACTUAL PER FECTION WHICH I T INDUCES IN A N O T H E R . ^ T h e a x i o l o g i c a l l e v e l of v a l u e i s b a s e d on t h e ONTOLOGICAL L E V E L . T H I S I S SO IN TWO WAYS! THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL I S , AS POINTED OUT, THAT ONLY A REAL E X I S T I N G BEING CAN BE AN OBJECT OF D E S I R E . T H US , I F THE OBJECT DID NOT E X I S T , AND CONSEQUENTLY HAVE THE ONTOLOGICAL LEVEL OF VA L U E, IT COULD NOT PO S S I B L Y BE AN A X IO LO G IC A L VALUE TO AN A P P E T I T I V E B E I N G . SECON DLY, THERE IS THE DEPENDENCE T H A T , ALTHOUGH THE D E S IR E OF A MAN FOR AN OBJECT MAY NOT OCCUR U N T I L LATE R, THE FACT THAT T H I S OBJECT IS CAPABLE OF PE R FE C TING H I S D ESIR E IS THERE EVEN BEFORE THE D E S I R E . FOR EXAMPLE, A MAN MAY BE ^ C f . J o s e p h de F i n a n c e , " L e s P l a n s de l a L i b e r t e , " S c i e n c e s E c c l e s i a s t i q u e s . X I I I , 3, 1 9 6 1 , p . 2 9 7 - " L a P E R F E C T I O N , EN E F F E T , APPART I E N T , X LA F O I S AUX DEUX o r d r e s : X l ' o r d r e o n t o l o g i q u e , c a r l ' E t r e P A R F A I T EST CELUI QUI R E A L I S E PLEIN EM ENT SON ESSENCE; X L'ORDRE AX I O L O G I Q U E , CAR LE BIE N , C ' E S T LE SON ESSENCE; X L'ORDRE A X I O L O G I Q U E , CAR LE B I E N , C ' E S T LE P A R F A IT ET LE P E R F E C T I F ET TOUTE CHOSE DESIR E SA P E R F E C T I O N . " 59 T H I R S T Y AND HAS NEVER AS YET EX PERIENCED THE S A T I S F A C T I O N THAT A GLASS OF COLD BEER CAN G I V E ON A HOT A F TE R NOON. Ne v e r t h e l e s s , t h e b e e r s t i l l h a s t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s WHICH W I L L ALLOW H I S TASTE TO BE S A T I S F I E D . THE MAN HERE IS A CASE OF ONE WHO n DOES NOT KNOW WHAT IS GOOD FOR H I M . " A x i o l o g i c a l v a l u e s o r , r a t h e r t h e t e n d e n c i e s i n THE SUBJECT THE S A T I S F A C T I O N OF WHICH W I L L C O N S T IT U T E AN A X IO L O G IC A L V A L U E , ARE RESULTS OF FORM. FOR EXAMPLE, THE HUMAN SOUL G I V E S TO MAN H I S PRIMARY SET OF CHARA C T E R I S T I C S , AND THUS IS H I S SU BSTANTIA L FORM; THE COLOR OF H I S H A I R CAUSES A REACTION IN A PHOTOGRAPHIC P L A T E , BUT SINC E THE COLOR OF H I S H A I R , AT LEAST O R I G I N A L L Y , IS CONSEQUENT UPON H I S B IR T H AND THUS H I S NATURE, T H I S ACCIDE NTAL FORM AND IT S RESULTANT TE N D EN C IE S COULD BE CALLED NATURAL. T H I R D L Y , T H I S MAN HAS LEARNED THE CALM o f a B e e t h o v e n s o n a t a a n d , t h u s , t h e s a t i s f a c t i o n of T H I S D E S IR E IS AN ACQUIRED GOOD. TO KNOW IS TO R EC EI VE IN A N O N - P H Y S I C A L , I N T E N T I O N A L MANNER THE FORM OF THE o t h e r . T h u s , w h e n on e k n o w s t h e c o l o r o f a b i r d , h e HAS IN H I S EYE " t h a t WHICH MAKES THAT COLOR TO BE WHAT IT I S " AND, THUS , THE "FORM" OF THAT COLOR. CONSEQUENT UPON EVERY FORM IS A TEN DENCY. THE S A T I S F A C T I O N OF THESE TE N D E N C IE S IS AN A X IO L O G IC A L VA L U E. ONTOLOGICAL VALUE RESULTS AS A S A T I S F A C T I O N OF A PO TE NTIAL E X I S T E N T * S ! I TENDENCY TO ACTUAL E X I S T E N C E ; A X IO L O G IC A L VALUE RESULTS AS A S A T I S F A C T I O N OF THE COGNIZANCE OF A FORM * S TENDENCY j TO R E A L I Z A T I O N . T h e ONTOLOGICAL L EVEL OF VALUE AND THE A X IO L O G IC A L LEVEL OF VALUE ARE EACH S U B D I V I D E D INTO THREE OTHER CATEGORIES TO I N D I C A T E THE THREE USAGES OF VALUES OR GOODS IN OUR L I V E S . THE F I R S T IS THE G O O D - I N - I T S E L F ( BONUM H O N E S T U M ). I T IS THE GOOD THAT IS W I L L E D , THE OBJECT OF A D E S IR E OR OF AN A P P E T I T E . T H I S IS THE CENTRAL NOTION OF THE GOOD. T h e r e a r e o t h e r f o r m s of t h e g o o d t h a t a r e d e s i r e d ONLY BECAUSE THEY CONTRIBUTE TO O B T A I N I N G THE BONUM h o n e s t u m . T h e s e a r e t h e g o o d as a m e a n s or t h e b q nu m u T I L E ■ T h e b.qnum u t i l e i s s u c h t h a t i t r e c e i v e s i t s GOODNESS FROM THE BONUM HONESTUM. S l N C E THE ACT OF W I L L I N G IS A COMPLEX ACT, WHAT IS A MEANS AT ONE POINT IN THE W I L L I N G PROCESS CAN BE AN END AT ANOTHER P O I N T . F or EXAMPLE, A MAN DESIR ES AND W I L LS TO REC E IVE A COLLEGE DEGREE. THE COLLEGE DEGREE BECOMES THE BONUM HONESTUM, THAT WHICH I S W IL LE D IN I T S E L F . MAJORING IN ACCOUNTING AT USC IS A MEANS, THE BONUM U T I L E . HOWEVER, ON THE MORNING OF R E G I S T R A T I O N , THE R E G I S T R A T IO N BECOMES AN END, 61 WHILE STARTIN G H I S CAR, D R I V I N G TO THE CAMPUS, ET C. BECOME MEANS. ! i T h e t h i r d t y p e o f a x i o l o g i c a l v a l u e i s t h e b o n u h i X X I D E L E C T A B I L E . PL EASURE. • '* ' THE A r I S T O T E L E A N - T h O M I S T I C j TREATMENT OF PLEASURE SEEMS TO BE U N I Q U E . PLEASURE IS j A CONCOMIT'ANT OF A GOOD THAT IS ALREADY POSSESSED. THERE j IS NO PLEASURE OF REST UNLESS THE BODY HAS BEEN REFRESHEDj i THERE IS NO PLEASURE OF TASTE UNLESS THE ICE-CREA M HAS BEEN EATEN. WE MUST THEREFORE CONSIDER THAT EVERY DEL IG H T IS A PROPER ACCIDENT RESULTING FROM H A P P I N E S S , OR FROM SOME PART OF H A P P I N E S S ; SINC E THE REASON THAT A MAN IS DELIGHTED IS THAT HE HAS SOME F I T T I N G GOOD, E ITH E R IN R E A L I T Y OR IN HOPE, OR AT LEAST IN MEMORY. 3 ^ T h e bonum o e_l.e_c_i: a_b i l e i s t h e good as a c c o m p l i s h e d , t h e BONUM HONESTUM I S THE GOOD AS ACCOMP LISHABLE. S l N C E ALL GOODS ARE FORETASTES OF THE ULTIMATE GOOD, ALL PLEASURE IS A FORETASTE OF THE PLEASURE OF THE PO SSESSION OF THE U LTIMA TE GOOD ( H A P P I N E S S ) . T H I S DOES NOT IMPLY THAT ONE ^.S.U W 1A T h.E ,9 1 .Q L < i 1A5., I , 5 , 6 . TJj l ^ EST I G I T U R CONS I DERANDUM QUOD OMNES D E L E C T A T IO EST QUODDAM PROPRIUM ACCIDENS QUOD CONSEQUITUR BEAT I TUB — INEM, VEL AL I QUAM B E A T U D I N I S PARTEM; EX HOC ENIM A L I Q U I S DELECTATUR, QUIA HABET BONUM ALI QUOD S I B I C O N VE N IE N S, VEL IN RE, VEL IN SP E, VEL ALTEM IN MEMOR IA. SUMMA T h e o l o g I A E . 1 - 1 1 , 2 , 6 . CANNOT WIL L PLEAS URE . ONE CAN W I L L PLEASURE AND PLEASURE THEN BECOMES A BONUM HONESTUM ( A N END) W H IL E THE GOOD THAT BRINGS THE PLEASURE BECOMES A BONUM U T I L E ( m e a n s ) . I t i s l e g i t i m a t e to W I L L p l e a s u r e at t i m e s , BUT TO MAKE T H I S THE ONLY VALUE CO N SID E RA TIO N THAT ONE HAS WOULD BE AN IN V E R S IO N OF THE NATURE OF THE VALUE S I T U A T I ON. D . T h e H i e r a r c h y o f V a l u e s " V a l u e " i s an a n a l o g i c a l t e r m . ^ T h a t r s , e a c h GOOD HAS ITS OWN R E A L I T Y , ITS OWN ACT OF E X I S T E N C E . F or T H I S REASON ONLY GENERAL TYP ES OF VALUES CAN BE c l a s s i f i e d . S i n c e a x i o l o g i c a l v a l u e s a r e t h e r e s u l t s OF THE S A T I S F A C T I O N S OF THE TEN DENCIE S OF FORMS, THERE ARE AS MANY T ENDENCIE S AS THERE ARE TYPES OF FORMS. S ome b e i n g s a c t o n l y b e c a u s e of t h e i r i n h e r e n t SU BSTANTIA L AND ACCIDENTAL F O R M S . ^ I n IN ANIM ATE OBJECTS, THE A P P E T I T E IS THE VERY ACT OF B E I N G . FOR 1^1 I, 1 3, 6. ^ F O R THE D I S T I N C T I O N OF THE TYPES OF BEINGS ACCORDING TO FORM AND A C T I V I T I E S , S E E SUMMA T h E Q L O G I A E . I * 1 8 , 3 . EXAMPLE , A STONE ACTS S I M P L Y BECAUSE IT I S A STONE. I t HOLDS DOWN S O I L , REFLECTS L I G H T , UNDERGOES CHEMICAL AND PH Y SIC AL CHANGES BECAUSE OF CERTAIN INHERENT T E N D E N C I E S . A TREE DOES ALL OF T H I S BUT IN A D D I T I O N HAS THE A B I L I T Y TO GROW, TO REPRODUCE I T S E L F , TO ORGANIZE IT S OWN i MATTER, TO CURE I T S OWN WOUNOS, ANO SO FORTH. BUT IN t N EIT H ER OF THESE TWO EXAMPLES DO WE SEE ANY EV ID ENCE OF LEARNING FROM E X P E R I E N C E . THE ONLY FORMS, THAT I S , P R I N C I P L E S OF A C T I O N , THAT THE STONE OR THE TREE HAVE ARE THOSE GIVEN TO IT BY NATURE. ON THE OTHER HAND, ANIMALS CAN REACT TO T H E I R KNOWLEDGE. A DOG SEES A BONE AND DES IR E S I T . THE ANIMAL SMELLS THE MASTER AND REACTS TO H I M . A n ANIMAL CAN LEARN THE MEANING OF THE ANGRY TONE OF H I S M A S T E R 'S V O I C E , OR THE U PRAIS ED HAND, AND REACT TO THESE S T I M U L I BECAUSE OF L E A R N I N G . THROUGH KNOWLEDGE, THE ANIMAL HAS ACQUIRED A NEW FORM AND, T HUS , A NEW TENDENCY; AND THER E FORE, THERE IS A NEW TYPE OF GOOD, NAMELY, THAT P E R CE IV E D BY THE SENSES. To SAY THE SAME T H IN G IN ANOTHER WAY, I AM REFERRING TO THOSE GOODS WHICH W I L L S A T I S F Y A SENSE A P P E T I T E . T h e r e i s a f o u r t h g e n e r a l t y p e o f a p p e t i t e a n d , T H U S , A FOURTH GENERAL LEVEL OF VA L U E. T he HIGHES T A P P E T I T E IS THAT WHICH IS WITH KNOWLEDGE AND FREE W I L L ; FOR T H I S A P P E T I T E 64 37 IN SOME WAY MOVES I T S E L F * I n t h i s a r e a t h e s u b j e c t m a y c h o o s e a g o o d w h i c h t r a n s c e n d s THE L I M I T A T I O N S OF IM ME D IA TE T I M E AND SPACE. T H U S , A STUDENT ORDERS H I S L I F E FOR FOUR YEARS TO GET A COLLEGE DEGREE AS A GOAL WHICH E X I S T S NO PLACE EXCEPT IN H I S ] [ : i M I N D . I n T H I S AREA OF WHAT CAN BE CALLED THE I N T E L L E C - ; jTUALLY KNOWN OR RATION AL GOOD, THERE ARE SEVERAL S P E C IA L I j j I t YPES OF THE GOODS THE MORAL GOOD OF MAN, THE GOOD OF j i j F R I E N D S H I P AND L O V E , THE COMMON GOOD OR THE GOOD OF j S O C I E T Y , AND THE GOOD OF GOD, OR THE U L T I M A T E GOOD. I t m a y BE SEEN THAT ALTHOUGH he s h a r e s t h e p o w e r s OF I N A N I M A T E , V E G E T A T I V E AND S E N S I T I V E B E I N G S , FOR A RATIONAL CREATURE, THERE IS MORE OF H I S " S E L F " INVOLVED IN THESE LATTER RATION AL VA L U E S . THE VALUE OF A FU L F I L L M E N T OF A TASK IS ONE THAT CAN BE RECOGNIZED ONLY BY THE M I N D . I F SOME S E N S IB L Y KNOWN GOOD HAS TO BE S A C R I F IC E D IN THE PROCESS, I T WAS A PR IC E WORTH PAYING BE CAUSE AS ONE S A T I S F I E S H I S M I N D , HE IS MORE INVOLVED AS A HUMAN PERSON THAN BY THE S A T I S F A C T I O N OF THE OTHER POWERS. 7 S J Su P R EM U S AUTEM A P P E T I T U S EST QUI CUM C O G N I T I O N E ET L I B E R A ELECT I O N E : H I C ENIM A P P E T I T U S QUODAMMOOO MOVET s e i p s u m . C o m m e n t a r i a i n L i b r u m B e a t i D i o n y s i i de D i v i n i s N o m i n i b u s . I V , I X . 65 I n s u n , l e t u s s a y t h a t v a l u e , or t h e g o o d , i s an OBJECT WHICH S A T I S F I E S A TEN DENCY. A LL TH IN G S THAT E X I S T HAVE S A T I S F I E D "ESSENCE * S TENDENCY TO EXISTENCE** AND, AS A RESULT HAVE ONTOLOGICAL GOODNESS. IN A D D I T I O N , A THING CAN BE FURTHER PERFECTED BECAUSE SOME OBJECT CAN S A T I S F Y IT S TEN DENCY. THE SUBJECT ACQUIRES A NEW FORM OF ONTOLOGICAL GOODNESS, WHILE THE GOODNESS IN THE OBJECT IS CALLED A X IO L O G IC A L GOODNESS, BECAUSE IT IS ORDERED TO THE SU B JE C T. ALL GOODNESS, ONTOLOGICAL OR A X I O L O G I C A L , IS INHERENT IN THE B E I N G ; BUT THE SU BJECT*S REC O G N IT IO N OF THE O B J E C T 'S GOODNESS CREATES A RELATION 8ETWEEN THEM. VALUES OR GOODS ARE DES IR ED AS ENDS, AS MEANS, OR AS PLEASURE. THERE ARE AS MANY VALUES AS THERE ARE S A T I S F I E D T E N D EN C IE S AND AS MANY LEV ELS OF VALUES AS THERE ARE TYPES OF TE N D E N C IE S OR FORMS. B a s i c a l l y , l e v e l s o f v a l u e c o r r e s p o n d to t h e l e v e l s o f b e i n g ; n a t u r a l ( i n a n i m a t e ) , v e g e t a t i v e , s e n s i t i v e an d RAT I 0 N A L . CHAPTER THREE EY.I.L..QR ■ ■ Q . I . S Y . A L U E . A . N a t u r e o f Di s v a l u e — i _G_e_n.E-R-A.L- T h e t r e a t m e n t o f e v i l in t h e w r i t i n g s o f St , T hom as A q u i n a s i s p e r h a p s t h e l e a s t u n d e r s t o o d o f h i s MANY WELL-KNOWN P O S I T I O N S . THERE I S A TWOFOLD REASON fo r t h i s . H i s t r e a t m e n t o f e v i l i s a d i r e c t r e s u l t of A METAPHYS IC AL A N A L Y S IS RATHER THAN E M P I R I C A L IN DUCTIO N C o n s e q u e n t l y , a n y o n e who d o e s no t t e n d to t h i n k m e t a p h y s i c a l l y LOOKS UPON THE T H O M I S T I C P O S I T I O N AS AN OVER s i m p l i f i c a t i o n . T h e s e c o n d r e a s o n , a t l e a s t fo r t h e CONTEMPORARY M IS UNDERSTANDIN G OF T H I S P O S I T I O N , IS THAT WE WHO L I V E UNDER THE SHADOW OF ATOMIC WARFARE, WE WHO L I V E IN A PERIOD OF NATION AL AND RACIAL UNRE ST , F I N D THE DOCTRINE OF THE N E C E S S IT Y OF E V I L RATHER DIS C O N C E R T I N G . De F i n a n c e ' s r e m a r k s a r e m o s t t r u e when one T H IN KS OF THE T H O M I S T I C NOTION OF E V I L : THOMISM IS a PHILOS OPHY OF HARMONY AND ORDER, AND WE L I V E IN A TRAGIC WORLD. THOMISM IS AN IN TEL LEC TUAL I SM, AND IN THE EYES OF A NUMBER OF OUR CONTEMPORARIES THE IN T E L L E C T HAS FALLEN INTO A KIND OF D I S C R E D I T THAT HAS BEEN ONLY AGGRAVATED BY RECENT E V E N T S . REASON DOES NOT S U F F I C E TO SECURE M A N 'S H A P P I N E S S ; IT S F A I L U R E S HAVE CREATED A K IN D OF D ISTRUST OF IN TELLEC TU AL 66 C ONSTRUCTIO NS. THERE IS A TENDENCY TO D I S M I S S AT THE SAME T I M E IN TELLEC TUAL ISM AND R A T I O N A L I S M . ' * THE CONTEMPORARY WORLD DOES NOT UNDERSTAND E I T H E R L e i b n i z ’ s " b e s t of a l l p o s s i b l e w o r l d s " or T h o m a s ’ s WORLD REDEEMED BY GRACE. S i n c e t h e g o o d i s t h a t w h i c h s a t i s f i e s an a p p e t i t e or a t e n d e n c y , e v i l h a s t h e n a t u r e o f t h e o p p o s i t e . E v i l i s t h a t w h i c h f r u s t r a t e s a n y a p p e t i t e or t e n d e n c y . T he g o o d or e v i l of an a c t i o n , as of OTHER T H I N G S , DEPENDS ON ITS FULLNESS o OF B E I N G OR I T S LACK OF THAT FU LLNES S. G o o d has a s i t s p r i m a r y m e a n i n g " t h e p e r f e c t , " t h a t i s THAT WHICH IS F I L L E D UP, THAT WHICH IS COMPLETE, OR TO BE MORE E X A C T , THAT WHOSE PO TENCIES ARE F U L F I L L E D . ANY A C T I O N , I D E A , IMAGE, IN A WORD, ANY BEING IS GOOD I F IT HAS ITS OWN TE N D EN C IE S PERFECTED OR I F IT PERFECTS THE T E NDENCIE S OF ANOTHER. CONVERSELY, ANY BEING WHOSE OWN T E NDENCIE S ARE FRUSTRATED OR WHICH FRUSTRATES THE TEN D EN C IE S OF ANOTHER IS E V I L . UNFORTUNATELY, THE T H O M I S - T I C NOTION OF THE LACK OF GOOD IS EXTREMELY BROAD. THE A J o s e p h de F i n a n c e , "A R e p o r t on F r e n c h P h i l o s o p h y , " T h e M o d e r n S c h o o l m a n . XXV, 1 , 194-7, p . 2 6 . 2 Bonum et m a l u m a c t i o n i s , s i c u t e t „c e t e r u m r e r u m , a t t e n d i t u r e x p l e n i t u d i n e ESSENDI, VEL DEFECTI i p s i u s . S u m m a T h e o l o q I AE-, I - I I , 1 8 , 2 . 68 NOTION OF E V I L COVERS EVER YT HING FROM MASS MURDER TO A I j i SIMP LE LACK OF AN O P PO R T U NITY - THE BROADNESS OF THE I j | NOTION OF E V I L HAS LEAD TO SOME M I S U N D E R S T A N D IN G . I t | SEEMS THAT THERE IS A REAL DIF FER EN CE BETWEEN THE E V I L | OF NOT HAVING THE A B I L I T Y TO PLAY THE PIANO AND THE E V I L OF COMMIT TIN G MURDER, BUT THE D E F I N I T I O N OF E V I L HERE IS ; THE SAME. ! IN ORDER TO C L A R I F Y T H I S NOTION OF E V I L , I T MUST i BE PO INTE D OUT THAT WHEN I STATE THAT E V I L IS FRUSTRA T I O N OF A TENDENCY AND, THUS , A LACK OF GOOD, 1 DO NOT MEAN TO IMPLY THAT ALL LACKS OF GOOD ARE E V I L . E v I L IS NOT JUST THE ABSENCE OF GOOD; I T IS THE ABSENCE OF A GOOD THAT SHOULD BE T H ER E. S l N C E BEING AND GOOD ARE CON VE RTIBLE N O T I O N S , WE COULD SAY THAT E V I L IS THE LACK OF A LEVEL OF BEING THAT SHOULD BE TH ER E. FOR EXAMPLE, THE FACT THAT A STONE DOES NOT SEE IS NOT AN E V I L , AT LEAST NOT NORMALLY. T H I S LACK IN THE STONE IS A MERE N E G A T IO N , THAT I S , IT DOES NOT HAVE A Q U A L IT Y OR A LEVEL OF B E I N G , BUT IT WAS NEVER INTENDED TO HAVE THAT P A R T I CULAR QUALITY OR LEVEL OF B E I N G . TRUE E V I L IS NOT MERELY A N EG A T IO N ; IT IS A P R I V A T I O N . THAT I S , I T IS THE LACK OF A GOOD THAT OUGHT TO BE T H ER E. T H I S WOULD HAPPEN IN THE CASE OF A MAN WHO DID NOT SE E. HlS NATURE DEMANDS THAT HE SHOULD SEE AND, THUS, GAVE HIM THE TENDENCY TO SEE. I f , BECAUSE OF A B IR T H DEFECT OR | 6 9 | j IL L N E S S OR A C C I D E N T , T H I S MAN DOES NOT SE E, THEN H I S j NATURE HAS BEEN FRUSTRATED AND E V I L IS PRESENT • THERE IS A SENSE IN WHICH A NEGATION CAN BECOME A P R I V A T I O N . F or e x a m p l e ; t h e s t o n e m e n t i o n e d a b o v e d o e s n o t h a v e I THE A B I L I T Y to SEE BUT AT T IM E S IT MIGHT BE BETTER I F IT COULD. IF THE STONES OF A B U I L D I N G , FOR EXAMPLE, COULD : SEE AND P O IN T OUT THE I D E N T I T Y OF A C R I M I N A L , THEN THE JOB OF CRIME DET EC TION WOULD BE MUCH E A S I E R . NEEDLESS TO SAY, IT IS NOT THE STONE WHICH IS FRUS TRATED , BUT THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY. T H U S , THE E V I L IS NOT THE LACK OF A BONUM HONE STUM BUT OF A M J U fH , . IJ X 1 .L E .- I n THE OTHER EXAMPLES M E N T IO N E D , MASS MURDER IS AN E V I L BECAUSE IT FRUSTRATES THE V I C T I M S * NATURAL TENDENCY TO L I V E AND ALSO FRUSTRATES THE MURDERER'S NATURAL TEN DENCY TO MORAL R E C T I T U D E , WHICH THOMAS U L T I M A T E L Y I D E N T I F I E S WIT H UNION WITH GOD. THE I N A B I L I T Y TO PLAY THE tel A N 0 WOULD BE AN E V I L ONLY I F THE PERSON INVOLVED SHOWED SOME A B I L I T Y TO PLAY OR HAD SOME REAL DES IR E TO PLAY WHICH WAS NEVER F U L F I L L E D . S t . T h o m a s p o i n t s o u t two d i f f e r e n t m e a n i n g s of E V I L . T h e F I R S T IS " SUBJECTUM M A L I . " THAT I S , THE SUBJECT OF E V I L OR THE BEING WHOSE POWERS ARE FRUS TRATED . ^COMMENTUM IN QUATOUR L I BROS S.E.N T E N T. I A RUM .. 1 I , XXXIV, 1, 4. 70 I ! ; F or e x a m p l e , a man who i s i l l i s t h e s u b j e c t u m m a l i . h i s TENDENCY TO GOOD HEALTH IS FRUSTRATED. IN THE CASE OF A ! |MORAL E V I L DONE BY ONE MAN TO ANOTHER, THERE ARE TWO SUBJECTA M A L I . FOR EXAMPLE, I F ONE MAN L I E S TO ANOTHER, THE L I A R T S TENDENCY TO MORAL RE C TIT U DE IS FRUSTRATED, THUS HE IS A SUBJECTUM M A L I . HOWEVER, THE MAN L I E D TO HAS H I S TENDENCY TO KNOW THE TRUTH FRUSTRATED: THUS , HE IS ALSO A SUBJECTUM M A L I . T h e SECOND SENSE o f e v i l i s t h e " i p s u m m a l u m " THAT I S , THE E V I L I T S E L F . THE SECOND SENSE REFERS TO h . THE E V I L DEED, THE FRUS TRATION I T S E L F . THE L I E , THE D ISA P P O IN T M EN T OF THE LOVER, THE IL L H E A L T H , THE B L I N D NESS OF THE DOG, THE LAMENESS IN THE C H I L D ALL REFER TO THE SECOND SENSE OF E V I L . T H I S D I S T I N C T I O N BETWEEN SUBJECTUM MALI AND IPSUW MALUM IS BEHIND THE T R I T E STATEMENT: "HATE THE S I N ( I PSUM malum') . BUT LOVE THE SINNER CSUBJECTUM M A L I " T h e T h o m i s t i c n o t i o n t h a t e v i l i s a p r i v a t i o n of THE GOOD HAS BEEN MISUNDERSTOOD TO MEAN THAT THOMISM DENIES THE E X I S T E N C E OF E V I L . THE R A I N - S T A R V E D EARTH, O V E R -P O P U L A T IO N , F A I L U R E S TO LOVE ANOTHER, P O L I T I C A L UNREST——ALL G IV E TESTIMO NY TO THE PRESENCE OF E V I L IN ^D.s. .Na. lq , 1 , 1 . 71 ; t h e w o r l d . Wh a t T h o m a s , a n d t h e w h o l e m e d i e v a l t r a d i - i T I O N DOES DENY I S THAT E V I L I S A T H IN G IN I T S E L F , OR THAT a n y t h i n g i s w h o l l y e v i l . ^ A s Ma r i t a i n r a t h e r p o e t i c a l l y I ST A T E D , E V I L E X I S T S AS "A WOUND OR M U T I L I AT I ON OF THE i bei ng. E vi l e x i s t s i n t h i n g s , b u t i s n o t i t s e l f a : T H I N G . B . T h e C h a r a c t e r i s t i cs o f E v i l or D i s v a l u e T h e f i r s t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of e v i l i s i t s u n i v e r s a l i t y . S i n c e g o o d i m p l i e s p e r f e c t i o n , o n l y G od i s a b s o l u t e l y g o o d . T h i s m e a n s t h a t e v e r y b e i n g o t h e r t h a n Go d i s a s u b j e c t u m m a l i . E v e r y c r e a t u r e h a s s o m e TENDENCY THAT W I L L NOT BE S A T I S F I E D . THE V A R IO U S LE V ELS OF T E N D EN C IE S THAT E X I S T IN AN I N D I V I D U A L MAN I M P L I E S THE PRESENCE OF E V I L . FOR EXAMP LE , A MAN MAY WANT TO BUY A NEW CAR, AND AT THE SAME T I M E HE MAY WANT TO TAKE a t r i p t o E u r o p e . H e i s n o t f i n a n c i a l l y a b l e to do BOTH. At LEAST ONE OF THE T E N D E N C I E S OR D E S I R E S W I L L BE FR USTRA TED . E v I L OCCURS BECAUSE TE N D E N C IE S C O N F L I C T . ^ J a c q u e s M a r i t a i n , S t . T h o m a s a nd t h e P r o b l e m o f E v i l . ( M i l w a u k e e : 1 9 4 2 ) , p . 1 . b i p . . p . 2 . T h e s a m e a p p l i e s i n t h e a r e a o f m o r a l g o o o s a n d e v i l s . I f a ma n r e f r a i n s f r o m an u n k i n d w o r d , h e f r u s t r a t e s H I S TENDENCY TO APPEAR SMART, OR TO TAKE REVENGE; BUT HE PERFECTS H I S TENDENCY TO MORAL R E C T I T U D E , OR UNION W I T H G o d , OR SOCIAL NATURE AS A WHOLE. I f A MAN FASTS BECAUSE H I S R E L I G I O N PRE SC RIBE S C ER T A IN SUCH CUSTOMS, H I S TENDENCY TO S P I R I T U A L AWARENESS C O N F L I C T S WITH H I S TENDENCY TO FOOD. H e IS S A C R I F I C I N G ONE GOOD ( F O O D ) FOR ANOTHER. H e IS A SUBJECTUM MALI OF THE IPSUM MALUM HUNGER — BECAUSE HE I S AT THE SAME T I M E A BETTERED MAN BECAUSE OF S P I R I T U A L AWARENESS. IT WOULD SEEM THAT THERE IS ACTUALLY MORE E V I L THAN GOOD IN THE w o r l d . C o n s i d e r t h i s t e x t f r o m St . T h o m a s : F or a t h i n g t o be e v i l , o n e s i n g l e d e f e c t s u f f i c e s . Wh e r e a s , f o r i t t o be g o o d S I M P L Y , IT I S NOT ENOUGH FOR I T TO BE GOOD IN ONE P O I N T O N L Y , IT MUST BE GOOD IN EVERY R E S P E C T . 7 T h i s m e a n s t h a t t o be w h o l l y g o o d , a b e i n g m u s t h a v e a l l OF IT S PO TE N C I E S A C T U A L I Z E D , ANY S I T U A T I O N LESS THAN T H I S I M P L I E S THE PRESENCE OF E V I L . EVERY T H IN G THAT E X I S T S I S GOOD BECAUSE IT E X I S T S ; YET EV ER YTH IN G THAT E X I S T S , OTHER THAN GOD, IS A M IX T U R E OF GOOD AND E V I L 7 r AD HOC QUOD ALI QUOD S I T MALUM, S U F F I C I T UNUS SINGULAR I S D EFEC TU S; AD HOC AUTEM QUOD S I T S I M P L I C I T E R BONUM, NON S U F F I C I T SING ULARE BONUM, SED I N T E G R I T A S BON IT AT I S . SUMMA T h E O L O G I A E . I — I | , 2 0 , 2 . BECAUSE THE TEN DENCIE S L I M I T ONE ANOTHER. IN T H I S PHILOSOPHY OF E V I L , E V I L IS THE SAME AS L I M I T A T I O N . A n y l i m i t e d b e i n g h a s an a d m i x t u r e of e v i l b y t h e v e r y FACT OF IT S L I M I T A T I O N . THE NOTION THAT THERE WILL ALWAYS BE AN ADMIXTURE OF GOOD AND E V I L A P P L I E S EVEN IN THE AREA OF M O R A L I T Y . ONE MUST OFTEN S A C R I F I C E ONE MORAL MAXIM TO OBSERVE ANOTHER. AS LONG AS CONTINGENT BEINGS E X I S T — THAT I S , AS LONG AS BEIN GS E X I S T WHO ARE NOT THE CAUSE OF T H E IR OWN B E I N G — E V I L WILL E X I S T . T H I S IS SO FOR A TWOFOLD REASON. E v e r y c a u s e d b e i n g i s c a p a b l e o f d e s t r u c t i o n . As a RES ULT, DEATH HANGS OVER EVERY CREATURE AS A P O S S I B I L I T Y . T h i s u l t i m a t e e v i l i s a l w a y s a p o s s i b i l i t y . S e c o n d l y , SINCE THE CREATURE IS C O N T IN G E N T , HE DOES NOT HAVE COM PLETE CONTROL OVER H I S CIRCUMSTANCES AND, THUS IS ALWAYS IN DANGER OF F R U S T R A T I O N . RATHER THAN T h O M I S T I C P H I L O S OPHY BEING IGNORANT OF THE E X IS T E NC E OF E V I L , THOMISM HOLDS THAT E V I L IS U N I V E R S A L . A MORE ABSTRACT WAY OF LOOKING AT THE U N I V E R S A L I T Y OF E V I L COMES FROM THE A r I ST OTELEAN-THOMI ST IC EXPLANATION OF CHANGE. ACCORDING TO T H I S THEORY, ALL CREATED TH IN G S ARE COMPOSITES OF MATTER AND FORM. MATTER IS THE SUB STRATUM OF CHANGE AND FORM IS IT S D E T E R M I N A T I O N , THE SET OF C H A R A C T E R IS T IC S THAT MAKE THE I N D I V I D U A L TO BE OF A CERTAIN S P E C I E S . IT IS IM P O S S IB L E FOR ANY CHANGE TO 74 OCCUR WHICH DOES NOT E N T A I L SOME L O S S . THE STEAK CANNOT REMAIN A PART OF A L I V I N G STEER AND BECOME FOOD FOR ME AT THE SAME T I M E . "TH E P R I V A T I O N OF ANOTHER FORM IS THE NECESSARY CONSEQUENT OF THE PRESENCE OF A G IV EN Q f o r m . " E v i l o c c u r s a c c i d e n t a l l y i n e v e r y c h a n g e . S i n c e EVERY BETTERMENT IS A CHANGE, THE PR IC E OF THE GOOD IS THE A C C I D E N T A L A D M I S S I O N OF SOME E V I L . ONE CANNOT HAVE H I S CAKE AND EAT IT TOO. A n o t h e r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of e v i l i s t h a t i t a l w a y s E X I S T S IN GOOD T H I N G S . THERE IS NO ABSOLUTELY E V I L t h i n g . S i n c e e v i l i s a p r i v a t i o n , a t o t a l l y e v i l b e i n g WOULD BE TO TALLY D E P R I V E D OR N O N - E X I S T E N T . ALL THINGS THAT E X I S T HAVE AT LEAST THE ON TOLOGICAL LEVEL OF GOOD- q N ES S, THE GOODNESS OF E X I S T E N C E . AS STATED P R E V I O U S L Y , EVEN THE D E V I L , IF HE E X I S T S , IS GOOD. ABSOLUTE EV IL WOULD BE ABSOLUTE POTENCY OR N O T H I N G . A T H I R D C H A R A C T E R I S T I C OF E V I L ACCORDING TO o EX PARTE AUTEM FORMAE E F F E C T U S , PER ACCIDE NS MALUM I N C I D I T , INQUANTUM FORMAE A L I Q U I DE N E C E S S I T A T E A D JU N G IT U R P R I V A T I O A L T E R t U S FORMA. SUMMA CONTRA £ £ £ L L E & , M l, 10. 9 l M P O S S I B I L E EST AUTEM I N V E N I R I A L I Q U I D IN REBUS QUOD T O T A L I T E R BONO P R I V E T U R . SUMMA T H E O L O G I A E . I l - l l , 1 7 2 , 6 . S t . T h o m a s i s i t s n e c e s s i t y . E v i l i s a c o n s e q u e n c e o f t h e m u l t i p l i c i t y i n t h e u n i v e r s e . A c c o r d i n g to S t . T h o m a s , t h e u n i v e r s e w o u l d b e l e s s p e r f e c t i f t h e r e WERE LESS M U L T I P L I C I T Y . HOWEVER, SINC E THERE IS M U L T I P L I C I T Y IN THE U N IV E R S E THERE MUST BE L I M I T A T I O N ALSO 11 AND L I M I T A T I O N I M P L I E S E V I L . ANOTHER WAY OF STATING T H I S IS TO SAY T H A T , SI N C E ONLY GOD IS I N F I N I T E AND 12 WITHOUT L I M I T A T I O N , THE U N IV E RS E CANNOT BE PERFECT. IF IT WERE PE RFE CT, IT WOULD BE GOD. N ot ONLY IS PH YSIC AL E V I L NECESSARY, BUT MORAL E V I L IS ALSO AND IS PERMITTED BY GOD. AS SOON AS THE HUMAN WIL L IS ADMITTED TO BE F R E E , ONE MUST ADMIT THE N E C E S S I T Y OF MORAL F A I L U R E . WHEN THOMAS SPEAKS OF THE N E C E S S IT Y OF MORAL E V I L , HE I S , OF COURSE, SPEAKING AS A THEOLOGIAN WHO B E L I E V E S THAT MORAL E V I L OR, RATHER, THE PERSONAL R EC O G N IT IO N OF O N E 'S MORAL E V I L , IS A PATH TO A HIGHER GOOD, THAT I S , THE R E C O G N IT IO N OF THE GOOD NESS o f Go d . ^ T h o m a s h a s i n m i n d t h a t t h e m o r a l e v i l 10 S-UMMA CO N T R A G E N T E S . 1 1 1 . 7 .1 . “ I ' ! C o m m e n t u m i n Q u a t u q r L i b r q s S e n t e n t I ARUM. I , XL 1V , 1 , 2 . 1 2 £ j j m / L J .h .ii& L Q G .L te .', i , 4 e t 7 . ^ M a r i t a i n , OP. C I T . . P. 1 5 . 76 OF MAN HAS BEEN REDEEMEO THROUGH GRACE. IT IS M A N 'S WILL WHICH ALLOWS HIM TO FALL INTO MORAL E V I L ; BUT IT IS 1 4 THE SAME WILL WHICH TENDS TOWARDS GOD IN F R I E N D S H I P . T he n e c e s s i t y of e v i l r e b u k e s a n y p o s i t i o n t h a t WOULD HOLD THAT E V I L IS AN I L L U S I O N OR THAT E V I L WOULD DISAPPEAR IF ONE HAD S U F F I C I E N T F A I T H IN GOD. CONFORMITY t o t h e W i l l o f G od m a y m a k e t h e e v i l e a s i e r to b e a r , b u t 1 5 IT DOES NOT CAUSE IT TO CEASE TO E X I S T . ^ A n o t h e r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of e v i l i s i t s p o w e r or i t s A B I L I T Y TO CAUSE. A C T U A L L Y , E V I L AS A P R I V A T I O N , A LACK, HAS NO POWER IN I T S E L F . I n F ACT, ONE OF THE TRAGIC PARADOXES OF E V I L IS THAT THE POWER OF E V I L IS THE POWER 1 6 OF THE GOOD IN WHICH IT OPERATES. T h e n w h a t i s t h e p o w e r of e v i l ? I t i s THE VERY POWER OF THE GOOD THAT THE E V I L WOUNDS AND PREYS UPON. THE MORE POWERFUL T H I S GOOD IS THE MORE POWERFUL THE E V I L W I L L BE NOT BY V I R T U E OF I T S E L F , BUT BY V I R T U E OF T H I S GOOD. '7 1 4 IJ P E H -, p . 1 9 - > P . 1 2 . *16 .SlUlM.A. .C .Q .N W .Q.S.H.T.ES, M l , 9 . 17 ' M a r i t a i n , OP. C I T . P. 2 . 77 T he e v i l t h a t i s d o n e i s p r o p o r t i o n a l to t h e g o o d t h a t COULD HAVE BEEN DONE BY THE GOOD. A MOTHER * S LOVE IS A GREAT GOOD. BUT WHEN IT IS ABSENT, THE POWER FOR GOOD THAT A MOTHER WOULD HAVE BEEN OVER A C H I L D ' S L I F E BE COMES A PROPORTIONAL POWER FOR E V I L . THE IN T E L L E C T OF MAN, THE GREATEST POWER IN THE U N I V E R S E , CAN PRODUCE WORKS OF ART, NOBLE L I T E R A T U R E , PEACE AMONG MEN. T H I S SAME I N T E L L E C T , WHEN PERVERTED , PRODUCES DISCORD AND TRAGEDY. S t a t e d m e t a p h y s i c a l l y , e v i l w o r k s a c c i d e n t a l l y ; THAT I S , IT IS THE P O S I T I V E R E A L IT Y IN THE SUBSTANCE THAT ACTS, BUT SINCE THAT P O S I T I V E R E A L I T Y IS "DAMAGED” BY E V I L , IT PRODUCES E V I L RES ULTS. THE E V I L IN THE SUBSTANCE, BY I T S E L F , DOES NOTHIN G; IT ACTS THROUGH THE GOOD IN THE SUBSTANCE. IN OTHER WORDS, SINC E E V I L IS A P R I V A T I O N OF THE GOOD THAT SHOULD BE THERE AND SINCE GOOD AND BEING ARE THE SAME IN R E A L I T Y , EV IL I S A P R I V A T I O N OF BEING THAT OUGHT TO BE THERE. THUS , THE BEING IS D E F EC T IV E AND T H I S D EFEC TIVEN ES S IN THE B EIN G IS THE CAUSE OF ANY E V I L RESULT. tT FOLLOWS THAT E V I L IS PRODUCED ALSO AC CIDE N T A LL Y . N a t u r e n e v e r i n t e n d s e v i l . S i n c e t h e good a n d AN END ARE OF THE SAME NATURE, E V I L CAN SEVER BE IN TEN DED . WHAT IS INTENDED IS THE GOOD THAT ACC I DEN — 78 xlg TALLY PRODUCES E V I L . THE CAUSE OF E V I L I S A CERTAIN DEFECT OR L I M I T A T I O N IN THE GOOD. FOR EXAMPLE, A STUDENT WISHES TO LEARN THE ATOMIC WEIGHTS OF THE EL EMENTS. H lS j MEMORY G I V E S HIM THE A B I L I T Y TO REMEMBER IN GENERAL BUT, SINCE H I S MEMORY IS L I M I T E D , HE I S UNABLE TO REMEMBER ALL T H I N G S . A t THE T I M E OF THE E X A M I N A T I O N , I F HE DOES NOT RECALL THE W E I G H T S , HE MAY SUFFER THE E V I L OF F A I L URE. F a i l i n g an e x a m i n a t i o n i s an e v i l b e c a u s e i t i s AT LEAST THE FRUSTRATIO N OF A D E S I R E ; BUT IT IS AN E V I L THAT RESULTS FROM THE L I M I T A T I O N OF A NATURAL GOOD ( M I S m e m o r y ) • E v i l i s p r o d u c e d a c c i d e n t a l l y b e c a u s e t h e n a t u r a l t e n d e n c y o r t h e a p p e t i t e or t h e a c t o f w i l l d e s i r e s one 1 9 THING BUT PRODUCES ANOTHER. y FOR EXAMPLE, A TREE HAS A NATURAL TENDENCY TO GROW, AND T H I S GROWTH IS GOOD; BUT WHILE GROWING, THE TREE MAY DISTURB THE FOUNDATIONS OF A HOUSE AND A C CIDE NT A L L Y PRODUCE E V I L . A n ANIMAL MAS AN A P P E T I T I V E RESPONSE CONSEQUENT UPON SM ELLIN G SOME MEAT, BUT I F THE MEAT HAS BEEN PO IS O N E D, THERE IS AN E V I L EFFECT TO T H I S NATURAL GOOD. A MAN DES IR ES TO K I L L A DEER AND M IS TA K ES A SOUND IN THE WOODS FOR A DEER WHEN 1 8 S _ umma Cont r a G en t e s . I l l , 6 . ^ D e M a l o . I , 3 . 79 I T IS ANOTHER MAN WHOM HE SHOOTS. THE GOOD OF SPORT AND R ELAXATIO N HAS A C C ID E N T A L L Y PRODUCED AN E V I L . A n o t h e r w a y o f s a y i n g t h a t t h e r e i s no p e r se CAUSE OF E V I L , BUT MERELY A PER ACC I DENS CAUSE, IS TO i SAY THAT E V I L IS NEVER D I R E C T L Y D E S I R E D , BUT DES IR ED I N D I R E C T L Y BECAUSE OF THE GOOD IN WHICH THE E V I L I N HERES. 20 S i n c e t h e r a t i o o f g o o d i s t h e r a t i o o f I A P P E T I A B I L I T Y . • . AND S I N C E E V I L IS OPPOSED j | TO GOOD, I T IS I M P O S S IB L E THAT E V I L AS i ! SUCH SHOULD BE SOUGHT BY THE A P P E T I T E , E I T H E R NATURAL OR ANIMAL OR BY THE I N T E L LECTUAL A P P E T I T E W.HICH IS THE W I L L . NEVER T H E L E S S , E V I L MAY BE SOUGHT ACCIDE NTALLY SO FAR AS I T ACCOMPANIES A G O O D . * ' God is t h e c a u s e o f e v i l o n l y in an a c c i d e n t a l m a n n e r . S i n c e He c a u s e s a l l g o o d t h i n g s w i t h t h e i r l i m i t a t i o n s , He h a s p e r m i t t e d , o r a c c i d e n t a l l y c a u s e d , e v i l . W h a t He c a u s e s o r p e r m i t s , h o w e v e r , i s t h e g o o d , AND THE E V I L IS CAUSED A C C I D E N T A L L Y . No ONE D IR E C T L Y CAUSES E V I L BECAUSE E V I L , AS SUCH, ( I PSUM MALUM*) IS NEVER CAUSED. THE E X I S T E N C E OF E V I L IS NOT IN C O M P A T I B L E ! 20 R a t i o i s o n e o f t h o s e L a t i n w o r d s t h a t i s a l m o s t UNTRANSLATABLE. HERE I T IS USED TO MEAN NATURE OR P R I N C I P L E OF O P E R A T I O N . 2 1 C um r a t i o b o n i s i t r a t i o a p p e t i b i l i s . . . m a l u m AUTEM 0PP0 NATUR BONOJ I M P O S S I B I L I EST QUOD ALI QUOD MALUM INQUANTUM H U J U S M O D I, APPET ATUR, NEQUE A P P E T I T U n a t u r a l i , NEQUE AN I M A L I , NEQUE I NTELLEC TUAL I , QUI EST VO LUNTAS. 80 w i t h Go d ' s p r o v i d e n c e or g o v e r n a n c e of t h e u n i v e r s e * St . T h o m a s ' s p o i n t h e r e is p e r h a p s t o o a b s t r a c t . He a r g u e s t h a t d i v i n e p r o v i d e n c e i s d i r e c t e d o n l y t o w a r d THE PRE SERVA TION OF THE S P E C IE S AND THE E V I L TO AN I N D I V I D U A L IS A C C I D E N T A L . NOW, SINCE I T IS IN POTENCY TO ALL FORMS, MATTER IS INDEED ORDERED TO HAVE ALL OF THEM; HOWEVER, A CER TAIN ONE OF T H E M IS NOT N E C ES SA R IL Y O R D E R E D TO I T , S J.N C E WITHOUT T H I S C E R T A IN ONE IT / T H E SPECIE.fi/ BE ACTUALLY P E R F E C T . 2 2 j Wha t i s h e r e m e a n t i s t h a t , i f a p a r t i c u l a r dog i s born j B L I N D , T H I S CAN BE A T TRIB UTED TO THE DEFECTDOR L I M I T A— j T I O N OF M ATTER, AND NATURE HAS NOT ERRED SINCE MOST ANIMALS HAVE T H E I R S I G H T . T H I S ARGUMENT LOSES ALL WEIGHT WHEN A P P L I E D TO THE HUMAN S P E C I E S . SlN C E EACH I N D I V I D U A L MAN IS A PERSON, HE IS OF I N F I N I T E WORTH AND THE E V I L DONE TO HIM CANNOT BE R A T I O N A L I Z E D AS MERELY i DONE TO AN I N D I V I D U A L IN THE S P E C I E S . IN SUM, LET US SAY THAT E V I L IS A LACK OF A DUE GOOD. I T IS A P R I V A T I O N OF B E I N G , A LACK OF POWER OR T a m e n ALIQUOD MALUM A PP E T IT U R PER ACCIDE NS IN QUANTUM CONSEQUITUR AD ALIQUOD BONUM. SUM M A T h E O L O G I A E . I , 1 9 , 9 . 22 Ma t e r i a a u t e m , quum s i t i n p o t e n t i a ad o m n e s FORMAS, OMNES QUIDEM NATA EST HABERE; NULLA TAMEN EST El DEB I T A , QUUM S I N E QUAVIS UNA EARUM P O S S I T ESSE P E R - FECTA IN ACTU. SU M M A CONTRA G E N T E S . I l l , 6. 81 A C T U A L I Z A T I O N THAT SHOULD BE TH E R E. IT ACTS A C CIDE NT A L L Y THROUGH THE GOOD THAT I S THERE AND WITH THE POWER OF THE GOOD THAT IS ABSENT. I T IS A U N I V E R S A L , NECESSARY C O N - I ! 0 1TI ON OF THE M U L T I P L I C I T Y FOUND IN OUR U N I V E R S E . £M P .T £K ,f-Q iiR NATURAL. V E G E TA T IV E . S E N S IT IV E AND RATIONAL VALUES T he p u r p o s e of t h i s c h a p t e r i s t o s e r v e as a TR A N S IT IO N FROM THE LAST TWO CHAPTERS, IN WHICH THE j NATURE OF VALUE AND OISVALUE WERE DISCUSSED IN GENERAL, | | j TO SUBSEQUENT CHAPTERS IN WHICH S P E C I F I C VALUES AND | DISVALUES WILL BE DISCUSSED. I I Wh i l e c o n t e m p o r a r y a u t h o r s l i m i t t h e i r d i s c u s s i o n ! i | | i i OF VALUE TO THOSE VALUES WHICH AFFECT MAN, A METAPHYS- : ICAL APPROACH TO THE SUBJECT HOLDS THAT THERE ARE TEN DENCIES AND CONSEQUENTLY, VALUES FOR EVERY LEVEL OF B E IN G . T h i s a p p r o a c h t o v a l u e h o l d s t h a t v a l u e s and TENDENCIES ARE PRESENT EVEN THOUGH THERE IS NO CONSCIOUS INTEREST TAKEN IN THE OBJECT. ALTHOUGH SOME CONTEMPORARY AUTHORS SHOW SOME INTEREST IN WHAT I CALL S E N S I T IV E VALUES, OR THE VALUES WHICH ARE DEPENDENT ON SENSE KNOWLEDGE, MOST PRESENT DAY AUTHORS DEAL WITH WHAT I HAVE CALLED RATIONAL VALUES, OR THOSE VALUES THAT ARE RECOGNIZED IN T E L L E C T U A L L Y . THERE ARE, HOWEVER, TWO OTHER LEVELS OF VALUES, THE NATURAL LEVEL AND THE VEGE T A T IV E l e v e l . T h e s e a r e of i n t e r e s t t o t h e m e t a p h y s i c i a n , EVEN THOUGH THEY MAY NOT BE OF PARTICULAR INTEREST TO THE VALUE THEORIST AS SUCH. 8 2 I A . T H E_N.AT.gR AL AND V E G E T A T I V E L E V E L S OF A x i O L O G I C A L ! VALftS, . T h e o n t o l o g i c a l l e v e l o f v a l u e h o l d s t h a t e v e r y t h i n g THAT E X I S T S , BECAUSE I T E X I S T S , I S GOOD. THAT I S , | EV E R Y T H IN G S A T I S F I E S A B E I N G ' S TENDENCY TO A D E T E R M IN A TE i TYPE OF B E I N G . ONCE A THIN G E X I S T S , IT E X I S T S W IT H A i C E R T A IN NATURE, OR SOURCE OF A C T I V I T I E S . T H I S SOURCE i ' OF A C T I V I T I E S PRODUCES C E R T A IN T E N D E N C I E S , THE S A T I S FA CTIO N OF WHICH D E TERM IN ES A X I O L O G I C A L V A L U E . S l N C E ‘ NOT ONLY ANIMALS AND MEN HAVE T E N D E N C I E S , BUT PLANTS AND IN A N I M A T E OBJECTS A L SO , THERE ARE L EV E L S OF VALUE PROPER TO THESE LATTER UNCONSCIOUS CREATURES . I t IS TO THE SECOND OF T H E S E , THE I N A N I M A T E O B J E C T S , THAT WE SHALL F I R S T DRAW OUR A T T E N T I O N . S p e a k i n g o f t h e h u m a n l e v e l o f v a l u e , S t . T h o m a s s a y s : " N a t u r e i n c l i n e s u s to h o p e f o r t h e g o o d w h i c h IS PROP OR TIONATE TO HUMAN N A T U R E . " I f WE COMBINE THAT TEXT W I T H H I S T EACHIN G IN I , 8 7 , 4-j THAT THERE I S AN I N C L I N A T I O N CONSEQUENT UPON EVERY FORM, WE MAY A R R IV E AT THE CONCLUSION THAT NATURE OR FORM I N C L I N E S ALL CREATURES TO S T R I V E FOR WHATEVER IS BEST FOR THEM. E ach l e v e l o f b e i n g s t r i v e s to b e c o m e p e r f e c t i n o p e - A N a t u r a s u f f i c i e n t e r i n c l i n a t ad SPERANDUM BONUM, NATURAE PROPORT IO N A TU M. SUMMA T h E Q L Q G I A E , l l - l l , 2 2 , *1 AD "I. R A T IO N , AS WELL AS PERFECT IN S P E C IE S . T he r e a d e r i s a s k e d to r e c a l l t h e m e t a p h y s i c a l P O S ITIO N S PRESENTED IN CHAPTER ONE. FORM DETERMINES A j BEING TO BE AND ACT IN A DETERMINATE MANNER. STATED ANOTHER WAY, FORM IS THE SOURCE OF POWERS OR TENDENCIES, THUS THE SOURCE OF VALUE. I T he t e n d e n c y of t h e s u b s t a n t i a l for m i s to b e j i UNITED IN MATTER OR, TO SAY THE SAME T H I N G , TO TEND | TOWARD E X IS T E N C E . T H I S IS THE END OF GENERATION OF WHICH I PREVIOUSLY SPOKE, AND PRODUCES WHAT I PREVIOUSLY CALLED THE FUNDAMENTAL ONTOLOGICAL GOOD. THE TENDENCIES CAUSED BY ACCIDENTAL FORMS, WHEN S A T I S F I E D , PRODUCE ONTOLOGICAL AND AXIOLOGICAL VALUES. Be f o r e p r o c e e d i n g to w h a t i s t h e m a i n i n t e n t of T H IS CHAPTER, THE LEVELS OF VALUE, WE MUST MAKE ONE MORE D I S T I N C T I O N . T h i s i s t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n l i v i n g and N O N - L I V I N G WAYS OF B E IN G . AGAIN OUR EXPERIENCE SHOWS THAT ALL THINGS CHANGE. BUT THERE IS A FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCE IN THE TYPES OF CHANGE IN WHICH SOME BEINGS e n g a g e . T h e r e a r e b e i n g s who a r e c h a n g e d o n l y b y a n o t h e r AND THERE ARE OTHER BEINGS WHO, IN ADDITIO N TO BEING CHANGED BY ANOTHER, ARE ALSO CHANGED BY THEMSELVES. THE FIRST ARE THE MORE COMMON. THE P O SITIO N OF THE KEYS ON A TYPEWRITER ARE CHANGED BY THE FINGERS ABOVE THE KEYS. T he m i n u t e h a n d on a w a t c h i s c h a n g e d by t h e s p r i n g s , 85 GEARS AND SO FORTH WITH THE WATCH. BUT THE GROWTH OF A TREE IS NOT L IK E T H I S . GRANTED, THE TREE NEEDS WATER, SUNSHINE AND CHEMICALS IN THE SOIL IN ORDER TO GROW; BUT THESE ALONE ARE NOT ENOUGH. WITNESS A "DEAD" TREE. A l l t h e s u n s h i n e , c h e m i c a l s and w a t e r i n t h e w o r l d w i l l i NOT CAUSE IT TO GROW. A DOG NEEDS A BONE OR SOME OTHER OBJECT IN ORDER TO SEE, BUT THE BONE BY ITSELF DOES NOT s : EXPLAIN S IG H T , NOR DOES REFLECTED LIGHT BECAUSE THE ! LIGHT IS REFLECTED TO THE DOG'S COLLAR ALSO BUT THE : COLLAR DOES NOT SEE. A L I V I N G BEING CHANGES I T S E L F , THAT I S , IT IS ITSELF THE EXPLANATION OF ITS CHANGE OR PERFECTION. IT MAY USE OTHER THINGS TO ATTAIN ITS PER FECTIO N, BUT THESE OTHER THINGS ARE INSTRUMENTS IN THE SELF-PERFECTING PROCESS, RATHER THAN CAUSES. THE A C T I V I T Y ENGAGED IN BY AN INANIMATE BEING IS CALLED "T R A N S IE N T ” A C T I V I T Y , BECAUSE THE CAUSAL FORCE GOES ACROSS ( TRANS—I RE*) FROM THE CAUSE TO THE EFFECT. L I V I N G BEINGS ENGAGE IN "IMMANENT” A C T I V I T Y , BECAUSE, THE CAUSAL FORCE REMAINS IN ( IMMANERE^ ) THE CAUSE WHICH IS ALSO THE EFFECT. S i n c e t h e good i s t h a t w h i c h s a t i s f i e s a t e n d e n c y , THERE ARE AS MANY VALUES OR TYPES OF GOOD AS THERE ARE TYPES OF TENDENCIES. AXIOLOGICAL GOOD IS THEREFORE D IV ID E D INTO THE NATURAL GOOD— THAT I S , THOSE WHICH SATISFY INANIMATE TENDENCIES; VEGETATIVE GOOD— THAT 86 j l S , THOSE WHICH S A T I S F Y S A S I C B IO L O G IC A L T E N D E N C I E S ; \ S E N S I T I V E GOOD——THAT WHICH S A T I S F Y TE N D E N C IE S BASED ON SENSE KNOWLEDGE; AND RATIONAL GOOD— THAT WHICH S A T IS F Y j I N T E L L E C T U A L L Y AROUSED T E N D E N C I E S . NATURAL AND VEGE T A T I V E GOOD IS UNCONSCIOUS THAT I S , I T IS IMPLANTED BY |THE S U B S T A N T IA L FORM IN THE COMPOSITE; WHILE S E N S I T I V E OR I IRATIONAL GOODS ARE AC Q U IR ED . Na t u r a l good i s t h e r e s u l t of n o n - l i v i n g f or ms WHICH DIR ECT THE ROCK TO F A L L , WATER TO REFRACT L I G H T , A BOAT TO BE BUOYANT. THESE FORMS ARE THE MET APHYSIC AL SOURCES OF WHAT IS I N V E S T I G A T E D BY THE SC IE NCES OF PH Y S IC S AND C H E M I S T R Y . THE VALUES WHICH S A T I S F Y THESE T E NDENCIE S ARE UNCONSCIOUS AND IN VO LUNTARY . THEY ARE FOUND IN ALL LEVELS OF CREATURES UP TO AND IN C L U D IN G MAN. V e g e t a t i v e good i s t h e r e s u l t of l i v i n g f o r m s w h i c h D IR EC T THE PLANT TO ABSORB WATER, A TREE TO HEAL IT S OWN WOUNDS, AN ANIMAL TO GROW. THESE FORMS ARE THE META PH Y SIC AL SOURCES OF WHAT IS ST U D IE D BY THE S C IE N C E OF B IO L O G Y . T he VALUES WHICH S A T I S F Y THESE T E N D EN C IE S ARE UNCONSCIOUS AND INVOLUNTARY AND ARE FOUND IN ALL LEVELS OF CREATURES. 87 B . T he S e n s i t i v e L e v e l of A x i o l o g i o a l V a l u e "To KNOW IS TO BECOME THE O T H E R ." T « IS MEANS THAT j i | ! IN THE ACT OF KNOWLEDGE, THE KNOWER BECOMES IN T E N T IO N - i 2 ' ! |ALLY UNITED TO THE OBJECT KNOWN. T h IS IN TE N TION A LITY | I S NOT AN ACT OF THE WILL BY WHICH THE KNOWER INTENOS TO j |DO SOMETHING, BUT I T REFERS TO A CERTAIN EXTENSION OF THE | SELF TOWARDS THE OTHER. WHEN A KNOWER SEES THE WHITE FOAM OF THE WAVES BREAKING ON THE SHORE, H I S SENSE OF SIGHT ! HAS AN ACCIDENTAL M O D I F I C A T I O N , A NEW WAY OF BEING WHICH IT DID NOT POSSESS BEFORE. THAT PHENOMENON WHICH IN THE WAVES IS W H IT E, NOW BECOMES A WHITE MANIFESTATION IN H IS SENSE OF S IG H T . To KNOW I S , FOR THE KNOWER, TO TAKE UPON HIMSELF WHAT CAUSES THE OTHER TO BE WHAT IT I S . To KNOW IS TO REC E IV E, IN AN ACCIDENTAL MANNER, THE FORM OF THE OTHER THINGS. S e n s e k n o w l e d g e i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by t h e k n o w l e d g e OF THE OBJECT IN IT S I N D I V I D U A L I T Y . FOR EXAMPLE, THE MIND CAN T H IN K OF "W H IT E" AS THAT PREDICATE APPLICABLE TO ANY WHITE THIN G. BUT ONLY THE SENSE OF SIGHT CAN SEE THE IN D IV ID U A L WHITE OBJECT. THE MIND CAN CONCEIVE OF "APPLE P I E " AS APPLYING TO ANY APPLE P I E , BUT ONLY THE SENSE OF SMALL CAN PERCEIVE THE ODOR OF AN IN D IV ID U A L 2 INTENDER EI TO TEND TOWARDS. 88 P I E , AND ONLY THE SENSE OF TASTE CAN GRASP THE FLAVOR OF THE IN D IV ID U A L E X IS T IN G P I E . S i n c e t h e r e i s a t e n d e n c y c o n s e q u e n t u pon e v e r y FORM, EACH AWARENESS THROUGH SENSATION BRINGS WITH IT A TENDENCY TO OBTAIN THE OBJECT KNOWN, OR A TENDENCY AWAY FROM AN UNPLEASANT OBJECT KNOWN.^ As SOON AS A KNOWER COMES INTO CONTACT WITH A PLEASANT OBJECT, THERE IS AN IMMEDIATE TENDENCY TO POSSESS THAT OBJECT. T h i s c o n t a c t does n o t h a v e to be t h e k i n d of IMMEDIATE CONTACT THAT OCCURS IN THE SO-CALLED "EXTERNAL" s e n s e s . Me m o r y , i m a g i n a t i o n and i n s t i n c t a r e n o n - IMMEDIATE FORMS OF CONTACT BY WHICH THE KNOWER TENOS TO OBTAIN THE OBJECT KNOWN. THE GOOD CAN BE AN OBJECT OF MEMORY, AS, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE CASE OF ONE WHO REMEMBERS A PLEASANT AFTERNOON BY A LAKE. IN S T IN C T PROVIDES A TENOENCY TOWARDS THE GOOD, AS IN THE CASE OF A CHILD WHO CRIES WHEN HE HEARS A LOUD N O I S E , WITHOUT BEING AWARE OF THE POSSIBLE DANGER IN THE NOISE. A l t h o u g h t h e i n t e l l e c t a n d , t h u s , i n t e l l e c t u a l l y KNOWN VALUES ARE MORE S P E C IF IC A L L Y HUMAN, THE SENSE LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE AND VALUE IS THE MORE FUNDAMENTAL. T h e r e i s a t w o f o l d r e a s o n for t h i s : T he f i r s t i s t h a t ALL KNOWLEDGE BEGINS IN THE SENSES. INTELLECTUAL JttE.frLO.SIAE, I - I I , 8 , 1 . See a l s o : 1 , 8 7 , 4-. I 8 9 j KN OWL EDG E AND THE VALUES CONSEQUENT UPON IT ARE V A L I D TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY ARE BASED UPON SENSE E X P E R I E N C E . T h e SECOND REASON i s t h a t , s i n c e a p p e t i t e i s t h e t e n d e n c y TOWARD POSSESS ION AND SINCE ONLY I N D I V I D U A L OBJECTS E X I S T , joNLY A TENDENCY TOWARDS S A T I S F A C T I O N IN AN I N D I V I D U A L CAN I I b E FULLY S A T I S F I E D . THE INTELLECTUAL VALUES ARE S A T I S F I E D ONLY IN THE I N D I V I D U A L R E A L I T I E S KNOWN BY THE j SENSES• F or e x a m p l e , a ma n MAY TEND TOWARD " l o v e OF H I S I ’ N E I G H B O R ” A S A N E T H I C A L I D E A , B U T L O V E O F N E I G H B O R i E X I S T S O N L Y I N T H E I N D I V I D U A L G O O D D O N E T O T H I S O R T H A T I j | 1N D I V I DUAL MAN. I T IS IMPORTANT THAT NO CONFUSION BE MADE BETWEEN THE S E N S I T I V E LEVEL OF VALUE AND C ER T A IN ASPECTS OF THE RATIONAL LEVEL OF VALUE. S E N S I T I V E GOODS ARE THOSE BEINGS WHICH S A T I S F Y A P P E T I T E S AROUSED BY THE SENSES. IFOR E X A M P L E , A C O L D B E E R S A T I S F I E S T H A T P A R T I C U L A R j jLONGING ON A WARM AFTERNOON. HOWEVER, IF ONE WERE TO BE ASKED THE FOLLOWING Q U ES T IO N ! "DO YOU L I K E B E E R ? " , H I S ANSWER WOULD BE A COMBINATION OF S E N S I T I V E VALUES 'AND RATIONAL V A L U E S . He HAS NEVER TASTED THE UNIV ERSAL ; " b e e r . " T h e r e f o r e when h e m a k e s a u n i v e r s a l d e c l a r a t i o n THAT HE L I K E S B EE R, HE IS STA TIN G H I S UNIV ERS AL OR RATIONAL A P P E T I T E , WHICH IS BASED ON A S E N S I T I V E A P P E T I T E . S e n s i t i v e g o o d s a l w a y s e x i s t i n t h e i n d i v i d u a l SINCE SENSE KNOWLEDGE IS ONLY AN AWARENESS OF I N D I V I 90 d u a l s . Qu e s t i o n s of g e n e r a l t a s t e s and p r e f e r e n c e s are QUESTIONS OF RATIO N AL VALUES . C. T he Ra t i o n a l L e v e l of V a l u e T he I N T E L L E C T OR THE MIND I S THAT KNOWING POWER WHICH BELONGS S P E C I F I C A L L Y TO HUMAN BEINGS AND WHICH CAN GRASP R E A L I T Y IN A N O N -1 N D I VI DUAL OR UNIV ERS AL WAY. THE TEN D EN C IE S THAT RESULT FROM T H I S UNIVERSAL WAY OF KNOWING G IV E US SUCH VALUES AS LOVE OF COUNTRY, L I F E ' S A M B I T I O N S , N AND JOY OF G I V I N G . T he s e n s e s p r e s e n t man w i t h i n d i v i d u a l g o o d s . At F I R S T , THE KNOWLEDGE WHICH THE IN T E L L E C T HAS IS MERELY A U N I V E R S A L I Z A T I O N OF THESE SENSE DATA. FOR EXAMPLE, THE SENSE OF S I G H T PE RCEIV E S THE COLOR W H I T E ; THE MIND KNOWS THE CONCEPT W H I T E . AS O N E 'S EX PE RIENCE GROWS, SEVERAL SENSATA ARE COMBINED UNDER ONE IN T E L L EC T U AL CONCEPT. F o r EXAMPLE, THE SOFT TOUCH OF WARM F L E S H , THE SWEET ODOR OF PERFUME AND POWDER, THE PLEASANT, CALM TONE OF V O IC E ARE COMBINED WITH THE SOUND MMAMAn TO FORM IN THE M I N D THE CONCEPT OF THE PARTICULAR R E A L IT Y WHICH THE C HIL D W IL L LATER KNOW TO BE A MOTHER. W i t h f u r t h e r e x p e r i e n c e s , t h e s e n o t i o n s ar e w i d e n e d to WOMEN, TO HUMAN BEINGS IN GENERAL, AND SO FORTH. A t ONE P O I N T , EACH MAN BECOMES S E L F - C O N S C I O U S . A t T H I S 91 PO IN T HE IS CAPABLE OF BECOMING A MATURE, EVALUATING j | b e i n g . S i m o n e de B e a u v o i r s a y s t h a t m o r a l i t y i s p o s s i b l e i i jONLY AFTER ONE BECOMES AWARE OF H I M S E L F WITH A PAST AND ! A 4 a jA FUTURE. A C H IL D IS NEVER MORAL FOR T H IS REASON. A ! |MAN IS WHAT HE VA L U ES , AND IT IS ON THE LEVEL OF I N T E L LECT THAT ONE IS CAPABLE OF S U F F I C I E N T S E L F - R E F L E C T I O N j iso THAT HE KNOWS WHAT H I S L I F E AND PERSON CAN BE. IN i | A D D I T I O N HE SEES THE A L T E R N A T IV E S WHICH H IS ENVIRONMENT I PRESENTS TO H I M . I n THE L IG H T OF H I S PAST E X P E R I E N C E S , ! A MATURE PERSON CAN BECOME FULLY MATURE AND FULLY A PERSON BY SE EIN G VARIOUS VALUES AND T H E IR R E L A T I V E M ERIT IN H I S L I F E , CHOOSING THE ONES WHICH HE T H IN K S CONTRIBUTE MOST TO H I S IDEAL S E L F - I M A G E AND R EJ E C T IN G THOSE THAT DETRACT. T h e s e r a t i o n a l v a l u e s f a l l i n t o s e v e r a l t y p e s . T h e f i r s t a r e a e s t h e t i c v a l u e s . B e a u t i f u l t h i n g s a r e GOOD BECAUSE THE PERSON HAS P ER CEIV ED THAT THE MIND CAN TRANSCEND FUNCTION AND AR RIVE AT ORDER. AFTER ONE HAS DEVELOPED H I S TEN D EN C IE S TO BEAUTY, HE THEN IS CAPABLE OF DEVELOPING MORAL V A L U E S . MORAL VALUES ARE GOODS THAT ADD ORDER AND PE R FE C TIO N TO H I S OWN L I F E . S l N C E MAN 'S L I F E IS NOT AN INSULAR ONE, BUT DEPENDS ON OTHERS AND IS F U L F I L L E D IN OTHERS, SO CIETAL VALUES ARE NEXT D E V E L - 4 E t h i _cs of A m b i g u i t y . ( N ew Y o r k : 1 9 4 8 ) , p . 2 7 . 92 OPED. AS MAN GROWS MORE IN H I S SE L F-E S T E E M AND IN THE ESTEEM OF OTHERS, HE DEVELOPS THE VALUE OF L O V E . F I N A L L Y , SEEKING FOR AN U L T I M A T E VALUE TO G I V E MEANING AND ORDER TO ALL OF H I S OTHER VALUES , HE F IN D S THE T H EO - LOGICAL V A L U E . SUBSEQUENT CHAPTERS WI LL DEAL WITH THE j MORAL, S O C I E T A L , AND THEOLOGICAL VALUES . MORAL V A L U E -A W .P.1SVALVE | | T h e m e t a p h y s i c s o f m o r a l v a l u e i s a c o n s e q u e n c e o f j T H E M E T A P H Y S I C S O F V A L U E I N G E N E R A L . AS W E H A V E S E E N I N P R E V I O U S C H A P T E R S * T H O M A S ’ S M E T A P H Y S I C A L C O N C E P T O F T H E I 7 I I I j ' I j G O O D I S T H A T W H I C H S A T I S F I E S A T E N D E N C Y . S l N C E T H O M A S j H O L D S T H A T T H E R E I S A H U M A N N A T U R E — T H A T I S , A H U M A N i ’ ; I i S O U R C E O F A C T I V I T I E S O R H U M A N F O R M W H I C H I S C O M M O N T O i A L L M E N , I T F O L L O W S T H A T T H E R E A R E C E R T A I N P E R F E C T I O N S i ' : O F M A N T H A T A R E C O M M O N T O A L L M E N . M O R A L V A L U E I S D I S T I N G U I S H E D F R O M O T H E R V A L U E S I N T H A T M O R A L V A L U E F U L F I L L S M A N A S M A N , T H A T I S , F U L F I L L S M A N f S B A S I C H U M A N N A T U R E W H I L E O T H E R V A L U E S F U L F I L L P A R T I C U L A R T E N D E N C I E S O F A N I N D I V I D U A L M A N . T h o s e a c t i o n s w h i c h c o m p l e t e t h i s b a s i c h u m a n N A T U R E A R E M O R A L L Y G O O D , A N D T H O S W H I C H F R U S T R A T E I T A R E M O R A L L Y E V I L . M O R A L L Y G O O D A C T I O N S A R E T H O S E W H I C H A R E C O M P A T I B L E W I T H H U M A N N A T U R E , W H I L E M O R A L L Y E V I L A C T I O N S A R E T H O S E W I T H A R E I N C O M P A T I B L E W I T H T H I S N A T U R E . A . M o r a l V a l u _ e _ s - A M D _ t _ h s O t h e r A x i q l q g i c a l V a l u e s . E a c h t h i n g i n t h e u n i v e r s e h a s a p o i n t a t w h i c h i t 9 3 ! 9 4 is p e r f e c t . A l t h o u g h a s t e a k c a n b e t o o w e l l d o n e f o r O N E P E R S O N A N D Y E T T O O R A W F O R A N O T H E R , T H E R E I S A P O I N T i | A T W H I C H I T I S P E R F E C T F O R E A C H P E R S O N ; O N E P O I N T A T ! | I W H I C H I T S G O A L H A S B E E N A C H I E V E O . IN T H E C A S E O F A j j ' [ j S E L F - C O N S C I O U S , S E L F - D E T E R M I N I N G B E I N G , T H E P E R F E C T I O N ; I S S E L F - I N D U C E D . A M A N C A N B E T O O K I N D O R N O T S U F F I - j [ I | | C I E N T L Y K I N D , B U T I T I S H I S D E C I S I O N T O M A K E . B e B R I N G S j | H I M S E L F T O H I S O W N P R O P E R D E G R E E O F P E R F E C T I O N . T h I S i B R I N G I N G O F O N E S E L F T O P E R F E C T I O N I S M O R A L I T Y . A M O R A L ! G O O D I S A N Y W I L L E D O B J E C T W H I C H T E N D S T O B R I N G A M A N T O H I S U L T I M A T E P E R F E C T I O N , W H E R E A S A M O R A L E V I L I S A N Y W I L L E D O B J E C T W H I C H T E N D S T O T A K E A W A Y F R O M T H A T F I N A L P E R F E C T I O N O F H I S N A T U R E . M o r a l p e r f e c t i o n i s a r e t e . It i s t h e d e v e l o p m e n t O F E A C H O F O N E ’ S T E N D E N C I E S T O T H E I R H I G H E S T P O I N T O F F U L F I L L M E N T . A L T H O U G H T H E A R E T E O F E A C H M A N D I F F E R S A S T O P A R T I C U L A R V I R T U E S , F O R E X A M P L E , C O U R A G E O R T E M P E R A N C E , T h o m a s w o u l d h o l d w i t h A r i s t o t l e t h a t t h e a r e t e , T H E E N D , O F A H U M A N L I F E I S T H E S A M E F O R A L L M E N A N D O N L Y T H E M E A N S A R E S U B J E C T T O A R G U M E N T . T h i s v i e w o f m o r a l i t y d o e s n o t s e e m o r a l i t y a s " t h e p r e s e r v a t i o n a n d f o s t e r i n g o f a d e s i r e d w a y o f L I F E F O R A L L T H E M E M B E R S O F T H E G R O U P W I T H W H O M I D E N - 95 T I F I C A T I O N I S P O S S I B L E , " N O R I S T H E C R I T E R I O N O F M O R A L I T Y " W H A T K I N D S O F T H I N G S O R C O N D I T I O N S M A K E A N A C T I O N W O R T H Y O F A P P R O V A L , A L T H O U G H , A S W I L L B E S E E N | I N T H E N E X T C H A P T E R , T H E C O M M O N G O O D O R T H E G O O D O F | S O C I E T Y I S A N I M P O R T A N T P A R T O F E T H I C S , I N T H O M I S T I C ! [ P H I L O S O P H Y , E T H I C S D E A L S P R I M A R I L Y W I T H S E L F - P E R F E C T I O N | A N D O N E ' S O W N H A P P I N E S S , M O R A L I T Y I S E S S E N T I A L L Y T H E A C H I E V E M E N T O F W H A T I S G O O D F O R A N I N D I V I D U A L P E R S O N , ! T A K I N G I N T O A C C O U N T T H E F A C T T H A T T H E C O M M O N G O O D I S A G O O D F O R A N I N D I V I D U A L P E R S O N , W E H A V E P R E V I O U S L Y S E E N T H E D I S T I N C T I O N B E T W E E N T H E O N T O L O G I C A L G O O D A N D T H E A X I O L O G I C A L G O O D . P E R H A P S , A T T H I S P O I N T , W E C A N M A K E T H I S D I S T I N C T I O N C L E A R E R . T h e O N T O L O G I C A L G O O D I S T H E G O O D O F T H E O B J E C T I T S E L F . T h e A X I O L O G I C A L G O O D I S T H E S A M E G O O D A S I T S A T I S F I E S T E N D E N C I E S , T H E S A T I S F A C T I O N O F W H I C H I S C O N S C I O U S L Y w i l l e d . I d e a l l y , i n a l l v a l u e s i t u a t i o n s , t h e o n t o l o g i c a l G O O D A N D T H E A X I O L O G I C A L G O O D S C O I N C I D E , T H A T I S , T H E V A L U I N G S U B J E C T C H O O S E S T H A T W H I C H I S R E A L L Y G O O D A N D N O T O N L Y T H A T W H I C H I S A P P A R E N T L Y G O O D . S l N C E M O R A L D e w i t t H . P a r k e r , Xh_ e P h i l o s o p h y o f _ V a l u e t ( A n n A r b o r : 1 9 5 7 ) * p - 2 4 9 . W i l l i a m H . W e r k m e i s t e r , T h e o r i e s o f E t h i c s . ( L i n c o l n : 1 9 6 1 ) , p . 4 1 7 . 96 VALUES DEAL WITH L I V I N G OR SELF-PERFECTING BEINGS, THE VALUING SUBJECT (THE PERFECTING AGENT) AND THE OBJECT ( t h e p e r f e c t e d ) a r e t h e s a m e . T he s u b j e c t w h i c h a c c o m p l i s h e s IS THE IN D I V I D U A L , CONCRETE HUMAN BEING IN T H IS PARTICULAR S IT U A T IO N WHO IS TRYING TO PERFECT HIM SELF. ' T he g oo d a c c o m p l i s h e d i s i n t h e p e r s o n h i m s e l f . I n T h om a s 1s w o r d s , TtfE T e r f e c t man i s one who h a s a t t a i n e d h i s g o a l . ^ S i n c e t h e r e i s a r e a l hu m an n a t u r e to be I ' |PERFECTED, THERE ARE REAL GOALS OR OBJECTIVES TO BE f I I ATTAINED. THEREFORE, THE MORALLY PERFECT MAN IS THE ONE ! ■ i I WHO HAS MADE THE ONTOLOGICAL GOOD OF HUMAN NATURE HIS ' 4- AXIOLOSICAL OR CHOSEN GOOD. FOR EXAMPLE, A MAN HAS PROJECTED FOR HIMSELF THE IDEAL OF BEING JUST TO ALL OTHER MEN. A t THE SAME T I M E , LET US SAY, A METAPHYSICS OF MORALS TEACHES THAT ALL MEN HAVE A RIGHT TO EQUAL TREATMENT AND O PPO R TU N IT IE S. BEING JUST TO ALL MEN IS THEN AN ONTOLOGICAL MORAL GOOD, AND ^THUS AN ACTION HAS IT S FULL QUALITY OF HUMAN FACTION WHEN IT STRIVES FOR AN OBJECT WHICH MAN SHOULD SEEK, AND THEN TOO, EO IPS O . IT IS GOOD. O n THE OTHER HAND, AN ACTION HAS NOT ITS WHOLE CHARACTER OF HUMAN ACTION WHEN THE OBJECT WHICH IT AIMS AT IS NOT WHAT THE FORM OF MAN REQUIRES, AND THEN ALSO, EO IP S O , IT IS AN e v i l a c t i o n . " E t i e n n e G i l s o n , Mo r a l V a l u e an d T he Mo r a l L i f e , ( N ew Y o r k , 1 9 6 1 ) , p . 8 1 . 4. E l i z a b e t h G. Sa l m o n , T he Good l n _Ex i s t e n t i a l M L T A P t m i C . S , ( M i l w a u k e e : 1 9 5 5 ) > p - 7 4 . 97 T H E I N D I V I D U A L I N Q U E S T I O N H A S C H O S E N I T , T H E R E B Y M A K I N G I T A N A X I O L O G i C A L G O O D . H e , A S S U B J E C T W H I C H A C C O M P L I S H E S , I S T R Y I N G T O P R O D U C E T H I S I D E A L I N H I M S E L F A S | R E A L I T Y ( A S S U B J E C T W H I C H H A S B E E N A C C O M P L I S H E D ) . S l N C E | T H I S I S H I S I D E A L S E L F - I M A G E , A N O R M O F M O R A L I T Y , A N Y i A C T I O N W H I C H R E S U L T S I N T H I S E F F E C T I S M O R A L L Y G O O D , A N D , O F C O U R S E , I T I S A L S O O N T O L O G I C A L L Y G O O D . H O W E V E R , A L T H O U G H T H E O N T O L O G I C A L M O R A L G O O D A N D T H E A X I O L O G I C A L M O R A L G O O D M A Y , I N R E A L I T Y , B E T H E S A M E , B E C A U S E O F P R E S S U R E S , T H E Y M A Y N O T A L W A Y S A P P E A R T O B E T H E S A M E . ! T h i s i s w h a t c o n s t i t u t e s t e m p t a t i o n . T e m p t a t i o n i s t h e C O N F U S I O N O F A N O T H E R A X I O L O G I C A L G O O D W I T H T H E A X I O L O G I C A L G O O D W H I C H I S A L S O T H E O N T O L O G I C A L G O O D . T H I S ; M A N W H O W I S H E S T O B E J U S T T O A L L M E N , W H E N H E H A S T O : C H O O S E B E T W E E N G I V I N G A P O S I T I O N T O A Q U A L I F I E D N E G R O A N D A L E S S Q U A L I F I E D C A U C A S I A N , M A Y N O T B E A B L E T O S E E ! W H A T I S T H E R E A L O R O N T O L O G I C A L G O O D . R A C I A L J U S T I C E I S T H E R E A L G O O D A N D I T I S E V E N T H E M A N * S C H O S E N G O O D , B U T , I N M O M E N T S O F T E M P T A T I O N , H E M A Y N O T B E A B L E T O S E E I T F O R W H A T I T I S A N D M A Y T H I N K T H A T S O M E O T H E R G O O D W I L L G I V E H I M M O R E S A T I S F A C T I O N O R H A P P I N E S S . M o r a l d i f f i c u l t i e s a r i s e b e c a u s e o n e i s n o t a l w a y s A W A R E O F W H A T W I L L B R I N G H A P P I N E S S . A N O T H E R W A Y O F S T A T I N G T H A T I S T O S A Y T H A T E T H I C S O R M O R A L I T Y I S A F O R M O F S E L F - L O V E A N D T H A T T H E R E C A N B E C O N F U S I O N O F 98 W H A T I S T R U E S E L F - L O V E . T H E R E A R E A T L E A S T T W O N O T I O N S O F S E L F - L O V E W H I C H M U S T B E D I S T I N G U I S H E D . T H E F I R S T C O N S I S T S I N S E E K I N G T H E T R U E G O O D O F O N E ' S S E L F . T H A T I S , I T C O N S I S T S I N F I N D I N G O N E ' S O N T O L O G I C A L G O O D , E S - P E C I A L L Y T H E U L T I M A T E O N T O L O G I C A L P E R F E C T I O N O F H I S H U M A N N A T U R E A S A W H O L E . T H I S I S A L E G I T I M A T E N O T I O N i O F S E L F - L O V E A N D I S T H E O N E T O W H I C H W E R E F E R W H E N W E S A Y T H A T M O R A L I T Y I S S E L F - L O V E . T H E O T H E R N O T I O N O F ! j | S E L F - L O V E I S C O N S I D E R I N G O N E S E L F A S T H E H I G H E S T O R i i | 5 ; U L T I M A T E G O O D • T H I S I S N O T T H E P R O P E R G O A L O F M O R A L I T Y i I ! g j B E C A U S E I T R E A L L Y I S S E L F - D E S T R U C T I V E . I f O N E C L O S E S i ■ H I S E Y E S T O E V E R Y G O O D O T H E R T H A N T H E I M M E D I A T E S A T I S F A C T I O N O F H I M S E L F , H E I S N O T C A P A B L E O F S E E I N G W H A T I S i H I S R E A L G O O D , A N D H E D E T E R I O R A T E S I N S E L F - P I T Y B E C A U S E H E R I G H T L Y F E E L S T H A T H I S L I F E I S W A S T E D . M O R A L P E R - : F E C T I O N I S S E L F - L O V E I N T H E F I R S T S E N S E M E N T I O N E D A B O V E . ; T h o m a s d e f i n e s l o v e a s a t e n d e n c y t o a n y g o o d . ^ T h u s ^ M a r t i n D ' A r c y , T h e M i n d a n d H e a r t of L o v e . ( N ew ; Y o r k : 1 9 6 0 ) , p . 7 7 . g R o b e r t 0 . J o h a n n , T he Me a n i n g of L o v e . ( L o n d o n , 1954), p. 43. 7 Am OR s i g n i f i c a n t c o a p t a t i o n e m quan dam a p p e t i t i v a e v i r t u t i s ad a l i q u a d b o n u m . Summa T h e o l o g i a e . ! - l l , 2 8 , 99 ANY ACT OF VALUATION IS AN ACT OF LOVE AND BECAUSE MORAL j | VALUATION IS SELF-PERFECTION IT IS THEREFORE SELF-LO VE. j i Man m u s t p e r f e c t or l o v e h i m s e l f i f he i s t o make h i m - i i SELF COMPLETE IN OPERATION. j AS WE STATED IN THE SECOND CHAPTER, MAN COMES INTO THE UNIVERSE COMPLETE IN GENERATION OR S P E C IE S , BUT NOT COMPLETE IN OPERATION. THAT I S , HE HAS HUMAN NATURE OR I * | IS A HUMAN BEIN G, BUT DOES NOT YET ACT IN A FULLY HUMAN | | WAY. One l e a r n s TO a c t IN A t r u l y human w a y by c h o o s i n g j j ! GOALS THAT ARE COMPATIBLE WITH HUMAN NATURE, AND THESE | GOALS CONSTITUTE MORAL VALUE. ONTOLOGICAL MORAL VALUE IS THE REAL GOOD OF HUMAN NATURE WHILE AXIOLOGICAL VALUE, THE CHOSEN OR ASCRIBED GOOD, IS ANY VALUED OBJECT WHICH CAN BE USED BY THE FREE MORAL SUBJECT TO ACCOM PLISH HIS SEL F -P ER F EC T IO N . ; B. T he Natu r a l L aw AXIOLOGICAL MORAL VALUE IS THE GOOD WHICH A MAN CHOOSES BECAUSE HE THINKS THAT IT WILL COMPLETE H I M , IT W IL L , IN E X I S T E N T I A L I S T TERMS, G I V E HIM "AUTHENTIC E X I S T E N C E . " T h i s MORAL VALUE IS S U B J E C T IV E , BUT THAT DOES NOT IMPLY THAT MORALITY IS A SU B JEC TIV ISM OR R E L A T IV IS M . MORAL VALUE IS SUBJECTIVE IN THE SENSE THAT ETHICS DEPENDS ON THE SUBJECT'S EVALUATION, BUT T H I S 100 EVALUATION HOPEFULLY C O I N C I D E S WITH THE TRUE 6 0 0 0 OF HUNAN NATURE. MAN IS WHAT HE I S BECAUSE HE IS R A T I O N A L . S i n c e m a n i s r a t i o n a l , h e p a r t i c i p a t e s i n t h e o r d e r i n THE U N IV E RSE IN A UNIQUE AND S E M I - C R E A T I VE WAY. THAT IS MAN CAN ORDER H IM S E L F TO AN END RATHER THAN BE ORDERED TO ONE BY AN IMPLANTED FORM.® T H I S ORDERING OF ONESELF IN CONFORMITY TO THE ETERNAL PLAN OF GOD IS WHAT THOMAS 9 CALLS THE NATURAL LAW. S t . T h o m a s h o l d s t h a t t h e r e i s a h u m a n n a t u r e WHICH WE ALL SHARE. THAT I S , THERE IS A S I M I L A R SOURCE OF A C T I V I T I E S WITH I T S C A P A B I L I T I E S IN ALL OF US. WE ARE NOT TOTALLY FREE TO CHOOSE OUR S E L F - I M A G E OR THE E X IS T E NC E WE WANT FOR OURSELVES. WE HAVE BEEN G IV EN CER TAIN I N C L I N A T I O N S THAT MUST BE TAKEN INTO C O N SID E R ATIO N IN THE MORAL S I T U A T I O N . H A P P I N E S S , FOR EXAMPLE CANNOT BE R EJ EC T E D . ALTHOUGH WE CAN ELECT TO REJECT PA RTIC ULAR MEANS TO H A P P I N E S S , WE C A N 'T CONSCIOUSLY ELECT TO BE UNHAPPY. WE ARE FREE TO S U B S T IT U T E OTHER 8 S umma T h e o l q g i a e . I , 1 8 , 3 - Q 7 lN TER CETERA AUTEM,. R A T l O N A L I S CREATURA E X C E L L E N - T I O R I QUODAM MODO D I V I N A E P R O V I D E N T I A E SU B JA C ET, INQUAN TUM ET IP SA F I T PROVI DENT IAE P A R T I C E P S , S I B I I PS I ET A L I I S PROVI DENS. UNDE ET IN IPSA P A R T I C I P A T U R RATIO AETERNA, PER QUAM HABET NATURALEM I N C L I N A T I 0 NEM AD DEBITUM ACTUM ET F I N E M . E t T A L I S P A R T I C I P A T I O LEG I S AETERNAE IN RAT IO N A L I CREATURA LEX NATURAL IS D I C I T U R . S umma T h e o l q g i a e . I - I I , 9 1 , 2 . 101 GOALS FOR THE REAL H A P PINE SS THAT HUMAN NATURE DEMANDS, I BUT T H I S ACCORDING TO A R I S T O T L E AND THOMAS WILL ALWAYS END IN F R U S T R A T IO N . THE PO IN T IS T H I S , THERE IS AN O B J E C T I V E MORAL ORDER BECAUSE T H I S IS AN OBJECTIV E HUMAN j NATURE TO BE P E R F E C T E D . ^ THE ALMOST UNIV E RSAL AGREE MENT CONCERNING C ER TA IN MORAL VALUES HAS BEEN EXPL AIN ED IN MANY WAYS. SOME MORALIS TS SAY THAT THE IMMORALITY i OF MURDER, R APE, I N J U S T I C E AND LYIN G IS U N IV E RSALLY | ACCEPTED BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE SOCIAL CHAOS IF THESE i ACTS WERE ALLOWED, OR THAT WE HAVE BEEN C O N D IT IO N E D BY EV OL UTION TO ACCEPT THEM. St . THOMAS HOLDS THAT THESE ACTS ARE U N IV E R S A L L Y ACCEPTED AS IMMORAL BECAUSE THEY ARE CONTRARY TO THE NATURAL LAW, THAT I S , INCOMPATIBLE WIT H AN O B J E C T IV E HUMAN NATURE. T h i s o b j e c t i v e h u m a n n a t u r e i s n o t t o be i n t e r p r e t e d AS S U B S I S T I N G INDEPENDENTLY FROM I N D I V I D U A L MEN. St . T h o m as i s i n d e e d i n d e b t e d t o P l a t o , b u t a t t h i s p o i n t . O b j e c t i v e human n a t u r e means t h a t i f we w e r e t o COMPARE ALL THE MEN IN THE U N I V E R S E , WE WOULD SEE THAT ^ H omo a u t e m i n s p e c i e c o n s t i t i a t u r p e r a n i m a m RAT IONALEM. ET ID E 0 ID QUOD EST CONTRA ORDINEM RAT I - O N I S , PROPRIE EST CONTRA NATURAM H O M I N I S INQUANTUM EST HOMO; QUOD AUTEM EST SECUNDUM RATI ON EM, EST SECUNDUM NATURAM H O M I N I S INQUANTUM EST HOMO. BONUM AUTEM H O M I N I S EST SECUNDUM RAT IONEM E S S E , ET 'MALUS H O M IN IS EST PRAETER RATIONEM E S S E , ' UT D l O N Y S I U S D I C I T . SuMMA .T .H .E .9L J.f3.IA £> l-M , 7% 2. 102 THEY ALL HAVE CER TAIN POWERS AND T E N D EN C IE S IN COMMON. A l l m e n g r o w , n o u r i s h an d a r e c a p a b l e of r e p r o d u c t i o n . T h e y a l l s e e , t a s t e , t o u c h a n d e n g a g e i n o t h e r s e n s e a c t i v i t i e s . T h e y a r e a l l c a p a b l e o f a b s t r a c t t h o u g h t , AT LEAST TO SOME E X T E N T . THEY ALL HAVE GOALS WHICH THEY WIL L TRY TO ACCO MPLISH. S t . THOMAS REASONS THAT IF THERE IS A S I M I L A R I T Y OF A C T I V I T I E S , THERE MUST BE A S I M I L A R SOURCE OF A C T I V I T I E S IN EACH MAN. IT IS T H I S SOURCE OF A C T I V I T I E S THAT IS CALLED HUMAN NATURE, AND IT IS THE S I M I L A R I T Y OF A C T I V I T I E S THAT G IV E S EV ID ENCE THAT T H I S NATURE IS O B J E C T I V E . T h e ABOVE C O N ST IT U T E S WHAT COULD BE CALLED " E M P I R I C A L E V I D E N C E " FOR THE EX IS T E N C E OF AN O B J E C T IV E HUMAN NATURE. IN A D D I T I O N TO THE ABOVE, THOMAS OFFERS METAPH YS ICAL REASONING FOR THE E X IS T E N C E OF SUCH A HUMAN NATURE AND ITS P E R F E C T I O N . T H O M I S T I C PHILOSOPHY HOLDS THAT THE UNIVERSE WAS CREATED BY GOD. ARGUING FROM ANALOGY TO HUMAN PR OD UCTIONS, THOMAS HOLDS THAT JUST AS A TABLE IS A GOOD TABLE IF I T CONFORMS TO THE CARPEN TER 'S PLAN, SO MAN IS A GOOD MAN IF HE CONFORMS 11 to G o d ' s v i e w o f w h a t ma n s h o u l d b e . A c t u a l l y n a t u r a l law r e f e r s to t h e p l a n w h i c h G od 11 OMNIS ACTUS HUMANUS ATT INGEN S AD RAT IONEM AUT AD IPSUM DEUM EST BONUS. SUMMA T H E O L Q G I A E , l l - l l , 1 7 , 1 . HAS FOR ALL CREATURES, BUT WE ARE L I M I T I N G IT HERE TO THE MORAL PLAN WHICH GOO HAS FOR MAN. NATURAL LAW IS MAN'S P A R T IC IP A T IO N IN THE ETERNAL LAW, OR THE D I V I N E CREATIVE IDEAS. MAN'S GOOD IS TO FOLLOW THIS LAW OR I f PLAN AS IT APPLIES TO H IM . THE NATURAL LAW IS THEN THE j ROOT OF THE ONTOLOGICAL GOOD FOR MAN. i As A MAN BECOMES CONFORMED TO THE NATURAL LAW, OR IN OTHER TERMS, AS MAN MAKES THE ONTOLOGICAL GOOD OF JJHE ’ j i NATURAL LAW HIS PERSONAL AXIOLOGICAL GOOD, HE REACHES A NEW LEVEL OF EXISTENCE. IN CHAPTER TWO, I STATED THAT "GOOD" AND "B EIN G" ARE CONVERTIBLE TERMS. T H I S MEANS THAT EVERY BEING IS GOOD AND THAT EVERY GOOD IS A FULL NESS OF SOME ESSENCE OR A BEING. A MAN WHO CONFORMS TO THE NATURAL LAW HAS INCREASED HIS GOOD AND THUS HAS ATTAINED A NEW ACCIDENTAL LEVEL OF B E IN G . A GOOD MORAL ACT MAKES A MAN SOMETHING MORE THAN HE WAS, WHILE A BAD MORAL ACT LEAVES HIM IN HIS PRESENT STATE OF N O T - F U L L Y - 12 h u m a n . Wh e n I s a y n o t - f u l l y - h u m a n , I am r e f e r r i n g to HIS OPERATION. A MAN IS BORN FULLY HUMAN IN NATURE OR SP EC IE S, BUT MUST MAKE HIMSELF FULLY HUMAN IN OPERATION. Mor a l v a l u e , i n t h e l i g h t of n a t u r a l l a w , m a y be STATED AS SUCH A USE OF REASON AS WILL AID A PERSON IN 1 2 Et i e n n e G i l s o n , Mor a l V a l u e s a n d t h e Mo r a l L i f e . ( N e w Y o r k , 1 9 6 1 ) , p . 8 0 . 104 SEEKING THE TRUE PE R FE C TIO N OF H I S L I F E A PERFECTION I i ALREADY KNOWN IN THE M I N D OF GOO. c . lU L . S . Q . Q P .W.I.L.L ] T h o m a s d i v i d e s t h e p o w e r s of m a n i n t o f i v e g e n e r a l i ' T Y P E S : v e g e t a t i v e , s e n s i t i v e , a p p e t i t i v e , l o c o m o t i v e : 'IX I AND I N T E L L E C T I V E . ^ ALTHOUGH MAN'S H IG H E S T POWER AND I THAT WHICH D I S T I N G U I S H E S HIM FROM THE REST OF CREATION ! IS H I S REASON, THE COMPLETE F U L F I L L M E N T OF MAN OCCURS THROUGH THE OTHER POWERS OF H I S BEING AS DIR EC TED BY 1 4 HIS W I L L . IT WOULD BE AN ANACHRONISM TO SAY THAT T h o m a s a g r e e s w i t h Ka n t ; t h a t o n l y t h e w i l l m a y t r u l ' BE CALLED GOOD, BUT WE DO F IN D A S I M I L A R I T Y OF P O S I T I O N S . 1 5 T he GOOD OBJECT t h a t m a n a c h i e v e s p e r f e c t s h i s w i l l . ^ T h a t i s , i f a m e t a p h y s i c s of m o r a l s w o u l d t e a c h t h a t J U S T I C E TO OTHER MEN IS A GOOD, AND IF A MAN S T R I V E S TO 1 % ,m H A „ T .H E .Q .L Q .Q I A,5., I» 7 8 , 1 . 1 4 A c t i o i n t e l l e c t u s c o n s t s t i t i n ho c q u o d r a t i o REI IN T E L L E C T A E EST IN I N T E L L I G E N T ! ; ACTUS VER0 VO LU N TA TIS P E R F I C I T U R EX EO QUOD VOLUNTAS I N C L IN A T U R AD I PSAM REM PROUT IN SE E S T . SUMMA T h E Q L O G I A E . I , 8 2 , 3« ^ E T IN B O N IT A TE ANIMAE PRIMA PARS EST BONITAS V O L U N T A T I S , EX QUA ALI Q U I S HOMO BENE U T I T U R QUALI BET A L IA B O N I T A T E . SUMM& T H E O L Q G I A E . I l - l l , 1 2 2 , 2 . 105 DEVELOP THAT V I R T U E IN H I S L I F E , THEN H I S WILL IS PERFECTED BY THE GOOD OBJECT THAT HE HAS A T T A I N E D . I n 16 THE SAME MANNER, S T R I V I N G AFTER THAT WHICH IS E V I L ! MAKES A MAN'S WIL L E V I L . A VIRTUOUS L I F E IS A L I F E OF j j S T R I V I N G TOWARDS THOSE OBJECTS WHICH ARE GOOD. A CERTAIN MORAL REALISM PERVADES THE W R I T I N G S OF T h o m a s . I t i s n o t a m a t t e r o f c h o i c e t h a t m u r d e r i s j w r o n g . Mu r d e r i s w ro ng b e c a u s e i t i s n o t t h e s o r t of | j ACTION THAT IS COM PATIBLE WITH HUMAN NATURE. THE OBJEC ; T I V I T Y OF MORAL VALUES HAS BEEN HELD BY VARIOUS P H I L O SOPHERS fr o m t h e S t o i c s to t h e p r e s e n t . A l t h o u g h PHILOSOPHERS ARE SEPARATED BY SEVERAL C E N T U R I E S , CULTURAL, R E L I G I O U S AND P O L I T I C A L D I F F E R E N C E S , THEY AGREE THAT MORAL ACTION S AND THE C R I T E R I A FOR A MORAL MAN ARE DISCOVERABLE BY REASON. P H IL O S O P H IC A L ANTHRO POLOGY DIS C LO S ES TO US THE NATURE OF MAN AND H IST O R Y TEL LS US OF THE DEEDS THAT HAVE TENDED TO MAKE MEN HAPPY OR UNHAPPY R E S P E C T I V E L Y . THE M0 RALLYIMATURE AGENT WI LL LEARN FROM THESE TWO SOURCES THE METHOD BY WHICH HE CAN PERFECT H I S W IL L AND H IS WHOLE PERSONALITY T h e w i l l i s m a n ' s s u p r e m e p owe r b e c a u s e w i t h i t , HE USES ALL H I S OTHER POWERS AND ACCOMPLISHES WHATEVER HE MUST ACCO MPLISH . THE TRULY PERFECT OR F U L F I L L E D MAN 16 IN THE SENSE OF A IPSUM MALUM. C F . CHAPTER T h r e e . 106 IS THE ONE WHO HAS TRAINED HIM SELF TO WIL L THOSE GOODS ! j THAT H I S REASON HAS TOLD HIM ARE ONTOLOGICALLY GOOD. I | i i 0 . T h e M o r a l O u g h t j IN CONTEMPORARY A XIO LO G IC A L L I T E R A T U R E , A D I S T I N CTIO N IS MADE BETWEEN THE MORAL OUGHT— D U T Y ; AND THE PRUDEN TIAL OUGHT THE FULF ILL M E N T OF VALUES. S T . I ! T h o m a s , of c o u r s e , wa s u n f a m i l i a r w i t h t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n ! BUT I B E L I E V E THAT HE WAS A T E L E 0 L 0 G I ST TO SUCH AN EXTENT THAT HE WOULD NOT ALLOW SUCH RADICAL D I S T I N C T I O N BETWEEN TYPES OF O B L I G A T I O N S . THE ONLY D I S T I N C T I O N BETWEEN MORAL AND OTHER VALUES THAT HE WOULD ALLOW IS THAT MORAL VALUES PERFECT THE WILL AND THUS THE WHOLE PERSON D IR E C T L Y W HIL E OTHER VALUES PERFECT THE WHOLE MAN ONLY A C C ID E N T A L L Y BECAUSE THEY PERFECT SOME P A R T I CULAR p o w e r . S ome T h o m i s t s s e e d i f f i c u l t i e s i n m a k i n g MORAL VAL UES PURELY S E L F - P E R F E C T I V E , AS ARE OTHER VALUES 17 BUT THESE ARE THE E X C E P T I O N S . 1 MOST TH O MISTS AGREE THAT THE MORAL OUGHT IS A FORM OF THE PRUDEN TIAL OUGHT. T h e COMMITMENT TO A MORAL OR ANY OTHER VALUE I S , FOR A ^ J o s e p h de F i n a n c e , " L e s P l a n s de l a L i b e r t e . ” S c i e n c e s E c c l e s i a s t i q u e s . X II I, 3, 1 9 6 1 , p . 3 0 0 -0 2 , p a s s i m . 107 T h o m i s t , t h e r e s u l t o f a c o m p l e x a c t o f t h e w i l l a n d t h e I N T E L L E C T . A F T E R T H E I N T E L L E C T H A S P R E S E N T E D T H E O B J E C T i | A S G O O D A N D A S A T T A I N A B L E , T H E R E I S T H E N A S U B S E Q U E N T j ! i j A C T O F I N T E L L E C T C A L L E D " t M P E R I U M . " T H I S I M P E R I U M I S A j D E D U C T I O N F R O M A F I R S T P R I N C I P L E I N T H E P R A C T I C A L I N T E L - | L E C T C A L L E D S Y N D E R E S I S . W H I C H S T A T E S T H A T n T H E G O O D I S j | ' I Q I T O B E D O N E A N D E V I L T O B E A V O I D E D . " A F I R S T P R I N C I P L E j | S H O U L D N O T B E I N T E R P R E T E D A S I N N A T E K N O W L E D G E , B U T I T ! ' ! i i I S C A L L E D " F I R S T " B E C A U S E L I T T L E E X P E R I E N C E I S R E Q U I R E D : F O R I T S F O R M U L A T I O N A N D , S E C O N D L Y , B E C A U S E S U B S E Q U E N T I | K N O W L E D G E D E P E N D S O N T H I S F I R S T P R I N C I P L E . F O R E X A M P L E , T H E F I R S T P R I N C I P L E O F S P E C U L A T I V E R E A S O N I N G I S T H E P R I N C I P L E O F N O N - C O N T R A D I C T I O N : T H A T A T H I N G C A N N O T B E A N D N O T B E I N T H E S A M E M A N N E R A T T H E S A M E T I M E . T H I S P R I N C I P L E I S A C Q U I R E D K N O W L E D G E , B U T L I T T L E E X P E R I E N C E I S R E Q U I R E D T O G A T H E R I T . O N E D O E S N O T H A V E T O D I V I D E T O O M A N Y C O O K I E S W I T H A Y O U N G E R B R O T H E R B E F O R E T H E L A T T E R U N D E R S T A N D S T H A T A W H O L E C O O K I E A N D A H A L F A C O O K I E A R E N O T T H E S A M E . T H E S A M E I S T R U E F O R T H E P R I N C I P L E O F S Y N D E R E S I S W H I C H I S T H E F I R S T P R I N C I P L E O F T H E P R A C T I C A L I N T E L L E C T . As S O O N A S O N E H A S A N Y S E N S O R Y E X P E R I E N C E O F P L E A S U R E O R P A I N , H E I S I M M E D I A T E L Y A W A R E T H A T " T H E G O O D I S T O B E D O N E A N D E V I L I S T O B E A V O I D E D . " 18 S u m m a T h e o l o g i a n . I , 7 9 , 1 2 . ! 1 0 8 j ITh e p r i n c i p l e i s n o t an a r b i t r a r y p h i l o s o p h i c a l s t a t e - i M E N T B U T E X H I B I T S S O M E T H I N G A B O U T T H E N A T U R E O F M A N . | M a N I S A G O A L - S E E K I N G A N I M A L A N D , S I N C E G O O D A N D G O A L ; i t A R E S Y N O N Y M O U S , T H E G O O D B Y I T S V E R Y N A T U R E M U S T B E D O N E . AS S T A T E D I N P R E V I O U S C H A P T E R S , T O A C T I S T O F U L F I L L A T E N D E N C Y , A N D T O A C T I N A H U M A N W A Y I S T O j C O N S C I O U S L Y A N D V O L U N T A R I L Y F U L F I L L A T E N D E N C Y . S Y N D E R E S I S I S S I M P L Y T H E A W A R E N E S S O F T H I S N A T U R A L j 19 ! ( O R D E R I N G M A N H A S T O T H E G O O D . y j On c e t h e i n t e l l e c t p r e s e n t s a g o o d to b e d o n e , j j i A N I M M E D I A T E D E D U C T I O N I S M A D E F R O M T H E G E N E R A L P R I N - ! C IP L E THAT THIS IN D IVID U A L GOOD IS TO BE DONE. FOR EXAMPLE, THE INTELLECT PRESENTS A COLLEGE AS A GOOD. A D E D U C T I O N I S M A D E T H A T A C O L L E G E D E G R E E I S T O B E j A T T A I N E D . T H I S D E D U C T I O N , H O W E V E R , I S S T I L L T O O A B S T R A C T T O C A U S E A C T I O N . T H E I N T E L L E C T M U S T F U R T H E R D E D U C E T H A T j i i T H E D E G R E E C A N w E A T T A I N E D B Y T H E S U B J E C T I N Q U E S T I O N . j iONCE THIS LATTER STEP HAS BEEN TAKEN, WE HAVE THE j j i I J U D G E M E N T O F C O N S C I E N C E ; G E T T I N G A C O L L E G E D E G R E E I S A i G O O D T H A T M U S T B E D O N E B Y M E . C O N S C I E N C E I S A J U D G E - j i ' ( M E N T M A D E B Y T H E I N T E L L E C T D I R E C T I N G M A N T O A C T F O R A C E R T A I N G O A L U N D E R D E F I N I T E C I R C U M S T A N C E S . j 19 j - C h a r l e s J . O ' N e i l , " S a i n t T h o m a s and t h e N a t u r e | of M a n , " P r o c e e d i n g s of t h e A m e r i c a n P a t h o l i c P h i l q s o - i j . P H i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n . 1 9 5 " I , p - 5 9 . ! 109 ( T h e p r i n c i p l e of s y n d e r e s i s a nd t h e r e s u l t a n t JUDGEMENT OF CONSCIENCE IS SIM IL A R FOR THE ATTAINMENT : OF BOTH AXIOLOGICAL AND MORAL VALUES. IF ONE HAS AN t I OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE SOMETHING THAT DOES NOT BELONG TO | H IM , THE INTELLECT WILL SEE THAT THE L I M I T E D MAXIM ! i j ! I "STEALING IS E V I L " GETS ITS AUTHORITY FROM THE PR IN C IPL E | OF SYNDERESI S . THE MAN WILL THEN SEE THAT STEALING IS WRONG FOR HIM AT T H IS PARTICULAR MOMENT. DUTY OR i OBLIGATION IS SIMPLY THE DIRECTION OF ONE'S POWERS BY j J i THE WILL TO A CERTAIN GOAL. |F ONE HAS AN OBLIGATION TO BE HONEST, THIS MEANS SIMPLY THAT HE IS DIRECTING HIMSELF TOWARDS THAT GOAL. T H I S IS REALLY NOT DIFFERENT FROM THE JUDGEMENT THAT BEETHOVEN'S NlNTH IS A GOOD AND THEREFORE TO BE HEARD. S t a t e d more s t r o n g l y , o b l i g a t i o n i s an o r d e r i n g 20 OF ONE'S LIBERTY to A CERTAIN END. FREELY TO DIRECT ONE'S POWERS TOWARD A FREELY CHOSEN GOAL IS TO TAKE ON AN O B LIG ATIO N. ONE HAS TOTAL CONTROL OVER HIS OWN LIBERTY AND CAN OBLIGE ONLY HIM SELF. To BE A TOTALLY INVOLVED HUMAN BEING MEANS TO ACCEPT GOALS AND TO COMMIT ONE'S LIBERTY AND EXISTENCE TO CERTAIN GOALS. Mo r a l v a l u e s and o t h e r a x i o l o g i c a l v a l u e s a r e t h e t o o l s 20 J o s e p h de F i n a n c e , E x i s t e n c e et L i b e r t y . ( P a r i s , 1 9 5 5 ) , R . 1 1 - 110 BY WHICH ONE PERFECTS H IM S E L F . THERE IS A DIFFERENCE IN THE DEGREE OF INVOLVEMENT BETWEEN THE OBLIGATION TO a t t e n d Ho l l y w o o d B owl b e c a u s e on e e n j o y s c l a s s i c a l M U SIC , AND THE OBLIGATION TO WORSHIP GOD BECAUSE ONE RECOGNIZES H I S DEPENDENCE UPON GOD; BUT THE NOTION OF OBLIGATION IS THE SAME. E. Mo r a l D i s v a l u e or E v i l As MENTIONED IN THE SECOND CHAPTER, E V IL IS A FRUSTRATION OF A TENDENCY; IT IS A LACK OF A GOOD THAT SHOULD BE THERE. ONCE ONE ADMITS THAT THERE IS AN OBJECTIVELY REAL HUMAN NATURE, HE HAS ADMITTED THAT THERE IS AN OBJECTIVELY REAL GOOD THAT EACH MAN SHOULD STRIVE TO A T T A I N , NAMELY, THE CONFORMITY OF ONESELF TO THIS IDEAL HUMAN NATURE. ONE COMMITS MORAL E V I L IF HE HAS THE OPPORTUNITY OF S T R I V I N G AFTER T H I S GOOD AND EITHER FAIL S TO MAKE THE EFFORT OR F A IL S IN H IS EFFORT. T h a t i s to s a y , r e a s o n p r e s e n t s t o t h e ma n an o p p o r t u n i t y TO DO GOOD, AND S IN OR MORAL E V IL CONSISTS IN THE 21 W I L L ' S REFUSAL TO ACTU ALIZE T H IS OPPORTUNITY. MORAL EVIL IS A FAILURE TO USE ONE*S REASON PROPERLY; THAT I S , 21 J a c q u e s Ma r i t a i n , S a i n t T h o m a s A q u i n a s and t h e P r o b l e m of E v i l t ( M i l w a u k e e , 1 9 4 * 2 ) . p » 3 1 . 111 IT IS A FAILURE TO ACT WHEN REASON HAS PRESENTED AN OPPORTUNITY TO ACT. Wh e n I s a i d t h a t m o r a l e v i l i s a f a i l u r e t o u s e i | REASON, I DID NOT MEAN TO IMPLY THAT REASON IS NOT I N - t * | VOLVED IN MORAL E V I L . WHAT I DID MEAN TO IMPLY WAS ! THAT MORAL EVIL IS A FAILURE TO USE REASON PROPERLY. I | IN A MORAL D E C I S IO N , THE WILL IS PRESENTED WITH AT j ! LEAST TWO ALTERNATIVES BY THE INTELLECT. IF REAL MORAL I | CONFLICT IS PRESENT, THE WILL IS INCLINED TO BOTH ALTER- i i n a t i v e s . When t h e w i l l c h o o s e s t h e a l t e r n a t i v e t h a t i s i AGAINST THE NATURAL LAW, OR TO SAY THE SAME T H IN G , THE ALTERNATIVE WHICH FRUSTRATES THE TOTAL PERSON, IT DOES SO BECAUSE IT HAS CHOSEN A LESSER GOOD WHICH IS I NOR- 22 DINATELY DESIRED. MAN IS ORDERED TO THE GOOD BY HIS VERY NATURE, BUT BECAUSE MAN IS A COMPLEX ANIMAL WITH SEVERAL LEVELS OF TENDENCIES, HE IS ORDERED TO SEVERAL LEVELS OF GOODS. IF HE CHOOSES A LOWER ORDER OF GOOD OVER A SUPERIOR ONE, THEN HIS WILL IS D I S - 0 RDERED, , 0 R INORDINATE. THE INTELLECTUALLY KNOWN GOODS MUST BE PREFERRED TO THE SENSIBLE GOODS, AND SO FORTH. IT IS IN T H IS SENSE THAT S T . THOMAS SAYS: wSIN CONSISTS PROPERLY IN AN ACTION DONE FOR A CERTAIN END, AND 22 OBJECTUM AUTEM PECCATI EST ILLUD BONUM IN QUOD TENDIT INORDINATUS A PP ET IT U S. SUMMA THEOLQGIAE. I I — I I . 118, 2. 112 LACKING DUE ORDER TO THAT E N D . " T H I S MEANS THAT ALL MEN SEEK HAPPINE SS OR, TO SAY THE SAME T H I N G , THEY SEEK T H E I R PROPER GOOD. SlN C ON SISTS IN TAKING FOR THE PROPER GOOD OF MAN THAT WHICH IS ONLY AN APPARENT GOOD. F o r e x a m p l e , St . T h o m as h o l d s t h a t t h e c o n t e m p l a t i o n o f God i s t h e p r o p e r and h i g h e s t goo d f o r a l l m e n . I t is t h i s good t h a t c o n s t i t u t e s m a n ’ s h a p p i n e s s . I f a man WERE FACED WITH THE CHOICE OF LOSING H I S WEALTH OR HIS REPUTATION AND J O I N I N G THE R E L I G I O N OF H IS C O N V I C T I O N , HE IS FACED WITH TWO GOODS. IF HE CHOOSES THE WEALTH OF REPUTATION OVER THE R E L I G I O N , THEN HE HAS CHOSEN AN i APPARENT GOOD OVER THE REAL GOOD. HlS WILL IS NOT ORDERED PROPERLY. | T I S IN T H I S SENSE THAT S I N OR MORAL E V I L IS A D I S O R D E R I N G . H o w e v e r , n o t a l l h u m a n f r u s t r a t i o n s a r e m o r a l ! e v i l s . L a c k o f h e a l t h , i n v o l u n t a r y l a c k of e d u c a t i o n , I PRESSURES OF e n v i r o n m e n t a n d so f o r t h , p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n s , i n WHICH THE AGENT’ S TEN DENCIE S ARE FRUSTRATED BUT S I T U A T I O N S IN WHICH HE IS EITH E R NOT AT ALL RESPONSIBLE OR HAS ONLY L I M I T E D R E S P O N S I B I L I T Y . THOMAS D I S T I N GUISHE S BETWEEN A h P A I N " WHICH IS A S I M P LE E V I L TO A ^ P E C C A T U M PROPRE C O N S I S T I T IN ACTU QUI AGITUR PROPTER FINEM A L IQ U E M , CUM NON HABET DEB ITUM OR DINEM AD FINEM I L L U M . SUMMA T H E O L Q G IA E . I - I I , 2 1 , 1 . 113 HUMAN B E I N G , AND A "FAULT*1 WHICH IS AN E V I L WHICH IS 2 4 VO LUNTARILY CAUSED, THE " P A I N " IS NOT L I M I T E D TO MERELY P H YSIC AL P R I V A T I O N , SUCH AS THE LOSS OF HEALTH OR THE LOSS OF WEALTH OR R E P U T A T I O N , BUT INCLUDES ALSO PSYCHOLOGICAL AND EMOTIONAL E V I L S * T H U S , THE MAN WHO IS UNDER GREAT EMOTIONAL STRESS BECAUSE OF WORRY OR OVER WORK OR EMOTIONAL I L L N E S S IS SUFFER ING A " P A I N " WHICH MAKES HIM LESS RESPONSIBLE FOR H I S A C T I O N S . T H U S , A PERSON WHO I S EMOTIONALLY I L L COULD PERHAPS PERFORM MANY ACTS WHICH O B J E C T I V E L Y ARE CONTRARY TO THE IDEAL HUMAN NATURE, BUT THEY ARE NOT MORAL E V I L S F A U L T S— BECAUSE THEY DO NOT REQUIRE AN ACT OF THE W I L L . T H I S D I S T I N C T IO N I M P L I E S THAT ONE MUST BE PSYCHOLOGICALLY AND EMOTIONALLY SOUND IN ORDER TO BE A FULLY P A R T I C I P A T I N G MORAL AGENT. F . M o r a l i t y as t h e F u l f i l l m e n t o f M a x * s _Es_ s.eelc.E- THE WHOLE of T h O M I S T I C E T H IC S HOLDS THAT THERE IS AN IDEAL HUMAN NATURE TO WHICH THE I N D I V I D U A L MAN MUST CONFORM. F A I L U R E TO CONFORM CO N S T IT U T ES MORAL 2 4 De RATIONE CULPAE EST QUOD S I T s ec u n d u m v o l u n - TATE M, DE RATIONE AUTEM POENAE EST QUOD S I T CONTRA VOLUNTATEM. De MaLQ. I , 4 ; SEE ALSO! SUMMA T h EQ LQ GIAE. I , 4 8 , 5- 114 e v i l . N o t o n l y i s t h e r e a n a b s o l u t e m o r a l o r d e r to MAN * S U N I V E R S E , BUT THE U N IV ERSE AS A WHOLE ALSO IS ORDERED. IN FAGT, THE n NATURAL LAW" ARGUMENT, SO IM PORTANT TO T H O M I S T I C MORAL P H IL O S O P H Y , STATES THAT THERE IS A RIGHT WAY OF DOING T H IN G S FOR THE WHOLE OF THE i UN I VE RSE. A GREAT D I F F I C U L T Y INVOLVED IN T H I S APPROACH TO MORAL PHILOS OPHY IS THAT IT LENDS I T S E L F TO A PURELY R A T I O N A L I S T I C I N T E R P R E T A T I O N . WE DO NOT B E L I E V E THAT I I e i t h e r A r i s t o t l e o r Thomas w e r e r a t i o n a l i s t s , e i t h e r in \ 1 ! M ET APH YS IC S OR IN M O R A L IT Y ; BUT T H E I R W R I T I N G S LEND i THEMSELVES TO SUCH AN I N T E R P R E T A T I O N . IN FACT SUCH AN IN T E R P R E T A T IO N HAS BEEN THE COMMON TEACHING OF THE SCH OLASTICS SINC E THE S I X T E E N T H CENTURY. T H O M I S T I C MORAL PHILOS OPHY PRESUPPOSES THE T H O M I S TIC NOTION OF HUMAN NATURE. IT PRESUPPOSES THAT THE ESSENCE OF MAN IS COMPLETELY KNOWN AND SET DOWN AS A B LUEPR IN T READY FOR THE CARPENTERS TO B U IL D UPON. BUT WHAT IS T H I S HUMAN NATURE? LET US GRANT THAT MAN IS A p r o d u c t of G o d ’ s c r e a t i v e i d e a s . H u m a n n a t u r e , t h e n , i s G o d ’ s i d e a o f m a n . I n t h e m i n d of G o d , e a c h h u m a n i n d i v i d u a l IS KNOWN PE R FE C TL Y , NOT ONLY IN WHAT HE HAS IN COMMON WITH ALL MEN, BUT ALSO IN H I S I N D I V I D U A L I T Y . BUT T H I S S T I L L DOES NOT TELL US WHAT HUMAN NATURE I S . PH IL O 115 SOPHERS HAVE NO MORE ACCESS TO THE M IN D OF GOD THAN HAVE BANKERS OR BOOKKEEPERS. THE IDEAL TOWARDS WHICH WE SHOULD BE S T R I V I N G MAY BE IN THE MIND OF GOD, BUT THAT REALLY DOES NOT HELP EITHER THE I N D I V I D U A L MORALLY EVAL UATING PERSON TO SOLVE H IS MORAL PROBLEM OR THE MORAL PHILOSOPHER WHO WISH ES TO WRITE ABOUT THE MORAL S I T U A - I T I ON. Op e r a t i o S e o u i t u r e s s e . A c t i o n s fl ow from t h e ESSENCE. I f t h i s i s t r u e , s o m e l i g h t m a y f a l l on m a n ' s | e s s e n c e , t h r o u g h an a n a l y s i s of h i s a c t i v i t i e s . T h i s I a p p r o a c h i s t h e o n l y one w h i c h we h a v e . We c a n n o t c u t OPEN THE I N D I V I D U A L MORAL MAN AND THEREBY F I N D EI TH ER H I S ESSENCE OR H I S NATURE OR H I S I D E A L - S E L F - I M A G E LURKING SOMEWHERE 8 ETWEEN H I S HEART AND H I S B R A I N . To DEDUCE MAN'S NATURE FROM H I S A C T I V I T I E S IS THE APPROACH THAT THE PHILOSOPHER HAS, BUT IT I S A L I M I T E D ONE. FOR WHAT i DO WE KNOW BY T H I S APPROACH? NOTHING BUT THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR. T h e PHILOSOPHER CAN DEDUCE THAT "MAN1' IS A S E N T I E N T , R A T I O N A L , V O L I T I O N A L BEING WHO SEEKS H A P P I N E S S . T H I S IS AN ABSOLUTELY TRUE STATEMENT; BUT IT S TRUTH L I E S IN I T S ABSTRACTNESS. THOMAS AND A R I S T O T L E AND MOST PHILOSOPHERS of t h e We s t e r n t r a d i t i o n i n s i s t t h a t o n l y i n d i v i d u a l s e x i s t ; YET T H E Y, AND PERHAPS ALMOST ALL PH IL O S O P H IC A L 116 M O R A L I S T S , BASE T H E I R M OR ALITY ON THE ABSTRACTION CALLED " m a n " b u t whom U n a m u n o , w i t h g o o d r e a s o n c a l l e d t h e " n o - h a n . " ^ I t i s p e r h a p s fo r t h i s r e a s o n — NAMELY, ITS a b s t r a c t n e s s — t h a t , a g a i n c i t i n g U n a m u n o , e t h i c s n e v e r MADE A PERSON GOOD WHO WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GOOD O T H E R - 26 WISE. I HAVE CALLED T H I S SECTION " E T H I C S AS THE F U L F I L L M E N T OF MAN 'S ESSENCE" IN ORDER TO BRING OUT A CERTAIN D I F F I C U L T Y , NAMELY, THE IM P E RS O N A LITY OF ABSTRACT T H O M I S T I C E T H I C S . T H I S ETH IC S HAS BECOME HIGHLY L E G A L - I S D I C AND C A S U I S T I C BECAUSE IT IS CONSIDERED TO BE A F U L F I L L M E N T OF SOME ABSTRACT HUMAN NATURE. I f ONE BEGINS ET H IC S WHERE ST. THOMAS BEGINS NAMELY, WITH THE E X IS T E N C E OF AN IDEAL HUMAN NATURE AND THE E X IS T E N C E OF AN ALL-KNOWING GOO, THEN THE CONSEQUENT MORAL CODE IS BOUND TO BE L E G A L I S T I C . I , IN F A C T , AGREE WITH ST. T h o m a s t h a t s u c h i s t h e s t a r t i n g - p o i n t of e t h i c s , b u t I WISH TO POINT o u t THE DEFECTS IN T H I S P O S I T I O N AND HOPE THAT THE NOTION OF C R E A T IV E LOVE OFFERED SUBSEQUENTLY WI LL REMOVE SOME OF THE D I F F I C U L T I E S INHERENT IN AN ABSTRACT E T H I C S . 2 ^ T r a g i c .S e n s e of L i f e t ( N ew Y o r k , 1 9 5 4 ) , p . “ 1 2 6 1b i o . p . 2 9 5 . 117 I n s u m , l e t u s s a y t h a t i n t h e a r e a of m o r a l g o o d , THE D I S T I N C T I O N BETWEEN A X IO L O G IC A L AND ONTOLOGICAL VALUE IS MOST R E L EV A NT . THERE IS AN ID E A L HUMAN NATURE IN THE MIND OF GOD AND CONFORMITY TO T H I S IDEAL HUMAN NATURE IS THE ONTOLOGICAL MORAL GOOD. ON THE OTHER H AND, EACH MAN SEEKS THE PE R FE C TIO N OF H I S OWN L I F E ; HE SEEKS A U T H E N T I C E X I S T E N C E AS THE IO E AL MAN HE HAS P I C T U R E D . T H E G O O D THAT DEVELOPS T H I S IDEAL MAN CON S T I T U T E S A X I O L O G I C A L MORAL VA L U E. S T . THOMAS ALSO HOLDS THAT GOD HAS SO DES IGNED MAN THAT THE MATURE MAN WOULD SEE THAT THE ONTOLOGICAL AND A X I O L O G I C A L VALUES SHOULD C O I N C I D E . CHARTER SIX IH ELflQ O D -Q ELJSO aifTY OR THE COMMON GOOD An i m p o r t a n t p r o b l e m in e t h i c s a n d , c o n s e q u e n t l y , IN VALUE THEORY IS THE QUESTION OF THE R E L A T I O N S H I P OF THE I N D I V I D U A L TO H IS S O C I E T Y , OR IN ITS MORE C L AS SIC A L j I FORMU LATION, THE QUESTION OF THE COMMON GOOD. A n I N D I - | V I DU A L IS OFTEN CALLED UPON TO S A C R I F I C E H I S PERSONAL i VA LUES , SUCH AS WEALTH, B U SIN ESS SUCCESS, ED U C A T I O N , AND I | SO FORTH, TO FURTHER THE VALUE OF THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE. Not ONLY ARE THE MORE DRAMATIC MOMENTS INVOLVED HERE SUCH AS SPENDING ONESELF IN THE S E R VIC E OF H I S COUNTRY, EVEN TO THE P O I N T OF DEATH FOR THE SAKE OF H I S COUNTRY BUT ALSO THE LESS DRAMATIC Q U E S T I O N S , SUCH AS V O T I N G , T A X A T I O N , L U N C H - C 0 UNTER S I T - I N S AND C I V I L D I S O - : . j j BED I E N C E . T he WHOLE EM PH A SIS OF THE VALUE THEORY WHICH I I AM PROPOSING IS PLACED UPON THE UNIQUEN ES S OF THE I i I j I N D I V I D U A L IN H I S ROLE OF E V A L U A T I N G . Is T H I S VALUE I THEORY, WHICH IS FUNDAMENTALLY S U B J E C T I V E , CAPABLE OF i ! E S T A B L IS H I N G A VALUE FOR S O C I E T Y AS A WHOLE? I B E L I E V E ! j | THAT THE D I S T I N C T I O N BETWEEN ONTOLOGICAL AND A X IO LO G IC A L j i | VALUE WILL BE AN AID IN SO LVIN G T H I S PROBLEM. 118 119 A . T h e Or d e r i n t h e Um i v e r s e I t i s a b a s i c p o s i t i o n o f T h o m i s t i c m e t a p h y s i c s THAT THE UNIVERS E AS A WHOLE WAS CREATED BY AN I N T E L L I G E N T c r e a t o r . S i n c e t h e c r e a t o r wa s i n t e l l i g e n t , t h e CREATION WAS NOT HAPHAZARD BUT F I L L E D WITH MEANING AND K p u r p o s e . E v e r y t h i n g i n t h e u n i v e r s e h a s a p u r p o s e , NAMELY, THE RETURNING OF MEN TO GOD, THE CREATOR, t h r o u g h c o n f o r m i t y to G o d ' s p l a n or c o n f o r m i t y to t h e D I V I N E I D E A S . WE USUALLY L I M I T OUR D I S C U S S I O N OF T H I S CONFORMITY TO MAN, BECAUSE ONLY WITH MAN WHO IS FREE TO CONFORM OR NOT TO CONFORM IS THERE A PROBLEM OF THE RETURN TO GOD. BUT EVERY CREATURE FROM A SPECK OF DUST TO ANGELIC BEINGS HAVE T H E I R PAR TICULAR PURPOSE IN THE D I V I N E PLAN. IN THE SECOND CHAPTER, I PO IN TE D OUT T h o m a s ' s p o s i t i o n t h a t so m e b e i n g s e e k t h e i r d e s t i n y BY T H E IR OWN D I R E C T I O N WHILE OTHERS SEEK T H E I R D E S TI N Y BECAUSE OF IMPLANTED PURPOSES, WHILE MAN SEEKS H I S OWN D E S T I N Y F R E EL Y . I n OTHER WORDS, "ORDER IN THE U N I V E R S E , " " r e t u r n to G o d , " a n d " n a t u r a l d e s i r e " a r e a l l d i f f e r e n t ABSTRACTIONS FROM AND FORMULATIONS OF, THE SAME R E A L I T Y . T h i s i s no t an a c c i d e n t a l p a r t o f T h o m i s m . T he RECOGNIT IO N OF THE V A L I D I T Y OF NATURAL D E S IR E IS TAKEN TO SUCH AN EXTENT THAT THOMAS MAKES IT ONE OF H I S REASONS 120 1 FOR HOLDING THE E X I S T E N C E OF AN IMMORTAL L I F E . C O N - I S I D E R ALSO THE FOLLOWING T E X T : T j L E R E M J J . S T B E S O M E I N C O R P O R E A L C R E A T U R E S / . A N G E L ^ / . F O R W H A T I S P R I N C I P A L L Y I N T E N D E D by G od i n c r e a t u r e s i s g o o d a n d t h i s c o n s i s t s i n a s s i m i l a t i o n to G od H i m s e l f . A nd ! THE PERFECT A S S I M I L A T I O N OF AN EFFECT TO | A CAUSE IS ACCOMPLISHED WHEN THE EFFECT I I M I T A T E S THE CAUSE ACCORDING TO THAT WHERE- | BY THE CAUSE PRODUCES THE E F F E C T . . . . | Now God p r o d u c e s t h e c r e a t u r e s by H i s I i n t e l l e c t a n d w i l l . H e n c e t h e p e r f e c t i o n j OF THE U N IV E RS E REQUIRES THAT THERE SHOULD BE IN T EL L EC T U AL C R E A T U R E S .2 ; H e ARGUES THAT S I N C E THE PERFECT ORDER OF THE UNIVERSE j I DEMANDS THAT GOD BE I M I T A T E D IN AS MANY WAYS AS P O S S I B L E , ; THERE MUST E X I S T MANY PO S S I B L E CREATURES TO DO THAT I M I T A T I O N . THE P O IN T TO BE MADE HERE IS THAT ALL T H IN G S THAT E X I S T DO SO BECAUSE THEY ARE I M I T A T I O N S OF THE D I V I N E ESSENCE. T H I S IS A VERY PL A T O N IC DOCTRINE. P l a t o h e l d t h a t t h e t h i n g s i n o ur u n i v e r s e a r e i m i t a t i o n s OF FORMS OR I D E A S . S t . THOMAS IN A SENSE PUT 1 SUMMA T h E Q L O G I A E . I , 7 5 , 6 . 2 NECESSE EST PONERE ALIQUAS CREATURAS I N C 0 R P 0 R E A S . I d ENIM QUOD PRAEC IP UE IN REBUS C R E A T IS DEUS I N T E N O I T , EST BONUM QUOD CONS I ST IT IN ASS IM ULATI ONE AD DEUM. PERFECTA AUTEM A S S I M U L A T I O EFFECTUS AD CAUSAM AT T E N D ! T U R , QUANDO EFFECTUS I M I T A T U R CAUSAM SECUNDUM IL LUD PER QUOD CAUSA PRODUCIT EF FEC TUM, S I C U T CALDUM FAC IT CALIDU M , DEUS AUTEM CREATURAM PRODUCIT PER IN TELLEC TUM ET VO LU N - TATEM, UT SUPRA OSTENSUM E S T . UNDE AD PERFECT IONEM U N I V E R S I R E Q U I R I T U R QUOD S I N T ALI QUAE CREATURAE I N T E L - L E C T U A L E S . SUMMA T h EOLOGLAE. I , 5 0 , 1 . 121 t h e s e P l a t o n i c f o r m s o r i d e a s in t h e m i n d o f Go d, S i n c e God i s a p e r f e c t l y i n t e l l i g e n t c r e a t o r , T h o m as h o l d s THAT, I F THE U N IV E R S E NEEDS A R E A L I T Y , THAT R E A L I T Y MUST ! z | e x i s t . " N a t u r e d o e s n o t f a i l in n e c e s s a r y t h i n g s . ny | R e c a l l t h a t , i n a p r i o r c h a p t e r , s i n was c a l l e d a d i s - | o r d e r i n g . T h i s m e a n t t h a t s i n w e n t a g a i n s t t h e n a t u r a l i | ORDER OF THE U N IV E R S E CREATED BY GOD. | S t a t e d i n i t s s i m p l e s t t e r m s , s i n c e G od p r o d u c e s j THE NATURAL D ES IR E S OF MEN, IDEALLY THERE WOULD BE NO I * \ C O N F LI C T OF THE P R I V A T E , I N D I V I D U A L GOOD AND THE COMMON GOOD. T h e COMMON GOOD is a r e a l g o o d o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l ! ( a s w i l l be s e e n s u b s e q u e n t l y ) . C o n f l i c t s d e r i v e e i t h e r f r o m t h e l i m i t a t i o n s of a p e r s o n ' s r e a s o n SUCH as i n t h e c a s e of a p e r s o n who d o e s no t s e e t h a t t h e c o m m o n GOOD IS H I S GOOD OR EVEN THAT IT IS A COMMON GOOD; OR THEY DER IV E FROM A PERSON'S REFUSAL TO BE REASONABLE----- AS IN THE CASE OF ONE WHO SEES THE COMMON GOOD AS A REAL GOOD BUT REFUSES TO ACCEPT I T . I n sum, l e t us s a y t h a t t h e common g o o d , i f i t i s TRULY A COMMON GOOD, IS THE ONTOLOGICAL GOOD OF THE PERSON. IT IS GOOD THAT IS DUE TO HIM BECAUSE OF THE ORDER OF THE U N I V E R S E , WHICH ORDER I S IMPLANTED IN EACH ^NATURA NON D E F I C I A T IN N E C E S S A R I I S . SUMMA T h e q l q gIAE t I , 78> 4 . 1 2 2 IN D I V I D U A L BECAUSE IT IS CREATED BY GOD. B . M a n i s N a t u r a l l y S o c i a l A n e x t r e m e l y p o v e r t y s t r i c k e n c o n c e p t i o n o f S O C IE T Y , YET ONE THAT SEEMS TO BE WIDELY ACCEPTED, IS THAT WHICH HOLDS THAT SOCIETY IS MERELY AN A R T I F I C I A L DEVICE FOR MUTUAL PROTECTION. T H IS VIEW OF SOCIETY HOLDS THAT THE I N D I V I D U A L GIVES UP SOME OF H IS RIGHTS IN ORDER TO LIVE TOGETHER PEACEFULLY WITH OTHER I N D I V I DUALS. IT WOULD ALSO HOLD THAT NATURAL RIGHTS ARE IN THEMSELVES U N LIM IT ED BUT ARE ARBIT RARILY L I M I T E D BY I N D I V I D U A L S GROUPING TOGETHER SO THAT A SOCIETY CAN BE f o r m e d . H o w e v e r , i n t h e l i g h t o f w h a t h a s b e e n s a i d i n PRIOR CHAPTERS, IT SHOULD BE PATENT THAT RIGHTS ARE NOT U N L I M I T E D . T he FACT THAT HUMAN BEINGS ARE COMPLEX MEANS THAT THE TENDENCIES CONSEQUENT UPON ONE LEVEL OF BEIN G NATURALLY L I M I T TENDENCIES OF OTHER LEVELS OF BEING. F or EXAMPLE, THE RIGHT (TENDENCY) TO EAT IS NATURALLY L I M I T E D BY THE RIGHT (TENDENCY) TO HAVE GOOD HEALTH. On e CANNOT EAT IN AN ARBITRARY AND U N L IM IT E D MANNER AND RETAIN GOOD HEALTH. On THE LEVEL OF THE COMMON GOOD, T H I S VIEW HOLDS THAT MAN REALLY GIVES UP NOTHING TO ENTER INTO S O C IE T Y , BECAUSE HE IS BY NATURE A SOCIAL BEING AND THAT HE NEVER HAS U N L IM IT E D R IG H T S , EITHER 123 W IT H IN OR WITHOUT A SOC IET Y. A n o t h e r p o i n t w h i c h m u s t be c o n s i d e r e d i s t h a t MOST OF THE TENDENCES FROM WHICH WE ACT ARE GAINED THROUGH EXPERIENCE. BUT THE VERY NATURE OF EXPERIENCE IS L I M I T A T I O N . I n OTHER WORDS, WE DO NOT GAIN UNLIM IT ED TENDENCIES BY EXPERIENCE, BUT ONfeS THAT ARE CONDITIONED BY THE P O S S I B I L I T I E S OF FULFIL LM ENT. THE M IN D , BEING A U N IV E R S A L IZ IN G FORCE, CAN EXPAND OUR CONCEPTION OF THE TENDENCIES, BUT T H I S IS NOT TRUE TO WHAT WAS TAUGHT BY EXPERIENCE. FOR T H IS REASON, I CANNOT ACCEPT ANY nSOCIAL-CONTRACT" OR n STATE-OF-NATURE" POSITIO N WHICH WOULD DENY THE I N T R I N S I C L I M I T A T I O N OF TENDENCIES AND NATURAL RIGHTS. A c c o r d i n g t o St . Thom as, t h e r e a r e tw o r e q u i r e ments THAT ARE NECESSARY IF MAN IS TO ATTAIN HIS A DESIRED PERFECTION. THE FIRST IS THE ACTS OF VIRTUE THEMSELVES BY WHICH THE SUBJECT PERFECTS HIM SELF. T h e s e a c t s of v i r t u e c o n s t i t u t e m o r a l v a l u e d i s c u s s e d IN THE PREVIOUS CHAPTER. THE.SECOND REQUIREMENT IS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF PHYSICAL GOODS THAT MAKE A HUMAN L IF E 4-. Ad bonum AUTEM UNIUS HOMINIS v i t a m duo r e q u i r - i t u r : unum p r i n c i p a l e , quod e s t OPERATIO SECUNDUM VIRTUTEM ( v i R T U S AUTEM EST QUO BENE V I V I T U r ) ; ALIUD VERO SECUNDARIUM ET QUASI INSTRUMENTALE, S C I L IC E T CORPORALIUM b o n o r u m s u f f i c i e n t i a quorum u s u s e s t n e c e s - SARIUS AD ACTUM V I R T U T I S . De R e G IM IN E P R IN C IP U M . j , 1 5 . 124 p o s s i b l e . S i n c e s o c i e t y p r o v i d e s a n d p r o t e c t s t h e s e I G O O D S , S O C I E T Y I S A M E A N S T O T H E E N D O F A P E R F E C T L I F E F O R M A N . M A N M U S T L I V E I N A S O C I E T Y I N O R D E R T O L E A D A M O R A L L I F E . ( T S H O U L D B E O B V I O U S T H A T F R O M T H E P U R E L Y j P H Y S I C A L S T A N D P O I N T T H A T I T W O U L D B E I M P O S S I B L E T O H A V E | A F U L L Y S A T I S F Y I N G H U M A N L I F E , I N T H E F U L L M E A N I N G O F | ! I : I I T H E W O R D " H U M A N ” I F O N E H A D T O W O R K C O N S T A N T L Y F O R T H E I j | N E C E S S I T I E S W H I C H W E P R O D U C E M U C H M O R E E F F I C I E N T L Y W H E N | W E W O R K T O G E T H E R . T H E C U L T U R A L A N D M O R A L A S P E C T S O F | O U R L I V E S D E P E N D A L T O G E T H E R U P O N S O C I E T Y ' S C O N T R I B U T I O N . | j W e C O U L D N O T A P P R E C I A T E T H E G R E A T A C C O M P L I S H M E N T S O F ' O T H E R I N D I V I D U A L S I N M U S I C , A R T A N D L I T E R A T U R E , I F T H E R E W E R E N O T A N O R G A N I Z E D S O C I E T Y T O P R E S E R V E T H E M : f o r u s . I n t h e m o r a l o r d e r , w e c o u l d n o t b e a w a r e o f T H E P O S S I B I L I T I E S O F P E R F E C T I O N O P E N T O U S , I F W E D I D N O T L I V E I N A S O C I E T Y . On a d e e p e r l e v e l , w e n e e d F R I E N D S H I P a n d l o v e F O R T H E I R O W N S A K E . I T I S O N L Y I N G I V I N G O U R S E L V E S T O O T H E R S T H A T W E T R U L Y F I N D O U R S E L V E S . WE C A N N O T F I N D T H E T R U E L O V E O F G O D , W H I C H F O R S t . T H O M A S I S T H E A B S O L U T E V A L U E , E X C E P T I N T H E L O V E O F O U R F E L L O W M E N . T h e s t r i v i n g s o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l m a n t o l i v e a t p e a c e a n d F U L F I L L M E N T W I T H O T H E R S A R E N O T T H E R E S U L T S O F A S O C I A L C O N T R A C T O R A M E R E E N V I R O N M E N T A L C O N D I T I O N I N G , B U T R E S U L T F R O M A N A T U R A L D E S I R E T O F U L F I L L O N E S E L F B Y 125 F U L F I L L I N G O T H E R S , A N D A R E , T H U S F O U N D A T I O N A L T O A L L S O C I E T A L G R O U P I N G S . C . T h e P u r p o s e o f G o v e r n m e n t T h e u n i v e r s e a s a w h o l e h a s t h e p u r p o s e o f c o n - ! f o r m i n g t o t h e w i l l o f G o d , o r i n t h e c a s e o f a r a t i o n a l j * \ B E I N G , O F A U N I O N W I T H G O D T H R O U G H K N O W L E O G E A N D L O V E . F o r m a l i z e d s o c i e t y s h a r e s i n t h i s p u r p o s e i f i t i s w h a t ! I T M U S T B E , A N I N S T R U M E N T F O R M A N ' S H A P P I N E S S . I T B E C O M E S S U C H A N I N S T R U M E N T I F I T I S A M E A N S T O M A N ' S U N I O N w i t h G o d . T h e h i g h e s t s o c i e t y o r t h e h i g h e s t c o m m o n G O O D I S T H U S T H E V I S I O N O F G O D , ^ F O R I N S U C H A V I S I O N , A L L I N D I V I D U A L S W I L L B E U N I T E D I N A S O C I E T Y I N W H I C H E A C H I N D I V I D U A L H A S H I S H I G H E S T T E N D E N C I E S S A T I S F I E D A N D I N W H I C H , B E C A U S E A L L A R E S A T I S F I E D , T H E R E W I L L B E N O C O N F L I C T A M O N G I N D I V I D U A L S . S i n c e t h e h i g h e s t c o m m o n g o o d i s t h e B e a t i f i c V i s i o n , a l l g o v e r n m e n t s d e r i v e t h e i r v a l u e f r o m t h e f a c t t h a t t h e y a r e m e a n s t o t h e a t t a i n m e n t o f t h e B e a t i f i c V i s i o n . T h e p u r p o s e o f a c i v i l g o v e r n m e n t i s t o p r o v i d e ^ J a c q u e s M a r i t a i n , T h e P e r s o n a n d , t h e C o m m o n G o o d . ( N e w Y o r k , 1 9 4 - 7 ) > p p . 6 - 1 2 , p a s s i m . 126 T R A N Q U I L I T Y , E D U C A T I O N A N D P R O T E C T I O N T O T H E E X T E N T T H A T T H E S E A R E N E C E S S A R Y F O R T H E L I F E O F V I R T U E W H I C H I S A M E A N S T O T H E B E A T I F I C V I S I O N . T H E P U R P O S E O F G O V E R N M E N T I S T O P R O V I D E A N A T M O S P H E R E F O R M A N T O M A K E H I M S E L F H A P P Y . ^ I N A N I D E A L S O C I E T Y C I V I L A N D M O R A L L A W S W O U L D C O I N C I D E . T H I S D O E S N O T M E A N T H A T I A M A D V O C A T I N G A T H E O C R A C Y . A N Y F O R M O F G O V E R N M E N T W O U L D B E V A L I D A S L O N G A S I T P R O V I D E D T H E P R O P E R A T M O S P H E R E F O R T H E M O R A L L I F E . O n e o f t h e f u n c t i o n s o f c i v i l s o c i e t y i s t o t e a c h A N D T O D E T E R . I f A L L P E R S O N S I N A S O C I E T Y C O U L D A G R E E A S T O T H E N A T U R E O F M A N A N D T H E C O M P A T I B I L I T Y O R I N C O M P A T I B I L I T Y O F A G I V E N A C T I O N , T H E N T H I S S O C I E T Y C O U L D L E G I S L A T E S U C H L A W S F O R T H E P U R P O S E O F E D U C A T I N G T H E C I T I Z E N R Y T O T H E G O O D I N V O L V E D , A N D D E T E R R I N G T H E W E A K F R O M T H E O P P O S I T E , W H I C H I S E V I L . T h e D I F F I C U L T Y C O M E S F R O M T H E F A C T T H A T W E L I V E I N A P L U R A L I S T I C S O C I E T Y . B E C A U S E O F T H E V A R I O U S B A C K - ^ Q U I A I G I T U R V I T A E Q U A I N P R A E S E N T I B E N E V I V I M U S F I N I S E S T B E A T I T U D O C A E L E S T I S ; A D R E G I S O F F I C I U M P E R - T I N E T E A R A T I O N S V I T A M M U L T l T U D I N I S B O N A M P R O C U R A R E S E C U N D U M Q U O D C O N G R U I T A D C A E L E S T E M B E A T I T U D I N E M C O N - S E Q U E N D A M J U T S C I L I C E T E A P R A E C I P I A T Q U A E A D C A E L E S T E M B E A T I T U D I N E M D U C U N T , E T E O R U M C O N T R A R I A , S E C U N D U M Q U O D F U E R I T P O S S I B I L E , I N T E R D I C A T . P E R E G I M I N E P R I N C I P U M , I, 15. 127 GROUNDS OF OUR C I T I Z E N S , IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO HAVE LAWS WHICH COVER THE MANY ASPECTS OF HUMAN L I F E . WHEN LAWS E X I S T , EVEN IF THEY ARE "GOOD" LAWS IN THE SENSE THAT I j THEY MAY CONTRIBUTE TO THE L I F E OF V IR T U E FOR MANY, IT IS SOMETIMES IMPRUDENT OR POSSIBLY EVEN E V IL TO HAVE THESE LAWS BECAUSE OF THE OPPOSING CONVIC TIO NS OF THE OTHER C I T I Z E N S . FOR EXAMPLE, MOST SOUTH AMERICAN | NATIONS HAVE LAWS WHICH FORBID DIVORCE. To A GREAT i | EXTENT T H I S IS DUE TO THE INFLUENCE OF THE CATHOLIC | Ch u r c h w h i c h was i n s t r u m e n t a l i n c o l o n i z i n g t h e s e a r e a s . T h e s e a n t i - d i v o r c e l a w s w o u l d be good i f e v e r y o n e i n THESE COUNTRIES WERE CONVINCED EITHER OF THE E V IL OF DIVORCE OR OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH. SlN CE SUCH IS NOT THE CASE, THESE LAWS ARE IMPRUDENT. THE SAME IS TRUE OF THE LAWS FORBIDDING D IS S E M IN A T IO N OF BIRTH CONTROL L IT E R A T U R E , AND THE ALCOHOL P R O H I B IT I O N LAWS IN CERTAIN STATES OF OUR OWN COUNTRY. IF ALL C I T I Z E N S COULD AGREE THAT BIRTH CONTROL OR ALCOHOL WERE E V I L S , ! THEN THESE WOULD BE PRUDENT LAWS. T he GREATEST D I F F I C U L T Y IN SUCH IMPRUDENT LAWS IS THAT NOT ONLY ARE THESE I N D IV I D U A L LAWS DISRESPECTED, BUT LAW IN GENERAL AND THE WHOLE SOCIETAL STRUCTURE BECOMES WEAKENED. NOT ALL C I T I Z E N S ARE L IK E SOCRATES WHO WOULD DIE FROM AN I N J U S T IC E PERFORMED IN THE NAME OF LAW, BECAUSE THE LAW IS USUALLY GOOD. 128 A LAW IS A DIRECTION OF REASON PROMULGATED FOR THE COMMON GOOD. I f THE LEGISLATION IS NOT FOR THE COMMON GOOD, IT SIMPLY I S N ’ T A LAW. iF A MAN IS PER SONALLY CONVINCED THAT A CERTAIN ACT OF LEGISLATURE EITHER IS NOT REASONABLE OR IS NOT FOR THE COMMON GOOD, HE HAS NO OBLIGATION TO FOLLOW I T . AT LEAST, HE HAS NO OBLIGATION FROM THAT PARTICULAR LAW. He MAY NOT BE OBLIGATED TO FOLLOW IT BECAUSE OF THE LAW IT S E L F , BUT HE COULD BE OBLIGATED NOT TO GIVE SCANDAL TO THOSE WHO DO NOT REALIZE HIS P O S I T I O N , ESPECIALLY THE YOUNG. FOR EXAMPLE, I F A MAN IS CONVINCED THAT INCOME TAXATION LS. UNCONSTITUTIONAL HE HAS NO MORAL OBLIGATION TO PAY H IS TAXES. HE, OF COURSE, DOES HAVE THE LEGAL O B L IG A T IO N . H o w e v e r , i f he w o u l d t e a c h h i s c h i l d r e n d i s r e s p e c t f o r LAW BY NOT PAYING, HE WOULD HAVE TO PAY IN ORDER NOT TO SCANDALIZE t h e c h i l d r e n . I f t h e i n d i v i d u a l has s u f f i c i e n t RESPECT FOR HUMAN FREEDOM, HE WILL DO ALL IN H I S POWER TO GET THE LAW REPEALED, BUT HE MUST BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT REFUSING TO OBSERVE A LAW WHICH HE THINKS IS WRONG. IN OTHER WORDS, THE QUESTION OF THE COMMON GOOD AND GOVERNMENT IS AS COMPLEX AS MAN HIMSELF. A CERTAIN LAW MAY FRUSTRATE AN I N D I V I D U A L ’ S TENDENCY AND THUS BE E V I L ; BUT IF IT IS TRULY A LAW, THAT I S , TRULY ORDERED TO THE COMMON GOOD, OBEDIENCE TO T H IS LAW WIL L PERFECT 129 A HIGHER TENDENCY OF THAT SAME I N D I V I D U A L . FOR EXAMPLE, IF A MAN WISHES TO DIVORCE H I S W I F E , NOT BECAUSE OF ADULTERY OR I N C O M P A T I B I L I T Y BUT BECAUSE HE WISHES TO ESCAPE THE R E S P O N S I B I L I T I E S OF A HOME L I F E , AND I F HE L I V E S IN A STATE WHICH P R O H I B I T S D I V O R C E , H I S TENDENCY TO FREEDOM IS FRUSTRATED AND, THUS, HE SUFFERS AN E V I L ; BUT AT THE SAME TIM E THE COMMON GOOD IS PROTECTED B E - j CAUSE SO CIETY IS MADE MORE STABLE, AND, THUS, A HIGHER ! i ! GOOD IS A C H I E V E O . i I T h e COMMON GOOD IS t h e PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT. i S i n c e , i n a s o c i e t y of i n d i v i d u a l , l i m i t e d h u m a n b e i n g s , GOVERNMENT AND LAWS W I L L NEVER BE PE R FE C T, C I V I L D I S O BED IENCE IS SOMETIMES A V I R T U E . HOWEVER, THE S T A B I L I T Y ; OF S O C I E T Y MUST ALWAYS BE RESPECTED BECAUSE SUCH S T A B I L I T Y PROVIDES THE ATMOSPHERE FOR A TRULY HUMAN L I F E . 0 . T he C ommon G ood i s a G ood o f t h e I n d i v i d u a l M u c h of t h e d i f f i c u l t y i n v o l v e d i n t h e q u e s t i o n OF THE COMMON GOOD IS THAT THERE IS A TENDENCY TO T H I N K OF THE COMMON GOOD AS BELONGING TO " S O C I E T Y " RATHER THAN TO THE I N D I V I D U A L S IN S O C I E T Y , R E J E C T I N G T H I S RE I F I — C A T I O N , I WOULD AGREE WITH G. E . MOORE THAT "EVERY ACTION WHICH MOST PROMOTES THE GENERAL GOOD ALWAYS ALSO - 150 P R O M O T E S T H E A G E N T * S O W N G O O D , " ' 7 T H E C O M M O N G O O D I S A G O O D W H I C H I N D I V I D U A L S H A V E I N C O M M O N . I t B E L O N G S T O | S O C I E T Y O N L Y I N T H E S E N S E T H A T S O C I E T Y I S A C O L L E C T I O N i I ! O F I N O I V I D U A L S . I D O N O T A G R E E W I T H C E R T A I N T H O M I S T S W H O H O L D i i T H A T T H E C O M M O N G O O D I S P R I M A R I L Y I N S O C I E T Y A N D S E C O N - | D A R I L Y I N I N D I V I D U A L S . C O N S I D E R , F O R E X A M P L E , T H E i | F O L L O W I N G T E X T : j _ _ — _ I t ^ T H E C O M M O N G 0 0 . f i / l S T H E G O O D H U M A N L I F E O F T H E M U L T I T U D E , O F A M U L T I T U D E O F P E R S O N S ; I T I S T H E I R C O M M U N I O N I N G O O D L I V I N G . I T I S T H E R E F O R E C O M M O N T O B O T H T H E W H O L E A N D T H E P A R T S I N T O W H I C H I T F L O W S B A C K A N D W H I C H I N T U R N M U S T B E N E F I T F R O M I T . 8 T h i s t e x t s e e m s t o i m p l y t h a t s o c i e t y i s s o m e t h i n g m o r e T H A N I N D I V I D U A L S W H O L I V E A N D W O R K T O G E T H E R A N D F U L F I L L e a c h o t h e r . T h i s f u l f i l l i n g o f e a c h o t h e r i n s o c i e t y i s t h e c o m m o n g o o d . T h e c o m m o n g o o d d o e s n o t " f l o w b a c k " f r o m t h e w h o l e t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l . I t f l o w s f r o m O N E I N D I V I D U A L T O A N O T H E R . I T I S N O T " R E C E I V E D I N Q P E R S O N S , " B U T I S A R E L A T I O N S H I P B E T W E E N A M U T U A L G I V I N G O F P E R S O N S . ^ G e o r g e E d w a r d M o o r e , E t h i c s . ( L o n d o n , 1 9 5 2 ) , p . 1 4 1 . g J a c q u e s M a r i t a i n , T h e P e r s o n a n d t h e C o m m o n G o o d . ( N e w Y o r k , 1 9 5 7 ) , p - 4 -1 . B i p . p . 5 1 . 131 S i n c e t h e common good i s a good fo r t h e i n d i v i d u a l , ONE SHOULD BE WIL LING TO MAKE S A C R IF IC ES IN THE NAME OF ! j THE COMMON GOOD. WHEN ONE PAYS TAXES, OR SERVES IN THE [ f | ARMY, OR VOTES, OR EVEN DIES FOR HIS COUNTRY, HE IS ! DOING THIS FOR A GOOD THAT HE HOLDS IN COMMON WITH MANY OTHER MEN. S T . THOMAS SAYS THAT: A ny goo d or e v i l d o n e to t h e m e m b e r of a SOCIETY REBOUNDS ON THE WHOLE SOCIETY; THUS WHO HURTS THE HAND, HURTS THE MAN. ! Wh e n , t h e r e f o r e , a n y o n e d o e s good or e v i l ] TO ANOTHER I N D IV ID U A L THERE IS A TWOFOLD | MEASURE OF MERIT OR DEMERIT IN HIS ACTION: F I R S T , IN RESPECT TO THE RETRIBUTION OWED TO HIM BY THE IN D IV ID U A L TO WHOM HE HAS DONE GOOD OR HARM; SECONDLY, IN RESPECT TO THE RETRIBUTION OWED TO HIM BY THE WHOLE OF SOCIETY. When a man s t e a l s from a n o t h e r m a n , or when one p e r s o n MURDERS ANOTHER, EACH MEMBER OF SOCIETY IS INJURED BE CAUSE EACH MEMBER OF SOCIETY HAS A RIGHT TO THE WELL- ORDERING OF SOCIETY WHICH HAS BEEN DISRUPTED. T H I S IS ANOTHER SENSE IN WHICH E V IL IS S E L F -D E S T R U C T IV E . THE CRIMINAL STEALS FROM H IMSELF. QUICUMQUE ERGO AG IT A L IQ U ID IN BONUM VEL MALUM ALICUJUS IN SOCIETATE E X I S T E N T I S , HAC REDUNDAT IN TOTAM SOCIETATEM, SICUT QUI LAEDIT MANUM, PER CONSEQUENS LAEDIT HOMINEM. CUM ERGO A L IQ U IS AG IT IN BONUM VEL MALUM ALTER I US SINGULARIS PERSONAE, CADIT t BI D UPLIC IT ER RATIO M E R IT I VEL D E M E R I T I . UNO MODO, SECUNDUM QUOD DEBETUR El RETRI BUT I 0 A SINGULARI PERSONA QUAM JUVAT VEL OFFEND I T • ALI 0 MODO, SECUNDUM QUOD DEBETUR El RETRI BUT I 0 A TOTO COLLEGIO. SUMMA T h E 0 L 0 GI A E . I —I I , 21 , 3 - 132 I n s u m , t h e common good i s due to t h e w e l l - o r d e r i n g o r t h e u n i v e r s e as i t comes fr om Go d , Na t u r a l l y s o c i a l MEN NEED a WELL ORDERED UNIVERSE FOR THEIR OWN PERFEC TION AND IT IS THE BUSINESS OF C I V I L GOVERNMENT TO SO PROVIDE. ! CH AEIEB L £5VE N X H .£_iiL T . 1 mftlfiw-OR THEOLOGICAL VALUE Pr o f e s s o r E t i e n n e G i l s o n ' s g r e a t w o r k , Be i n g and a S ome P h i l o s o p h e r s shows how t h e c o n c e p t of b e i n g t a k e s I ON A RADICALLY DIFFERENT MEANING IN S t . THOMAS THAN IT h ad i n A r i s t o t l e . I n A r i s t o t l e , b e i n g m e a n t s u b s t a n c e ; ; i n T h o m a s , i t m e a n t e x i s t e n c e . Be c a u s e be i n g m e a n s EXISTENCE THERE IS a CERTAIN P A R T IC IP A T IO N THAT EVERY I EX IS T IN G THING HAS IN THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. STATED IN j ANOTHER WAY, EACH CREATURE IS AN "OVERFLOW" OF GOD'S ( e x i s t e n c e GIVEN S P E C IE S , OR DETERMINATE E X IS TE N C E, BY f f FORM. I t IS THE PURPOSE OF T H IS CHAPTER TO SHOW THAT THE GOODNESS WHICH EACH CREATURE HAS IS A PA R T IC IP A T IO N i IN THE D I V I N E GOODNESS, AND CONSEQUENTLY, THAT GOD IS : VALUED IN ALL THIN GS. i A . Ex i s t .e n c e. of t h e U l t i m a t e G-QCd i j I t i s t h e c o n t e n t i o n OF ANY TELEOLOGICAL ETHICS I THAT AN ULTIMATE GOOD MUST E X I S T . ARISTOTLE POINTS i | THIS OUT VERY EARLY IN THE NlCOMACHEAN E T H I C S . I t IS i ! i i 1 i E t i e n n e G i l s o n , B e i n g and Some P h i l o s o p h e r s . | ( T o r o n t o , 1 9 4 - 9 ) . 135 134- IMPOSSIBLE TO ACT AT ALL UNLESS A MAN HAS AN ULTIMATE GOAL. I F ONE DESIRES TO ATTAIN A COLLEGE DEGREE, HE DOES SO FOR SOME FURTHER REASON, PERHAPS TO ATTAIN A GOOD POS ITIO N UPON GRADUATION, PERHAPS TO PLEASE HIS : PARENTS, PERHAPS FOR A SENSE OF ACCOMPLISHMENT; BUT ONE NEVER DESIRES SIMPLY FOR THE SAKE OF D E S IR E . COMMEN TING ON A SIMILAR TEXT IN THE D e A n IMA, S t . THOMAS s a y s : Now OBVIOUSLY EVERY A P P E T IT IO N IS FOR SOME END BEYOND I T S E L F . IT IS ABSURD THAT DESIRE IS FOR THE SAKE OF D E S IR IN G ; DESIRE IS ESSENTIALLY A TENDENCY TO "THE OTHER ." Mo r e o v e r , an o b j e c t of d e s i r e i s a l w a y s THE PRACTICAL REASON'S STARTING P O IN T ; WHAT IS FIR ST DESIRED PROVIDES THE END WHENCE ITS DELIBERATIONS BEGAN.2 One can p u s h h i s d e s i r e s b a c k and b a c k u n t i l he r e a c h e s THE DESIRE FOR HAPPINESS, WHICH ARISTOTLE AND THOMAS BOTH HOLD TO BE SELF- J U S T I F Y I N G . ; BY HAPPINESS OR BEATITUDE IS MEANT THE COMPLETE | SATISFA CTION OF ALL POSSIBLE D ESIR ES. HAPPINESS IS THE ARETE OR PERFECTION OF THE WHOLE MAN; IT IS THE GOAL OF ETHIC S. IN OTHER WORDS, SATISFACTION OF APPETITE IS | ALMOST SYNONYMOUS WITH SEEKING HAPPINESS, W H I C H , IS | SYNONYMOUS WITH SEEKING THE ULTIMATE GOOD. WE MUST ! 2 I ARI STOTLE' S P _ E _ A m M-A IN THE VERSION OF WlLHAM | OF MOERBEKE AND THE COMMENTARY OF S T . THOMAS A Q U IN A S . : (N ew Hav e n, 1 9 5 9 )? Book 111, Section X V , # 8 2 1 . 135 R E M E M B E R T H A T T H O M A S ' S N A T U R A L L A W P O S I T I O N H O L O S T H A T C E R T A I N D E S I R E S A R E N A T U R A L L Y I M P L A N T E D I N E A C H M A N . H a p p i n e s s i m p l i e s t h e f u l f i l l m e n t o f t h e s e n a t u r a l | d e s i r e s . M a n m u s t , o f n e c e s s i t y d e s i r e a l l , w h a t e v e r H E D E S I R E S , F O R T H E L A S T E N D . T H I S I S E V I D E N T F O R T W O R E A S O N S . F l R S T , B E C A U S E W H A T E V E R M A N D E S I R E S , H E D E S I R E S I T U N D E R T H E A S P E G T O F T H E G O O D . A N D I F H E D E S I R E S I T , N O T A S H I S P E R F E C T G O O D , W H I C H I S T H E L A S T E N D , H E M U S T O F N E C E S S I T Y D E S I R E I T A S T E N D I N G T O I T H E P E R F E C T G O O D , B E C A U S E T H E B E G I N N I N G O F ' A N Y T H I N G I S A L W A Y S O R D A I N E D T O I T S C O M P L E - ! j T I O N . 5 I A n O B J E C T I S S O U G H T B E C A U S E I T I S C O N C E I V E D O F A S A G O O D — — E N D A N D G O O D A R E S Y N O N Y M O U S A S S T A T E D I N C H A P T E R T w o . B u t e a c h g o o d i n t u r n b e c o m e s a m e a n s t o a f u r t h e r i I G O O D . O n e p a s s e s a n e x a m i n a t i o n i n o r d e r t o p a s s t h e I c o u r s e , i n o r d e r t o p a s s t h e y e a r , t o g r a d u a t e , t o g e t [ i j a g o o d p o s i t i o n , t o s u p p o r t h i s f a m i l y , t o h a v e d o m e s t i c | j i t r a n q u i l i t y , t o h a v e a s e n s e o f a c c o m p l i s h m e n t , t o b e h a p p y . U n l e s s t h e r e w e r e a n u l t i m a t e g o o d , t h e r e w o u l d B E N O P R O X I M A T E G O O D S A N D T H U S , N O A C T I V I T Y B E C A U S E N O I 7 I ; P U R P O S E S . I ■ ^ N E C E S S E E S T Q U O D O M N I A Q U A E H O M O A P P E T I T , A P P E T A T P R O P T E R U L T I M F I N E M . E t H O C A P P A R E T D U P L I C I R A T I O N E . P R I M O Q U I D E M Q U I A Q U I D Q U I D H O M O A P P E T I T , A P P E T I T S U B R A T I O N E B O N I . Q U O D Q U I D E M S I N O N A P P E T I T U R U T B O N U M P E R - ! F E C T U M , Q U O D E S T U L T I M U S F I N I S , N E C E S S E E S T U T A P P E T I T U R U T T E N D E R E I N B O N U M P E R F E C T U M ; Q U I A S E M P E R I N C H O A T I O j A L I C U J U S O R D I N A T U R A D C 0 N S U M M A T I 0 N E M I P S I U S . S U M M A T . H . E j . Q . l . P P I A S , I - M , 4 , 6 . 136 E ach man i s c a p a b l e of c h o o s i n g w h a t e v e r he w a n t s TO BE HIS ULTIMATE GOOD, SUCH AS MONEY OR POWER. IF HE SO CHOOSES, THEN ALMOST EVERY DECISION IN HIS L I F E WILL BE DIRECTED TO THAT END. BUT THOMAS WOULD POINT OUT THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN C R IT E R IA TO BE MET FOR THE ULTIMATE GOOD, SO THAT, ALTHOUGH ONE MAY CHOOSE WHATEVER HE WANTS TO BE HIS ULTIMATE GOOD, THAT DOES NOT IMPLY THAT HE HAS PROPERLY CHOSEN. SAID IN ANOTHER WAY, THE ULTIMATE VALUE EXISTS ON BOTH THE AX I 0 LOGICAL AND THE ONTOLOGICAL LEVEL. THERE IS AN ULTIMATE GOOD FOR TH IS IN D IV ID U A L MAN (ONTOLOGICAL) BUT HE MAY MISTAKE IT AND SUPPLY SOME OTHER GOOD AS ULTIMATE ( AX I 0 L 0 G IC A L ) . THE C R IT E R IA FOR THE ONTOLOGICAL ULTIMATE GOOD ARE: T h e s e t h r e e m u s t co n c u r i n h a p p i n e s s ; NAMELY, V IS IO N WHICH IS PERFECT KNOWLEDGE OF THE I N T E L L I G I B L E END; COMPREHENSION, WHICH IM P L IE S PRESENCE OF THE END; AND DELIGHT OR ENJOYMENT, WHICH IMPLIES u REPOSE OF THE LOVER IN THE OBJECT BELOVED. I f A MAN IS TO BE TRULY HAPPY, HE MUST SEEK AS HIS UL TIMATE GOAL THAT WHICH IS A PERFECTION OF HIS INTELLECT OR HIS HIGHEST POWER. St . THOMAS IS HERE, ARGUING FROM HIS COMMITMENT THAT THERE IS A BASIC HUMAN NATURE IN V ET IDEO NECESSE EST AD B EAT ITU DIN EM ISTA TRIA CONCURRERE; S C I L I C E T , V IS IO N E M , QUAE EST C OG NI TO PER- FECTA I N T E L L I G I B I L I S F I N I S ; COMPREHENSI 0 NEM, QUAE IM - PORAT PRAESENTI AM F I N I S ; DELECT I ONEM, VEL FRUITIONEM, QUAE IMPORTAT QUI ET AT I ON EM REI AM AN T IS IN AMATA. S u m m a T h e o l o g i a e . I - I I , 4 , 3 . 157 WHICH WE ALL S H A R E , THE R EF OR E T H E R E MUST BE ONE B A S I C GOAL TOWARDS WHICH WE ALL S T R I V E . MUCH OF T HE D I S S A T I S F A C T I O N AND U N H A P P I N E S S IN THE WORLD TODAY I S DUE TO THE FACT THAT SO MANY PERSONS HAVE N EV ER BEEN S U F F I C I E N T L Y S E L F - R E F L E C T I V E TO SEE WHAT M A N ' S GOALS T R U L Y ARE. | F ONE DOES NOT KNOW WHAT HE IS L O O K I N G FOR, THE P O S S I B I - B I L I T Y OF F I N D I N G I T IS R EM OTE. A R E L A T I V I S M IN L I F E ' S GOALS IS NOT TO BE ASSUMED H E R E . AS STATEO A B O V E , ST. THOMAS HOLDS T H A T THERE IS A HUMAN NATURE COMMON TO ALL ME N . As FREE B E I N G S , WE CAN CHOOSE WHATEVER WE WANT AS A L I F E GOAL OR U L T I M A T E g o o d , b u t T h o m a s w o u l d i n s i s t t h a t t h i s u l t i m a t e g o o d MUST MEET C E R T A I N R E Q U I R E M E N T S . B e a t i t u d e i s t h e p e r f e c t g o o d o f an i n t e l l e c t u a l n a t u r e . T h u s i t i s t h a t , as E V E R Y T H I N G D E S I R E S THE P E R F E C T I O N OF I T S N A T U R E , I N T E L L E C T U A L NATURE D E S I R E S N A T U RA LLY TO BE H A P P Y . NOW THA T WHICH IS MOST P E R F E C T IN ANY I N T E L L E C T U A L NATURE IS THE I N T E L L E C T U A L O P E R A T I O N , BY W H IC H IN SOME SEN SE IT GRASPS E V E R Y T H I N G . WHENCE THE B E A T I T U D E OF EVERY I N T E L L E C T U A L NATURE C O N S I S T S IN U NDERS TAND I N G . 5 ^ O l C E N D U M QUOD B E A T I T U D O , S I C U T D I C T U M E S T , S I G - N I F I C A T BONUM PER FEC TUM I N T E L L E C T U A L I S N A T U R A E . E t IND E EST QUOD, S I C U T UNAQUAQUE RES A P P E T I T SUAM P E R - F E C T I O N E M , IT A ET I N T E L L E C T U A L I S NATURA N AT U R A L I TER A P P E T I T ESSE B E A T A . ID AUTEM QUOD EST P E R F E C T I S SI M U M IN QUALI BET I N T E L L E C T U A L ! N A T U R A , EST I N T E L L E C T U A L I S O P E R A T I O , SECUNDUM QUAM C A P I T QUODAMMODO O M N I A . UNDE C U J U S L I B E T I N T E L L E C T U A L I S NATURAE CREATAE B E A U T I T U D O C O N S I S T I T IN I N T E L L I G E N D O . SUMMA T h E O L Q G I A E . I , 2 6, 2. 138 To S t . Thom as, t h e i n t e l l e c t i s t h e h i g h e s t o f m a n ' s POWERS AND IS A POWER OF THE SOUL D IR E C T L Y , NOT OF THE SOUL-BODY COMPOSITE. WHEN THOMAS SPEAKS OF THE PER FECTION OF THE INTELLECT OR OF THE UNDERSTANDING, HE I IN REALITY SPEAKING OF THE PERFECTION OF THE WHOLE PER SO NALITY. S t . Thomas h o l d s t h a t each man must p o s i t f o r HIMSELF ONE ULTIMATE GOAL AND SHOULD ST R IV E TO ATTAIN i t . A c t u a l l y , h e goes f u r t h e r and s t a t e s t h a t we SHOULD BECOME AWARE OF THE ONE ULTIMATE GOAL THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN IMPLANTED IN OUR NATURE. To BE HAPPY, WHICH IS SYNONYMOUS WITH ONE'S ULTIMATE GOAL, ONE MUST CONSCIOUSLY RECOGNIZE WHAT HIS ULTIMATE GOAL IS AND MUST TAKE PLEASURE IN POSSESSING I T . B . T h e r e i s _ _Q n_e U l t i m a t e G o a l f o r A l l Men I t IS THE POSITION OF T h O M IS TIC PHILOSOPHY THAT THERE IS ONLY ONE OJECT WHICH CAN FULLY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF BEING AN ULTIMATE END FOR MAN. T H I S o b j e c t is Go d . T h i s c o n c l u s i o n i s a r r i v e d at i n a THREEFOLD MANNER: ONE STRICTLY METAPHYSICAL, THE SECOND FROM PHILOSOPHICAL PSYCHOLOGY, AND THE THIRD IS THE E X I S T E N T I A L APPROACH TAKEN BY MANY CONTEMPORARY THOMISTIC PHILOSOPHERS. 139 T he m e t a p h y s i c a l a p p r o a c h to t h i s p o s i t i o n is a FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF A NOTION THAT WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN, NAMELY, THAT BEING AND GOOD ARE CONVERTIBLE. S i n c e e v e r y b e i n g is g o o d i n a s m u c h as i t e x i s t s , and GOOD BECAUSE IT E X IS T S , THE ULTIMATE CAUSE OF ITS EXISTENCE IS THE ULTIMATE CAUSE OF ITS GOODNESS. g T he COMMON SOURCE OF t h e s e PROCESSIONS IS THE GO OD.. . BECAUSE WHATEVER PROCEEDS from God t o c r e a t u r e s , He c o m m u n i c a t e s „ TO THE CREATURE BECAUSE OF HlS GOODNESS. I n o t h e r w o r d s , G od ca n a c t o n l y for H i s own g o o d n e s s , SINCE GOODNESS AND PURPOSE ARE THE SAME THING. GOD CREATED CREATURES BECAUSE THEY WERE TO BECOME MANIFES TATIONS o f His own g o o d n e s s . C o n s e q u e n t upon t h i s is t h e i d e a t h a t e a c h o b j e c t o f a p p e t i t i o n has b e i n g from God as a m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f G o d 's p o w e r , b u t a l s o has go o d n es s from God as a m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f G o d 's g o o d n e s s . T h u s , e v e r y a p p e t i t i o n as a t e n d e n c y t o a good i s a TENDENCY TO WHAT THAT OBJECT HAS IN P A R T IC IP A T IO N FROM God. I f t h i s i s so, t h e n th e a p p e t i t e w i l l n o t be g C r e a t i o n i s known as " p r o c e s s i o n " in t h e T h o m i s t i c p h i l o s o p h y . ^ P R I N C I P I U M AUTEM COMMUNE HARUM PR0 CESSI 0 NUM, BONUM E S T . . . Q U I A QUIDQUID A DEO IN CREATURAS PROCEDIT, HOC CREATURAE SUAE PROPTER SUAM BONITATEM COMMUNICAT. l-N_J-JJlR-UM . _B -g A .ri- P i ON I 5 I I _0 _ E D I V I N I S MOM I N I BUS COMMEN- T A R I * . I V , I . i 1 4 0 i i j i FULLY S A T I S F I E D UNLESS IT POSSESSES GOD. | A SECOND METAPHYSICAL APPROACH IS THAT IF GOD IS ; P ure A c t , as T h o m i s t i c p h i l o s o p h y h o l d s H im to b e , t h e n | t h i s e x c l u d e s p o t e n c y . E x c l u d i n g p o t e n c y i m p l i e s t h a t j t h e r e i s no q u a l i t y in t h e u n i v e r s e t h a t i s n o t p r e - ' EMINENTLY IN GOD. IF THERE WERE SUCH A Q U A L IT Y , T HIS WOULD IMPLY THAT THERE WOULD BE SOMETHING GOD COULD j POSSESS BUT DOES NOT. I n THAT CASE, He WOULD NOT BE t o t a l or Pur e A c t . But e v e r y a p p e t i t i o n of e v e r y CREATURE IS A TENDENCY TO ITS PERFECTION; IT IS A TENDENCY TO A QUALITY THAT EXISTS PRE-EMINENTLY IN I Q Go d . When a n y good i s l o v e d or d e s i r e d , t h e so u r c e OF ALL GOODNESS IS LOVED OR DESIRED AT THE SAME T I M E . T he c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e r e i s on l y one go a l f o r f a l l m e n i s a r r i v e d at from p h i l o s o p h i c a l p s y c h o l o g y i a l s o . I f t h e r e were not an u l t i m a t e goal to g i v e j m e a n i n g to l e s s e r g o a l s , t h e n man would not a c t at a l l . i j A t t h e same t i m e St . Thomas h o l d s t h a t t h e r e is one i j SIMILAR HUMAN NATURE FOR ALL MEN; THE CONCLUSION CAN i Q | Om n i s m o t u s et o p e r a t i o r e i c u j u s l i b e t in a l i q u i d PERFECTUM TENDERE VIDETUR. PERFECTUM AUTEM HABET RATIONEM BONl; PERFECTIO ENIM CUJUSLIBET REI EST B O N I TAS E J U S . . . .BONUM AUTEM QUODLI BET EST S I M I L I T U D O QUAEDAM SUMMI B O N l. COMPENDIUM T h EQLOGIAE. CAP. Cl I I . S ee a l s o : F i n i s u l t i m u s a g e n t i s n a t u r a l i s o p e r a n t i s EST BONUM UN I VERS I QUOD EST BONUM PERFECTUM. I N DECEM L-I..R -B -0-S . E t h i corum A r i s t o t e l i s ad Ni comachum E x p o s i ti-Q.. m i , 1 5 . 141 THEREFORE BE DEDUCED THAT THERE IS ONE S I M I L A R GOAL FO 9 ALL MEN. IN OTHER WORDS, ALL MEN HAVE A NATURAL D ESIR E FOR T H E I R A.R.ELTE OR P E R F E C T I O N . BUT MAN IS NOT REALLY FREE TO CHOOSE WHAT GOAL WIL L S A T I S F Y H I S NATURE. H e CAN CHOOSE MEANS TO A T T A I N H A P P I N E S S TO BE A COLLEGE PROFESSOR, TO BE A BOOKKEEPER, TO MARRY AND HAVE F I V E C H I L D R E N , TO BE A M I L LI 0 NA IRE — BUT St . THOMAS WOULD I N S I S T THAT THE CONTINGENCY OF ALL THESE GOALS MAKE THEM MERELY MEANS TO HAPPINE SS RATHER THAN HAPP IN ESS I T S E L F . HE HAS ALREADY S A I D THAT ONLY AN IN T E L L E C T U A L L Y KNOWN GOOD COULD BE AN U L TI M A T E GOAL. IT THEN IS A SHORT STEP TO SAY THAT ONLY GOD COULD BE THE U LTIMA TE OR FULLY S A T I S F Y I N G GOOD. T he REASON FOR T H I S L I E S IN THE NATURE OF THE IN T E L L E C T AND THE W I L L . I n T H O M I S T I C P H IL O S O P H Y , THE IN T E L L E C T IS THE POWER TO APPREHEND IN A UNIV ERS AL WAY. T he w i l l i s a power to t e n d to w a r d s good a p p r e h e n d e d i n A UNIVERS AL WAY. FOR T H I S REASON ANY I N D I V I D U A L GOOD, EVEN APPREHENDED U N I V E R S A L L Y , CAN S A T I S F Y N EIT H ER THE IN T EL L E C T NOR THE W I L L . THERE IS ALWAYS ROOM FOR MORE. F or e x a m p l e , t h e s e n s e of t a s t e a p p r e h e n d s p l e a s a n t FLAVORS, AND THE IN T E L L E C T CAN U N I V E R S A L I Z E T H I S 9 SUMMA T HEO-LOG I AE . I - I I , 1 , 4 . 14-2 PLEASANTNESS TO A KNOWLEDGE OF S T E A K - I N - G E N E R A L , PECAN- I P I E - I N - G E N E R A L , L I E B F R A U M I L C H - I N - G E N E R A L * THE IN TELLECT CAN EVEN APPREHEND, AND THUS THE WILL CAN TEND TOWARD F O O D - I N - G E N E R A L . BUT AT THE SAME TIM E THE I N T E L L E C T IS AWARE THAT THERE ARE OTHER T H I N G S IN THE U N I V E R S E . THE j U N I V E R S A L I Z I N G ASPECT OF THE I N T E L L E C T MAKES I T S E L F AWARE OF THE LACK OF S E L F - S U F F I C I E N C Y INVOLVED IN ALL j r e a l i t y . T h o m i s t i c p h i l o s o p h y c o n c l u d e s t h a t t h e o n l y j FULLY S A T I S F Y I N G OBJECT OF THE I N T E L L E C T AND THE WILL I WOULD BE AN I N F I N I T E TRUTH AND AN I N F I N I T E GOOD. THE ! : I N F I N I T E TRUTH WHICH THE MIND SEEKS IS NOT ONLY THE | E PIS TEMO LO G IC A L TRUTH OF THE M I N D ' S CONFORMITY TO I T H I N G S , BUT IT IS THE ETERNAL, ONTOLOGICAL TRUTH OF THE CONFORMITY TO THE SOURCE OF ALL T H I N G S . THE CORRESPON- i i DENCE THEORY OF TRUTH HOLDS THAT E P I S T E M 0 LOGICAL TRUTH [ i : IS A CONFORMITY OF HUMAN IDEAS TO R E A L I T Y . BUT THINGS ! i E X I S T BECAUSE THEY CORRESPOND TO THE C R E A T IV E IDEAS OF | Go d . G od is i n f i n i t e T r u t h b e c a u s e t h e c r e a t i v e ideas 1 1 0 I ARE THE " B L U E P R I N T " FROM WHICH ALL T H IN G S ARE D E S I G N E D . I T he g o o d n e s s of G od l i e s i n t he n o t i o n t h a t God i s ! | i I P u r e- A c t — t h a t G od h a s no p o t e n c y . A s s t a t e d p r e - I | VIOU S L Y, THIS MEANS THAT GOD IS COMPLETE, PERFECT, UN CHANGEABLE. T h e r e i s no b e t t e r s t a t e t o w h i c h G od can 10 P.E VER I T A T E . I , 2 . a t t a i n . G od i s i n f i n i t e T r u t h a n d i n f i n i t e G o o d , an d ONLY IN THE KNOWLEDGE OF THAT I N F I N I T E TRUTH AND LOVE OF THAT I N F I N I T E GOOD WILL MAN F I N D COMPLETE H A P P I N E S S . A C R I T I C I S M OF T H I S P O S I T I O N WI LL BE MADE IN THE F I N A L J 1 i CHAPTER. i THE T H I R D APPROACH TO GOD AS AN U L TI M A T E GOOD IS PERHAPS MORE USE FU L . ONE F I N D S H IM S E L F FULLY ONLY IN G I V I N G H IM S E L F TO SOMEONE E L S E . THE " E X I S T E N T I A L I S T " a p p r o a c h to T h o m i s t i c a x i o l o g y h o l d s t h a t o n l y to God I ca n one f u l l y o p e n o n e s e l f . H u m an b e i n g s , b e c a u s e o f f e a r , i n s e c u r i t y or w e a k n e s s w o u l d n o t g i v e t h e m s e l v e s j FULLY TO OTHER HUMAN B E I N G S . A t THE L E A S T , IT WOULD BE i TOO EMBARRASSING; AT THE MOST, IT WOULD BE TOO COMMIT T I N G . S t a t e d i n a n o t h e r w a y , v a l u i n g c o n s i s t s i n a j S E L F - G I V I N G ; ONLY A S U B S I S T E N T S E L F - G I V I N G CAN FULLY ' 11 BE A PERFECT VA LU E. IT I S IN GOD THAT ONTOLOGICAL I AND AX IO LO G IC A L GOOD MEET F U L L Y . IT IS IN GOD THAT j j EROS AND AGAPE M E E T . THE FORMER, BECAUSE ONLY GOD IS l I ! E S S E N T IA L L Y GOOD, T HUS , PERFECTLY AN OBJECT OF D E S I R E . I T h e l a t t e r , b e c a u s e o n l y by t o t a l l y o p e n i n g o n e - s e l f t o God ( a g a p e ’) is one t o t a l l y f u l f i l l e d f E r o s ' ) . i i"1 R o b e r t 0 . J o h a n n , T h e Me a n i n g of L o v e . ( L o n d o n , 1 9 5 4 - ) , p . 5 4 - 144 C r e a t i o n m u s t b e c o n s i d e r e d i n t h i s s e n s e . God LOVES THE POSSIBLE BEINGS WHOM HE KNOWS THAT He COULD CREATE TO SUCH AN EXTENT THAT He FULLY OPENS HlMSELF TO THEM, GIVING THEM B EIN G . OUR LOVE OF GOD IS A RETURN I 12 | TO OUR SOURCE OF B E IN G , THUS A TRUE FORM OF SELF-LO VE. | L o v e i s t h e c o m m i t m e n t of o n e e x i s t e n c e to a n o t h e r . i God c o m m i t t e d H i m s e l f t o us a n d c a u s e d u s to b e . O n l y I WHEN WE FULLY COMMIT OURSELVES TO GOD W I L L WE BE FULLY 3 j PERFECTED. | C. God is L oved in A l l. T h x n _ g _ s _ _ As A CONSEQUENCE OF WHAT HAS BEEN S A I D , IT SHOULO i 15 I BE NOTED THAT ANY TENDENCY IS A TENDENCY TO GOD. ^ AS i ! I J o h a n n s a y s : Wh a t I l o v e i n m y s e l f o r a n o t h e r i s a s u b - S I STENT L I K E N E S S OF GOO. THUS THE U LTIMA TE ONENESS OF VALUE IS ASS URED. GOD THE CREATOR, ! PRESENT IN A L L , IS LOVED IN ALL AND ABOVE A L L . j B u t t h i s u n i q u e v a l u e , a s p a r t i c i p a t e d . i s i I N D I S T I N G U I S H A B L E FROM THAT CORE OF R E A L IT Y MOST PROPER TO EACH CREATURE, IT S OWN SU B - ! S I S T E N C E . I T IS THE PRESENCE OF T H I S VALUE j i j | 1 2 I blq_. p . 1 0 . ; ^ N a t u r a l e d e s i d e r i u m n i h i l e s t a l i u d quam i n - j c l i n a t i o i n h a e r e n s r e b u s ex O R D I N A T I O N E p r i m i m o v e n - I t i s . In Decem L i b r o s E t h i c q r u m A r i s t o t e l i s ad ! N ic h o m a c h u m E x p o s i t i o . I , 2 . 145 IN THE CREATURE WHICH IS THE CREATURE. HENCE, EACH CREATURE IS A UNIQUE VALUE, VET COMMUN ING IN ITS UNIQUEN ES S WITH EVERY OTHER CREA TURE i n t h e U n i q u e V a l u e . S i n c e t h e r e f o r e WHAT I LOVE IN BEING IS THE PRESENCE OF THE A b s o l u t e , I c a n l o v e i t i n t h e o t h e r as w e l l AS IN M Y S E L F . ^ S i n c e e v e r y b e i n g i s a p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n G o d ' s b e i n g , ALL THE GOODNESS WHICH L I M I T E D BEIN GS HAVE IS ALSO A P A R T I C I P A T I O N IN G o d ' s GOODNESS. St . Thomas h o l d s t h a t n o t o n l y do a l l c r e a t u r e s NATURALLY TEND TO LOVE GOO, BUT THEY TEND TO LOVE HlM EVEN ABOVE TH EMSELVES. C o n s e q u e n t l y , s i n c e G od i s t h e u n i v e r s a l GOOD, AND UNDER T H I S GOOD BOTH MEN AND ANGELS AND ALL CREATURES ARE COMPRISED, BECAUSE EVERY CREATURE IN REGARD TO ITS E N T I R E BEING NATURALLY BELONGS TO GOD, IT FOLLOWS THAT FROM NATURAL LOVE, ANGEL AND MAN A L IK E LOVE GOD BEFORE THEMSELVES AND WITH GREATER LOVE. IN OTHER WORDS, THE CREATURE R E A L I Z E S HE HAS BEING IN A CONTINGENT MANNER AND LOVES THE CAUSE OF H I S BEING MORE THAN HE DOES H I M S E L F . 1 4 r R o b e r t 0 . J o h a n n , T h e Me a n i n g o f L o v e . ( L on don 1 9 5 4 ) , p . 5 0 . ^ Q u I A I G I T U R BONUM U N IV E R S A L E EST IPSE D EU S, ET SUB HOC BONO CONTINETUR ETI AM ANGELUS ET HOMO ET OMNIS CREATURA, QUIA OMNIS CREATURA NATURAL IT E R SECUNDUM ID QUOD ES T, D e i e s t ; SEQU ITUR QUOD NATURALI D I L E C T I O N E ETIAM ANGELUS ET HOMO PLUS ET P R I N C I P A L I U S D I L I G A T DEUM QUAM S E I P S U M . SUMMA T h E Q L O G I A E . I , 6 0 , 5 - j 146 A l l v i r t u e s t a k e on a new m e a n i n g i n t h e l i g h t of T H I S D O C T RINE . HONESTY IS NOT MERELY RESPECT FOR ANOTHE R'S GOODS, BUT IT IS RESPECT FOR GOD IN ANOTHER. C h a r i t y i s not m e r e l y l o v e o f n e i g h b o r , b u t i t i s l o v e of God i n t h e n e i g h b o r . T r u t h f u l n e s s i s n o t m e r e l y RESPECT FOR o n e ' s OWN OR SOMEONE E L S E 'S M I N D , BUT R E S - | PECT FOR THE TRUTH OF GOD AS REPRESENTED IN THE OTHER. God i s t h e u l t i m a t e c r i t e r i o n o f a l l h u m a n a c t s . I H um an a c t s h a v e a t w o f o l d m e a s u r e ; o ne i s PROXIMATE AND HOMOGENEOUS, NAMELY, REASON; WHILE THE OTHER IS REMOTE AND E X C E L L I N G , NAMELY Go d : WHEREFORE EVERY HUMAN ACT IS GOOD WHICH A T T A I N S REASON OR GOD H I M S E L F . J ] I n TERMS WHICH WE HAVE PREVIOU SLY USED, A GOOD i MORAL ACT IS ONE WHICH CONTRIBUTES TO O N E 'S L I F E GOALS, I I BUT S I N C E God i s t h e i m p l i c i t l i f e g o a l o f a l l m e n , I i God i s t h e u l t i m a t e c r i t e r i o n o f a l l m o r a l a c t s . T he i i _ TRAGEDY OF MORAL F A IL U R E OR S I N IS THAT MAN BY H I S VERY NATURE SEEKS GOD AND LOVES GOD IN ALL T H I N G S , EVEN IN THAT WHICH HE THOUGHT HE WAS A T T A I N I N G IN THE j i s i n . O n e do e s a s i n f u l a c t b e c a u s e of t h e g o o d n e s s i n ! I T , YET BECAUSE OF THE S I N F U L A C T , THE ATTAINMEN T OF | SUPREME GOODNESS I S FRUSTRATED. *16 HUMANORUM AUTEM A C T U U M . . . DUPLEX EST MENSURA; UNA QUIDEM PROXIMA ET HOMOGENEA, S C I L I C E T R A T I O ; A L I A AUTEM SUPREMA ET EXCED EN S, S C I L I C E T D EU S. E t OB HOC OMNIS ACTUS HUMANUS ATT INGENS AD RATION EM AUT AD IPSUM DEUM EST BONUS. SUMMA T h EOL.OG.I A E . 1 1 - 1 1 , 1 7 , 1 - 147 V e r y e a r l y i n t h e Co n f e s s i o n s . S t . A u g u s t i n e s t a t e s THAT MAN IS MADE FOR GOD AND WILL FIND HAPPINESS ONLY IN D i v i n e u n i o n . T h i s p r e m i s e o f t h e o l o g y has b e e n a c o n c l u s i o n of Ch r i s t i a n p h i l o s o p h e r s e v e r s i n c e m en b e g a n to p h i l o s o p h i z e in t h e l i g h t of t h e i r C h r i s t i a n e x p e r i e n c e . A r e a l i z a t i o n of t h i s p o s i t i o n a d d s a new d i m e n s i o n TO EVERY OTHER PHILOSOPHICAL DOCTRINE. CHAPTER E IG H T VALUE AS C O N STITU TIVE OF THE HUMAN PERSON j A . S u m m a r y o f t h e T h o m i s t i c V a l u e T h e o r y : S t . T h o m a s s e e s t h e u n i v e r s e a n o a l l o f i t s p a r t s i a s a n o r d e r e d w h o l e . I t i s a n o r d e r e o w h o l e b e c a u s e i t 1 I IS THE PRODUCT OF AN I N F I N I T E CREATIVE INTELLIGENCE ; WHICH CAUSES EACH CREATED THING TO PERFECT ITSELF AND i ! THUS TO PERFECT THE WHOLE. PERFECTION IS TO BE UNDER- i STOOD HERE IN ITS ROOT MEANING OF "THAT WHICH IS DONE COMPLETELY." |N OTHER WORDS, WHEN I SPEAK OF THE PER FECTION OF THE UNIVERSE OR OF ANY OF ITS PARTS, I IMPLY THE BRINGING OF THE UNIVERSE OR PART THEREOF TO A | DESIRED STATE OF COMPLETION. | T he CREATION OF THE UNIVERSE BY GOD DOES NOT IMPLY I ! A STATIC UNIVERSE, AS SARTRE HAS THOUGHT."' GOD CREATES I I 2 ! THINGS IN ORDER THAT THEY MAY ACT. ALTHOUGH GOD IS THE | i A " E x i s t e n t i a l i s m , " E x i s t e n t i a l i s m a n d H u m a n E m q t i o n s . ( N e w Y o r k , 1 9 4 * 7 ) » p * 1 8 . p SUMMA T h E Q L O G IA E . I , 2 , 5 ; THE F IR S T AND SECOND PROOFS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. SEE ALSO! SUMMA C o n t r a G e n t e s . I l l , 6 4 - 6 6 . 1 48 " ........ ” 1 4 9 3 ULTIMATE CAUSE OF THE A C T I V I T I E S OF ALL T H I N G S * THERE IS IN EACH I NO I V I O U A L A NATURE OR FORM WHICH IS A P R O X I MATE CAUSE OF A C T I V I T I E S . SOME T H I N G S F U L F I L L THE POWERS j GIVEN TO THEM BY T H E I R FORM UNCO NSCIOUSLY* OTHERS CON S C I O U S L Y , AND S T I L L OTHERS CONSC IOUSLY ANO V O L U N T A R I L Y . 4 A ny O B J E C T , IN t h e s e n s e p r e v i o u s l y d e f i n e d , w h i c h j i BRINGS ANY TENDENCY OF ANY AGENT TO ANY DEGREE OF F U L F I L L M E N T , IS A GOOD OR V A L U E . ANY OBJECT WHICH F R U S - ; TRATES THE F U L F I L L M E N T OF ANY TENDENCY I S , TO THE EXTENT I THAT I T FRUS T RA T ES , AN E V I L OR D I S V A L U E . j S i n c e t h e u n i v e r s e i s i n t e l l i g e n t l y d e s i g n e d a n d | ALL T H I N G S IN THE U N IV E R S E OPERATE FOR T H E I R OWN PER FECTION AS THEY HAVE BEEN D E S I G N E D , ALL VALUES ARE OB J E C T I V E . T ha t i s , t h e r e i s a p r e d e t e r m i n e d g o a l f o r EVERY CREATURE. THE CAUSE OF T H E I R PREDETERMINED GOALS | IS THE M I N D OF GOD CALLED IN T H O M I S T I C T ER M S, THE ' c ; E t e r n a l L a w . 7 T h e s u m t o t a l of t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n s t o I THESE GOALS AS THEY E X I S T IN CREATURES IS CALLED THE ! ^ SUMMA T h E Q L O G I A E , I , 4 3 , 7 » SUMMA CONTRA G E N T E S . i l l I , 6 3 - 7 0 . " H e n c e i t is c l e a r t h a t in a l l t h i n g s t h a t | OPERATE GOO IS THE CAUSE OF T H E I R O P E R A T I N G . FOR EV ERY THING THAT OPERATES IS IN SOME WAY A CAUSE OF B E I N G . . . . . B u t n o t h i n g is a c a u s e o f b e i n g e x c e p t in so f a r as i t ACTS BY Goo’ s P O W E R . ” ^ P a g e 3 1 • 5 Summa T h e o l o g i a e , l - l l , 9 3 i 1 - ' 150 g N a t u r a l L a w . T he " p r o b l e m " of v a l u e o c c u r s o n l y on t h e h u m a n l e v e l . T he t e n d e n c i e s of b e i n g s w h i c h a r e l e s s e n d o w e d I I THAN MEN ARE FU LFILLED BY D I V I N E D I R E C T I O N . MAN, HOW— 7 EVER, ACTS FREELY. He ACTS FREELY BECAUSE HIS MIND ALLOWS HIM TO SEE VARIOUS POSSIBLE OBJECTS WITH WHICH HE ! CAN F U L F IL L A GIVEN POTENCY. ALL VALUES ARE OBJECTIV E, I : BUT BECAUSE MAN CAN SEE HOW A- PARTICULAR VALUE DOES OR ! | j j DOES NOT F U L F IL L A TENDENCY, A NEW APPROACH TO VALUE IS j i I j NECESSARY, NAMELY, SEEING VALUE AS ASCRIBED. 1 HAVE ! REFERRED TO VALUE AS IT EX IS T S IN THE OBJECT, OR OB- | JEC T IVE VALUE,® AS ONTOLOGICAL VALUE. I HAVE REFERRED TO | VALUE AS IT IS SEEN IN THE OBJECT, OR ASCRIBED TO THE OBJECT, AS AXIOLOGICAL VALUE. IDEALLY, ONTOLOGICAL AND AXIOLOGICAL VALUES WOULD BE THE SAME, BUT SINCE MAN DOES | 9 i | NOT HAVE PERFECT KNOWLEDGE THESE TWO ASPECTS OF VALUE DO | NOT ALWAYS C O IN C IO E . | T h i s d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n o n t o l o g i c a l and ax i o l o g i - i CAL VALUE HAS BEEN PARTICULARLY HELPFUL IN DETERMINING I I i 6 ■ j S u m m a T h e o l o q i a e . I - I I , 9 4 , 1* j ! 7 I I ' T h i s i s one o f t h e m o r e p a r a o o x i c a l p o s i t i o n s in { T h o m a s , n a m e l y , t h a t man i s d e t e r m i n e d by God to a c t f or S P E C IF IC GOALS, BUT HE IS DETERMINED TO DO SO FREELY. S e e : S umma T h e q l q g i a e . I , 1 8 , 5 * "B ut w h a t e v e r our i n t e l l e c t WORKS TOWARDS ARE PRESCRIBED FOR IT BY NA TU RE." S ee a l s o : S umma Co n t r a Ge n t e s . I l l , 2 5 a n d 7 3 * Q S ee p a g e s 5 0 - 5 1 * 151 T H E S T A T U S O F M O R A L , S O C I E T A L A N D U L T I M A T E V A L U E S * A L L { R A T I O N A L C R E A T U R E S S E E K T H E I R F U L F I L L M E N T V O L U N T A R I L Y . T h i s v o l u n t a r y f u l f i l l m e n t c o n s t i t u t e s m o r a l v a l u e . O n t o l o g i c a l m o r a l v a l u e i s t h e g o o d o f a h u m a n l i f e a s c o n f o r m e d t o t h e d e s i g n s o f G o d . A x i o l o g i c a l m o r a l V A L U E I S T H E S A M E G O O D O R S O M E O T H E R G O O D A S S E E N B Y A M A N T O B E T H A T W H I C H C A U S E S T H E F U L F I L L M E N T O F H I S L I F E . M o r a l e v i l i s t h e f a i l u r e t o p e r f e c t o n e ' s l i f e i n a P A R T I C U L A R L Y H U M A N W A Y . S i n c e m a n f i n d s f u l f i l l m e n t i n a s o c i e t y , o n e o f T H E P E R S O N A L G O O D S O F T H E I N D I V I D U A L P E R S O N I S T H E W E L L - B E I N G O F T H E S O C I E T Y . T H E O N T O L O G I C A L G O O D O F A W E L L - O R D E R E D S O C I E T Y I S A G O O D W H I C H B E L O N G S T O E A C H I N D I V I D U A L I N T H A T S O C I E T Y . O N L Y T H E L I M I T A T I O N O F O U R K N O W L E D G E M A K E S U S V I E W S O C I E T Y ' S G O O D A S S O M E T I M E S I N C O N F L I C T | W I T H A P E R S O N A L G O O D . j I I I I j F i n a l l y , t h e r e i s t h e v a l u e u n d e r w h i c h a l l o t h e r j V A L U E S A R E S U B S U M E O , A N D T H I S I S T H E V A L U E O F T H E L O V E O F G o d . O n l y G o d i s t h e s o u r c e o f a l l v a l u e s b e c a u s e H e i s l T H E S O U R C E O F A L L E X I S T E N C E . O N L Y G O D I S T H E U L T I M A T E I G O A L B E C A U S E , A S T H E M O S T P E R F E C T B E I N G , H e I S T H A T W H I C H A L L C R E A T U R E S S E E K W H E N T H E Y V A L U E A N Y T H I N G . A L L V A L U A T I O N I S C O N S C I O U S L Y O R U N C O N S C I O U S L Y A S T R I V I N G A F T E R G O D . G o d H i m s e l f i s t h e h i g h e s t o n t o l o g i c a l v a l u e , a n d t h e * ! G R E A T E S T M O R A L D U T Y O F A M A N I S T O R E C O G N I Z E T H I S F A C T A N D ' ; r ' f j T O M A K E U N I O N W I T H G O D A L S O A N A X I O L O G I C A L V A L U E . 152 B . C r i t i q u e o f C e r t a i n A s p e c t s o f t h e T h o m i s t i c N o t i o n o f t h e G o o d A l t h o u g h t h e u n i v e r s e o f S t . T h o m a s w a s n o t a S T A T I C , P A S S I V E U N I V E R S E , I T W A S A C L O S E D U N I V E R S E . BY T H A T I M E A N T O S A Y T H A T S I N C E T H O M A S T H O U G H T O F T H E i U N I V E R S E A S T H E P R O D U C T O F T H E M I N D O F G O D , H E C O N C L U D E D T H A T V A L U E S A N D G O A L S W E R E P R E D E T E R M I N E D F O R A L L T I M E S . I T H O M A S C E R T A I N L Y H A O N O A W A R E N E S S O F E V O L U T I O N , A N D I S E E M I N G L Y , H A D L I T T L E P L A C E I N H I S S Y S T E M F O R P E R S O N A L C R E A T I V I T Y . He V I E W E D H U M A N N A T U R E A N O T H U S H U M A N G O A L S A S P R E D E T E R M I N E D . M a n ' s L I F E F O R H I M W A S S I M P L Y A L I F E O F C O N F O R M I T Y T O T I E M I N O A N D W I L L O F G O D T O T H E E X T E N T T H A T T H E I N D I V I D U A L M A N C O U L D R E A S O N W H A T G O D D I C T A T E S O R W H A T T H E I N D I V I D U A L M A N A C C E P T S T H R O U G H R E V E L A T I O N . | IT I S A V A I N A N A C H R O N I S M T O W I S H T H A T S T • T H O M A S H A D B E E N A W A R E O F B E R G S O N , B U T I B E L I E V E T H A T S O M E O F T H E i D I F F I C U L T I E S I F I N D I N T h O M I S M W O U L D B E L E S S E N E D I F | T h o m a s h a d p u t l e s s e m p h a s i s o n c o n c e p t s a n d m o r e e m p h a s i s I Jo n v i e w i n g h u m a n k n o w l e d g e a n d e x i s t e n c e a s c r e a t i v e . T h e " c o n c e p t u a l i s m " o f T h o m a s i s m o s t e v i d e n t i n H I S T R E A T M E N T O F M A N ' S O E S T I N Y - A S - M A N O R M O R A L I T Y . T h o m a s s e e m s t o h a v e t a k e n o v e r A r i s t o t l e ' s d e f i n i t i o n o f G o d a s " t h o u g h t t h i n k i n g t h o u g h t . " T h e n a t u r a l l a w a r g u m e n t , W H I C H I S S O I M P O R T A N T I N T H O M A S ' M O R A L P H I L O S O P H Y l A N D I N T H E C A T H O L I C C H U R C H S I N C E H I S T I M E , P R E S U P P O S E S 155 T H A T G O O I S A N " E T E R N A L B L U E P R I N T , " A N E T E R N A L S E T O F I O E A S W H I C H M U S T B E R E A L I Z E D . B U T U N F O R T U N A T E L Y , T H E N A T U R A L L A W A R G U M E N T I S T O O A B S T R A C T T O P R E S E N T A R E A L M O R A L C O D E F O R A N I N D I V I D U A L M A N . I T I S I N T E R E S T I N G F O R A M E T A P H Y S I C A L L Y T R A I N E D M O R A L I S T T O S P E C U L A T E A S T O I W H A T A R E T H E D I C T A T E S O F T H E N A T U R A L L A W , B U T O N L Y F E W M E N W O U L O F I N D A B A S I S F O R P E R S O N A L C O M M I T M E N T I N S U C H A ; T H E O R Y . S u c h a n A R G U M E N T d o e s N O T r e a l l y t e l l a n y o n e h o w ; i T O S O L V E A P E R S O N A L V A L U E C H O I C E . P R E S C I N D I N G F R O M A i i > ! D I V I N E R E L E L A T I O N , M A N C A N D I S C O V E R W H A T H I S G O O D I S O N L Y i B Y A N A N A L Y S I S O F H U M A N N A T U R E M A N I F E S T E D B Y C O N C R E T E I | H U M A N B E I N G S . T H E G O O D L I F E F O R M A N I S G O I N G T O H A V E T O i i B E S O M E T H I N G S P E C I F I C A L L Y H U M A N , B U T S P E C I F I C A L L Y H U M A N i I N A C O N C R E T E S I T U A T I O N . BY T H A T I M E A N T H A T G O A L S — S U C H A S " E X I S T E N C E , 1 1 f , L I F E , " A N D " R E A S O N " C O U L O N O T B E i T H E G O A L F O R A M A N B E C A U S E T H E Y A R E N O T C O N C R E T E L Y H U M A N . A S P E C I F I C H U M A N G O A L W O U L O B E T H E P E R F E C T I O N O F T H E H U M A N M I N D , W H I C H I S , O F C O U R S E , T H E P U R P O S E O F T H E M O R A L | i [ L I F E , A C C O R D I N G T O A R I S T O T L E . B U T T H I S I S T O O A B S T R A C T | | T O B E A W O R K I N G M O R A L C O D E F O R T H E I N D I V I D U A L M A N . I i i W h a t I c o n s i d e r t o b e a m o r e f u n d a m e n t a l d i f f i c u l t y I S T H E H Y L E M O R P H I C S T R U C T U R E U N D E R L Y I N G T H E T H O M I S T I C T H E O R Y O F T H E G O O D . T H E H Y L E M O R P H I C T H E O R Y I S A C O N - ! V E N I E N T E X P L A N A T I O N F O R T H E C H A N G E S T H A T O C C U R I N O U R | ........ " ' ...... ' ............ 154' DAILY EXPERIENCE, BUT DOES EXPLANATION NECESSARILY I N D I - I CATE CONSTITUTION? I MEAN THAT THE FORM-MATTER THEORY EXPLAINS THE CHANGES IN THINGS BUT DOES THAT PROVE THAT I | THINGS ARE COMPOSED OF FORM AND MATTER? WE CAN EXPLAIN THE A C T I V I T I E S OF A TREE IN TERMS OF FORM AND MATTER, BUT THE TREE STIL L SEEMS TO REMAIN A TREE ------ IT DOES I NOT BECOME FORM AND MATTER. T h i s d i f f i c u l t y is f o u n d not o n l y in T h o m i s m but IN OTHER PHILOSOPHIES AND PERHAPS IN ALL INTELLECTUAL i i ; ENDEAVORS. THE P H YSICIS T EXPLAINS THE TREE IN TERMS OF j MOLECULES, ATOMS, ELECTRONS, AND SO FORTH. THE BIOLOGIST I I DOES SO IN TERMS OF OTHER CATEGORIES, THE ECONOMIST IN TERMS OF S T IL L OTHERS} YET THE TREE IS STILL A TREE. AS I HAVE S A ID , PERHAPS THE VERY NATURE OF THOUGHT DEMANDS THAT WE ABSTRACT AND USE THESE CATEGORIES BUT THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN USING CATEGORIES IN BIOLOGY OR ECONOMICS AND USING THEM IN PHILOSOPHY OR THEOLOGY WHICH i AFFECTS ONE'S WHOLE L I F E . ! I THINK THIS PARTICULAR CONCEPTUALISM OF S T . I T ho m a s i s t h e re a s o n why he n e v e r s e e m s to co m e to g r i p s I i WITH IN DIV IDUALS as SUCH. I WOULD SAY THAT THERE IS AN I M P L I C I T CONTRADICTION IN SAYING THAT ONLY INDIVIDUALS 9 EX 1ST, AS DO BOTH THOMAS AND ARISTOTLE} AND AT THE SAME TIME SAYING THAT THE IN D IV ID U A L IS FOR THE SAKE OF THE j i i i 7 Summa T h e o l o g i a e . I , 4 4 , 2 and I , 8 4 , 4 . 155 s p e c i e s . ^ H u m a n a c t i o n — m o r a l i t y , i n a b r o a d u s a g e OF THE TERM — IS ALWAYS DETERMINED BY THE S P E C I E S , NEVER 11 i B Y T H E I N D I V I D U A L . P E R H A P S T H E R E I S A N I D E A L H U M A N I j N A T U R E I N T H E M I N D O F G O D T O W H I C H M A N M U S T C O N F O R M , B U T i [PERHAPS T H I S IDEAL NATURE I S CHARACTERIZED BY FREEDOM I T S E L F RATHER THAN THE F U L F I L L M E N T OF THE I N D I V I D U A L POWERS OF MEN. T h o m a s 1 p o s i t i o n , t h a t t h e p e r f e c t i o n o f t h e i n t e l l e c t IS MAH*S HIGHEST GOOD, PRESUPPOSES THAT THE SOUL- | BOOT ( F O R M - M A T T E R ) EXPLA NATION OF MAN IS C O N S T I T U T I V E AND I THAT THE SOUL IS THE NATURE OF MAN. I HAVE ALREAOY MEN T IO N E D THE D I F F I C U L T I E S i SEE IN THE FORMER P R E S U P P O S I T I O N . T he L A T T E R , NAMELY, THAT THE SOUL IS THE NATURE OF MAN, | T HIN K IS A L E G I T I M A T E IN T E R P R E T A T IO N OF HIS |P H IL O S O P H Y EVEN THOUGH HE S P E C I F I C A L L Y DENIES I T . ^ I f ! f . 1 3 | NATURE IS THE SOURCE OF A B E I N G ' S A C T I V I T I E S , ^ AND IF i | THE SOUL IS THE "SOURCE OF L I F E IN THOSE T H IN G S IN OUR I A iL ; WORLD WHICH L I V E , " THEN I WOULD CONCLUDE THAT THE SOUL I I I OF MEN IS I D E N T I F I A B L E WITH MAN1S NATURE! THE BODY OF 10 S u m m a T h e o l o g i a e . I l - l l , 6 4 , 5^ 1 1 i j S u m m a T h e o l o g i a e . I - H , 1 9 , 2 . I I 12 I ! Summa T h e o l o g i a e . I , 7 5 , 4 . j ' 1 3 : j ■ ' A r i s t o t l e , Phys i c s . I , 1 . i ! /j4 ! | S u m m a T h e o l o g i a e . I , 7 5 , 1# | | M A N -- -- -- -- -- - H A T T E R -- -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - D O E S N O T H I N G E X C E P T I N D I V I D U A T E H I M , I T j S E E M S T O H A V E N O P A R T I N H I S E V A L U A T I O N S O R I N H I S L I F E ’ S 1 5 ' g o a l s * T h o m a s i s c o n s i s t e n t h e r e . S i n c e i n d i v i d u a l i t y A N D T H U S T H E P H Y S I C A L A S P E C T S O F M A N A R E O F L E S S E R I M - I | p o r t a n c e , T h o m a s c o n c l u d e s t h a t t h e h i g h e s t g o a l o f m a n j ( W O U L D B E T H E P E R F E C T I O N O F H I S R A T I O N A L I T Y . | T h o m a s p o s i t s G o d a s t h e h i g h e s t i n t e l l i g i b l e e n d F O R M A N . I D O N O T B E L I E V E T H A T I N C R I T I C I Z I N G T H E C O N - | C E P T U A L I S M O F T H O M A S , I A M N E C E S S A R I L Y R E J E C T I N G H I S P O S I T I O N T H A T G O D I S T H E H I G H E S T E N D F O R M A N . K l E R K E - | g a a r d , J a s p e r s a n d o t h e r s a r e e x a m p l e s o f p h i l o s o p h e r s i W H O D E - E M P H A S I Z E T H E R O L E O F I N T E L L E C T , Y E T W H O R E M A I N T H E I S T S . F u r t h e r , t h e c o n c e p t u a l i s m o f T h o m a s e x p l a i n s m a n | I N t e r m s o f t h e r e s t o f n a t u r e , n o t a s f u n d a m e n t a l l y d i s t i n c t f r o m n a t u r e . I n t r a d i t i o n a l t e r m i n o l o g y , I P H I L O S O P H I C A L P S Y C H O L O G Y I S P A R T O F C O S M O L O G Y . I T H I N K j T H A T T H I S I S T H E R O O T O F T H E P R O B L E M S W H I C H I J U S T M E N - I I i T I O N E D C O N C E R N I N G T H E N A T U R A L L A W . S E E I N G M A N I N T E R M S ! O F N A T U R E D O E S N O T L E N D I T S E L F T O A P O S I T I O N W H I C H W O U L D | h O L O T H A T T H E F U R T H E R I N G O F M A N ' S F R E E D O M I S I T S E L F T H E | G O A L O F M A N 1 S N A T U R E . | T h e T h o m i s t i c p o s i t i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e p r o b l e m o f E V I L I S A L S O A R E S U L T O F S E E I N G M A N I N T E R M S O F T H E R E S T I i I ^ S u m m a T h e o l o g i a e , I , 1 8 , 3 a n d l - l l , 9 4 , 1 * | 157 OF NATURE. ULTIMATELY THOMAS EXPLAINS AWAY THE PROBLEM BY SAYING THAT EVIL IS A NECESSARY PART OF THE MULTI P L I C I T Y OF THE UNIVERSE. T H I S IS NO CONSOLATION TO THE | MAN WHOSE CHILD HAS JUST BEEN RAPED OR THE WIDOW WHOSE j i HUSBAND HAS JUST BEEN K I L L E D . i I ! I THINK THAT A MORE FRUITFUL INTERPRETATION OF THE CREATIVE POWER OF GOD WOULD BE TO CONSIDER GOO AS AN i I N F I N I T E ACT OF LOVE. IN T H I S CONTEXT LOVE HAS THE j I ; S P E C I F I C MEANING OF "COMMITTING ONE'S EXISTENCE TO AN j I J j o b j e c t . " God c r e a t e d , not b e c a u s e He saw H i m s e l f j i | IMITABLE IN A L I M I T E D MANNER BY CREATURES, BUT BECAUSE j ! He c o m m i t t e d H i m s e l f to t h e s e c r e a t u r e s . T he n a t u r a l law ! ; IS NOT THEN A LAW OF CONFORMITY TO CREATIVE IDEAS BUT A j |TENDENCY TO COMMIT ONE*S FREEDOM, ONE'S VERY EXISTENCE ■ i t o a n o t h e r . We ar e b e c a u s e God l o v e d u s , t h a t i s , He : . I | COMMITTED H lS EXISTENCE TO US. I DO NOT IMPLY A PAN T H E I S M . I MERELY MEAN THAT GOD CAUSED US TO .BE BECAUSE I H e JJi, NOT BECAUSE He T H IN K S . I ; j I DO NOT PRETEND THAT T H I S IS AN ULTIMATE ANSWER I . [TO THE PROBLEM OF MORAL OR OTHER VALUES. HOWEVER, I ! THINK THAT IT IS PERHAPS MORE FRUITFUL THAN THE CONCEP- I t u a l i s m of T h o m a s . V a l u e s e x i s t b e c a u s e t h i n g s e x i s t . [ T h i n g s e x i s t b e c a u s e God l o v e s t h e m . I t h e r e f o r e d ra w \ j I THE CONCLUSION THAT VALUATION IS BASICALLY AN ACT OF ; CREATIVE LOVE. T H IS IS NOT TO DENY THE ROLE OF THE 158 INTELLECT IN T H I S PROCESS, BUT THE INTELLECT IS MERELY A i TOOL. I THIN K THE C H R IS T IA N R EV EL A T IO N , THE EXPLANATION j of w h i c h was T h o m a s ' g o a l , t a k e s on a g r e a t e r m e a n i n g j |WHEN ONE REALIZES THAT THE MESSAGE OF CHRIST IS NOT SIMPLY AN UNDERSTANDING OF TH IN GS THAT E X I S T , BUT A LOVING OF PERSONS AND THIN GS THAT E X I S T BECAUSE THEY ARE EXPRES SIONS OF D I V I N E LO VE . THE T R A D IT IO N A L MORAL MAXIMS WILL NO DOUBT REMAIN, BUT THEY W I L L , I T H I N K , BECOME MORE I I m e a n i n g f u l . i ! i ■ f I THINK THAT THE VIEW THAT LOVE IS THE KEY TO VALUE IS A COMPLETION OF THOMAS* OWN P O S IT IO N WHICH HE i WAS INCAPABLE OF SEEING BECAUSE OF THE CONCEPTUALISM WHICH HE BORROWED FROM A R IS T O T L E . ALL THAT HAS BEEN SAID IN PREVIOUS CHAPTERS REMAINS TRUE IN T H IS L I G H T , BUT TAKES ON A DEEPER MEANING. j E a c h i n d i v i d u a l human p e r s o n c o m e s i n t o t h e w o r l d COMPLETE IN SPECIES BUT NOT COMPLETE IN OPERATION. |N ORDER TO COMPLETE HIMSELF IN OPERATION, MAN ACTS. H e TENDS TO ANY GOOD, C ONSTITUTIN G WHAT I THINK IS THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL FORM OF LOVE, SIMPLE APPETENCY. J AS HIS IOC IAL AWARENESS GROWS, THE PERSON SEES THAT OTHERS ARE NECESSARY FOR H IS FULFIL LMENT IN ACT. T e NO- i ING TOWARD OTHERS AS MEANS OF S A T IS F Y IN G HIMSELF CON- j S T IT U T ES A -—G“£C ON D TYPE OF LOVE WHICH, IN CONTEMPORARY ! # f L IT E R A T U R E , IS CALLEO EROTIC OR S E L F -P E R F E C T IV E LOVE* 159 T he l o w e s t f o r m of t h i s t y p e of l o v e i s t e n d i n g t o w a r d s i ANOTHER BECAUSE THE OTHER IS A MEANS OF PLEASURE. THE SECOND FORM OF EROTIC LOVE IS TENOING TOWARDS ANOTHER s PERSON TO USE HIM IN ORDER TO SUPPLY ONE'S NEEDS. THE HIGHEST FORM OF EROTIC OR SELF-P ERFECTIVE LOVE IS THE LOVE OF FRIE N D SH IP BY WHICH ONE TENDS TOWARD ANOTHER I PERSON AS A FRIEND IN ORDER TO SATISFY ONE*S NATURAL DE SIR E FOR FELLOW MEN. SEEING FELLOW MEN AS "OTHER S E L V ES ." j A TH IR D TYPE OF LOVE IS DIRECT, AGAPIC LOVE. WHEN A MAN HAS REACHED T H I S STAGE HE IS AWARE OF HIMSELF AS A D IS T IN C T SOURCE OF VALUES AND OPENS HIMSELF TO ANOTHER COMPLETELY SO THAT THESE VALUES MAY BE SHARED. T he ECSTATIC AND THE TRAGIC MEET IN a PARADOX WHICH IS ONE WITH THE BEING OF MAN. THE DESIRE TO GIVE MYSELF AND THE DESIRE TO BE F U L F IL L E D , THE NEED TO THROW MYSELF AWAY AND THE NEED TO BE SHELTERED ARE ONE WITH HUMAN L I F E ; LOGICALLY, THESE DRIVES ARE OPPOSED*,- j EX I STENT I ALLY, THEY ARE THE BEING OF MAN. ! T r a d i t i o n a l m o r a l p h i l o s o p h y has p r e s e n t e d o n l y I i j HALF OF THE HUMAN S I T U A T I O N . IT HAS PRESENTED MAN AS A j S E L F - P E R F E C T IV E , TEL EOLOGICAL CREATURE. I T IS MY CON- | j I TENT I ON IN T H I S CHAPTER THAT ONLY IN SELF-OPENNESS, IN A ! 1 S j SHARING OF ONE'S INNERMOST " S O L I T U D E , " IS THERE TRUE i I I ! S E L F -P E R F E C T IO N . I n THE MATURE MAN, EROTIC AND AGAPIC ! ! I I T - I I LOVE m e e t . T he m a t u r e man s e e s THAT he i s BY NATURE ! 1 6 i F r e d e r i c k D. Wi l h e l m s e n , T he Me t a p h y s i c s o f - L o v e , j ( N e w Y o r k , 1 9 6 2 ) , p . 2 J . 160 EC S T A T IC , THAT HE TENDS TO TRANSCEND HIS S U B J E C T I V I T Y , TO BREAK DOWN THE BARRIERS OF SELFHOOD TO TRULY F I N D HIM SELF BY LOSING HIMSELF IN ANOTHER. FAILURE TO DO T H I S IS l | SELFISHNESS AND MORAL IMMATURITY. ! L ov e i s t h e door t o more v a l u e s . A s we b e c o m e ! MORE AND MORE AWARE OF THE VALUE OF OURSELVES AND THE I ! VALUES OF. THOSE WE LOVE, WE BECOME MORE AND MORE AWARE OF .T HE CONTINGENCY OF LOVE AND OF EXISTENCE I T S E L F . LOVE I OPENS UP TO US A SEARCH FOR A LOVE GROUNDED IN A NON CONTINGENT EXIS TE N C E. BY LOVING OTHER E X IS T E N T S , MAN AS AN EXISTENT OPENS HIMSELF UP TO A SHARING IN WHAT | J a s p e r s c a l l s ” t r a n s c e n d e n c e , " w h a t T homas c a l l s ” I p s u m E s s e ,*1 and what most men c a l l Go d . C. C o n c l u s ION On l y a p e r s o n i s n a m e d . We do a t t r i b u t e n a m e s to ANIMALS, TO OUR CARS, TO A TYPEWRITER, BUT TH IS PER SO N I- ! F IC A T I O N IS NOT BECAUSE OF ANY I N T R IN S I C MERIT OF THE OBJECT ITSELF BUT BECAUSE WE HAVE ATTRIBUTED SOME P E R - I SONAL CHARACTERISTIC TO I T . NAMES ARE ONLY ATTRIBUTED j ’ i i i j TO THE THINGS, THE NAMES ARE NOT TRULY DESERVED. A i i j ! i | HUMAN BEING, HOWtVER, IS TRULY A PERSON AND AS SUCH TRULY! » I I | i DESERVES A NAME. B OETHIUS1 D E F I N I T I O N OF A PERSON, n AN : a h \ ! I N D IV ID U A L OF A RATIONAL NATURE,” ONLY HINTS AT A 1 7 I C i t e d i n Summa T h e o l o g i a e . I , 2 9 , 1 . I 161 I j D E F I N I T I O N OF THE GREAT MYSTERY OF HUMAN EXISTENCE. A HUMAN BEING, HOWEVER, IS NAMED PROPERLY. THE VALUE OF A HUMAN BEING COMES, NOT BECAUSE HE IS A MEMBER OF A PARTICULAR S P E C IE S , BUT BECAUSE HE IS A PERSON. HE IS A D IS T IN C T EXISTENT OF A RATIONAL NATURE ----- THAT I S , HE IS A D I S T I N C T EXISTENT WHO HAS THE POWER OF TRANS- | | CENDING HIS S U B J E C T IV IT Y AND DETERMINING HIS OWN MANNER | OF EXISTENCE. As A PERSON, MAN IS NOT A STATIC NATURE, A O i CONDEMNED TO " b e" IN A CERTAIN MANNER FOR ALL T IM E S . ; B o e t h i u s ' n o t i o n of a p e r s o n m u s t be d e v e l o p e d to t h e i P O IN T THAT WE REALIZE THAT THE RATIONAL NATURE OF MAN j ALLOWS HIM TO TRANSCEND HIS OWN SUBJECTIVITY!. REASON. | | a s de F i n a n c e s a y s , i s o n l y a t o o l by w h ic h man p u r s u e s 1 9 H I S GOALS. y \ A PERSON IS ONE WHO SEEKS A GOAL BECAUSE OF, AND BY j MEANS OF, H I S RATIONAL NATURE. THERE IS AN ANCIENT i | PH ILOSOPHICAL PO SIT IO N THAT A C T I V I T I E S ARE S P E C IF IE D ! | ( d e t e r m i n e d ) BY THEIR END. THAT IS TO SAY, A POWER GETS ! I T S MEANING FROM WHAT IT VALUES. A PERSON GETS HIS MEAN- j | i y jg , "L a l i b e r t e suppose donc que l e s u j e t n ' e s t PAS I COMPLETEMENT DEFINI PAR SO FORME NATURELLE, QU' IL LA j j TRANSCfNDE D ' UNE CERTAIN FACON, OU, M I E U X , QUE SA NATURE, j EST N * ET RE PAS , # SIMPLEMENT NATURE AU SENS DE NATURE i F I N I E , DETERM I NEE, PART IC U L A R IS E E . " JOSEPH DE FINANCE, | E x i s t e n c e e t L i b e r t e , ( P a r i s , 1955)* p . 8 . j ‘ 19 ! I 7hLA RAISON FONCTIONNE COMME UN ORGANE OU UN INTRU-j I MENT oe l ' h o m m e , s u b o r o i n e e a l a f i n a u ' en v e r t u de SA I | NATURE IL POURSUIT NECESSAIREMENT•" JOSEPH OE F IN A N C E, I # L e s Pl an s d e l a L i b e r t e ," S c i e n c e s E c c l e s t i a q u e s , XI I 1, 3, 1 9 6 1 . ! ING FROM WHAT HE VALUES * IN MORE CONTEMPORARY LANGUAGE, iWE WOULO SAY "T E L L ME WHAT YOU VALUE ANO I ’ LL T E L L YOU I 1 2 0 ! WHO YOU A R E . " S A R T R E 'S STATEMENT THAT "MAN I S THE FUTURE OF MAN"2 1 MEANS THAT MAN AS A FREE CREATURE PRO DUCES HIM S EL F BY H IS C H O I C E S . A PERSON IS WHAT HE VALUES AND, AS A PERSON, IS ONLY WHAT HE V A L U E S . i | Man c r e a t e s v a l u e s fo r h i m s e l f , b u t -s y so d o i n g , HE G IV E S VALUE TO THE U N I V E R S E . A TRULY HUMAN PERSON F I N D S HIM SELF TO BE MORE THAN A BODY, MORE THAN A SOUL, I | m 0RE THAN a FUNCTION IN S O C I E T Y . THE VALUING PERSON IS j t h e " I " w h i c h I m m a n u e l K a n t sa w as t h e o n e g l i m p s e i n t o i I t h e r e a l w o r l d . Al e x a n d e r P o p e o n c e s a i d t h a t t h e p r o p e r j STUDY OF MAN IS MAN H I M S E L F . L I V I N G AS WE DO IN A WORLD OF THE MAN WHO DOES NOT FULLY R E A L I Z E H I S I N F I N I T E VALUE AND D I G N I T Y AS A PERSON, IT IS IMPORTANT TO RECALL POPE*S WORDS. A l l OTHER HUMAN UNDERTAKINGS ARE SECONDARY TO THE i STUDY OF MAN AND HIS V A L U ES . 20 ] W i l l i a m H . We r k m e i s t e r , c l a s s r o o m l e c t u r e s ; s e e j A L S o : " V a l u e T h e o r y a n d t h e P r o b l e m o f O b l i g a t i o n , " T h e IP e r s o n a l i s t « XLV, 3 , 1 9 6 4 , p . 6 2 . " I n o u r u l t i m a t e c o m - ! IM ITMEN TS WE OURSELVES ARE AT STAKE AS A P E R S O N . " ! 2 1 i ! J e a n - P a u l S a r t r e , " E x i s t e n t i a l i s m , " E x i s t e n t i a l - j i s m a n d H u m a n E m o t i o n s . ( N ew Y o r k , 1 9 4 ? ) , p . 5 0 . j BIBLIOGRAPHY Al e x a n d e r , S a m u e l . P h i l o s o p h i c a l and L i t ,e r a r .y_ P i e _ c.e_ s_. L o n d o n , 1 9 3 9 * A r i s t o t l e . ,P.e. A * U N / V « ________________* N i c h o m a c h e a n E t h i c s . B a r r e t t , E . Boyd. The Q u e s t of Ho n o r . M i l w a u k e e , 1 9 5 3 - D ' A r c y , Ma r t i n C. T h e M i m d a n d . H e a r t of L o v e . New Y o r k , 1960 De Be a u v o i r , S i m o n e . T he E t h i c s o f Am b i g u i t y . New Y o r k , 1962. De F i n a n c e , J o s e p h . E t r e e t A g i r dans _ l a _ _ P h i l q s o p h l e o s l S t . Thomas. P a r i s , 1 9 4 -5 - - E x i s t e n c e e t L i b e r t e . P a r i s , 1 9 5 5 - . " L es P l a n s de l a L i b e r t e , " S c.i_ e n c e s E c c l e - s i a s t i o u e s . M o n t r e a l , V o l . X I I I , # 5 , D ecember 1 9 6 1 "R e p o r t on F r e n c h Ph i l o s o p h y , " T he Mo d e r n S c h o o l m a n . V o l . XXV, # 1 , November 194-7» S a i n t L o u i s . G i l s o n , E t i e n n e . M o r a l V a l u e s and t h e M o r a l L i f e t t r a n s Leo R i c h a r d W a r d , 1 9 6 1 . S p i r i t _ o_ f_ Me d i e v a l P h i l o s o p h y .. New Y o r k , 1 9 3 6 . W- IS DOM AND L o v e in S t . T h o m a s A q u i n a s .. M i l w a u k e e , 1 9 5 1 - H a l l , E v e r e t t W. W hat is V a l u e ? . The H u m a n i t i e s P r e s s , New Y o r k , 1 9 5 2 . H a w k i n s , D. J . B. B e in g and B e c o m in g . New Y o r k , 1 9 5 4 -. J o h a n n , R o b e r t . T h e M e a n in g o f L o v e . L o n d o n , 1954-. .. "A M e d i t a t i o n on F r i e n d s h i p , " The M o d e r n L, V o l . XXV, # 2 , J a n u a r y 194-8, S t . L o u i s . L y n c h , L a w r e n c e . " E x i s t e n t i a l i s m a n d t h e N a t u r e of Ma n , " Pr o c e e d i n g s o f the Am e r i c a n C a t h o l i c P h i l o s o p h i c a l As s o c i a t i o n . Wa s h i n g t o n , 1 9 5 *1 * Ma r i t a i n , J a c q u e s . T he P e r s o n a n d t h e C ommon Go o d . New Y o r k , 1 9 4 - 7 * _________ _ • Sa i n t T homas a n d t h e P r o b l e m , _ q f _ E v _ li. I Mi l w a u k e e , 1 9 4 - 2 . M c M a n u s , C h a r l e s J . " T h e Good in M e t a p h v s i c s and in Et h i c s , " P r o c e e d i n g s o f t h e A m e r i c a n Ca t h o l i c | j P h i_ io s o p h i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n . W a s h i n g t o n , 1 9 5 0 . j | Mo o r e , Ge o r g e E d w a r d . Et h i c s . L o n d o n , 1 9 5 2 . j ________________ * P r i n c i p i a E t h i c a . C a m b r i d g e , 1 9 2 2 . j | O a t e s , W h i t n e y J . A r i s t o t l e and t h e P r o b l e m o f V a l u e . j P r i n c e t o n , 1 9 6 3 * ; O ' N e i l , C h a r l e s J . " S a i n t Thomas a n d t h e N a t u r e o f M a n ," Proc.e_E-0_.ln.gs. o f t h e A m e r i c a n _ C a t h i o l l c P h i l o s o p h i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n . W a s h i n g t o n 1 9 5 1 * Pa r k e r , De w i t t H. H u m a n V a l u e s . N ew Y o r k , 1 9 5 ^ * P e g i s , An t o n C. " N a t u r e a n d S p i r i t : S ome R e f l e c t i o n s on t h e Pr o b l e m of t h e E n d of M a n , " P r o c e e d i n g s of t h e A m er i c a n Ca t h o l i c P h l l o _s o p_h i c a l A s s o c i a t l o n . Wa s h i n g t o n , 1 9 4 - 9 * . Sa i n t T homas a n d Ph i l o s o p h y . M i l w a u k e e , 1 9 6 4 - . - " S a i n t T h o m a s and t h e N ic h o m a c h e a n E t h i c s , " M e d i a e v a l S t u d i e s . . V o l . XXV, T o r o n t o , 1 9 6 3 * P e r r y , R a l p h B. G e n e r a l T h e o r y of V a l u e . New Y o r k , 1 9 2 6 . R e i d , T. E . H . e d i t o r , V a l u e s in C o n f l i c t . . T o r o n t o , 1 9 6 3 * R e n a r d , H e n r i . " E t r e et A g i r , by J o s e p h de F i n a n c e , " The M o d e r n S c h o o l m a n . V o l . X X IV , # 3 , M a r c h 1 9 4 - 7 , St. L o u i s . S a l m o n , E l i z a b e t h G . T he G o o d i n E x i s t e n t i a l M e t a p h y s i c s . M i l w a u k e e , 1 9 5 5 * 165 S a r t r e , J e a n - P a u l * " E x i s t e n t i a l i s m , ” E x i s t e n t i a l i s m a no. H u m an E m o t i o n s . New Y o r k , 1947. Sc h n e i d e r , Al e x a n d e r . T h e An a r c h y of F u e l i n g . New Y o r k , 1 9 6 3 . | Sm i t h , S i s t e r E n i d . T he Go o d n e s s of B e i j i g i n T h o m i s t i c P h i l o s o p h y a n d i t s C o n t e m p o r a r y S i gn i f i c_ a m o jl. Wa s h i n g t o n , 1 9 4 7 * I I Sm i t h , Ge r a r d . ” T h e Na t u r a l E nd of Ma n , " P r o c e e d i n g s | Q£.THE Am e r i c a n C a t h o l i c Ph i l o s o p h i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n . | Wa s h i n g t o n , 1 9 4 -9 * T h o m a s A q u i n a s . C o m p e n d i u m T he_ o l o g i a e . New Y o r k , 1 9 4 -9 * I ________________* C o m m e n t a r _ i_ u m _ i n D u o d j l c e m L i b r o s M e_ t_ a - PiLY.S.I.C0 RUM A-R I STQ.TE L IS S t AG I R IT A E . NEW YORK, 1 9 4 -9 - j : ________________• Co m m e n t a r i a i n L i b r u m Be a t i D i o n y s .i i d e P i v i n i s Nom i n i b u s . N ew Y o r k , 1 9 4 -9 * _________* C0MM.ENTAB.I A ..I N T b E_S _L l B _R _0 S A R I ST_QT_E.L_LS. .P. E. A n i m a . New Y o r k , 1 9 4 -9 * _________________• CQM MENTUM IN Qu ATUOS L IB R O S S e N T .E N I I ARUM .. N ew Y o r k , 1 9 4 - 9 - _ ______________* D e A m i h a . N e w Y o r k , 1 9 4 -9 * ___________* D e C ar i t a t e .. New Y o r k , 1 9 4 -9 * ! ________________• P S ...M A L & , N e w Y o r k , 1 9 4 -9 * _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ D e P o t e n t i a . New Y o r k , 1 9 4 -9 * ; ________________* D e R e g i m i n e . p R i N c i P U M . New Y o r k , 1 9 4 -9 - . D e S p i r r t u a l i bu s C r e a t u r i s . New Y o r k , 1 9 4 -9 - ________________- D e V e r i t a t e . New Y o r k , 1 9 4 9 * ________________ * D e V i r t i t u b i s i n C o m m u n i . New Y o r k , 1 9 4 9 * ________________- E x .p o .s i tip , in C a n t i cum C a n t i c q r u m . New Y o r k , 1 9 4 9 * ________________• Expos i t . 10 in Pecem L i b r o s E t h i c d r u m A r i s t o t e l i s ao N i c h o m a c h u m . New Y o r k , 1 9 4 9 * N ew Y o r k , 1 9 4 9 . 166 Ex.POSIT.IO IN LlBRUM SOETI 1 DE HEBOMAP I BUS. N ew Y o r k , 1 9 4 -9 • E x p o s i t i o i n L i b r u m Bo e t i i de T r i n j t a t e . E x p o s _i_ t_i q_ i .n E p i s t o l a m t D E p h e s Lo s . N ew Y o r k , 1 9 4 - 9 . _______- E X P as. IT-LO I N E P I S.TQ.L.AM _S ECU NOAM. AO T.H E I S A - LON I CENSES. NEW YORK, 1 9 4 9 - E x p o s i t i o i n Qc t o L i b r o s P h y s i c o r u m A r i s - t o t e l i s . N ew Y o r k , 1 9 4 9 - E xposi.no in P e r i h e r h e n i a s Seu oe I n x r e - PRETATI O N E . NEW YORK, 1 9 4 9 . . I n oe C a u s i s . N ew Y o r k , 1 9 4 9 . . Q u a e s t i o n .e s _ Q u o d l i b e t a l e s . N e w Y o r k , 1 9 4 9 . . S u m m a C o n t r a _Ge n t i l e s . N ew Y o r k , 1 9 4 9 - - _______. Sum m a T h e o l o g i a e . New Y o r k , 1 9 4 9 . Von H i l d e b r a n d , D i e t r i c h . C h r i s t i an E t h i c.s. New Y o r k , 1955- " T r a n s f o r m a t i o n of M a n ' s N a t u r e , " P r o c e e p - i n g s OF t h e A m e r i c a n C a t h o l i c Phi l q . s o . p . h i c a l A _ ss_ o- c i a t i o n . W a s h i n g t o n , 1 9 5 2 . W e r k m e i s t e r , W i l l i a m H . O u t l i n e s o f a V a l u e T h e o r y . I s t a n b u l , 1 9 5 9 - " P r o b l e m s o f V a l u e T h e o r y , " P h i l o s o p h y and P h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l R e s e a r c h . V o l . XI I , # 4 , J u n e 1 9 5 2 . " P r o l e g o m e n a t o V a l u e T h e o r y , " P h i l o s o p h y an d P h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l R e s e a r c h . V o l . X I V , # 3 - . T h e o r i e s o f E t h i c s . L i n c o l n , 1 9 6 1 . " V a l u e T h e o r y an d t h e P r o b l e m of Mo r a l O b l i g a t i o n . " T h e P e r s o n a l i s t _ . L o s A n g e l e s , V o l . X L V , # 3 , Su m m er, 1 9 6 4 . WlLHELMSEN, FREDERICK D. THE METAPHYSICS OF L O V E . NEW Y o r k , 1 9 6 2 .

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The meaning of judicium and its relation to illumination in the philosophical dialogues of augustine

PDF

A Philosophical Model For Counseling Systems

PDF

The Concept Of Agent Intelligence In Aristotle: A Solution In Accordance With The Traditional Problem Of The One And The Many

PDF

A Philosophical Critique Of F. R. Tennant'S Empirical Approach To Theism In The Light Of Current Science

PDF

The Philosophies Of Ralph Tyler Flewelling And Edgar Sheffield Brightman: A Comparison And A Critique

PDF

A Critical Examination Of Heidegger'S And Jasper'S Interpretations Of Nietzsche

PDF

Husserl And Merleau-Ponty And The Problem Of The Cultural Studies

PDF

The Implications Of Cultural Anthropology For The Question: What Is The Basis Of Moral Obligation?

PDF

The Effects Of The Los Angeles County Neighborhood Youth Corps Program Onthe Performance Of Enrollees In School

PDF

Law In The Old Stoa And Its Antecedents

PDF

Group Counseling With Under-Achievers In A Community College

PDF

The Problems Of Jr. College Freshmen And The Development Of The Jr. College Problem Check List

PDF

A Study Of The School Achievement And Adjustment Of Children From One-Parent Homes

PDF

Effects Of Short-Term Group Counseling On Changes In Attitudes Of Flexibility, Tolerance, And Nonauthoritarianism

PDF

Parental Support Of Independent Free Schools. Determinant And Value Implications For Public School Counselors: An Exploratory Study

PDF

A Comparative Study Of The Marathon-Group Experience In A University Counseling Center

PDF

A Study Of The Effectiveness Of Teaching Methods Of Study To Selected High School Freshmen

PDF

Value And Obligation: An Integration Of The Theories Of Ralph Barton Perry, C. I. Lewis, Dewitt Parker, And Charles L. Stevenson

PDF

A Study Of The Difficulties Indian And Japanese Students Encountered In Six Problem Areas At The University Of Southern California, 1969-1970

PDF

The Systematic Isolation And Validation Of Personality Determiners In The Handwriting Of School Children

Asset Metadata

Creator Morgan, John Daniel (author)

Core Title Towards A Metaphysics Of Value: A Critical Study Of The Axiological Implications Of The Metaphysics Of Saint Thomas Aquinas

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Philosophy

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,Philosophy

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Werkmeister, William H. (committee chair), Carnes, Earl F. (committee member), Robb, Kevin (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-229077

Unique identifier UC11360756

Identifier 6700415.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-229077 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 6700415.pdf

Dmrecord 229077

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Morgan, John Daniel

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA