|
Objection 1: It would seem that prudence appoints the end to moral
virtues. Since prudence is in the reason, while moral virtue is in
the appetite, it seems that prudence stands in relation to moral
virtue, as reason to the appetite. Now reason appoints the end to the
appetitive power. Therefore prudence appoints the end to the moral
virtues.
Objection 2: Further, man surpasses irrational beings by his
reason, but he has other things in common with them. Accordingly the
other parts of man are in relation to his reason, what man is in
relation to irrational creatures. Now man is the end of irrational
creatures, according to Polit. i, 3. Therefore all the other
parts of man are directed to reason as to their end. But prudence is
"right reason applied to action," as stated above (Article 2).
Therefore all actions are directed to prudence as their end.
Therefore prudence appoints the end to all moral virtues.
Objection 3: Further, it belongs to the virtue, art, or power
that is concerned about the end, to command the virtues or arts that
are concerned about the means. Now prudence disposes of the other
moral virtues, and commands them. Therefore it appoints their end to
them.
On the contrary, The Philosopher says (Ethic. vi, 12) that
"moral virtue ensures the rectitude of the intention of the end, while
prudence ensures the rectitude of the means." Therefore it does not
belong to prudence to appoint the end to moral virtues, but only to
regulate the means.
I answer that, The end of moral virtues is human good. Now the good
of the human soul is to be in accord with reason, as Dionysius
declares (Div. Nom. iv). Wherefore the ends of moral virtue must
of necessity pre-exist in the reason.
Now, just as, in the speculative reason, there are certain things
naturally known, about which is "understanding," and certain things
of which we obtain knowledge through them, viz. conclusions, about
which is "science," so in the practical reason, certain things
pre-exist, as naturally known principles, and such are the ends of
the moral virtues, since the end is in practical matters what
principles are in speculative matters, as stated above (Question
23, Article 7, ad 2; FS, Question 13, Article 3);
while certain things are in the practical reason by way of conclusions,
and such are the means which we gather from the ends themselves. About
these is prudence, which applies universal principles to the particular
conclusions of practical matters. Consequently it does not belong to
prudence to appoint the end to moral virtues, but only to regulate the
means.
Reply to Objection 1: Natural reason known by the name of
"synderesis" appoints the end to moral virtues, as stated above
(FP, Question 79, Article 12): but prudence does not do
this for the reason given above.
This suffices for the Reply to the Second Objection.
Reply to Objection 3: The end concerns the moral virtues, not as
though they appointed the end, but because they tend to the end which
is appointed by natural reason. In this they are helped by prudence,
which prepares the way for them, by disposing the means. Hence it
follows that prudence is more excellent than the moral virtues, and
moves them: yet "synderesis" moves prudence, just as the
understanding of principles moves science.
|
|