45. The Object of Reason: Essence and Universals

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

• The Object of Reason (Intellect): Aristotle’s core teaching that reason’s proper object is the ‘what it is’ (τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι, to ti en einai - ’the what was to be’) or essence/definition of things
• The Distinction Between Thing and Essence: Why a particular thing (e.g., this circle, this water) is not identical to what that thing is
• Immateriality of the Intellect: The argument that because intellect receives universals rather than singulars, it cannot be a body
• Matter, Quantity, and Individuation: How continuous quantity allows multiple individuals of the same kind to exist
• Comparison of Sense and Intellect: How sensory powers know singulars while intellect knows universals
• Theological Application: How this understanding illuminates the problem of speaking about God

Key Arguments #

The Thing vs. Its Essence #

• A magnitude (line, circle, square, sphere) is not identical to what a magnitude is
• If a circle and what a circle is were identical, there could be only one circle in existence
• Water and what water is are distinguishable; water exists in many instances while ‘water’ remains one universal
• The reason for this distinction: material things are subject to continuous quantity (part outside of part)
• In immaterial things (angels, God), the thing and its essence ARE identical, so there cannot be two angels of equal rank or two gods

Why Multiple Individuals of the Same Kind Can Exist #

• Continuous quantity allows a thing to be divided and its matter distributed in space
• One circle can be placed here, another there—both are circles because their essence remains the same
• Wooden chairs can be multiplied because there is enough matter (wood) available
• Without matter subject to continuous quantity, there could be only one individual of each essence
• This principle explains why God cannot have a duplicate: God is immaterial and therefore what God is and God Himself are identical

The Intellect Receives Universals, Not Singulars #

• What is received in a body (continuous matter) is received as singular (located here or there)
• The intellect receives things as universal (not located anywhere, not divisible)
• Therefore, the intellect cannot be a body or have a bodily organ
• The intellect is not continuous; it understands continuous things in a non-continuous way
• Example: A sensory organ subjected to a very strong stimulus (loud sound, bright light, strong smell) is temporarily or permanently damaged and cannot perceive other things; but the intellect, when understanding something very intelligible (like the Trinity), is not prevented from understanding lesser things (like isosceles triangles) and understands them even more clearly

The Two Ways of Knowing: Direct vs. Reflective #

• The intellect directly knows the universal (what a thing is)
• The senses directly know the singular (this particular thing)
• The intellect can know singulars indirectly through reflection (reflexio), understanding them as the origin from which the universal was abstracted
• When we compare a universal to its singulars (e.g., ‘man’ to individual men; ‘circle’ to individual circles), we are using the same power (intellect) knowing both, but in different modes: universal directly, singular reflectively

The Immateriality of the Intellect (Summary Argument) #

1. The intellect receives universals (definitions, essences)
2. What is received in a continuous body is received as singular (here or there)
3. Since the intellect receives things universally, it does not receive them in the manner of a continuous body
4. Therefore, the intellect is not a body; it is not continuous; it is immaterial

Important Definitions #

The What It Is (Essence) #

• Greek: τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι (to ti en einai) or simply the what a thing is (τὸ τί ἐστιν)
• Also called the essence or definition
• Expressed through the definition that states the universal nature common to all individuals of that kind
• Not identical to any particular individual thing, but what makes a thing to be what it is
• The proper and direct object of reason/intellect
• Berquist notes Aristotle uses the longer phrase “the what was to be” (the what it was to be) because it emphasizes that while matter could become other things, it is through form (the essence) that it actually is what it is

Continuous Quantity #

• A property of material bodies where parts meet at a common boundary (parts of a line meet at a point; parts of a surface meet at a line)
• Part outside of part (pars extra partem): characteristic feature allowing division and spatial separation
• Allows for multiple individuals of the same kind by distributing matter in space
• Present in both natural things (water, animals) and mathematical objects (circles, lines)

Universal vs. Singular #

• Singular: A particular individual thing existing here or there, received by sensory powers that have bodily organs
• Universal: What a thing is, common to all individuals of that kind, received by intellect as non-spatial and non-divisible
• The same reality can be known both ways: by sense as singular, by intellect as universal

Reflection (Reflexio) #

• The intellect’s indirect knowledge of singulars
• The intellect knows singulars not directly but as the origin from which universals are abstracted
• The intellect “comes back” (reflects) from the universal to the singular from which it was taken
• This is why we can speak of the comparison between universal and singular—the same power must know both, but in different ways

Examples & Illustrations #

Mathematical Examples #

• Circles: Two circles can be exactly the same kind because continuous quantity allows one to be placed here and another there; however, a circle and what a circle is are not identical
• Euclid’s First Theorem: Constructing two equal circles by rotating a line around two different endpoints
• Squares and Cubes: A cube is bound by six squares; the universal nature of ‘square’ or ‘cube’ is not identical to any particular individual square or cube

Natural Examples #

• Water: This water and that water (in a pond, in pipes, etc.) are different singulars, but what water is remains one universal
• Dogs: Many individual dogs exist because of continuous quantity of matter, but what a dog is remains one universal essence
• Flesh: Flesh is distinguishable from what flesh is; the senses know this hot or cold flesh, while the intellect knows what flesh is (a certain ratio of the hot and cold)

Sensory Damage Examples #

• Strong odors or tastes: A pungent smell prevents smelling other things; strong tastes prevent tasting others
• Bright light: Very bright light temporarily blinds the eye, preventing perception of other colors
• Loud sounds: Extremely loud noise can cause temporary or permanent hearing loss
• Contrast: After studying something very intelligible (like the Trinity), returning to lesser mathematical truths (like the isosceles triangle) becomes clearer, not darker—proving the intellect is not damaged by its objects

Theological Example #

• God’s Simplicity: In God, the thing and its essence are identical; God is whatever He has (God is wisdom itself, not merely wise)
• Multiple Gods Impossible: There cannot be two gods because in the immaterial divine nature, what God is and God Himself are identical
• Distinction of Divine Persons: The Church carefully teaches there are three persons in one God, and each person IS (not merely participates in) the one God—Father is God, Son is God, Holy Spirit is God, yet one God

Notable Quotes #

“Because reason or understanding has this universality, it’s open to receiving all the natures of these things. It must lack any bodily nature.”

“When the understanding or the reason considers something very understandable, when it turns to lesser things, it’s not prevented from seeing them. If anything, it sees them more clearly.”

“The fact that we receive it [the object of understanding] is something universal… is a sign that our understanding of reason is not a body. It’s not something continuous.”

Questions Addressed #

Why is there a distinction between a thing and what it is in material beings but not in immaterial beings? #

• Material things are subject to continuous quantity, which allows matter to be distributed in space and thus supports multiple individuals of the same kind
• In immaterial substances (angels, God), there is no continuous quantity, so what a thing is and the thing itself are identical
• This is why there can be many men (different individuals of the same universal essence) but only one God (where essence and individual are identical)

How can the intellect know both universals and singulars? #

• The intellect directly knows universals (what things are)
• The intellect indirectly or reflectively knows singulars as the origin of universals
• When comparing universal to singular, the same power (intellect) must know both, but in different ways
• The senses directly know singulars, while the intellect directly knows universals

How do we know that the intellect is not a body? #

• Bodies are continuous (part outside of part) and receive things as singular (here or there)
• The intellect receives things as universal (not spatial, not divisible)
• Strong sensory stimuli damage bodily sensory organs and impede further sensation; but understanding very intelligible things does not damage the intellect or prevent it from understanding lesser things
• Therefore, the intellect cannot be continuous, cannot be a body, and must be immaterial

What is the significance of the phrase “the what was to be” (τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι)? #

• This phrase emphasizes that while matter (the wood, for example) could have become other things (a table, a door, a boat), it is through form (the essence) that it actually is what it is (a chair)
• The phrase looks back to the matter from which something came to be, but recognizes that the matter was not yet what it came to be; the form actualizes the potential
• It emphasizes the role of form as definition and what makes something what it is