The substantial form gives it simple being facit esse actu simpliciter. That is the reason why there can only be one substantial form to each thing. By means of this principle, Aquinas opposes that interpretation by Avicebron in Fons Viate according to which an individual man should have many substantial forms, one making him substance, another giving him the body, another by which it has life, etc.
Thus, Aquinas concludes: It is one and the same substantial form that makes a man a particular thing or substance, and a bodily thing, and a living thing, and so on. For the higher form can give to its matter all that a lower form gives, and more; the soul gives not only substance and body but life also. We must not think, therefore, of the soul and body as though the body had its own form making it a body, to which a soul is super-added, making it a living body; but rather 9 that the body gets both its being and its life from the soul.
The kind of actuality pertaining to the soul is analogous to the possession of knowledge. On commenting on this definition, Aquinas says that his referring to a primary act not only means a differentiation of the soul as act from all the subsequent acts of the living but a distinction, as well, between the soul and the other forms of the elements that act upon the body. Here is how he asserts it: For from this principle the soul which is the richest of embodied forms, spring many different activities, so that it requires, in the matter informed by 11 it, a full equipment of different organs.
Aristotle chooses plants, the least perfect among the living, to demonstrate that every animate body is organic, meaning it has diversified parts, which amounts to saying that it has different organs performing different functions. According to this, we can say that the soul is the substantial form of natural organic bodies. Indeed, both definitions are essential. The first one encloses the essential order of the informed body, and the second the essential order of vital acts, since Aristotle sets out the four main manifestations of vitality.
Marcos Manzanedo, O. Aquinas comments upon this question: Soul is the one principle underlying the four distinct modes in which life is manifested, namely, the vegetative mode, which belongs to plants and to all living things; the sensitive mode in all animals; the intellectual mode in all men; and fourthly, the mode that is a power to move from place to place, which exists in all the higher animals, both those with senses only and 16 those with intellect as well.
However, if the soul is a principle shared by the various modes of life, Aristotle wonders if the principle that animates each one of these modes is to be identified with all the soul or with a part of the soul.
But where the thing also has sensation this vegetative principle is only a part of the soul. And the same reasoning applies to other 18 cases. The second sets up a general principle: Where one only of these principles is found it is the soul itself; but where several are found together each is a part of the soul and the soul itself is named after the principal part, whether sensitive or intellectual as the case 19 may be.
We may well wonder why it emerges when distinguishing the potentialities. The Aristotelian explanation is at once simple and confusing: everything sensitive is also appetitive because appetite consists of desire, anger and will. It is the inclination towards which the senses lead, particularly touch, which exists in all animals. Where there is sensation there is also pain and pleasure; the agreeable and the repulsive emerge.
Now the trend that proceeds from a sensible or intellectual form is called sensitive or intellectual desire; as that of any form in nature is called a natural desire. And from this desire follows the activity of local movement. Here then is the explanation we required of the five-fold 23 division of the powers of soul. A few lines below, he will add: Sensitivity implies a third power, appetition, which itself divides into three: into desire, in the stricter sense, which springs from the concupiscible appetite; anger, corresponding to the irascible appetite —both of these being in the sensitive part and following sense-knowledge—; and finally will, which 24 is intellectual appetite and follows intellectual apprehension.
Also see Martha C. For one thing, the reason for the diversity of souls is explained according to how the operations of the soul outdo the operations of the bodily nature, for all the bodily nature is subject to the soul and is, with respect to it, its matter and instrument.
As the triangle is contained 30 in the square, so is the vegetative in the sensitive. St Thomas comments as follows: In both cases what comes first is potentially in what follows.
In figures the three-sided figure exists potentially in the square; for the square is divisible into two triangles. Likewise the sensitive life-principle contains the vegetative, both as potential, as it were, with respect to sensitivity, and also as a certain life-principle in itself.
The same holds good with the other 31 figures and the other divisions of the soul. Again see a more solid and developed explanation in S. And if this is so, one ought first to consider the appropriate objects, which are prior even to the operations, and correspond to them. He further emphasizes that our potential intellect exists only potentially with respect to the intelligible ones and is made act by form abstracted from sensible images.
Nothing is known but is in act, which means that our possible intellect knows itself through the intelligible idea, not by intuiting its essence directly.
That is why it is crucial that, regarding knowledge of the soul, we should proceed from that which is more extrinsic, from which intelligible concepts are abstracted through which the intellect perceives itself; namely, that through the objects we should know the actions, through the actions, the powers, and through the powers, the essence of the soul.
The vegetative soul is addressed first because it is common to all living things. I quote: What he [Aristotle] means by living things producing their like is that animals produce animals and plants plants; and more precisely that each species produces its like, men producing men and olive-trees olive-trees.
And the reason why living things produce their like is that they may continuously participate, so far as they can, in what is divine and immortal, 36 i. From this, he concludes that the more perfect a being is, the more it is like the most perfect forms, so that any being which is in a lower degree wishes to be like the higher forms.
That is why Aristotle says: To this extent do they participate as far as they are able, in the imperishable and the divine. For this all things seek after, doing all that they do by nature 38 for the sake of this. Thomas the theologian, who attempts to understand man as a creature that stands as a link between the spirits and the bodies, and, besides, denotes the Platonic- Plotinic influence which comes down to him through the Liber de Causis.
Sunt ergo elementa propter corpora mixta; haec vero propter viventia; in quibus plantae sunt propter animalia; animalia vero propter hominem. Thus, he writes: The soul is the cause and principle of the living body. Now these words can be used in many ways. Aquinas, in commenting this passus, claims that two arguments are utilized to prove that the soul is the cause of the living thing as its form.
Now it is the soul that gives being to living things; for their being is precisely their life, which they have from the soul. Hence, the soul causes the body as its 43 form. I quote the second argument: The actuality of anything is the immanent idea ratio and form of the thing as in potency. But the mind, in its constructions, always orders and arranges materials in view of some form.
So also, then, does Nature. Moreover, the soul is the end not only of living bodies, but also of all sublunary natural bodies.
Now certain movements are characteristic of living bodies; such, for instance, as that by which animals move themselves about from place to place, though this, to be sure, is not found in all living things. Similarly, sensation involves a certain alteration of the body not found except in beings that have soul. So too with growth and decay; these movements imply the use of food and therefore also a soul.
Aristotle brings the subject of vegetative life to a close addressing two issues. Firstly, he distinguishes three factors with respect to nourishment: what is nourished, that by which it is nourished, and that which nourishes. He resolves it as follows: What nourishes is the primary soul, that which is nourished is the body 47 containing it, and that by which it is nourished is food.
Aquinas, in commenting upon this, adds that the vegetative soul is nourishment principle as the main agent, whilst food is such as instrumental agent. I quote from De Anima: Since all things are rightly named from their end [of this soul] is to have generated another being like itself, then the primary soul is generative of 49 what is like itself.
In the commentary, Thomas expands the text so that the definition is understood better. With this end in mind, he quotes the three vegetative activities, which are found in a certain order. First nourishment, by which living things stay alive. Second, and as a more perfect activity than the previous one, growth, by which a living thing increases and perfects itself both in quantity and in capacity.
Third, the last and most perfect of all vegetative activities, reproduction, by which a living thing, complete in itself, gives its existence and perfection to one like itself. From this explanation, it may be 46 Ibid.
In this way, I prove the fourth thesis set out in the introduction to this paper, namely that the vegetative life comes at the lowest level, as a basis on which the others occur, when they do.
Besides, Aristotle himself argues in the penultimate chapter of Book III of De Anima: Every living thing, then, must have the nutritive soul, and in fact has a soul from its birth until its death; for what has been born must have growth, a highest point of development, and decay, and these things are impossible without food.
Of necessity, then, a vegetative power is found in all that is 51 born and dies. In turn, Aquinas comments on the fragment thus: All beings that participate in any way in soul must, from the first moment of their generation until their final corruption, have some share in the vegetative principle, indicating by these terms that he speaks especially of animate beings which come to being through generation and cease through corruption No animate and generated being can exist without passing through the stages of growth, maturity and decline.
And these all presuppose food And as it pertains to the vegetative principle to make use of food, this principle must be common to everything that is born and that dies; and must be related to the other parts of the soul as the foundation 52 they all presuppose.
Sensitivity In the following pages, we will discuss more briefly what is involved in sensitivity, whose basic difference with vegetative life consists in the inclusion of knowledge —only sensible knowledge, naturally. In the comment, Aquinas points to another Aristotelian quotation which adds new concepts on the sensitive soul: The sensitive soul is clearly not actually, but only potentially, the sense- object.
That is why sensation will not occur without an exterior sense- 55 object. In lectio 12, St. Thomas addresses knowledge as such and the distinction between sensible and intellectual knowledge.
Composition Art. Avicenna s De Anima in the Latin West. De anima. Aristotle De Anima. Author : R. Aristotle s De Anima. De Anima L. Liber de Anima Editio tertia auctior. Literary Collections. Alexander Aphrodisiensis De anima libri mantissa.
Literary Criticism. Dissertatio historico philosophico litteraria qua philosophumena veterum ac recentiorum de anima et eius immortalitate edisserunt praeses M Christianus Augustus Salig respondens Ioannes Georgius Niesius etc. Pr s Disputationum de anima rationali prima ultima etc. They are in St. This opusculum discusses twenty-one questions about the soul, among which are the following: Whether the angel and the human soul differ specifically.
Whether the soul is in the whole body and in each part of it. Whether the soul is identical with its powers. Whether the soul, existing apart from the body, can suffer punishment by corporeal fire. Doctor Rowan's translation, though a faithful rendition of the original, is in clear, readable English. The value of this version is greatly enhanced by copious footnotes of two kinds: exact citations of authors e.
Augustine to whom St. Thomas refers; explanations of terms and views that otherwise might be obscure to modern readers. The translator has also provided a comprehensive index. A seminal work by Aristotle on the nature of that which animates living things.
Includes well-chosen notes and a comprehensive introduction. In the 12th century the "Book of the Soul" by the philosopher Avicenna was translated from Arabic into Latin. It had an immense success among scholastic writers and deeply influenced the structure and content of many psychological works of the Middle Ages.
The reception of Avicenna's book is the story of cultural contact at an imipressively high intellectural level. The present volume investigates this successful reception using two approaches.
The first is chronological, tracing the stages by which Avicenna's work was accepted and adapted by Latin scholars. The second is doctrinal, analyzing the fortunes of key doctrines. The sense of the original Arabic text of Avicenna is kept in mind throughout and the degree to which his original Latin interpreters succeeded in conveying it is evaluated. Discusses how philosophers from Thomas Aquinas to Pierre d'Ailly dealt with the difficult task of giving a unified account of life and traces the various stages in the transformation of the science of the soul between and The Clarendon Aristotle Series is designed for both students and professionals.
It provides accurate translations of selected Aristotelian texts, accompanied by incisive commentaries that focus on philosophical problems and issues, The volumes in the series have been widely welcomed and favourably reviewed.
0コメント