|
Objection 1: It seems that goodness has not the aspect of a final
cause, but rather of the other causes. For, as Dionysius says
(Div. Nom. iv), "Goodness is praised as beauty." But beauty
has the aspect of a formal cause. Therefore goodness has the aspect of
a formal cause.
Objection 2: Further, goodness is self-diffusive; for Dionysius
says (Div. Nom. iv) that goodness is that whereby all things
subsist, and are. But to be self-giving implies the aspect of an
efficient cause. Therefore goodness has the aspect of an efficient
cause.
Objection 3: Further, Augustine says (De Doctr. Christ. i,
31) that "we exist because God is good." But we owe our
existence to God as the efficient cause. Therefore goodness implies
the aspect of an efficient cause.
On the contrary, The Philosopher says (Phys. ii) that "that is
to be considered as the end and the good of other things, for the sake
of which something is." Therefore goodness has the aspect of a final
cause.
I answer that, Since goodness is that which all things desire, and
since this has the aspect of an end, it is clear that goodness implies
the aspect of an end. Nevertheless, the idea of goodness presupposes
the idea of an efficient cause, and also of a formal cause. For we
see that what is first in causing, is last in the thing caused.
Fire, e.g. heats first of all before it reproduces the form of
fire; though the heat in the fire follows from its substantial form.
Now in causing, goodness and the end come first, both of which move
the agent to act; secondly, the action of the agent moving to the
form; thirdly, comes the form. Hence in that which is caused the
converse ought to take place, so that there should be first, the form
whereby it is a being; secondly, we consider in it its effective
power, whereby it is perfect in being, for a thing is perfect when it
can reproduce its like, as the Philosopher says (Meteor. iv);
thirdly, there follows the formality of goodness which is the basic
principle of its perfection.
Reply to Objection 1: Beauty and goodness in a thing are identical
fundamentally; for they are based upon the same thing, namely, the
form; and consequently goodness is praised as beauty. But they differ
logically, for goodness properly relates to the appetite (goodness
being what all things desire); and therefore it has the aspect of an
end (the appetite being a kind of movement towards a thing). On the
other hand, beauty relates to the cognitive faculty; for beautiful
things are those which please when seen. Hence beauty consists in due
proportion; for the senses delight in things duly proportioned, as in
what is after their own kind---because even sense is a sort of
reason, just as is every cognitive faculty. Now since knowledge is by
assimilation, and similarity relates to form, beauty properly belongs
to the nature of a formal cause.
Reply to Objection 2: Goodness is described as self-diffusive in
the sense that an end is said to move.
Reply to Objection 3: He who has a will is said to be good, so far
as he has a good will; because it is by our will that we employ
whatever powers we may have. Hence a man is said to be good, not by
his good understanding; but by his good will. Now the will relates to
the end as to its proper object. Thus the saying, "we exist because
God is good" has reference to the final cause.
|
|