|
Objection 1: It would seem that the knowledge of an angel is
discursive. For the discursive movement of the mind comes from one
thing being known through another. But the angels know one thing
through another; for they know creatures through the Word. Therefore
the intellect of an angel knows by discursive method.
Objection 2: Further, whatever a lower power can do, the higher
can do. But the human intellect can syllogize, and know causes in
effects; all of which is the discursive method. Therefore the
intellect of the angel, which is higher in the order of nature, can
with greater reason do this.
Objection 3: Further, Isidore (De sum. bono i, 10) says
that "demons learn more things by experience." But experimental
knowledge is discursive: for, "one experience comes of many
remembrances, and one universal from many experiences," as Aristotle
observes (Poster. ii; Metaph. vii). Therefore an angel's
knowledge is discursive.
On the contrary, Dionysius says (Div. Nom. vii) that the
"angels do not acquire Divine knowledge from separate discourses, nor
are they led to something particular from something common."
I answer that, As has often been stated (Article 1; Question
55, Article 1), the angels hold that grade among spiritual
substances which the heavenly bodies hold among corporeal substances:
for Dionysius calls them "heavenly minds" (Article 1; Question
55, Article 1). Now, the difference between heavenly and
earthly bodies is this, that earthly bodies obtain their last
perfection by chance and movement: while the heavenly bodies have their
last perfection at once from their very nature. So, likewise, the
lower, namely, the human, intellects obtain their perfection in the
knowledge of truth by a kind of movement and discursive intellectual
operation; that is to say, as they advance from one known thing to
another. But, if from the knowledge of a known principle they were
straightway to perceive as known all its consequent conclusions, then
there would be no discursive process at all. Such is the condition of
the angels, because in the truths which they know naturally, they at
once behold all things whatsoever that can be known in them.
Therefore they are called "intellectual beings": because even with
ourselves the things which are instantly grasped by the mind are said to
be understood [intelligi]; hence "intellect" is defined as the
habit of first principles. But human souls which acquire knowledge of
truth by the discursive method are called "rational"; and this comes
of the feebleness of their intellectual light. For if they possessed
the fulness of intellectual light, like the angels, then in the first
aspect of principles they would at once comprehend their whole range,
by perceiving whatever could be reasoned out from them.
Reply to Objection 1: Discursion expresses movement of a kind.
Now all movement is from something before to something after. Hence
discursive knowledge comes about according as from something previously
known one attains to the knowledge of what is afterwards known, and
which was previously unknown. But if in the thing perceived something
else be seen at the same time, as an object and its image are seen
simultaneously in a mirror, it is not discursive knowledge. And in
this way the angels know things in the Word.
Reply to Objection 2: The angels can syllogize, in the sense of
knowing a syllogism; and they see effects in causes, and causes in
effects: yet they do not acquire knowledge of an unknown truth in this
way, by syllogizing from causes to effect, or from effect to cause.
Reply to Objection 3: Experience is affirmed of angels and demons
simply by way of similitude, forasmuch as they know sensible things
which are present, yet without any discursion withal.
|
|