|
Objection 1: It seems that pusillanimity is not opposed to
magnanimity. For the Philosopher says (Ethic., 3) that "the
fainthearted man knows not himself: for he would desire the good
things, of which he is worthy, if he knew himself." Now ignorance
of self seems opposed to prudence. Therefore pusillanimity is opposed
to prudence.
Objection 2: Further our Lord calls the servant wicked and slothful
who through pusillanimity refused to make use of the money. Moreover
the Philosopher says (Ethic. iv, 3) that the fainthearted seem to
be slothful. Now sloth is opposed to solicitude, which is an act of
prudence, as stated above (Question 47, Article 9). Therefore
pusillanimity is not opposed to magnanimity.
Objection 3: Further, pusillanimity seems to proceed from
inordinate fear: hence it is written (Is. 35:4): "Say to the
fainthearted: Take courage and fear not." It also seems to proceed
from inordinate anger, according to Col. 3:21, "Fathers,
provoke not your children to indignation, lest they be discouraged."
Now inordinate fear is opposed to fortitude, and inordinate anger to
meekness. Therefore pusillanimity is not opposed to magnanimity.
Objection 4: Further, the vice that is in opposition to a
particular virtue is the more grievous according as it is more unlike
that virtue. Now pusillanimity is more unlike magnanimity than
presumption is. Therefore if pusillanimity is opposed to magnanimity,
it follows that it is a more grievous sin than presumption: yet this is
contrary to the saying of Ecclus. 37:3, "O wicked presumption,
whence camest thou?" Therefore pusillanimity is not opposed to
magnanimity.
On the contrary, Pusillanimity and magnanimity differ as greatness
and littleness of soul, as their very names denote. Now great and
little are opposites. Therefore pusillanimity is opposed to
magnanimity.
I answer that, Pusillanimity may be considered in three ways.
First, in itself; and thus it is evident that by its very nature it
is opposed to magnanimity, from which it differs as great and little
differ in connection with the same subject. For just as the
magnanimous man tends to great things out of greatness of soul, so the
pusillanimous man shrinks from great things out of littleness of soul.
Secondly, it may be considered in reference to its cause, which on
the part of the intellect is ignorance of one's own qualification, and
on the part of the appetite is the fear of failure in what one falsely
deems to exceed one's ability. Thirdly, it may be considered in
reference to its effect, which is to shrink from the great things of
which one is worthy. But, as stated above (Question 132,
Article 2, ad 3), opposition between vice and virtue depends
rather on their respective species than on their cause or effect.
Hence pusillanimity is directly opposed to magnanimity.
Reply to Objection 1: This argument considers pusillanimity as
proceeding from a cause in the intellect. Yet it cannot be said
properly that it is opposed to prudence, even in respect of its cause:
because ignorance of this kind does not proceed from indiscretion but
from laziness in considering one's own ability, according to Ethic.
iv, 3, or in accomplishing what is within one's power.
Reply to Objection 2: This argument considers pusillanimity from
the point of view of its effect.
Reply to Objection 3: This argument considers the point of view of
cause. Nor is the fear that causes pusillanimity always a fear of the
dangers of death: wherefore it does not follow from this standpoint
that pusillanimity is opposed to fortitude. As regards anger, if we
consider it under the aspect of its proper movement, whereby a man is
roused to take vengeance, it does not cause pusillanimity, which
disheartens the soul; on the contrary, it takes it away. If,
however, we consider the causes of anger, which are injuries inflicted
whereby the soul of the man who suffers them is disheartened, it
conduces to pusillanimity.
Reply to Objection 4: According to its proper species pusillanimity
is a graver sin than presumption, since thereby a man withdraws from
good things, which is a very great evil according to Ethic. iv.
Presumption, however, is stated to be "wicked" on account of pride
whence it proceeds.
|
|