FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   801   802   803   804   805   806   807   808   809   810   811   812   813   814   815   816   817   818   819   820   821   822   823   824   825  
826   827   828   829   830   831   832   833   834   835   836   837   838   839   840   841   842   843   844   845   846   847   848   849   850   >>   >|  
immaterial act, as we have said above of the intellect (Q. 76, A. 1); and therefore, as the intellect understands itself, though it be itself an individual intellect, so also it understands its act of understanding, which is an individual act, in the past, present, or future. In this way, then, the notion of memory, in as far as it regards past events, is preserved in the intellect, forasmuch as it understands that it previously understood: but not in the sense that it understands the past as something "here" and "now." Reply Obj. 3: The intelligible species is sometimes in the intellect only in potentiality, and then the intellect is said to be in potentiality. Sometimes the intelligible species is in the intellect as regards the ultimate completion of the act, and then it understands in act. And sometimes the intelligible species is in a middle state, between potentiality and act: and then we have habitual knowledge. In this way the intellect retains the species, even when it does not understand in act. _______________________ SEVENTH ARTICLE [I, Q. 79, Art. 7] Whether the Intellectual Memory Is a Power Distinct from the Intellect? Objection 1: It would seem that the intellectual memory is distinct from the intellect. For Augustine (De Trin. x, 11) assigns to the soul memory, understanding, and will. But it is clear that the memory is a distinct power from the will. Therefore it is also distinct from the intellect. Obj. 2: Further, the reason of distinction among the powers in the sensitive part is the same as in the intellectual part. But memory in the sensitive part is distinct from sense, as we have said (Q. 78, A. 4). Therefore memory in the intellectual part is distinct from the intellect. Obj. 3: Further, according to Augustine (De Trin. x, 11; xi, 7), memory, understanding, and will are equal to one another, and one flows from the other. But this could not be if memory and intellect were the same power. Therefore they are not the same power. _On the contrary,_ From its nature the memory is the treasury or storehouse of species. But the Philosopher (De Anima iii) attributes this to the intellect, as we have said (A. 6, ad 1). Therefore the memory is not another power from the intellect. _I answer that,_ As has been said above (Q. 77, A. 3), the powers of the soul are distinguished by the different formal aspects of their objects: since each power is defined in reference to that thing to whic
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   801   802   803   804   805   806   807   808   809   810   811   812   813   814   815   816   817   818   819   820   821   822   823   824   825  
826   827   828   829   830   831   832   833   834   835   836   837   838   839   840   841   842   843   844   845   846   847   848   849   850   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

intellect

 

memory

 
species
 

understands

 

distinct

 

Therefore

 

intellectual

 
intelligible
 

potentiality

 

understanding


powers

 

sensitive

 

Augustine

 

Further

 
individual
 

immaterial

 

distinction

 

reason

 

aspects

 

formal


distinguished

 

objects

 
reference
 
defined
 
Philosopher
 

storehouse

 
treasury
 

nature

 
attributes
 
answer

contrary
 

habitual

 
knowledge
 
middle
 

retains

 

SEVENTH

 
understand
 
forasmuch
 

understood

 
completion

ultimate

 

Sometimes

 

previously

 

ARTICLE

 

notion

 

future

 
assigns
 

present

 
Objection
 

Whether