|
Objection 1: It seems that not every being is good. For goodness
is something superadded to being, as is clear from Article 1. But
whatever is added to being limits it; as substance, quantity,
quality, etc. Therefore goodness limits being. Therefore not every
being is good.
Objection 2: Further, no evil is good: "Woe to you that call
evil good and good evil" (Is. 5:20). But some things are
called evil. Therefore not every being is good.
Objection 3: Further, goodness implies desirability. Now primary
matter does not imply desirability, but rather that which desires.
Therefore primary matter does not contain the formality of goodness.
Therefore not every being is good.
Objection 4: Further, the Philosopher notes (Metaph. iii) that
"in mathematics goodness does not exist." But mathematics are
entities; otherwise there would be no science of mathematics.
Therefore not every being is good.
On the contrary, Every being that is not God is God's creature.
Now every creature of God is good (1 Tim. 4:4): and God is
the greatest good. Therefore every being is good.
I answer that, Every being, as being, is good. For all being, as
being, has actuality and is in some way perfect; since every act
implies some sort of perfection; and perfection implies desirability
and goodness, as is clear from Article 1. Hence it follows that
every being as such is good.
Reply to Objection 1: Substance, quantity, quality, and
everything included in them, limit being by applying it to some essence
or nature. Now in this sense, goodness does not add anything to being
beyond the aspect of desirability and perfection, which is also proper
to being, whatever kind of nature it may be. Hence goodness does not
limit being.
Reply to Objection 2: No being can be spoken of as evil, formally
as being, but only so far as it lacks being. Thus a man is said to be
evil, because he lacks some virtue; and an eye is said to be evil,
because it lacks the power to see well.
Reply to Objection 3: As primary matter has only potential being,
so it is only potentially good. Although, according to the
Platonists, primary matter may be said to be a non-being on account
of the privation attaching to it, nevertheless, it does participate to
a certain extent in goodness, viz. by its relation to, or aptitude
for, goodness. Consequently, to be desirable is not its property,
but to desire.
Reply to Objection 4: Mathematical entities do not subsist as
realities; because they would be in some sort good if they subsisted;
but they have only logical existence, inasmuch as they are abstracted
from motion and matter; thus they cannot have the aspect of an end,
which itself has the aspect of moving another. Nor is it repugnant
that there should be in some logical entity neither goodness nor form of
goodness; since the idea of being is prior to the idea of goodness, as
was said in the preceding article.
|
|