96. Powers of the Soul: Their Origin, Order, and Persistence

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Flow of Powers from the Soul #

• Powers flow from the soul naturally, not through temporal change or transmutation
• Analogy: being two naturally results in being half of four without the two changing
• Powers proceed from the soul as natural results of its essence, similar to how a triangle naturally has interior angles equal to two right angles
• The soul is a cause of its powers both as an active principle and as a receptive principle

The Order Among Powers #

• Powers can be prior to one another in two ways:
  1. In perfection: Powers closer to the soul’s perfection are prior (e.g., reason before sensation)
  2. In generation/reception: Powers more susceptible to the soul are prior in the order of material causation
• Analogy from the Categories: quantity is before quality (surface precedes color); one accident can be received in substance through another
• Powers are opposed to one another as perfect to imperfect, not as contradictories
• The imperfect naturally proceeds from the perfect

Which Powers Remain in the Separated Soul #

• Intellectual powers (understanding and will) remain in act—they have the soul alone as their subject
• Sensitive powers (sensation, imagination, external senses) remain only as roots or principles, not in act
• Vegetative/nutritive powers remain only as roots or principles
• When the body is destroyed, accidents that depend on the body as their subject cannot remain in act
• Acts of sensitive powers cannot occur without bodily organs

Key Arguments #

Article 7: Does One Power Proceed from Another Power? #

Objection 1: All powers are created together with the soul; therefore one cannot arise from another

• Response: Simultaneous creation does not preclude causal order. Things can proceed from one another while being present simul (together). Properties naturally flow from essences without temporal change.

Objection 2: One accident cannot be the subject of another accident; therefore one power cannot arise from another

• Response: While one accident is not strictly the subject of another, one accident can be received in substance through another as a middle term. Example: surface is how substance receives color; quantity is how substance receives quality.
• Application: The soul receives one power through another power in one of two orders (perfection or generation).

Objection 3: Powers are divided by opposites; how can one arise from another?

• Response: Powers are opposed as perfect to imperfect, not as contradictories. The imperfect naturally proceeds from the perfect, so opposition does not prevent derivation.

Article 8: Do Powers Remain in the Separated Soul? #

Objection 1: Powers are natural properties of the soul; properties never separate from their subjects

• Response: Some powers are properties of the soul alone; others are properties of the soul-body composite. Only the former remain.

Objection 2: The old man’s weakness in vision comes from bodily decay, not the power itself; therefore the power remains

• Response: The power itself is not corrupted, but neither can it act without its bodily organ.

Objection 3: Luke 16 shows the rich man remembering in hell; therefore memory and sensitive powers remain

• Response: The word ‘memory’ is equivocal. Luke refers to intellectual memory (in reason), not sensory memory. Both can be called memory, but they are distinct.

Objection 4: Joy and sadness remain in the separated soul

• Response: These are acts of the will (intellectual appetite), not sense emotions. The names of emotions are borrowed to describe acts of the will, dropping the bodily aspect.

Important Definitions #

Simul (Together): Things can be together in time while one is still a cause of the other. This contrasts with temporal sequence and illustrates that simultaneous existence does not preclude causal order.

Radix (Root or Principle): The mode in which sensitive powers remain in the separated soul—they exist potentially, not actually, without bodily organs. The soul retains the virtual beginning or source of these powers.

Equivocation: Using the same word in different senses without recognition. Example: ‘memory’ as a sense power vs. ‘memory’ in reason itself; ‘joy’ as a bodily emotion vs. ‘joy’ as an act of the will.

Power/Potentia: A principle of operation; the ability to act or be acted upon. Distinguished from act (actus), which is the exercise of that ability.

Examples & Illustrations #

The Macarthur Inchon Landing #

Berquist uses MacArthur’s decision to invade at Inchon in the Korean War to illustrate prudence and foresight in practical reasoning about contingent singular situations. The decision involved considerable risk, studied knowledge of tides and enemy disposition, and ultimately proved successful. The example shows how foresight involves estimating consequences in situations that cannot be settled by strict syllogism—one courageous if it works, foolish if it doesn’t.

Wolfe and Strategic Surprise #

Compared to MacArthur’s Inchon landing—both achieved success through doing what the enemy thought impossible. Machiavelli’s History of Florence notes that nothing succeeds like doing what the enemy cannot foresee.

Churchill and Chamberlain on Hitler #

Churchill’s foresight that Hitler must be opposed early, before German rearmament became complete, contrasts with Chamberlain’s appeasement. Churchill understood that waiting would place Britain in a worse position. This illustrates prudential reasoning about the consequences of action and inaction.

Nixon’s Sixth Sense #

Nixon, traveling through a menacing crowd, decided to turn down a street. Two blocks away, a bomb was set to explode. Shows the role of intuitive judgment in practical reasoning.

Falling in Love vs. Choosing Love #

Berquist distinguishes amor (emotional love, sense appetite) from dilectio (chosen love, act of will). In Shakespeare’s As You Like It, Phoebe’s falling in love is “love at first sight”—the sense emotion. In Hamlet, Hamlet’s choice of Horatio as friend reflects deliberate selection: “since my dear soul was mistress of her choice.” Marriage vows ask for choice (Do you choose?), not emotional attachment.

The Separated Soul and Memory #

The parable of Lazarus and the rich man (Luke 16) shows the rich man remembering his earthly life after death. But this is intellectual memory, not sensory memory—the soul retains reason and will but not bodily sensation.

Notable Quotes #

“It’s hard to use a syllogism on that, because in one sense, he’s courageous if it works, but in another sense, he’s a fool if it doesn’t.” — On prudential judgment about contingent singular situations

“The more you know the situation, the better you can make such a judgment.” — On how foresight depends on knowledge of particulars

“The man of foresight can foresee the consequence of doing this or not doing that.” — Definition of prudence

“Grace never goes against nature; it elevates nature.” — Principle underlying how grace perfects the powers of the soul

“You don’t have the ability to see in my separated soul to hear smell taste or touch…I’ll be understanding and willing.” — On which powers remain in act in the separated soul

“It’s not asking for that emotional attachment. He’s asking for choice.” — On the distinction between amor and dilectio in marriage vows

“The flesh also wants to be in on this.” — On why even in heaven (laus vocalis, vocal praise) the body matters

Questions Addressed #

Q1: Does one power proceed from another power? #

Answer: Yes, in a certain order. Powers precede one another according to perfection (reason before sensation in dignity) or according to generation (sensation naturally precedes desire for sensed objects). The imperfect naturally proceeds from the perfect.

Q2: Which powers remain in the separated soul? #

Answer:

• In act: Understanding and will (intellectual powers with the soul as subject)
• As roots/principles only: Sensation, imagination, memory (as sense power), and all vegetative powers—these require bodily organs to operate

Q3: Can we speak of memory and joy in the separated soul? #

Answer: Yes, but equivocally. ‘Memory’ in the separated soul is intellectual memory (in reason), not sensory memory. ‘Joy’ and ‘sadness’ in the separated soul are acts of the will, not bodily emotions. The names of emotions are borrowed to describe acts of the intellective appetite, dropping the bodily aspect.

Q4: Why can’t sensory powers act without a body? #

Answer: Sensory operations require bodily organs as their instruments and subjects. Sight requires eyes, hearing requires ears, etc. When the body is destroyed, the accidents whose subject is the body-soul composite cannot remain in act.

Theological Implications #

The distinction between powers remaining in act vs. as roots has theological significance for understanding the separated soul’s knowledge, desire, and emotional condition in the afterlife. It also connects to the resurrection: the soul naturally desires the body (the flesh also wants to be in on this), and in the resurrection, there will be vocal praise (laus vocalis), indicating the restoration of bodily dimension to the soul’s operations.