Part, Question

1501   1, 81  |               and we learn art by the intellect. Therefore the will moves
1502   1, 81  |         Therefore the will moves the ~intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[82] A[
1503   1, 81  |               agent. In this way the ~intellect moves the will, because
1504   1, 81  |           this way the will moves the intellect and all the powers ~of the
1505   1, 81  |         perception of color, and the ~intellect to the knowledge of truth.
1506   1, 81  |            Para. 1/1~Reply OBJ 1: The intellect may be considered in two
1507   1, 81  |              act. If, therefore, ~the intellect and the will be compared
1508   1, 81  |               said above ~(A[3]), the intellect is simply higher and nobler
1509   1, 81  |             If, ~however, we take the intellect as regards the common nature
1510   1, 81  |     determinate power, then again the intellect is higher ~and nobler than
1511   1, 81  |            its object. Wherefore ~the intellect understands the will, and
1512   1, 81  |               which is good, and the ~intellect as a thing and a special
1513   1, 81  |               special power; then the intellect itself, and ~its act, and
1514   1, 81  |               will is higher than the intellect, and can move it. From this
1515   1, 81  |              their acts, ~because the intellect understands that the will
1516   1, 81  |               and the will wills ~the intellect to understand. In the same
1517   1, 81  |            Para. 1/1~Reply OBJ 2: The intellect moves the will in one sense,
1518   1, 81  |               and the will ~moves the intellect in another, as we have said
1519   1, 81  |              but we must stop at ~the intellect as preceding all the rest.
1520   1, 81  |             principle higher than our intellect ~- namely, God - as also
1521   1, 81  |           neither on the part of the ~intellect are the apprehensive powers
1522   1, 82  |       well-disposed to the act of the intellect when we know the truth,
1523   1, 82  |             is either "an appetitive ~intellect or an intellectual appetite."
1524   1, 82  |    intellectual appetite. But in the ~intellect there are two powers - the
1525   1, 82  |     intellectual apprehension we have intellect and reason, so on ~the part
1526   1, 82  |             it is evident that as the intellect is to reason, so is the
1527   1, 82  |            Para. 1/1~Reply OBJ 3: The intellect is compared to the will
1528   1, 83  |              knows bodies through the intellect?~(2) Whether it understands
1529   1, 83  |               senses?~(7) Whether the intellect can, through the species
1530   1, 83  |           Whether the judgment of the intellect is hindered by an obstacle
1531   1, 83  |              knows bodies through the intellect?~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[84] A[
1532   1, 83  |              know bodies through the ~intellect. For Augustine says (Soliloq.
1533   1, 83  |          cannot be ~understood by the intellect; nor indeed anything corporeal
1534   1, 83  |              know bodies ~through the intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[84] A[
1535   1, 83  |               intelligible, so is the intellect to ~the sensible. But the
1536   1, 83  |             means can it, through the intellect, know bodies, which are
1537   1, 83  |               1/1~OBJ 3: Further, the intellect is concerned with things
1538   1, 83  |               know bodies through the intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[84] A[
1539   1, 83  |           contrary, Science is in the intellect. If, therefore, the ~intellect
1540   1, 83  |        intellect. If, therefore, the ~intellect does not know bodies, it
1541   1, 83  |        knowledge of truth through the intellect, maintained that, besides
1542   1, 83  |         appertains to the act of the ~intellect, are not referred to these
1543   1, 83  |            thing understood is in the intellect under conditions of ~universality,
1544   1, 83  |            the ~very operation of the intellect, whose act of understanding
1545   1, 83  |           receiving gold. So also the intellect, ~according to its own mode,
1546   1, 83  |           therefore, that through the intellect the soul knows bodies by ~
1547   1, 83  |               to its object. For the ~intellect knows bodies by understanding
1548   1, 83  |              knows only bodies so the intellect knows only ~spiritual things;
1549   1, 83  |              thus failing ~to discern intellect from sense.~Aquin.: SMT
1550   1, 83  |              knowledge. Therefore the intellect which ~abstracts the species
1551   1, 83  |        foregoing, that if there be an intellect ~which knows all things
1552   1, 83  |               this is the ~"mind" or "intellect." And he says that the part
1553   1, 83  |         things sensible - through the intellect, ~to all things intelligible.~
1554   1, 83  |          Philosopher, speaking of the intellect, says (De ~Anima iii, 4)
1555   1, 83  |           both ~as to sense and as to intellect. And he is reduced from
1556   1, 83  |          Anima iii, ~4) held that the intellect by which the soul understands
1557   1, 83  |            hold that ~naturally man's intellect is filled with all intelligible
1558   1, 83  |              the same way the angelic intellect is perfected by intelligible
1559   1, 83  |             nature; whereas the human intellect is in ~potentiality to such
1560   1, 83  |                On the other hand, the intellect does not receive substantial ~
1561   1, 83  |        understood: for, in a way, the intellect in act is the thing understood ~
1562   1, 83  |            the intelligible is to the intellect, as the sensible is ~to
1563   1, 83  |   intelligible species, by which our ~intellect understands, are caused
1564   1, 83  |             intelligible forms of our intellect ~are derived from some separate
1565   1, 83  |            actual. If, therefore, our intellect, previously in ~potentiality,
1566   1, 83  |              needs be caused ~by some intellect which is always in act.
1567   1, 83  |               But this is a separate ~intellect. Therefore the intelligible
1568   1, 83  |          intelligible species of our ~intellect are derived from certain
1569   1, 83  |          individuating stone, so our ~intellect, by participating the idea
1570   1, 83  |           intelligible species of our intellect are images of the ideas,
1571   1, 83  |               on to the last separate intellect which he called the ~"active
1572   1, 83  |          intelligible species of our ~intellect are derived from certain
1573   1, 83  |          species do not remain in our intellect after it has ~ceased actually
1574   1, 83  |               to turn (to the active ~intellect) in order to receive them
1575   1, 83  |              are participated by our ~intellect are reduced, as to their
1576   1, 83  |          comparison between sense and intellect. ~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[84] A[
1577   1, 83  |              Reply OBJ 3: Our passive intellect is reduced from potentiality
1578   1, 83  |                that is, by the active intellect, which is a power ~of the
1579   1, 83  |               which ~he said that our intellect knows all things: so that
1580   1, 83  |              becomes a stone, so our ~intellect, by participating the same
1581   1, 83  |               not distinguish between intellect and sense, as ~Aristotle
1582   1, 83  |             other hand, held that the intellect is distinct from the ~senses:
1583   1, 83  |         sensible things affecting the intellect, but by separate intelligible ~
1584   1, 83  |             being participated by the intellect, as we have said above (
1585   1, 83  |           while the senses rouse ~the intellect to the act of understanding.~
1586   1, 83  |             with Plato he agreed that intellect ~and sense are different.
1587   1, 83  |               Aristotle held that the intellect has an operation ~which
1588   1, 83  |             which he calls the active intellect, of which we ~have spoken
1589   1, 83  |         themselves affect the passive intellect, and require to be made ~
1590   1, 83  |            intelligible by the active intellect, it cannot be said that ~
1591   1, 83  |               the light of the active intellect is ~needed, through which
1592   1, 83  |               proving that the active intellect must be separate, namely,
1593   1, 83  |           Thes. Para. 1/1~Whether the intellect can actually understand
1594   1, 83  |                It would seem that the intellect can actually understand
1595   1, 83  |               the ~phantasms. For the intellect is made actual by the intelligible
1596   1, 83  |               is informed. But if the intellect is in act, it understands. ~
1597   1, 83  |              species suffices for the intellect to ~understand actually,
1598   1, 83  |               on the senses than the ~intellect on the imagination. But
1599   1, 83  |           Therefore much more can the intellect ~understand without turning
1600   1, 83  |             space. If, therefore, our intellect cannot ~understand anything
1601   1, 83  |              it is impossible for our intellect to understand ~anything
1602   1, 83  |             First of all ~because the intellect, being a power that does
1603   1, 83  |              it is clear that for the intellect to ~understand actually,
1604   1, 83  |          proper object of the angelic intellect, ~which is entirely separate
1605   1, 83  |            proper object of the human intellect, ~which is united to a body,
1606   1, 83  |               And, therefore, for the intellect to understand actually ~
1607   1, 83  |             the ~proper object of our intellect were a separate form; or
1608   1, 83  |              would be no need for the intellect to turn to the ~phantasms
1609   1, 83  |              preserved in the passive intellect exist there ~habitually
1610   1, 83  |               individual, whereas the intellect does.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[84]
1611   1, 83  |           Whether the judgment of the intellect is hindered through suspension
1612   1, 83  |              that the judgment of the intellect is not hindered ~by suspension
1613   1, 83  |               But the judgment of the intellect is higher than the ~senses.
1614   1, 83  |         Therefore the judgment of the intellect is not hindered through ~
1615   1, 83  |            syllogize is an act of the intellect. But during ~sleep the senses
1616   1, 83  |        Therefore the ~judgment of the intellect is not hindered through
1617   1, 83  |           free use of his ~reason and intellect. Therefore the judgment
1618   1, 83  |         Therefore the judgment of the intellect is hindered ~by suspension
1619   1, 83  |           have said above (A[7]), our intellect's proper and ~proportionate
1620   1, 83  |              is not possible ~for our intellect to form a perfect judgment,
1621   1, 83  |             Reply OBJ 1: Although the intellect is superior to the senses, ~
1622   1, 83  |               to the judgment ~of the intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[84] A[
1623   1, 83  |             so is the judgment of his intellect unfettered, though not ~
1624   1, 84  |              inquiry:~(1) Whether our intellect understands by abstracting
1625   1, 84  |               phantasms are ~what our intellect understands, or that whereby
1626   1, 84  |          understands?~(3) Whether our intellect naturally first understands
1627   1, 84  |            universal?~(4) Whether our intellect can know many things at
1628   1, 84  |            same time?~(5) Whether our intellect understands by the process
1629   1, 84  |             division?~(6) Whether the intellect can err?~(7) Whether one
1630   1, 84  |              can err?~(7) Whether one intellect can understand better than
1631   1, 84  |              another?~(8) Whether our intellect understands the indivisible
1632   1, 84  |           Thes. Para. 1/1~Whether our intellect understands corporeal and
1633   1, 84  |                It would seem that our intellect does not understand corporeal ~
1634   1, 84  |           from the phantasms. For the intellect ~is false if it understands
1635   1, 84  |            there will be error in the intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[85] A[
1636   1, 84  |              impressing itself on the intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[85] A[
1637   1, 84  |       intellectual soul - the passive intellect and the active ~intellect.
1638   1, 84  |             intellect and the active ~intellect. But it does not belong
1639   1, 84  |             not belong to the passive intellect to abstract ~the intelligible
1640   1, 84  |               function of the active ~intellect, which is related to the
1641   1, 84  |               iii, 7) says that "the ~intellect understands the species
1642   1, 84  |           matter; such is the angelic intellect, the ~object of whose cognitive
1643   1, 84  |             or in God. But ~the human intellect holds a middle place: for
1644   1, 84  |               must needs say that our intellect understands material ~things
1645   1, 84  |            immateriality of the human intellect, ~and not its being in a
1646   1, 84  |              that the objects of ~the intellect are separate ideas; and
1647   1, 84  |               the other. Thus for the intellect to abstract one ~from another
1648   1, 84  |               of abstraction, for the intellect to abstract things which
1649   1, 84  |         phantasms. If, therefore, the intellect is said to be false when
1650   1, 84  |             thing understood; for the intellect ~is false when it understands
1651   1, 84  |            than as it is; and so the ~intellect would be false if it abstracted
1652   1, 84  |          according to the mode of the intellect, and not ~materially, according
1653   1, 84  |            flesh and these bones. The intellect therefore abstracts the
1654   1, 84  |          cannot be ~abstracted by the intellect form "flesh and bones."~
1655   1, 84  |              can be abstracted by the intellect from ~sensible matter, not
1656   1, 84  |               to be abstracted by the intellect, are abstract in reality.~
1657   1, 84  |                existence as the human intellect, and therefore have not
1658   1, 84  |             impression on the passive intellect. This is done ~by the power
1659   1, 84  |               the power of the active intellect which by turning towards
1660   1, 84  |               produces in the passive intellect a certain likeness which ~
1661   1, 84  |           subsequently in the passive intellect, ~as a body transferred
1662   1, 84  |              Not only does the active intellect throw light on the ~phantasm:
1663   1, 84  |               the power of the active intellect the ~phantasms are made
1664   1, 84  |               Furthermore, the active intellect abstracts the intelligible ~
1665   1, 84  |              the power of the active ~intellect we are able to disregard
1666   1, 84  |            which ~informs the passive intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[85] A[
1667   1, 84  |            Para. 1/1~Reply OBJ 5: Our intellect both abstracts the intelligible
1668   1, 84  |           phantasm is related ~to our intellect as that which is understood?~
1669   1, 84  |            phantasm is related to our intellect as that which is understood.
1670   1, 84  |             understood in ~act is the intellect itself in act. But nothing
1671   1, 84  |               is understood is in the intellect actually understanding,
1672   1, 84  |        actually understood is in the ~intellect. Consequently it can be
1673   1, 84  |        intelligible species is to the intellect what the ~sensible image
1674   1, 84  |                but that by ~which the intellect understands.~Aquin.: SMT
1675   1, 84  |        According to this ~theory, the intellect understands only its own
1676   1, 84  |            species is related to ~the intellect as that by which it understands:
1677   1, 84  |             is the form by which the ~intellect understands. But since the
1678   1, 84  |            understands. But since the intellect reflects upon itself, by ~
1679   1, 84  |            thing understood is in the intellect by its own ~likeness; and
1680   1, 84  |           actually ~understood is the intellect in act, because the likeness
1681   1, 84  |         understood is the form of the intellect, as the likeness of a sensible ~
1682   1, 84  |     considered as universal is in the intellect. ~We see something similar
1683   1, 84  |              the consideration of the intellect, in ~which there is a likeness
1684   1, 84  |          operations ~are found in the intellect. For in the first place
1685   1, 84  |               passion ~of the passive intellect as informed by the intelligible
1686   1, 84  |        species; and ~then the passive intellect thus informed forms a definition,
1687   1, 84  |              proposition conveys the ~intellect's division or composition.
1688   1, 84  |        themselves; but that which the intellect forms for ~itself for the
1689   1, 84  |      secondarily known as regards our intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[85] A[
1690   1, 84  |           things for its ~object, and intellect has the universal for its
1691   1, 84  |             we must consider that our intellect proceeds from a state of ~
1692   1, 84  |                The perfect act of the intellect is complete knowledge, when ~
1693   1, 84  |             or a lion: ~therefore our intellect knows "animal" before it
1694   1, 84  |          Moreover, as sense, like the intellect, proceeds from potentiality
1695   1, 84  |                But in both sense and ~intellect the knowledge of the more
1696   1, 84  |         things at the same ~time. For intellect is above time, whereas the
1697   1, 84  |        belongs to time. Therefore the intellect does not understand ~different
1698   1, 84  |          nothing to prevent the same ~intellect being in act as regards
1699   1, 84  |               1/1~OBJ 3: Further, the intellect understands a whole at the
1700   1, 84  |            many parts. Therefore the ~intellect understands many things
1701   1, 84  |             other comparison. But our intellect knows the difference and ~
1702   1, 84  |                1/1~I answer that, The intellect can, indeed, understand
1703   1, 84  |         Therefore whatever things the intellect can ~understand under one
1704   1, 84  |               But whatever things the intellect ~understands under different
1705   1, 84  |      impossible ~for one and the same intellect to be perfected at the same
1706   1, 84  |            Para. 1/1~Reply OBJ 1: The intellect is above that time, which
1707   1, 84  |               1/1~Reply OBJ 4: If the intellect sees the difference or comparison
1708   1, 84  |           Thes. Para. 1/1~Whether our intellect understands by composition
1709   1, 84  |                It would seem that our intellect does not understand by ~
1710   1, 84  |            only of many; ~whereas the intellect cannot understand many things
1711   1, 84  |              or ~future time. But the intellect abstracts from time, as
1712   1, 84  |             conditions. Therefore the intellect does not understand by ~
1713   1, 84  |               1/1~OBJ 3: Further, the intellect understands things by a
1714   1, 84  |             animal" is. Therefore the intellect does ~not act by composition
1715   1, 84  |        signify the conceptions of the intellect, as the ~Philosopher says (
1716   1, 84  |          propositions. Therefore ~the intellect acts by composition and
1717   1, 84  |              I answer that, The human intellect must of necessity understand
1718   1, 84  |               division. For since the intellect passes from ~potentiality
1719   1, 84  |                 so likewise the human intellect does not acquire perfect
1720   1, 84  |            the angelic and the Divine intellect, like all incorruptible
1721   1, 84  |               angelic and ~the Divine intellect have the entire knowledge
1722   1, 84  |       reasoning. ~Therefore the human intellect knows by composition, division
1723   1, 84  |             reasoning. But the Divine intellect and the angelic intellect
1724   1, 84  |             intellect and the angelic intellect know, ~indeed, composition,
1725   1, 84  |       Composition and division of the intellect are made by ~differentiating
1726   1, 84  |              and comparing. Hence the intellect knows many things by ~composition
1727   1, 84  |             Reply OBJ 2: Although the intellect abstracts from the phantasms,
1728   1, 84  |       composition and division of the intellect involve time.~Aquin.: SMT
1729   1, 84  |            thing is received into the intellect ~according to the mode of
1730   1, 84  |          according to the mode of the intellect, not according to the mode
1731   1, 84  |       composition and division of the intellect; but it does not exist in
1732   1, 84  |               in the ~same way in the intellect and in the thing. For the
1733   1, 84  |           proper object of the ~human intellect is the quiddity of a material
1734   1, 84  |               that composition of the intellect ~whereby the universal whole
1735   1, 84  |               that composition of the intellect, whereby ~accident is predicated
1736   1, 84  |       Nevertheless composition of the intellect differs from composition
1737   1, 84  |           whereas composition of ~the intellect is a sign of the identity
1738   1, 84  |             above ~composition of the intellect does not imply that "man"
1739   1, 84  |            this kind of identity ~our intellect predicates the composition
1740   1, 84  |           Thes. Para. 1/1~Whether the intellect can be false?~Aquin.: SMT
1741   1, 84  |                It would seem that the intellect can be false; for the ~Philosopher
1742   1, 84  |               mind." But the mind and intellect are the same, as is shown
1743   1, 84  |               reasoning belong to the intellect. But ~falsehood exists in
1744   1, 84  |               falsehood can be in the intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[85] A[
1745   1, 84  |               falsehood can be in the intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[85] A[
1746   1, 84  |             Anima iii, 10), that "the intellect is always ~true."~Aquin.:
1747   1, 84  |             De Anima iii, 6) compares intellect with ~sense on this point.
1748   1, 84  |              the proper object of the intellect is the "quiddity" of a material
1749   1, 84  |                properly speaking, the intellect is not at fault concerning ~
1750   1, 84  |            which are understood, ~the intellect cannot err, as in the case
1751   1, 84  |               A[6] Body Para. 2/2~The intellect, however, may be accidentally
1752   1, 84  |          defect of its organ, for the intellect is a ~faculty that is independent
1753   1, 84  |              that falsehood is in the intellect in ~regard to composition
1754   1, 84  |          which are known thereby, the intellect is ~never deceived. In this
1755   1, 84  |               1/1~OBJ 2: Further, the intellect is true in its act of understanding.
1756   1, 84  |               1/1~OBJ 3: Further, the intellect is the most formal of all
1757   1, 84  |               The same applies to the intellect in two ~ways. First, as
1758   1, 84  |           ways. First, as regards the intellect itself, which is more perfect.
1759   1, 84  |             lower powers of which the intellect has need in its ~operation:
1760   1, 84  |          Second, for the truth of the intellect consists in the ~intellect
1761   1, 84  |            intellect consists in the ~intellect understanding a thing as
1762   1, 84  |           Thes. Para. 1/1~Whether the intellect understands the indivisible
1763   1, 84  |                It would seem that the intellect understands the indivisible ~
1764   1, 84  |            Did. ix, 6. ~Therefore our intellect understands the indivisible
1765   1, 84  |      indivisible is more ~like to the intellect than is the divisible; because "
1766   1, 84  |               divisible; because "the intellect is ~simple" (De Anima iii,
1767   1, 84  |          Anima iii, 4). Therefore our intellect first knows the ~indivisible.~
1768   1, 84  |               that, The object of our intellect in its present state is
1769   1, 84  |              6); and again before the intellect disposes and divides by ~
1770   1, 84  |     indivisible are understood by the intellect of itself, as being its ~
1771   1, 84  |             and ~proper object of the intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[85] A[
1772   1, 84  |             Body Para. 2/2~But if our intellect understood by participation
1773   1, 85  |             Out. Para. 1/1 - WHAT OUR INTELLECT KNOWS IN MATERIAL THINGS (
1774   1, 85  |             have to consider what our intellect knows in material things. ~
1775   1, 85  |           Thes. Para. 1/1~Whether our intellect knows singulars?~Aquin.:
1776   1, 85  |                It would seem that our intellect knows singulars. For whoever ~
1777   1, 85  |               of composition. But our intellect ~knows this composition; "
1778   1, 85  |                for it belongs to the ~intellect to form a proposition. Therefore
1779   1, 85  |            proposition. Therefore our intellect knows this ~singular, Socrates.~
1780   1, 85  |                Further, the practical intellect directs to action. But action ~
1781   1, 85  |        singular things. Therefore the intellect knows the ~singular.~Aquin.:
1782   1, 85  |              1/1 ~OBJ 3: Further, our intellect understands itself. But
1783   1, 85  |              singulars. Therefore our intellect knows singulars.~Aquin.:
1784   1, 85  |             more, therefore, can the ~intellect know it.~Aquin.: SMT FP
1785   1, 85  |                1/1~I answer that, Our intellect cannot know the singular
1786   1, 85  |       individual matter, whereas our ~intellect, as have said above (Q[85],
1787   1, 85  |              the universal. Hence our intellect knows directly ~the universal
1788   1, 85  |            intelligible species, the ~intellect, in order to understand,
1789   1, 85  |               formed by the practical intellect, as is said ~Ethic. vii,
1790   1, 85  |            principle of the practical intellect ~does not move save through
1791   1, 85  |      immaterial singular such as the ~intellect, there is no reason why
1792   1, 85  |            the singular directly, the intellect knows ~immaterially and
1793   1, 85  |           Thes. Para. 1/1~Whether our intellect can know the infinite?~Aquin.:
1794   1, 85  |                It would seem that our intellect can know the infinite. For
1795   1, 85  |              infinite things. But our intellect can know God, as we have ~
1796   1, 85  |              more, therefore, can our intellect know ~all other infinite
1797   1, 85  |               1/1~OBJ 2: Further, our intellect can naturally know "genera"
1798   1, 85  |             and figure. Therefore our intellect can know the infinite.~Aquin.:
1799   1, 85  |             with another in the same ~intellect, for many things can be
1800   1, 85  |             same time. ~Therefore our intellect can have an habitual knowledge
1801   1, 85  |              1~OBJ 4: Further, as the intellect is not a corporeal faculty,
1802   1, 85  |        infinite object. Therefore our intellect can ~know the infinite.~
1803   1, 85  |      proportional to each ~other, the intellect must be related to the infinite,
1804   1, 85  |                because never does our intellect understand so many ~things,
1805   1, 85  |              3~On the other hand, our intellect cannot understand the infinite
1806   1, 85  |     habitually. Not actually, for our intellect cannot know ~actually at
1807   1, 85  |               nor habitually can ~our intellect know the infinite, but only
1808   1, 85  |              by ~reason of our feeble intellect, which in its present state
1809   1, 85  |           future life this ~defect of intellect will be removed by the state
1810   1, 85  |   intelligible species enter into our intellect ~successively; since many
1811   1, 85  |             number ~of species in our intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[86] A[
1812   1, 85  |               1/1~Reply OBJ 4: As our intellect is infinite in power, so
1813   1, 85  |           Thes. Para. 1/1~Whether our intellect can know contingent things?~
1814   1, 85  |                It would seem that the intellect cannot know contingent things: ~
1815   1, 85  |            measured by time." Now the intellect abstracts from ~time, and
1816   1, 85  |           things are not known by the intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[86] A[
1817   1, 85  |               All knowledge is in the intellect. But some sciences ~are
1818   1, 85  |           corruptible. Therefore ~the intellect knows contingent things.~
1819   1, 85  |            down above (A[1]) that the intellect of ~itself and directly
1820   1, 85  |               indirect object of ~the intellect, as we have said above (
1821   1, 85  |          sense and indirectly by the ~intellect; while the universal and
1822   1, 85  |          things are known only by the intellect. Hence if we consider the
1823   1, 85  |           Thes. Para. 1/1~Whether our intellect can know the future?~Aquin.:
1824   1, 85  |                It would seem that our intellect knows the future. For our ~
1825   1, 85  |            knows the future. For our ~intellect knows by means of intelligible
1826   1, 85  |                and in frenzy. But the intellect is freer and ~more vigorous
1827   1, 85  |             from sense. Therefore the intellect of its own ~nature can know
1828   1, 85  |           Therefore much more can the intellect know the ~future.~Aquin.:
1829   1, 85  |               singular, and the human intellect knows ~them by reflection
1830   1, 85  |              enter the domain of the ~intellect and become the objects of
1831   1, 85  |               it is connatural to our intellect to know things, not thus, ~
1832   1, 85  |             by Divine power the human intellect is ~enlightened through
1833   1, 86  |             habits? ~(3) How does the intellect know its own act?~(4) How
1834   1, 86  |            things void of matter, the intellect and that which ~is understood
1835   1, 86  |                 A[1]). ~Therefore the intellect and its object are the same
1836   1, 86  |               Anima iii, 4) that "the intellect ~understands itself in the
1837   1, 86  |          manner ~it is clear that the intellect, so far as it knows material
1838   1, 86  |             likenesses. Now the human intellect is only a potentiality in ~
1839   1, 86  |          intellects, forasmuch as the intellect understands only by participation ~
1840   1, 86  |              If, therefore, the human intellect, as the Platonists held, ~
1841   1, 86  |              But as in ~this life our intellect has material and sensible
1842   1, 86  |               the light of the active intellect, which not only ~actuates
1843   1, 86  | instrumentality, actuates the passive intellect. Therefore the intellect ~
1844   1, 86  |              intellect. Therefore the intellect ~knows itself not by its
1845   1, 86  |              and therefore it is both intellect and the thing understood.
1846   1, 86  |            things - as is the passive intellect - or is the act of ~intelligible
1847   1, 86  |         phantasms - as is the active ~intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[87] A[
1848   1, 86  |    universally true in every ~kind of intellect. For as sense in act is
1849   1, 86  |              in act, so likewise ~the intellect in act is the object understood
1850   1, 86  |              which is the form of the intellect in ~act. So the human intellect,
1851   1, 86  |       intellect in ~act. So the human intellect, which becomes actual by
1852   1, 86  |             things without matter the intellect and what is ~understood
1853   1, 86  |               actually understood the intellect and what is understood are
1854   1, 86  |           Thes. Para. 1/1~Whether our intellect knows the habits of the
1855   1, 86  |                It would seem that our intellect knows the habits of the
1856   1, 86  |             Habits are present in our intellect, not as its object ~since,
1857   1, 86  |            present state of life, our intellect's object is the nature ~
1858   1, 86  |           Thes. Para. 1/1~Whether our intellect knows its own act?~Aquin.:
1859   1, 86  |                It would seem that our intellect does not know its own act.
1860   1, 86  |             the object. Therefore the intellect does not know its own act.~
1861   1, 86  |              some act. If, then, the ~intellect knows its own act, it knows
1862   1, 86  |               1/1~OBJ 3: Further, the intellect has the same relation to
1863   1, 86  |           Therefore neither ~does the intellect understand its own act.~
1864   1, 86  |            ultimate perfection of the intellect ~consists in its own operation:
1865   1, 86  |               thing understood of the intellect is its own act of ~understanding.
1866   1, 86  |          intellects. ~For there is an intellect, namely, the Divine, which
1867   1, 86  |   understanding. But there is another intellect, the ~angelic, which is
1868   1, 86  |           another, namely, the human ~intellect, which neither is its own
1869   1, 86  |             first known ~by the human intellect is an object of this kind,
1870   1, 86  |              and through the act ~the intellect itself is known, the perfection
1871   1, 86  |              OBJ 1: The object of the intellect is something universal,
1872   1, 86  |              comprised. Wherefore the intellect can understand its own act.
1873   1, 86  |               the first object of our intellect, in this state of ~life,
1874   1, 86  |          intelligent act of the human intellect is not the act ~and perfection
1875   1, 86  |            Hence the act ~whereby the intellect understands a stone is distinct
1876   1, 86  |           there any difficulty in the intellect being thus potentially infinite,
1877   1, 86  |             by the common sense. ~The intellect, on the contrary, does not
1878   1, 86  |           Thes. Para. 1/1~Whether the intellect understands the act of the
1879   1, 86  |                It would seem that the intellect does not understand the
1880   1, 86  |               nothing is known by the intellect, unless it be in some way ~
1881   1, 86  |              some way ~present in the intellect. But the act of the will
1882   1, 86  |               the will is not in the ~intellect; since the will and the
1883   1, 86  |                since the will and the intellect are distinct. Therefore
1884   1, 86  |              will is not known by the intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[87] A[
1885   1, 86  |             same as the object of the intellect. Therefore the ~act of the
1886   1, 86  |               from the object of the ~intellect, and therefore the act of
1887   1, 86  |             will is not known by the ~intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[87] A[
1888   1, 86  |             seems ~impossible for the intellect to known such affections
1889   1, 86  |             will is understood by the intellect, ~both inasmuch as one knows
1890   1, 86  |              good if the will and the intellect ~were in different subjects,
1891   1, 86  |              will would not be in the intellect. But as both are ~rooted
1892   1, 86  |              certain way, also in the intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[87] A[
1893   1, 86  |               of the will ~and of the intellect, differ logically, but one
1894   1, 86  |              the will ~fall under the intellect, and those of the intellect
1895   1, 86  |           intellect, and those of the intellect can fall under the ~will.~
1896   1, 86  |     affections of the soul are in the intellect not by ~similitude only,
1897   1, 87  |              very excellence. But the intellect is not subject to such a ~
1898   1, 87  |             is to the sensible, so is intellect to the ~intelligible. But
1899   1, 87  |           corruptible. Therefore our ~intellect can understand all intelligible
1900   1, 87  |             the proper objects of our intellect, and thus first and "per ~
1901   1, 87  |            mind. Hence ~the purer the intellect is, so much the more clearly
1902   1, 87  |          experience corroborates, our intellect ~in its present state of
1903   1, 87  |           which ~he calls the "active intellect," and which, being a separate
1904   1, 87  |             the medium of the passive intellect united to ~us, we can understand
1905   1, 87  |              he said that the active ~intellect is united to us, thus. For
1906   1, 87  |             means of both ~the active intellect and intelligible objects,
1907   1, 87  |             is clear that the ~active intellect must be compared to the
1908   1, 87  |           both ~these ways the active intellect can be compared to the intelligible ~
1909   1, 87  |                Therefore the ~passive intellect receives the intelligible
1910   1, 87  |   intelligible object and the active ~intellect together; and the more numerous
1911   1, 87  |              ourselves and the active intellect; so much so that when we ~
1912   1, 87  |      intelligible objects, the active intellect becomes one ~with us, and
1913   1, 87  |           matter whether the ~passive intellect in that state of happiness
1914   1, 87  |         instrumentality of the active intellect, as he himself ~maintains,
1915   1, 87  |          Alexander holds) the passive intellect ~can never understand separate
1916   1, 87  |               by means of the ~active intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[88] A[
1917   1, 87  |        because, supposing the active ~intellect to be a separate substance,
1918   1, 87  |               was said of the passive intellect (Q[70], A[1]). Secondly,
1919   1, 87  |              explanation, the active ~intellect, supposing it to be a separate
1920   1, 87  |             other acts of the active ~intellect so as to enable us to understand
1921   1, 87  |           above explained, the active intellect were united to us ~in substance,
1922   1, 87  |              the ~force of the active intellect, as it is a much greater
1923   1, 87  |            would ~not make the active intellect to be so united to us as
1924   1, 87  |           being united to ~the active intellect as some imagined.~Aquin.:
1925   1, 87  |              Q[79], A[4]), the active intellect is not a ~separate substance;
1926   1, 87  |          objects to which the passive intellect extends receptively; ~because,
1927   1, 87  |            Anima iii, 5), the passive intellect is "all ~things potentially,"
1928   1, 87  |          potentially," and the active intellect is "all things in act." ~
1929   1, 87  |           intelligible by the ~active intellect, and are received in the
1930   1, 87  |               received in the passive intellect. Hence in the ~present state
1931   1, 87  |              passive or by the active intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[88] A[
1932   1, 87  |              thereof. Now our passive intellect, in the present state of ~
1933   1, 87  |                improportionate to our intellect, in our present state of
1934   1, 87  |             are not understood by any intellect; for they are ~understood
1935   1, 87  |           Thes. Para. 1/1~Whether our intellect can understand immaterial
1936   1, 87  |                It would seem that our intellect can know immaterial substances ~
1937   1, 87  |                science resides in the intellect. But there are sciences ~
1938   1, 87  |               since the nature of our intellect is to abstract the quiddity
1939   1, 87  |        follows that however much our ~intellect abstract the quiddity of
1940   1, 87  |               first principles to the intellect. But we know all things
1941   1, 87  |          answer that, Since the human intellect in the present state of
1942   1, 87  |             the proper object of ~our intellect, as appears above in many
1943   1, 87  |              the light itself of our ~intellect is not the object it understands,
1944   1, 87  |             first object known by our intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[88] A[
1945   1, 88  |        corrupted. Therefore also ~the intellect itself is corrupted.~Aquin.:
1946   1, 88  |              those who are of weaker ~intellect fail to acquire perfect
1947   1, 88  |      explained the difference between intellect and sense. We may also say ~
1948   1, 88  |           cognitive power besides the intellect remains in the separated ~
1949   1, 88  |                Q[77], A[8]). But the ~intellect cannot know singulars, as
1950   1, 88  |             be directly known by the ~intellect, but only indirectly, as
1951   1, 88  |            way it is possible for the intellect to know singulars. For as
1952   1, 88  |              reason of their ~perfect intellect, through these species,
1953   1, 88  |            Para. 1/1~Reply OBJ 1: The intellect does not know the singular
1954   1, 88  |         knowledge resides not in the ~intellect itself, but in the sensitive
1955   1, 88  |              not ~kept in the passive intellect. If this were true, it would
1956   1, 88  |              knowledge resides in the intellect, which is "the abode of ~
1957   1, 88  |             powers ~and partly in the intellect. This can be seen by considering
1958   1, 88  |               Now the actions of the ~intellect, by which knowledge is here
1959   1, 88  |        through ~such acts the passive intellect acquires a certain facility
1960   1, 88  |           seconding the action of the intellect when ~it turns to them to
1961   1, 88  |           chiefly and formally in the intellect itself, ~whilst it resides
1962   1, 88  |           regards what belongs to the intellect itself, it must remain;
1963   1, 88  |               of the subject, for the intellect is an incorruptible ~faculty,
1964   1, 88  |   intelligible species in the passive intellect be corrupted by their ~contrary;
1965   1, 88  |         contrariety ~may exist in the intellect as regards mental composition
1966   1, 88  |                so far as it is in the intellect, remains in ~the separated
1967   1, 88  |          acquired here by acts of the intellect turning to ~phantasms: therefore
1968   1, 88  |            belonging in a way to the ~intellect, as explained above (Q[79],
1969   1, 92  |              Therefore things without intellect are not made to God's image.~
1970   1, 92  |             way of a "trace." Now the intellect or mind is that whereby ~
1971   1, 92  |               a certain trace of the ~Intellect that created them, if we
1972   1, 92  |         procession of the word in the intellect, and a procession of the
1973   1, 92  |            can make use of reason and intellect to understand and consider ~
1974   1, 92  |               of truth belongs to the intellect, and love of ~virtue to
1975   1, 93  |              FIRST MAN AS REGARDS HIS INTELLECT ~(FOUR ARTICLES)~We next
1976   1, 93  |           condition of man as to his ~intellect; (2) the condition of man
1977   1, 93  |             is beatitude ~itself, the intellect of a man who sees the Divine
1978   1, 93  |          operation itself, the ~human intellect can be known perfectly,
1979   1, 93  |             truth is ~the good of the intellect, so falsehood is its evil,
1980   1, 93  |              impossible for the human intellect to assent to ~falsehood
1981   1, 93  |              so there could be in his intellect the absence of some ~knowledge,
1982   1, 93  |         regards its proper object the intellect is ever true; and hence
1983   1, 93  |    incompatible with deception of the intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[94] A[
1984   1, 102 |        creature governs itself by its intellect and ~will, both of which
1985   1, 102 |              perfected by the Divine ~intellect and will. Therefore above
1986   1, 104 |               Whether He can move the intellect?~(4) Whether He can move
1987   1, 104 |               He acts by His will and intellect, which knows the ~particular
1988   1, 104 |             apprehended except by the intellect, which ~is neither a body
1989   1, 104 |         Whether God moves the created intellect immediately?~Aquin.: SMT
1990   1, 104 |         immediately move the created ~intellect. For the action of the intellect
1991   1, 104 |      intellect. For the action of the intellect is governed by its own ~
1992   1, 104 |             the mover. Therefore the ~intellect is not moved by another;
1993   1, 104 |              cannot move the ~created intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[105] A[
1994   1, 104 |               But the movement of the intellect is ~its act of understanding;
1995   1, 104 |              by the sensible, so the ~intellect is moved by the intelligible.
1996   1, 104 |           exceeds the capacity of our intellect. Therefore God cannot move ~
1997   1, 104 |        Therefore God cannot move ~our intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[105] A[
1998   1, 104 |       contrary, The teacher moves the intellect of the one taught. But ~
1999   1, 104 |        Therefore God ~moves the human intellect.~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[105] A[
2000   1, 104 |             that is said to move ~the intellect, which is the cause of the