Authors/Thomas Aquinas/metaphysics/liber5/lect16

Lecture 16

Latin	English
lib. 5 l. 16 n. 1 Hic distinguit modos qualitatis: et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ponit quatuor modos qualitatis. Secundo reducit eos ad duos, ibi, fere vero secundum duos modos. Dicit ergo primo, quod unus modus qualitatis est secundum quod qualitas dicitur differentia substantiae, idest differentia, per quam aliquid ab altero substantialiter differt, quae intrat in definitionem substantiae. Et propter hoc dicitur, quod differentia praedicatur in quale quid. Ut si quaeratur, quale animal est homo? Respondemus quod bipes: et quale animal equus? Respondemus quod quadrupes: et qualis figura est circulus? Respondemus quod agonion, id est sine angulo; ac si ipsa differentia substantiae qualitas sit. Uno igitur modo ipsa differentia substantiae qualitas dicitur.	987. Here he gives the various senses in which the term quality is used, and in regard to this he does two things. First, he gives four senses of the term quality; and second (966), he reduces them to two (“The senses of quality”). (1) He accordingly says, first, that the term quality is used in one sense as “substantial difference,” i.e., the difference by which one thing is distinguished substantially from another and which is included in the definition of the substance. And for this reason it is said that a difference is predicated as a substantial qualification. For example, if one were to ask what sort of (quale) animal man is, we would answer that he is two-footed; and if one were to ask what sort of animal a horse is, we would answer that it is four-footed; and if one were to ask what sort of figure a circle is, we would answer that it is “non-angular,” i.e., without angles; as if a substantial difference were quality. In one sense, then, quality means substantial difference. ,
lib. 5 l. 16 n. 2 Hunc autem modum qualitatis Aristoteles in praedicamentis praetermisit, quia non continetur sub praedicamento qualitatis, de quo ibi agebat. Hic autem agit de significationibus huius nominis, qualitas.	988. Now Aristotle omits this sense of quality in the Categories because it is not contained under the category of quality,—which he deals with there. But here he is dealing with the meaning of the term quality.
lib. 5 l. 16 n. 3 Secundum ponit ibi, alio vero dicit, quod alius modus qualitatis vel qualis est secundum quod immobilia et mathematica dicuntur qualia. Mathematica enim abstrahunt a motu, ut in sexto huius dicetur. Mathematica enim sunt numeri, et magnitudines; et in utrisque utimur nomine qualis. Dicimus enim superficies esse quales, inquantum sunt quadratae vel triangulares. Et similiter numeri dicuntur quales, inquantum sunt compositi. Dicuntur autem numeri compositi, qui communicant in aliquo numero mensurante eos; sicut senarius numerus et novenarius mensurantur ternario, et non solum ad unitatem comparationem habent, sicut ad mensuram communem. Numeri autem incompositi, vel primi in sua proportione dicuntur, quos non mensurat alius numerus communis, nisi sola unitas.	989. In another sense (488). (2) Here he gives a second sense in which the term quality is used. He says that the term quality or “qualified” is used in another sense insofar as immobile things and the objects of mathematics are said to be qualified in a certain way. For the objects of mathematics are abstracted from motion, as is stated in Book VI of this work (1161). Such objects are numbers and continuous quantities, and of both we use the term quality. Thus we say that surfaces are qualified as being square or triangular. And similarly numbers are said to be qualified as being compound. Those numbers are said to be compound which have some common number that measures them; for example, the number six and the number nine are measured by the number three, and are not merely referred to one as a common measure. But those which are measured by no common number other than one are called uncompounded or first in their proportion.
lib. 5 l. 16 n. 4 Dicuntur etiam numeri quales ad similitudinem superficiei et solidi, idest corporis. Secundum quidem imitationem superficiei, inquantum numerus ducitur in numerum, vel eumdem vel alium; ut cum dicitur bis tria, vel ter tria. Et hoc est quod dicit quoties quanti. Nam designatur quasi una dimensio in hoc quod dicitur tria, quasi vero secunda dimensio, hoc quod dicitur bis tria, vel etiam ter tria.	990. Numbers are also spoken of as having quality in a metaphor taken from surface and from “solid,” i.e., body. They are considered like a surface inasmuch as one number is multiplied by another, either by the same number or by a different one, as in the phrase “twice three” or “three times three.” And this is what he means by “so many times so much”; for something like one dimension is designated by saying “three,” and a sort of second dimension by saying “twice three” or “three times three.”
lib. 5 l. 16 n. 5 Ad imitationem vero solidi, quando est duplex ductus, vel eiusdem numeri in seipsum, vel diversorum numerorum in unum, ut cum dicitur ter tria ter, vel bis tria bis, vel bis tria quater. Et hoc est quod dicit quoties quot quanti. Sic enim considerantur in numero quasi tres dimensiones ad modum solidi. In hac autem numerorum ordinatione, aliquid consideratur per modum substantiae; sicut hoc quod dico tria, vel quicumque numerus qui in alium ducitur. Aliquid vero per modum quantitatis; sicut ipse ductus unius numeri in alterum, vel in se ipsum; ut cum dico bis tria, binarius significatur per modum quantitatis mensurantis, ternarius vero per modum substantiae. Id ergo, quod existit in substantia numeri praeter ipsam quantitatem, quae est numeri substantia, dicitur qualitas eius, ut hoc quod significatur per hoc quod dicitur bis vel ter.	991. Numbers are considered like a solid when there is a twofold multiplication, either of the same number by itself, or of different numbers by one; as in the expression “three times three times three” or “two times three times two” or “two times three times four.” And this is what he means by “so many times so many times so much.” For we treat of three dimensions in a number in somewhat the same way as in a solid; and in this arrangement of litlinbers there is something which is treated as a substance, as three, or any other number that is multiplied by another. And there is something else which is treated as quantity, as the multiplication of one number by another or by itself. Thus when I say “twice three,” the number two is signified after the manner of a measuring quantity, and the number three after the manner of a substance. Therefore what belongs to the substance of number besides quantity itself, which is the substance of number, is called a quality of it, as what is meant in saying twice or three times.
lib. 5 l. 16 n. 6 Alia litera habet secundum quantitatem; et tunc substantia numeri dicitur ipse numerus simpliciter prolatus, ut quod dico tria. Quantitas autem secundum quam attenditur eius qualitas, dicitur ipsa multiplicatio numeri in numerum. Et huic concordat litera sequens, quae dicit, quod substantia cuiuslibet numeri est id quod semel dicitur. Sicut substantia senarii est quod dicitur semel sex, non quod dicitur bis tria, vel ter duo: sed hoc pertinet ad eius qualitatem. Dicere enim numerum esse superficialem vel solidum sive quadratum, sive cubicum, significat eum esse qualem. Hic autem modus qualitatis est quarta species in praedicamentis posita.	992. Another text reads “according to quantity,” and then the substance of number is said to be the number itself expressed in an unqualified sense, as “three.” And insofar as we consider the quality of a quantity, this is designated by multiplying one number by another. The rest of the text agrees with this, saying that the substance of any number is what it is said to be once; for example, the substance of six is six taken once, and not three taken twice or two taken three times; and this pertains to its quality. For to speak of a number in terms of surface or solid, whether square or cubic,is to speak of its quality. And this type of quality is the fourth kind given in the Categories.
lib. 5 l. 16 n. 7 Tertio ponit ibi, amplius quaecumque dicit, quod etiam qualitates dicuntur passiones substantiarum mobilium, secundum quas corpora per alterationem mutantur, ut calidum, frigidum, et huiusmodi. Et hic modus pertinet ad tertiam speciem qualitatis in praedicamentis positam.	993. Again, all the modifications (489). (3) Then he gives the third sense in which quality is used. He says that qualities also mean the modifications of mobile substances according to which bodies are changed through alteration, as heat and cold and accidents of this kind. And this sense of quality belongs to the third kind of quality given in the Categories.
lib. 5 l. 16 n. 8 Quartum ponit ibi, amplius secundum dicit quod qualitas sive quale dicitur quarto modo secundum quod aliquid disponitur per virtutem et vitium, vel qualitercumque per bonum et malum, sicut per scientiam et ignorantiam, sanitatem et aegritudinem, et huiusmodi. Et haec est prima species qualitatis in praedicamentis posita.	994. (4) Next he gives the fourth sense in which quality is used. He says that quality or “qualified” is used in a fourth sense insofar as something is disposed by virtue or vice, or in whatever way it is well or badly disposed, as by knowledge or ignorance, health or sickness, and the like. This is the first kind of quality given in the Categories.
lib. 5 l. 16 n. 9 Praetermittit autem inter hos modos secundam qualitatis speciem, quia magis comprehenditur sub potentia, cum non significetur nisi ut principium passioni resistens; sed propter modum denominandi ponitur in praedicamentis inter species qualitatis. Secundum autem modum essendi magis continetur sub potentia, sicut et supra posuit.	995. Now he omits the second of these senses of quality because it is contained rather under power, since it is signified only as a principle which resists modification. But it is given in the Categories among the kinds of quality because of the way in which it is named. However, according to its mode of being it is contained rather under power, as he also held above (960).
lib. 5 l. 16 n. 10 Deinde cum dicit fere vero reducit quatuor positos modos ad duos; dicens, quod quale dicitur aliquid fere secundum duos modos, inquantum alii duo de quatuor reducuntur ad alios duos. Horum autem unus principalissimus est primus modus, secundum quem differentia substantiae dicitur qualitas, quia per eum aliquid significatur informatum et qualificatum.	996. The senses of quality (491). Then he reduces to two the four senses of quality so far given, saying that a thing is said to be qualified in a certain way in two senses, inasmuch as two of these four senses are reduced to the other two. (1) The most basic of these senses is the first one, according to which quality means substantial difference, because by means of it a thing is designated as being informed and qualified.
lib. 5 l. 16 n. 11 Et ad hunc modum reducitur qualitas, quae est in numeris, et in mathematicis aliis, sicut quaedam pars. Huiusmodi enim qualitates sunt quasi quaedam differentiae substantiales mathematicorum. Nam ipsa significantur per modum substantiae potius quam alia accidentia, ut in capitulo de quantitate dictum est. Sunt autem huiusmodi qualitates differentiae substantiarum aut non motarum, aut non inquantum sunt motae: et hoc dicit, ut ostendat quantum ad propositum non differre, utrum mathematica sint quaedam substantiae per se existentes secundum esse, ut dicebat Plato, a motu separatae; sive sint in substantiis mobilibus secundum esse, sed separatae secundum rationem. Primo enim modo essent qualitates non motorum. Secundo autem, motorum, sed non inquantum sunt mota.	997. The quality found in numbers and in other objects of mathematics is reduced to this as a part. For qualities of this kind are in a sense the substantial differences of mathematical objects, because they are signified after the manner of substance to a greater degree than the other accidents, as was stated in the chapter on quantity (980). Further, qualities of this kind constitute substantial differences, “either of things which are not moved, or not of them insofar as they are moved”; and he says this in order to show that it makes no difference to his thesis whether the objects of mathematics are self-subsistent substances, as Plato claimed, and are separate from motion; or whether they exist in substances which are mobile in reality but separate in thought. For in the first sense they would not be qualities of things which are moved; but in the second sense they would be, but not inasmuch as they are moved.
lib. 5 l. 16 n. 12 Secundus modus principalis est, ut passiones motorum inquantum mota, et etiam differentiae motuum dicantur qualitates. Quae quidem dicuntur differentiae motuum, quia alterationes differunt secundum huiusmodi qualitates, sicut calefieri et infrigidari secundum calidum et frigidum.	998. (2) The second basic sense in which quality is used is that in which the modifications of things which are moved as such, and also the differences of things which are moved, are called qualities. They are called the differences of motions because alterations differ in terms of such qualities, as becoming hot and becoming cold differ in terms of heat and cold.
lib. 5 l. 16 n. 13 Et ad hunc modum reducitur ille modus secundum quem vitium et virtus dicitur qualitas. Hic enim modus est quasi quaedam pars illius. Virtus enim et vitium ostendunt quasdam differentias motus et actus secundum bene et male. Nam virtus est, per quam se aliquis habet bene ad agendum et patiendum; vitium autem secundum quod male. Et simile est de aliis habitibus, sive intellectualibus, ut scientia, sive corporalibus, ut sanitas.	999. The sense in which virtue and vice are called qualities is reduced to this last sense, for it is in a way a part of this sense. For virtue and vice indicate certain differences of motion and activity based on good or bad performance. For virtue is that by which a thing is well disposed to act or be acted upon, and vice is that by which a thing is badly disposed. The same is true of other habits, whether they are intellectual, as science, or corporal, as health.
lib. 5 l. 16 n. 14 Sed tamen bene et male maxime pertinet ad qualitatem in rebus animatis; et praecipue in habentibus prohaeresim idest electionem. Et hoc ideo, quia bonum habet rationem finis. Ea vero, quae agunt per electionem, agunt propter finem. Agere autem propter finem maxime competit rebus animatis. Res enim inanimatae agunt vel moventur propter finem, non tamquam cognoscentes finem, neque tamquam se agentes ad finem; sed potius ab alio diriguntur, qui eis naturalem inclinationem dedit, sicut sagitta dirigitur in finem a sagittante. Res autem irrationales animatae cognoscunt quidem finem et appetunt ipsum appetitu animali, et movent seipsa localiter ad finem tamquam iudicium habentes de fine; sed appetitus finis, et eorum quae sunt propter finem, determinatur eis ex naturali inclinatione. Propter quod sunt magis acta quam agentia. Unde nec in eis est iudicium liberum. Rationalia vero in quibus solum est electio, cognoscunt finem, et proportionem eorum, quae sunt in finem ipsum. Et ideo sicut seipsa movent ad finem, ita etiam ad appetendum finem, vel ea quae sunt propter finem, ex quo est in eis electio libera.	1000. But the terms well and badly relate chiefly to quality in living things, and especially in those having “election,” i.e., choice. And this is true because good has the role of an end or goal. So those things which act by choice act for an end. Now to act for an end belongs particularly to living things. For non-living things act or are moved for an end, not inasmuch as they know the end, or inasmuch as they themselves act for an end, but rather inasmuch as they are directed by something else which gives them their natural inclination, just as an arrow, for example, is directed toward its goal by an archer. And non-rational living things apprehend an end or goal and desire it by an appetite of the soul, and they move locally toward some end or goal inasmuch as they have discernment of it; but their appetite for an end, and for those things which exist for the sake of the end, is determined for them by a natural inclination. Hence they are acted upon rather than act; and thus their judgment is not free. But rational beings, in whom alone choice exists, know both the end and the proportion of the means to the end. Therefore, just as they move themselves toward the end, so also do they move themselves to desire the end and the means; and for this reason they have free choice.