: M, Charles Daxonineke 16 July 1953) To mike precise tho subject mtter of naturel dootrine we mill ‘Gunmine tue proomia to ail the netural works. two adverse opin- Sona which we will nave in mind as we prooeed ere the followiaas Lr vahse whien minteina ths? modero seiesce nas mde a pollo~ pay of tabure obsolete, and 2, "Ret which calls, spurtous the Aiotinotion between pailaccany of muro as soiene: Lgetio 1: the procmiua 2 not 2 gart of anturel Goceniney it Le the work of the motapnysicion aos 18 very general (2 common, Pirst, let us consider the four orders wich St. Tho- bas hotee in hia prooniux to the Sthics (1, loctio 1, a-2) in or- Ser to eliminate an ambimity in tie notion’ of piloséphia natura- Lis. “rhe order waten ronson only considers and’ floes not make 1s, seid to bo the task of natural pailosopty. Wetarel pallosopny here is nob synonymous with patlosophy of mituze, but is Father 10 be opposed to pitlosophis Fationslig, In the Sthics, philosophia me Gurelis embraces ail the spscala tive solonc and metaphysics. nyeles, matnenatice " Guisl Iver Payssoerum, oulus expositions intenaims, Lsber soientiae naturals, in ele prisoi pio oper set. ast Sit seteria et edb jectun Selentiae metusalis, Seleadun est ipitar bapeatar, Seoantun'aiveraim definitions mosgn eoientias Siveratfiveri." Fhysios ie me first work of natural science, It should be studied 1 fogs one nae 20 begin here even today, oF oth ‘isusily done today? fs the: ‘order either on te part of She any? Wnat io natural sotonce about and wast aapsot of things doos it consider? sub jectum et materia... To understand graph, we mist go to De Trinitate, q. 5, art. Le Gxine’of Aristotle on te selences, of. VT Mota; De Trias, q.5, art, 1. Pirst of all, She practioal ‘in ifs. omi: te Tormer ‘iter knowe it to arder it to practice. we sahabi tus vol potontia .. determin tion to nn blest, Eotontin: the payer taus determined. To wherein the habi ‘wo Seok the potentia, The difference of objects que ob. Tor distinguished tho object of te eye, There emo ancng various species, eG, 405, ma, eve, but we do not require 8 aiffer-jas apesulabilia. ‘There is something quo to the knowing power. potentia] ont sometaing due to the fiasitus (sclonce). stated in the Physics: canis soientia in Selentie per deuonenrs tone, intellects end oanie Smaterial - te aint te such: poventia + What 1s St to know? How ao 1 ‘erea, Tan in possession af it ‘De belt of tae tree te suger is in ne ina way differing trom jt that my concept of the tree is net con Thave witain nr a sine and yet tais dosent effect the tres, ‘4aao8 to ny boing = tag treo T Kae the my st ie in iteoit. Senet witn toe. actorl free: formal tna. Whaat s left teaint wtea I know thea be untrue, fora tr fe both mtter and fern, "ink only of figure or shape; act of ‘The too ts not fust a suape, a geceatri can.wo say that knowing ie inmoverta mist be distingished into kind: Enewlsdge = of tose things waose beings require cattery Dokoninek: p. 8 ar tuiy 1988) Sf common to all knowledge - even sense ve knower bas’ the Yorn of another without Losing ane fora { of. supre). wiitnout mptter. We Approaches the pFoslon by Observing thet there are two Nays of bei! He"does aot raise tho prsblen in torus of form alono as we have ei sec. slam spectom. will be imperfect = thore is 4 soale Sonfinea to their cyn degree of deine. ode of being ia not simply perfect = pe Zeeta inperfecte, tne cerfection of the universe is tae ensemble ite'parts = each art, tanon, is confined to itsel?. (2) Intentionel - seo. quod perfectio unlus rel inyenitur in alio'ro- as 2 compensation for inperfect. perfection, ts shore s8 the Pomedy of Knowledge: soguining the perfeetion of Other, There is the perfection groper to tne knowing being = She perteotion of beoaning schething else withous losing Its ona Doing. Tne whole universe existe quodenaodo in the Knowing being. Tan aore than aysel? aot with rogara to ay specific perfection, but with regard to the perfection of knowleage.. Anima st quocen- mode omnia ingaintun nats est omnis cognesonre.JIT De snins. Note the proceaire of S Thomas - observation, not denonatration of tho existence of knowers. The aigpersion of the universe i8 rene Gled by knowledge, Thus philosophers say that tne ultimate end of Gntelligence is the description of tae worké ant its causes. This Ao StLll the finis solentiae with regard to. philosopny, but st 13 to longer the Sais soisatis, Now we have the Deatifis vision for Sur ultine te. eta. ng beings would gtt11 be @ universe for ‘de Zacto tas ent of the oe ordered. 20 kncwers, Ghinrd thing. The tain, fod it As deteriined by nga ae detersined by one How’ ona matter determine for oF perfection? 8 not form te ae serainant? ‘The one ito knows must not Have that wiich orevasts = taing Doing Knows. If tue knowor recoived ho form as mAttor resolves if, "tae known would determine tae knower as @ how deternimte bein: Bota ras the Known as known end the knower a¢ knower i excluded ‘he Kini of reception whian constitutes tae first perfection of . tings,” Hatter of tha kind is exeluded. I do not receive theDe Kes p, & a Saky’ {eont'af known ng ay matter received my form - that would be sontrary both fo tie Zorh Seenived end tie Tecelver in knowledges by tho knoner ae fora, Usually fof knowledge esctees ali tis as known ~ but id it 88 ‘mist net 00k for demonstration in this articla ~ we Aecape the dsetinetiog between knowers ant non-Lnowers. Uoterns ere most confused on knowledge, defining connaitre as" to to wie Mint e certain trae or real object of thought.” fers" cizeuiar definition = thong envere into it, a Tike to fuow saat is nena roo". Se thomas defines leno at habere foman elteri hot reser to sense knowloc Sf'eake account of envie rasiont: Various nodes of receiving innatorially: tellectual knowiedge. iaterial tings are not intel ligt ‘yo are material, are not inteliseibie, Corsicus mas to be rendered Tneeliigibie inact by us, Beings entirled devoid of mtter are intellieible in thonseives - but they are less intelligible for ua. Gutaquia recipi tur od moan reoipientis recipitur. Spooulebitia Gre in the intellect acscrding to the note of tne intellect ~ in- Yelnigible in act. why 1s it tet tie loteliiginie in potency 19 not inteliigibie in act? Sonse mowiledge is truly knowledge end 1s ars,” in intellestuar knowledge we must get sway fron ater inles. Material singul fly the material sisruiny = fare pore ofne. hy cant | Know te materiol singular aizeotly by UnteLiccruan knorledge? Not because it ia aingiler = Cot is most Singular. Dat we sensible sinuiars ove welr indiviueiity to miter, "Plato ie Flato due to meter <'why, die to 1) 40 he ine ‘nly in poteney? ‘What do we mesh by the antter! watch by matter. M, De xosinee =? 26 dany 1983, of. pe Trini cat a. 8) art. 1, 0, ps 28, 1. 10. ~ From tho part, of the intelieet, we mot sostiact fom the materiel singular ~ Ghe'mterisl singulare imply & certain infinity wolon cannot be Knows “yo perfectly henogensous taings: divereity without formal, Giterenes, “Why diverse? Why this outside tht? Dy reason of fhe subject, but nov as aubjeot, ut ao tho dononsiozs of one su Slect efe oiteide thove of another. Gifters from tne. sub jact of. the {felted ""zquel doneasions offre dholsies auf de matiore intelligible for doctrine on insiviauation. fect of shia quantize sigma = pateris Gh Sin attoln te indivezoal in tte siceuiarity: desi ost we oun dor tis one here. How eotld we know the. ind Ein Teafetaued, sage Seace Hnintedre? te Sonne, Vlnters fuaatitate = very inportant,. Brom the viewpoint of, specu Soido not snow directly the atoriat Jpaividis thon to form fe would bo intelligibic in act. shy is 1 that wo censct oor the mteriel aiseviar Gireotly with : Wet deetan ‘Paenleaget Gol doen alan tag Sige badade HES er aes Ee caowe en ‘Thanks to our senses we are jon Ge 18 composed of meter ail ‘whatever cote aote insofar ao it is in & Siye have sccothing abst lar orn be known only by Lt active enuse, of the enor by intellect. One eenaot Whe ineivigua, eo sueh Ehey 2s suen are not te objects. ° the’ viewpoint of practical seionse the clnuiar ie el} important. = Gapeyinental seienses too t 4s ell inportant, for experience 1s of the individual.