25. The Transcendentals: Being, One, True, and Good

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Six Transcendental Properties #

• Being (ens): That which exists in act; the most universal concept
• Thing (aliquid): Being considered as having determinate nature
• One (unum): Being considered as undivided in itself and distinct from all other things
• True (verum): Being as intelligible and knowable to the mind
• Good (bonum): Being as desirable and perfective
• A sixth transcendental is also mentioned but not fully developed in this lecture

How Transcendentals Add Meaning Without Adding Reality #

Thomas and Albert the Great show that transcendentals add meaning to being in three ways:

1. By negation of division in oneself (one)
2. By negation of relation to other things (one)
3. By adding relations of reason only (true as relation to intellect; good as relation to will)

• These additions are not real but rather conceptual or relational

The Nature of One #

• One means undivided in yourself and distinct from all other things
• One as a transcendental is different from one as the beginning of number
• The one that is a transcendental does not add something real to being
• Thomas clarifies that although the many seems prior to the one in understanding (since we negate division to define one), the idea of many is actually “many ones,” making this a subtle epistemic question

The Doctrine of Opposites #

Different types of opposition apply to different transcendentals:

Being and Non-being: Contradictory opposition

• “To be or not to be”—exhausts all possibilities, no middle ground
• Nothing in common between them

Something and Nothing: Similar to contradictory opposition

• No common subject or common genus
• “Commentaries” (contraries) have both a common subject and common genus, unlike this opposition

One and Many: Privative opposition (more like lack)

• One is undivided being; many is divided being
• The many is defined in terms of ones, creating circularity in understanding
• This is not pure contradiction but involves a kind of lack
• Different from the opposition of being/non-being

True and False: Contrary opposition

• If you think two is half of four, and another thinks two is not half of four, they think contrarily
• Thinking is divided into true thinking and false thinking (like two forms of thinking)
• Ignorance is not falsity (one is not thinking contrarily; one is not thinking at all)

Good and Bad: Privative opposition

• Bad is fundamentally the lack of something one is able to have and should have
• Like the opposition of one and many, but distinct in how the lack operates
• Aristotle distinguishes multiple senses of lack; only in certain senses is lack something bad

The Subtlety of Lack and Definition #

Berquist emphasizes that Aristotle and Thomas (but not Plato and Avicenna) recognize different senses of lack:

• Some lacks make something bad (privative in a strict sense)
• Some lacks are merely negations and do not make something bad (as in the definition of one as lacking division)
• One must consult Aristotle’s Metaphysics, Book V to understand the distinctions properly

The Problem of Two Great Minds Confused #

Plato and Avicenna (both “among the greatest minds of all time”) became confused about the one:

• They mixed up the one that is a transcendental with the one that is the beginning of number
• The one as a measure of number is relatively opposed to multitude
• The one as a transcendental is opposed to many in a different way (like lack)
• Avicenna incorrectly thought the transcendental one adds something real
• Plato incorrectly thought the transcendental one is the beginning of number, leading to the view that everything is numbers

Key Arguments #

The Priority of Understanding More Universal Concepts #

1. According to Aristotle, we must understand the more universal before the less universal
2. Therefore, we must understand the most universals before understanding anything
3. The most universals are extremely difficult to understand
4. Examples: understanding “quadrilateral” before “square”; understanding “number” before “prime number”
5. Conclusion: Mastery of the most universals is nearly restricted to Aristotle and Thomas

The Epistemological Challenge of First Principles #

• If you don’t understand being and its transcendental properties, you don’t understand anything
• Yet these are the hardest things to understand
• This creates a fundamental philosophical paradox about how learning begins

Important Definitions #

Being (ens) #

That which exists in act; what is not merely potential but actually is. Being is the proper object of the intellect and the most universal concept.

One (unum) #

Being considered as undivided in itself and distinct from all other things. As a transcendental, one does not add something real to being but only adds the negation of division.

Contradiction (contradictio) #

The opposition between two things that have nothing in common and allow no middle ground (e.g., being and non-being; something and nothing).

Contrariety (contrarietas) #

An opposition where both contraries have a common subject and common genus. Example: courage and cowardliness are both in the rational appetite.

Privation (privatio) / Lack #

An opposition between having and lacking something one is naturally able to have. The lacking one is in the same subject as the one having. Example: blindness and sight in an animal.

Transcendental (transcendentale) #

A property that applies to all being and transcends the ten categories. Transcendentals are really identical with being but differ from being in definition or notion.

Examples & Illustrations #

Understanding One vs. Many #

• The many is understood first in sensation (we see divided things before understanding undividedness)
• Yet the many is conceptually dependent on one (the many is “many ones”)
• This creates a subtle epistemic problem about which is truly prior

The Confusion of Great Philosophers #

• Even Plato and Avicenna mixed up the one as transcendental with the one as number
• The one as measure of number is a relative opposition (like numerator to denominator)
• The one as transcendental is a privative opposition (lacking division)
• This confusion led Avicenna to think the transcendental one adds something real (error) and Plato to think everything is ultimately numbers (error)

Distinguishing False from Ignorant Thinking #

• If I think “two is half of four” and you think “two is not half of four,” we think contrarily
• But if someone is merely ignorant and doesn’t think about this relationship at all, they are not thinking falsely—they are not thinking contrarily
• Only thinking that actively denies truth is false; mere lack of knowledge is not falsity

Notable Quotes #

“One means undivided in yourself and distinct from all other things.” — Thomas Aquinas, cited by Berquist

“The soul is in some way all things.” — Aristotle, De Anima, Book III, cited in lecture

“You can’t get something from nothing.” — Greek philosophical principle, noted as parallel to Parmenides’ claim about being and non-being

“Things are noble, can be true, right? Everything. And good. True and good.” — Berquist, summarizing the universality of transcendental properties

Questions Addressed #

How Do Transcendentals Add to Being Without Adding Reality? #

• Transcendentals like one, true, and good are really identical with being
• Yet they add distinct meanings or notions (rationes)
• Some transcendentals add negations (one adds negation of division)
• Some add relations of reason only (true adds relation to intellect; good adds relation to will)
• These additions are conceptual or rational, not real

What Is the Proper Type of Opposition for Each Transcendental? #

• Being and non-being: contradictory (to be or not to be)
• Something and nothing: contradictory (no common subject or genus)
• One and many: privative (like lack, but not strictly bad)
• True and false: contrary (like two forms of thinking)
• Good and bad: privative (lack of perfection one should have)

Why Did Plato and Avicenna Get Confused About One? #

• They failed to distinguish the one as transcendental from the one as beginning of number
• The one as number is measure (relative opposition to multitude)
• The one as transcendental is undivided being (privative opposition to divided being)
• This led Avicenna to incorrectly think the transcendental one adds something real
• And led Plato to incorrectly make everything numbers

How Can We Understand the Most Universals If They Are So Hard to Understand? #

• This is presented as a genuine philosophical problem
• The most universals must be understood first (since we must understand what is more universal before less universal)
• Yet they are extraordinarily difficult to understand
• Only thinkers of the stature of Aristotle and Thomas fully grasp them
• The lecture suggests this difficulty is inherent to the nature of first principles