132. The Will's Necessity and the Intellect-Will Hierarchy

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

• Types of Necessity Applied to the Will: Thomas distinguishes natural necessity (from intrinsic principles), hypothetical/conditional necessity (from the end), and necessity of force (external coercion)
• The Will’s Relationship to Happiness: The will necessarily adheres to beatitude as the last end, but not necessarily to particular goods or means
• Natural Necessity and Freedom: Natural necessity from the will’s own nature is compatible with voluntariness; only external coercion contradicts freedom
• Intellect vs. Will: An extended analysis of whether intellect or will is the higher power, requiring careful use of logical distinctions
• The Fallacy of Accident vs. The As Such (per se): The importance of distinguishing what belongs to something as such from what belongs to it accidentally

Key Arguments #

On Necessity and the Will #

• The Banquet Analogy: When one sees God face-to-face in heaven, the will is completely satisfied and at rest, necessarily adhering to God (like complete fullness at Thanksgiving dinner)
• God’s Liberality: Following Avicenna, God alone is truly liberal/generous; God gives without receiving return. Adding creature goodness to God is like adding a point to a line—it makes nothing better
• Partial vs. Complete Goods: Creatures possess goodness only partially and incompletely; therefore no creature necessarily moves the will. Only God, who is completely good, necessarily determines the will when directly perceived
• Consumer Society Example: Modern consumers are never satisfied despite accumulation (Alexander weeping over no more worlds to conquer); this illustrates how partial goods lack the power to satisfy the infinite capacity of the will
• The “Offer You Can’t Resist”: When people say an offer is irresistible (salary increase, etc.), they misuse language—partial goods never truly compel the will with absolute necessity

On Intellect vs. Will and the Distinction Simpliciter/Secundum Quid #

• The Dominican Maxim: “Never affirm, seldom deny, always distinguish”—essential for resolving apparent contradictions
• Simpliciter (Simply) vs. Secundum Quid (In Some Respect):
  • What belongs to a thing as such (per se) vs. what belongs to it accidentally
  • Example: A square is not essentially green; greenness is accidental to squareness
  • Example: Defining a dog as “four-footed animal” is incomplete; not all four-footed animals are dogs
• The Fallacy of Accident: Confusing essential properties with accidental ones (a pianist builds a house, but not as a pianist; the beer-drinker builds, but not as a beer-drinker)
• Definition and Convertibility: A definition must be convertible with what it defines—it must fit tightly, containing exactly what belongs to the thing and nothing else

On the Good and Its Definition #

• The Good as Object of Desire: The good is defined as “what all desire” (universal definition from Plato, Aristotle, Thomas, Dionysius)
• The Good as Such vs. Accidental Desire: The bad is never desired as bad; it may be desired accidentally (poison desired for its pleasant taste, not its poisonousness)
• Why This Distinction Matters: If the bad were also desired, the definition “good = what all desire” would not be convertible with the thing defined

Important Definitions #

• Natura necessitas (Natural Necessity): Necessity arising from intrinsic principles; what a thing naturally must do (fire burning, triangle having angles equal to two right angles)
• Necessitas hypothetica (Hypothetical/Conditional Necessity): Necessity arising from the end or goal; necessary if the end is to be achieved (food is necessary if one is to live; logic is necessary if one is to do philosophy well; loving God is necessary if one is to be joined to God)
• Necessitas coactionis (Necessity of Force): External compulsion; entirely repugnant to the will and incompatible with voluntariness
• Vis collativa (Collative Power): The power to bring together diverse things; what distinguishes reason from sense appetite. Reason brings together statements (discourse), definitions (genus and difference), or numbers (arithmetic) to derive something new
• Vis discursiva (Discursive Power): The power of running/proceeding from one thing to another; knowing what it does not know through what it does know
• Simpliciter (Simply/As Such): According to the essence or definition of a thing; what is true of it in itself
• Secundum quid (In Some Respect/Qualified): With qualification; what is true of it in relation to something else or accidentally

Examples & Illustrations #

• The Fish Smell (Cat Example): A cat smells fish in a waste basket—it grasps one thing (the smell) and is moved in a determined way. It does not compare multiple things as reason does
• The Hamlet Quote (Shakespeare): “Since my dear soul was mistress of her choice, and could of men distinguished, right her election hath sealed thee for herself.” Hamlet explains choosing Horatio as friend because reason can compare men and see their differences; the soul is mistress of choice when it has vis collativa and discursiva, the power to bring things together and distinguish them
• The Romeo and Juliet Garden Scene: Juliet confesses infinite love to Romeo, saying she could give him more and more love—illustrating how human love for creatures can only express itself as infinite capacity, whereas love of God fully satisfies the infinite capacity of the will
• The Bank Robbery: A man robs a bank not because robbery (as unjust) appears good, but because money appears good to him. He is not considering the full context of reason: that it isn’t his money, that it’s unjust, etc.
• The Businessman Breaking Down: An older businessman weeping because he cannot make another financial killing, though he needs no more money—shows the insatiability of pursuing partial goods
• Sexual Shame Example: Young people blush when discussing sexual matters; Aristotle says this is good because it shows a sense of decency and honor. Modern entertainment kills this shame, but shame is a “stepping stone to virtue”
• The Rape of Lucrece (Shakespeare): A narrative poem (not a play) representing temptation powerfully; shows an inner struggle and the sense of shame after succumbing to lust
• The Restaurant Menu Analogy: Multiple acceptable dishes; the will is not necessarily determined to one
• The Tie Choice Example: Two acceptable ties to wear; neither is necessarily required for happiness

Notable Quotes #

“God alone is liberal.” — Avicenna, quoted by Thomas on God’s pure generosity

“Never affirm, seldom deny, always distinguish.” — Dominican maxim, cited as essential for resolving philosophical puzzles

“I shall sin no more.” — Saint John’s warning about deathbed repentance and how creatures cannot satisfy the will even unto death

“Since my dear soul was mistress of her choice, and could of men distinguished, right her election hath sealed thee for herself.” — Shakespeare, Hamlet, illustrating rational choice through comparison

“The good is what all desire.” — Berquist’s synthesis of definitions from Plato, Aristotle, Thomas, and Dionysius

Questions Addressed #

Does the Will Necessarily Will Anything?

• The will necessarily wills beatitude/happiness as its last end, but not necessarily any particular goods or means
• This natural necessity (from the will’s own nature to its object) is compatible with freedom
• External coercion alone contradicts voluntariness

Why Don’t Partial Goods Necessarily Move the Will?

• Creatures possess goodness only partially; adding creature goodness to God is like adding a point to a line—it adds nothing
• The will’s capacity is infinite; only infinite goodness (God) can fill and satisfy it
• Therefore, no creature necessarily determines the will

What Is the Importance of the Simpliciter/Secundum Quid Distinction?

• It resolves apparent contradictions by clarifying what is true of a thing as such vs. what is true of it accidentally
• Essential for logic (definitions must be convertible with their definendum), metaphysics, and ethics
• Prevents the fallacy of accident (confusing essential with accidental properties)

How Do Sense and Reason Differ in Their Relationship to Objects?

• The sense appetite grasps one singular thing and is moved in a determined way (dog smelling meat)
• Reason is collative—it brings together diverse things, compares them, and draws conclusions
• Therefore, the will (whose object is presented by reason) can be moved by many considerations and not from necessity