62. God's Knowledge of Particular Things and the Universal/Particular Distinction

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Problem: Universal Cause vs. Particular Knowledge #

• Objection: If God knows things as they exist in him (in a first universal cause), he knows them only universally, not particularly
• This confuses two different senses of “universal”: universal causality (the cause) vs. universal predication (the knowledge)
• Thomas must show how God, knowing things as in himself, knows them in their own nature and distinctly

The Divine Essence and All Perfections #

• The divine essence contains not only what is common to all beings (the notion of “being”)
• More critically, it contains all perfections by which things are distinguished from one another
• Examples: to be alive, to understand, to be sentient—these are perfections that constitute particular natures
• Therefore, God knows not only through a universal principle but through a principle containing all particular perfections

The Analogy: Perfect to Imperfect Acts #

• The divine essence is compared to all creature natures not as universal to particular (like “unit” to “numbers” or “center” to “lines”)
• Rather, it is compared as perfect act to imperfect acts
• Example: Man (perfect) to Animal (imperfect); Six (perfect) to Three (imperfect)
• One who perfectly knows man knows animal with particular knowledge; one who knows six knows three with particular knowledge
• Similarly, God perfectly knowing himself must know all ways his perfection can be participated in

Particular Knowledge Through One Essence #

• God knows all things distinctly through his one essence because each creature’s particular nature consists in the way it participates in divine perfection
• To know the divine essence perfectly requires knowing all the ways it can be participated in by creatures
• To know being itself perfectly requires knowing all ways of being
• Thus God’s knowledge of creatures is both universal (through one principle) and particular (distinct according to their differences)

The Limit Analogy in Mathematics #

• Berquist illustrates this with the concept of limit: a circle as the limit of inscribed polygons
• Two distinct thoughts initially: circle and polygon
• But by understanding the circle as the limit of polygons (the asymptotic relationship), one knows both distinctly in a single thought
• This represents a feeble human attempt at what God does: knowing multiple distinct things through one understanding
• The key: seeing the distinction because the polygon approaches but never reaches the circle

Response to Objections #

To the First Objection (Knowledge as in the Knower) #

• Distinction: “As it is in the knower” can mean two things:
  1. According to the way of knowing on the side of the thing known (FALSE): knowing the stone as it is in the eye, not as it is in itself
  2. According to the mode on the part of the knower (TRUE): the known is known according to how perfectly it exists in the knower
• Example: Eye knows stone according to the stone’s form in the eye, yet knows the stone in its own nature outside the eye
• Application to God: God knows things not only as they are in him but also as they are in their own nature—indeed, more perfectly because they are more perfectly in God than in themselves
• God’s way of knowing them is more perfect than their way of being

Against Idealism (Berkeley Critique) #

• Berquist addresses the error that “everything I know is known by me, therefore nothing is known outside myself”
• Counterargument: When I know a triangle, I know what a three-sided plane figure is (the definition)
• The definition of triangle does not include “known by me”
• Even though the triangle is known by me, I know the triangle itself, not merely knowledge of the triangle

Key Arguments #

Why God Must Know Things Particularly, Not Merely Universally #

1. From Divine Perfection: If God’s knowledge of other things were only general (as “beings” merely), his understanding would be imperfect. But imperfection contradicts divine perfection and would limit his being (which is his understanding).

2. From the Nature of Causality: God is the first universal cause, but the divine essence contains all perfections—not just what is common. Unlike fire (which causes heat in all things it acts upon), God causes distinct natures through containing their distinct perfections within himself.

3. From Divine Self-Knowledge: God knows himself perfectly. To know the divine essence perfectly requires knowing all ways it can be participated in. To know being itself perfectly requires knowing all ways of being. Therefore, particular knowledge of creatures is necessary for God’s self-knowledge to be perfect.

4. From the Act-Potency Analogy: Just as one who knows a perfect act (man) thereby knows imperfect acts (animal) with particular knowledge, God who knows his perfect act (divine essence) knows all imperfect acts (creatures) with particular knowledge.

The Rejection of “General Knowledge Only” #

• Some philosophers wrongly held that God knows things only as “beings,” like fire knowing itself as heat would know all things as hot
• This cannot be true because:
  • Universal knowledge (in general only) is imperfect knowledge
  • Our understanding, moving from potency to act, first arises at universal and confused knowledge, then progresses to particular knowledge
  • If God’s knowledge were only universal, it would be imperfect, contradicting his perfection

Important Definitions #

Universal Cause (causa universalis) vs. Universal Knowledge (cognitio universalis) #

• Universal Cause: The first principle from which all particular effects proceed (e.g., God as first cause)
• Universal Knowledge: Knowledge that grasps only the common features of things, not their distinctions (e.g., knowing animals in general, not each animal in its particularity)
• The distinction: A universal cause need not have only universal knowledge; it can know things as they proceed from it in their particularity

Perfect Act (actus perfectus) vs. Imperfect Acts (actus imperfecti) #

• In God: the divine essence is pure act (actus purus)
• In creatures: each nature is an imperfect actualization of some perfection
• God’s knowledge relates to creature natures as perfect acts relate to imperfect acts: the perfect comprehends the imperfect

Participation (participatio) #

• Creatures are what they are by participating in divine perfections
• Each creature’s particular nature is constituted by the specific way it participates in the divine essence
• God’s knowledge of each creature is his knowledge of each way his essence is participated in

Examples & Illustrations #

The Limit of Polygons Approaching a Circle #

• If one inscribes a square in a circle, then bisects the arcs and adds more sides, creating an octagon, hexadecagon, etc.
• One can understand the circle as the limit of polygons as the number of sides increases infinitely
• In this understanding: circle and polygon are known in a single thought, yet their distinction remains clear (the polygon approaches but never reaches)
• This illustrates how one thought can encompass multiple distinct things—a feeble human image of divine knowledge

Man and Animal #

• One who knows man knows animal with particular knowledge (not merely general knowledge)
• Why: Animal is the more general perfection; man is a more specific perfection that includes and surpasses animal
• Similarly, God who knows his essence perfectly knows all creature natures with particular knowledge

Six and Three #

• One who knows six perfectly knows three with particular knowledge
• Why: Six, being a perfect number containing three imperfectly, necessarily includes knowledge of three and how three participates in the nature of number
• God knows creatures this way: knowing his infinite essence perfectly necessarily includes knowing how each creature participates in it

Fire and Heat #

• If fire knew itself as the source of heat, it would know heat’s nature and all things insofar as they are hot
• But this is insufficient analogy because fire only causes one perfection (heat); diversity comes from matter’s diverse dispositions
• God is unlike this: he alone causes all perfections, so his knowledge encompasses all diversities not just from external reception but from the perfections themselves

Notable Quotes #

“Whatever is of perfection in any creature…the whole pre-exists and is contained in God in some more excellent way.” — Thomas Aquinas (cited by Berquist, explaining why God’s knowledge encompasses all perfections, not just what is common)

“The essence of God is compared to all natures of things…as a perfect act to imperfect acts.” — Thomas Aquinas (cited by Berquist, establishing the key analogy for understanding particular knowledge)

“God knows all things by particular distinct knowledge according as they are distinguished one from another.” — Thomas Aquinas (cited by Berquist, as the conclusion showing God’s knowledge is both universal in mode and particular in content)

“When one understands the circle as the limit of polygons, one knows the circle and polygon together.” — Berquist (illustrating how one thought can grasp multiple distinct things through their relationship)

Questions Addressed #

Does God Know Things Only Universally Because He Knows Them as in a Universal Cause? #

Resolution: No. While God knows things as in himself (a universal cause), the divine essence contains all perfections including those by which things are distinguished. Thus God’s knowledge, though proceeding from one principle (his essence), is particular and distinct for each creature.

How Can One Thought Encompass Many Distinct Things? #

Resolution: Through understanding what is perfect and how imperfect things participate in it. Just as knowing man involves knowing animal, or knowing six involves knowing three, God’s knowledge of his essence involves distinct knowledge of all creatures according to how each participates in his perfections. The mathematical limit concept (circle as limit of polygons) offers a human analogy.

Does God’s Knowledge of Creatures Perfect Him or Depend on Them? #

Resolution: Neither. God knows creatures through his own essence, and this knowledge pertains to God’s perfection of understanding his own essence perfectly. The perfection is in God’s understanding (his essence), not in the creatures themselves. God’s knowledge does not depend on creatures but on his perfect self-knowledge.

If the Divine Essence is Infinitely Far from Creatures, How Can He Know Them Through It? #

Resolution: The distance objection misapplies symmetry. While creatures are infinitely distant from God’s essence, the relationship is not symmetric. God’s essence is compared to creature natures as perfect act to imperfect acts. Perfect acts comprehend imperfect acts; this asymmetry is what enables knowledge of creatures through the divine essence.