Part, Question
1 1, 12 | some proportion between the knower and the ~known, since the
2 1, 12 | is the perfection of the knower. But no proportion ~exists
3 1, 12 | the thing known is in the knower. But the thing known is
4 1, 12 | the thing known is in ~the knower according to the mode of
5 1, 12 | according to the mode of the knower. Hence the knowledge of ~
6 1, 12 | the knowledge of ~every knower is ruled according to its
7 1, 12 | exceeds the mode of the knower, it must result that ~the
8 1, 12 | above the nature of the knower. Now the ~mode of being
9 1, 12 | not extend to enable the ~knower to know infinitely; thus,
10 1, 12 | knowledge ~comes about by the knower being assimilated to the
11 1, 12 | mode of the ~nature of the knower. But our soul, as long as
12 1, 14 | everything known is in the knower, and the types of things
13 1, 14 | the thing known is in the knower. ~Hence it is manifest that
14 1, 14 | the thing known is in the knower according to the mode of
15 1, 14 | according to the mode of the knower. ~Now since the mode of
16 1, 14 | Philosopher (De Causis), "Every knower who knows his own essence, ~
17 1, 14 | is the perfection ~of the knower. But nothing is moved, or
18 1, 14 | a thing as it is in the knower, may be ~understood in two
19 1, 14 | sense it is false. ~For the knower does not always know the
20 1, 14 | existence it has in the knower; since the eye does not
21 1, 14 | outside the eye. And if any knower has a knowledge of the ~
22 1, 14 | existence it has in the knower, ~the knower nevertheless
23 1, 14 | has in the knower, ~the knower nevertheless knows it according
24 1, 14 | existence ~outside the knower; thus the intellect knows
25 1, 14 | knowledge) on the part of the knower, in that sense it is true
26 1, 14 | it is true that only ~the knower has knowledge of the object
27 1, 14 | object known as it is in the knower; for ~the more perfectly
28 1, 14 | the thing known is in the knower, the more perfect is ~the
29 1, 14 | requires likeness between the knower and the ~thing known. But
30 1, 14 | thing known must ~be in the knower. Therefore if evil is known
31 1, 14 | the ~comprehension of the knower." Now infinite things have
32 1, 14 | that the knowledge of every knower is measured by the mode
33 1, 14 | they import an ~act of the knower, something can be attributed
34 1, 14 | are not ~operable by the knower; such is the knowledge of
35 1, 16 | is as it ~appears to the knower, who is willing and able
36 1, 16 | the thing known is ~in the knower, whilst appetite is according
37 1, 16 | the thing known in the ~knower, which is implied by the
38 1, 19 | things as they exist ~in the knower; but the will is directed
39 1, 19 | the thing ~known is in the knower; while an act of the appetite
40 1, 43 | the object known is in the knower, and the beloved ~in the
41 1, 56 | is not of the nature of knower, as ~knowing, to be moved
42 1, 56 | presence of its essence in the knower, ~as light can be seen in
43 1, 57 | some assimilation of the ~knower to the object known. But
44 1, 59 | object ~known is within the knower; consequently the intellect
45 1, 59 | of the known within the knower. Now it is a mark of ~imperfection
46 1, 60 | of the known ~within the knower. It comes of the imperfection
47 1, 60 | reflected back ~upon the knower, in such a way that he knows
48 1, 60 | love on the part of the knower and lover. And thus one ~
49 1, 75 | actually ~in the nature of the knower; but given a thing which
50 1, 75 | be in ~the nature of the knower, not actually, but only
51 1, 75 | far as its form is in the knower. But the ~intellectual soul
52 1, 76 | the ~materiality of the knower, and of the species whereby
53 1, 76 | the species by ~which the knower knows. Now it is clear that
54 1, 76 | the assimilation of ~the knower to the thing known, it follows
55 1, 43 | the object known is in the knower, and the beloved ~in the
56 1, 57 | is not of the nature of knower, as ~knowing, to be moved
57 1, 57 | presence of its essence in the knower, ~as light can be seen in
58 1, 58 | some assimilation of the ~knower to the object known. But
59 1, 60 | object ~known is within the knower; consequently the intellect
60 1, 60 | of the known within the knower. Now it is a mark of ~imperfection
61 1, 61 | of the known ~within the knower. It comes of the imperfection
62 1, 61 | reflected back ~upon the knower, in such a way that he knows
63 1, 61 | love on the part of the knower and lover. And thus one ~
64 1, 74 | actually ~in the nature of the knower; but given a thing which
65 1, 74 | be in ~the nature of the knower, not actually, but only
66 1, 74 | far as its form is in the knower. But the ~intellectual soul
67 1, 75 | the ~materiality of the knower, and of the species whereby
68 1, 75 | the species by ~which the knower knows. Now it is clear that
69 1, 75 | the assimilation of ~the knower to the thing known, it follows
70 1, 83 | of necessity be in the ~knower in the same manner as in
71 1, 83 | the thing known is in the ~knower in the same mode as in the
72 1, 83 | exist materially in the knower, there ~would be no reason
73 1, 83 | must needs exist ~in the knower, not materially, but immaterially.
74 1, 83 | extends to things outside the knower: for we ~know things even
75 1, 83 | sometimes is only a potential knower, both ~as to sense and as
76 1, 84 | species of ~the known in the knower; therefore a thing is known
77 1, 87 | the thing known be in the knower, as a kind ~of form thereof.
78 1, 107 | the thing known is in the knower; but love as the lover is ~
79 2, 28 | through its likeness, to the knower. But the effect of love
80 2, 32 | the thing known ~is in the knower by its likeness; secondly,
81 2, 40 | by the movement of ~the knower towards things, but rather
82 2, 40 | things known are ~in the knower. But since the cognitive
83 2, 50 | said to be in act, as the knower is said to be in act; and
84 2, 66 | by the known being in the knower: ~whereas love is perfected
85 2, 94 | things known are in the knower; moreover its own natural ~
86 2, 1 | The thing known is in the knower according to the mode of ~
87 2, 1 | according to the mode of ~the knower. Now the mode proper to
88 2, 25 | thing known being in the knower. On the other hand, ~charity
89 2, 26 | thing known being in the knower, ~whereas the act of an
90 2, 26 | follows the mode of the ~knower.~Aquin.: SMT SS Q[27] A[
91 2, 27 | knowledge in respect of the knower, just as we have ~said of
92 3, 10 | in the intellect ~of the knower, finite. And in this way
93 3, 10 | medium; but as regards the knower, it depends on the power ~
94 3, 11 | knowledge is a perfection of the knower. But ~perfection is more
95 3, 13 | essence or form of the ~knower, since it may be had by
96 3, 13 | had by assimilation of the knower to the thing ~known by the
97 3, 13 | conformity or assimilation of the knower to the thing ~known suffices;
98 Suppl, 89| to knowledge, to wit, the knower and the thing ~known. Again,
99 Suppl, 89| Him. But ~as regards the knower there is the difference
100 Suppl, 89| follows the power of the knower: ~thus he who has stronger
101 Suppl, 89| there be proportion ~between knower and known, because the power
102 Suppl, 89| because the power of the knower needs to be ~adequate to
103 Suppl, 89| surpasses the power of the knower, as when we know God, or
104 Suppl, 89| for proportion between ~knower and known, but only for
105 Suppl, 89| so that, to wit, as the ~knower is to the knowable object,
106 Suppl, 89| we refer the mode to the knower, He ~will not be seen as
107 Suppl, 89| not come in between the knower and the thing known, but
108 Suppl, 89| is that which ~gives the knower the power to know [*Cf.
|