Alcala 1958

The Separated Substances By THERESA M . CREM , Ph .D . Ph ilo soph yD ep ar tm en t Col le ge fo r W om en e arated bstances . , . . s phy artment lege r en

T HE AIM OF me tap hys ics is no t me relyknow led ge of be ing in gen­ eral, but als o know led ge of the pri nci ple s of be in g, par ticu larl y of its ext rin sic pri nci ple s,the separa ted sub stance s. Nat ura l know led ge of suc h pri nci ple s must of ne ces sity be neg ati ve, and the mor e det erm ina tely negativ e it bec omes, the mor e clos ely do es it app roa ch rea lity . St . Thoma s, in the Pr oo em ium to hi s Commen tary on Ari sto tle' s Meta ph ysi cs , states that when sev era l thi ngs are ord ere d to one end , one of them must be dir ect ive of the oth ers . But all the sc ience sand arts are ord ere dto the perf ect ionof ma n. Ther e­ for e on e of them must dir ect the oth ers . But tha t sci en ce wh ich is mo st inte llec tua l, i.e ., the sci ence tha t trea ts of tho se thi ngs wh ich are most intelligi ble , is the one tha t is natu rall yfit ted to dir ect the oth ers . 1 Howev er, "in tellig ibl e"can be taken in thr ee wa ys : 2 1 . As to the or de rof in tel lec tio n. Those thi ngs wh ich giv e the int elle ctcer titu deare sai d to be int ell igi ble . But the cer titu deof sc ien ceis att ain ed by the int elle ctthr oug h cau ses . In the Po ste rio rAn al yt ic s, Ari stot le sa ys that we pos sess scien ce of a thi ng in an abs olu temanne r, as opp ose d to know l- 1 "Sicut doc et Phi loso phu s in Po liti cis suis , quan do aliqua plura ordin antu r ad unum , oport et unum eorum esse regu lans , sive rege ns, et ali a regul ata, sive recta . . . Omne s autem scie nti aeet artes ordi nant ur inunum, sci lice tad hom inis perf ectio nem ,quae est eju s beati tudo. Und e nece sseest, quod una earum sit aliarum omni um rectri x . . . scie nti a deb et esse natu- ralit er aliar um reg ula trix ,qua e max ime intel- lect ual isest . Haec autem est, qua e circ amax ime int elli gib iliaversatu r." (Pro oem iumin Me tap h.) 2 Proo emium in Me tap h. hysics l ledge of - le ge i les i g, l rly i sic principles, te t nce . l ledge ciples sity tive, inately e e , c lit . . s, e ium t b t ry tle's t physics, l , tive s. s rfection . - s. ce i ll t al, ., t i ble, that is naturally fitt s. 1 er, tel i ible" ways : 2 r f t l ection. i l ct ti de a l igible. de ce e l ct h . t rior alytics, le ce l te r, d l- I us liticis , r , l , , .. iae e in , t a i i decti ne , s . ee sit ia trix, li . irca l igibil a . i t h.) 2 h. c t

,

tal

l

ed ge in a pu rely acc ide nta lwa y, when we kno w the caus e of a thi ng pre cis ely as its caus e. 3 Th ere for e,kno wle dge of cau ses is sa id to be mo st inte llec tua l. 2. As to compa ris onbe tw ee n inte llec t an d sense. Int elle ctu al kno wle dge dif fer s from sen se kn ow ledge in that inte llec tua l know led ge is of unive rsa ls where as sen se knowled geis of particu lar s.Th ere for e,that sci en ce is mo st int elle ctu al wh ich is con­ cer ned with pr inc ipl estha t are mo st uni­ ver sal. 3. As to the ve ry kn ow led geof the in­ tel lec t. Th ose th ing s are mos t int ell igi ble wh ich are mo st sep ara tedfromma tter. For the re must be a pro por tion bet wee n the int ell igi blean d the inte llec t,sin ce the intel­ lect an d the intell igi blein ac t are on e. But the int elle ct is an imm ate rial fac ult y. 4 Th ere for ethe ob jec t of inte llec tual know l­ ed gemus t beimma ter ial. No w, tho se thin gs are mo st sep ara ted from mat ter wh ich are abs tra ctednot on ly from signate ma tter but als o from all sen sib lema tter. Our int ellect can abs tra ct from ma tter in thr ee wa ys : 5 1. Th ere are cer tai n ob jec ts of spec ula­ tion tha t dep end on ma tter ac co rd ing to be ing, for they can not ex ist ex cept in ma tter. Thes e are dis tin gu ish ed in that the y dep end on mat ter bot h really and accord ing to rea son , as do tho se thi ngs '"Scire autem opin amu r unumquodque simp li- cite r, sed non sop hist icomodo , quod est secu n­ dum acc iden s, cum causam arbitramur cognos - cer e propter quam res est : et quoni am illiu s caus a est. . . ." (P os t.Ana l. I, c. 2, 71b 8) 4 / n III de Ani ma, lec t. 7, nn. 684- 686; la . q.76, a. 1 ,c . 5 In de Tr in ita te,q. 5, a. 1, c. ; la , q. 85, a. 1, ad 2. e cisely e. 3 efore, k l dge s l tual. rison t e n ll t ll ct al l dge s ledge ll t al ledge rsals as l ge lars. fore, t ce t al i - i ciples - l. ledge f - lect. i s lligible i ted . tio n lligible l t, - igible . he intellect i an immaterial faculty. fore t ll t al l- e terial. , ted i cte l i le . ll ct :' in ts l - ing i g, t t . e i gui bed th ing s , 3 " ir r que li , i tico , - , • : s .. st. l. , ) '4/ ll , . ; . q. l, . 'I in.itate, l ; , I

78