Prima Secundae
Lecture 127: The Effects of Anger: Fervor, Reason, and Speech

Transcript
================================================================================

To the second one proceeds thus, it seems that fervor, how are you going to point that? I'm boiling, right? Is the water, when it's boiling, called to be fervent? A rolling boil, that's in English, they're called. A rolling boil. That's one for your tea. To the second one proceeds thus, it seems that fervor is not most of all an effect of anger, right? For fervor, as has been said above, pertains to love. The saints are fervent in their love, right? But love, as has been said above, is the beginning and the cause of all the passions, all the emotions. Since, therefore, the cause is more potent than the effect, it seems that anger does not most of all cause fervor. I rest my case, right? For that which of itself, those things which of themselves excite fervor, through the, what? Continuation of time, I guess. Yes, they are more increased. Just as love in, what? Is strengthened in time, right? But anger, through the period of time, is debilitated, right? It cools off a bit, right? Leave him alone until he cools off a bit. Right? So in the course of, you know. For the philosopher, it says in the second book of the rhetoric, that time quiets anger, right, huh? Forget and forgive, right? Therefore, anger does not properly cause, what? Fervor, huh? Again, I rest my case, huh? Moreover, fervor added to fervor increases the fervor, right? But a greater anger coming upon makes the lesser one, what? Yeah. Less. Yeah. As the philosopher says in the second book of the rhetoric, huh? Therefore, anger does not cause, what? Fervor, right? But against this is what Damascene says, right? The anger is the, what? The fervor, which is around the heart of blood, right? It's the bubbling of the blood around the heart, right? From the coming about, from the evaporation of what? Goal, I guess. Yeah, yeah. It's good old, good old biology, right? The exhalation of bile, sister. Bile, yeah. Yeah, bile. Goal. Now, Thomas says, huh? I answer, it should be said, that it has been said, huh? That the bodily change, which is found in the passions of the soul, right? Is proportional to the motion of the appetite, huh? It's simple understanding these things that we have nowadays, huh? Now, it is manifest that, what? Each desire, even an actual one, more strongly tends towards that which is, what? Contrary to it, if it be, what? Present. Present, huh? For we see that water being heated more, what? Yeah. As it were, what? The cold more vehemently acting upon the hot. It's a little hard to understand that example. Now, the motion, the repetitive motion of anger is caused from some injury inflicted upon you, right? As from something contrary, right? Acting upon you, right? I think when you, I've heard that said before, too. If you have a pot of hot water and you stick it outside the freezing weather, it's going to freeze faster than if you had cold water. Is that true? I don't know if it's true, but that's the example of you. Right, right. So, I was trying to figure out what is he saying here, and that's what I remember. I remember hearing that, too. I'm only trying to translate this idea into my brain. I like to think about that's true. Well, we have to have a test of this stuff. We have the authority to say, Tom was saying it. Next winter, next winter we'll have to have a... So you go and prove it empirically, and we'll believe you. But we'll have to have a test of it. So, you know, the teams are fighting there for victory, right? And the enemy is holding up strongly, right? Don't you desire to win even more so, right? Mm-hmm. You know? Yeah. You know, opposition, right? Try harder, right? Or fervent, huh? I saw a little bit of the game last night there. At the ninth inning, right? And Boston was ahead five to four, right? And the leaf pitcher, where he was there for Boston, he walks two or three guys, and he got the bases loaded, and then the next guy up. It's a home run. At the end of that game. What was it, what? Well, it was eight to five, I guess. I don't think possibly. Who was it, the other team? Baltimore. Yeah. They won the league last year, didn't they? So I didn't know. And therefore, the desire, or the appetite, most potissime, right? Well, strongly tends to repelling the injury, right? Through the desire for, what? Revenge. Revenge, right? And from this, there follows a, what? Great vehemence, impetuosity, and the motion of anger, right? And because the motion of anger is not in the way of, what, withdrawal, right? To which cold is proportioned, right? But more through the mode of falling up something, right? To which heat is, what, proportioned, right? So he's saying cold is kind of like a contraction, and heat is expensing, right? And heat, the water expands, right? Goes off, it settles down, right? And consequently, there comes about a motion of anger that is a cause of a certain fervor of the, what, blood, right, and the spirits around the heart, which is the tool, the passions of the soul, right? It seems like we're aware that may mean inferiority, that the heart is reacting, right? You know, tumbling, you know? I remember holding a little kitten one time, you know, and talking around. You just feel a cat, you know, shivering almost in your hands, right? But there's a lot of commotion, you notice, when you're really angry, too, right? And hence it is that on account of the great disturbance of the heart, which is an anger, there most of all appears in diorate people certain indexes, certain signs, right, in the exterior, what? Memories, right, huh? You tell when somebody's angry, really angry, huh? I used to, the blood vessels and their eyes start to show up, and the vein on their forehead starts to stick out. It's when you see the vein starting to stick out and start pulsing, that's when you're in real trouble. Or, uh, perspiration on the forehead. There was a guy in the U.S. house there around the time of the Civil War there, you know, but didn't beat the other guy with his cane, you know, but almost killed the guy, you know, just, you didn't see that guy about display in the house for a while. For as Gregory says in the fifth book of the Moralia, um, the heart palpitates, right, huh? Yeah. The kindling. Yeah, the heart being kindled by the stimulus of its anger, right, huh? The body, what? Tumbles, the tongue is what? Stumbles, I guess. Stumbles, yeah. The face heats up. It's kind of flamed or something. Yeah. The eyes are, how are you describing it? Oh, yeah, I don't know. Exasperated, yeah. It could be like irritated or fierce. Yeah, and what's that, ikhokwam? Are not recognized to be known? The eyes are both fierce. You know what? Yeah, I know. They're both fierce. Yeah. By the mouth there, it forms a clamor and the sense of what is spoken is ignorant, huh? Yeah. That's great. He's quite a good understanding. He's a good understanding of the nature and the morality of... Now, what about the first objection there from the idea that the cause is strong, I guess, huh? To first, therefore, it should be said that love itself is not so much sensed, huh? As when it, what? Need, right? Mm-hmm. It brings forth, right? Mm-hmm. Something that Augustine says, huh? It brings it forth. Yeah. As Augustine says in the Tenth Book of the Trinity. And therefore, when man suffers some, what? Loss. Loss. Loss. Loss. Loss. Loss. Loss. Loss. Loss. He says something. He says, love itself is not felt so keenly as in the absence of the beloved, as a custom of the church. Consequently, when a man suffers from a hurt done to the excellence that he loves, and grace is love, therefore, of the more. Okay. That's it, right? Oh, yeah. In a sense, yeah. If you attack the man's wife or girlfriend or something, right? Then he gets more angry, right? Or his child or something, right? You need my boy alone, you know? There's this thing recently there. It's all over the TV there, you know? This coach, you know, he didn't like the way his players were playing. He out there. He got to shun him, you know? Like that. He got fired, I guess, because of all the publicity that this was. Someone took a camera of it, you know? Wow. I had a coach just like that. Yeah. Actually, some of the players were defending the coach, you know? He gets things done, you know? I suppose he's... Yeah. You know, getting out... They have to... It's football. They have to be half crazy, I think. Yeah. Yeah. And therefore, what? Yeah. I can't be injury bestowed. The love is more, what? Sensed, right? Okay. Well, there's some truth to that, isn't it? You know? I was talking about the last week, was it? They're talking about the... Aristotle is quoting Aristotle about the man getting angrier because you're attacking philosophy and he's attached to it, right? But in fact, if you're attached to something and then someone starts attacking it, your attachment to that thing becomes, what? More felt, doesn't it, right? Kind of strange, but that seems to be true, doesn't it? Mm-hmm. Okay. And so when someone attacks the thing you love, whether it be physically or verbally, right, then you come more to the defense of it, right? I was meeting an account there of someone, you know, a comment to the faith, right? And she had these prejudices against the Catholic religion, right? And so on. But then she ran across this chick publications, I guess it's some kind of anti-Catholic album. And they had a real nasty attack upon the church, right? And the hatred of the church was just boiling and teething, you know? This kind of turned against this, right? You're not going to find out more about what the Catholic church is. But it wasn't even that she was attached to the church at that time, you know? It's just the way someone was attacking it, right? And you feel more attached to it, right? That's what... Yeah. Chesterton described that as the beginning of a conversion. As soon as you... If you ever had an opposition to the church, as soon as you see something reasonable about it and you just get offended when it's attacked. That's the beginning of the end. It just goes from there. Then you start to see how good it is and how reasonable it is. And he says, then you're done. So. And therefore, more fervently, the heart is moved to removing the pediment to the thing, what? Love, right? And this, the fervor itself of love, increases through what? Anger, right? And is more, what? Sensed, huh? But nevertheless, the fervor which follows heat for a different reason pertains to love and to anger, right? For the fervor of love is a certain sweetness and gentleness, I guess. I don't know. Benitate? Yeah. For it is in the, what? The thing loved. The thing loved, huh? And therefore, it's assimilated to the heat of air and blood. Blood, huh? And the kind of which sanguine people are more, what? Loving. It's interesting now, huh? You know, you take about the four, sanguine is one of the four types, right? So then we're given to love? Oh, what then? More loving. I have to talk to that with Warren Murray there, because he's got an extra on those four things. Yeah, that's been interesting, huh? They say that they're lovers, not fighters. What? They say that they're lovers, not fighters. Then, yeah. And it is said that, what? What's the yaker? Yeah, I see you are. What? It's saying that, cogent amare. The liver. The liver. Yeah. As the seat of the feeling. That's what it's ever. In which there is a certain generation of love, I mean, of blood. Okay, well, I didn't know about that. But anyway, not the liver. But the liver is what got rid of the alcohol system, I thought. I guess it said, the note there just said that it's considered the seat of the emotions and so forth, but it's what divination they would look at the liver of the animals to find out, you know, whatever the signs are or something. But the fervor of anger is with what? Bitter. Bitterness, huh? Yeah. It's consuming, right? Because it tends to the punishment of the contrary, right? So it's about that Shakespeare's metaphor there, and the very wrath of love. Cubs cannot part them. Wins is assimilated to the heat of fire, right? And of cholera. An account of this, Damascene says that it proceeds from the evaporation of bile, is it then? Gong. Gong is called bile-ish. Gong. Gong. Now, there's a second one here about the diminishing, right? To the second it should be said that everything whose cause is diminished through time is necessary that it be diminished by what? Time. For it is manifest that memory is diminished by time, right? It's sad to say, right? Living proof. Yeah. Things which are ancient, huh? Easily, what? Fall from memory, huh? Because they used to say that Thomas never forgot anything, didn't they say that? It wasn't that old. But anger is caused from the memory, right? Yes, they say forget and... The memory of an... Forget and forgive, right? That's what they say, right? For anger is caused from the memory of some injury. Gong. Gong. Gong. And therefore, the cause of anger through time is bit by bit, palatum, right? Diminished, huh? Until it is entirely, what? Taken away, right? For the injury seems to be greater when it is first sensed. And bit by bit is diminished the estimate of how bad it is, right? According as one more receives from the present sense. of injury, and it is similar about love, if the cause of love remains in what? Memory only, right? So we drifted apart and we didn't see each other and so on, right? That's what Aristotle talks about here, right? Once the philosopher says in the Eighth Book of the Ethics that if long comes about the absence of the friend, right, it seems to make a forgetfulness of friendship, right? But in the presence of the friend, always through time, is multiplied the cause of what? Friendship, right? And therefore the friendship what increases, huh? And likewise it would be about anger, if continually were multiplied, the cause of it, right? You know, it kept on salting me, right? Stipping on my toes, bumping into me in the hall and so on. Okay, that's the expression, impotent rage. Everybody, Mark, used to like that expression. If it's impotent rage, then it becomes laughable, right, huh? I know some parents there, you know, and the kid would get screaming, you know, on the floor, you know, and they'd take some cold water, and they'd make them even angry, you know, right? I was thinking of some camp that men would go to who had, or something, they were repressing some anger. So I figured, I really feel sorry for the son who was watching his father on television doing this. But there's this guy, he's sitting on the ground, he's got a thing, he's sitting on the ground with his legs, but he's got a huge stick in his head, and he's hitting the ground, and he's crying, and he's hitting the ground, and he's crying. He's just getting his anger out of him, and he's beating somebody, he's imagining, and he's beating someone, or something like that. Just getting, now let me take the example of impotent anger. Nevertheless, this, that anger is quickly consumed, right, attests to the vehement fervor of it, for just as a great fire is quickly extinguished, right, the matter being consumed, right, huh? So anger, unaccounted vehemence, quickly fails, huh? To the third, it should be said that every power divided into many parts is, what, diminished, right? And therefore when someone is angry with somebody, if he's angry afterwards to another, from this very fact his anger is diminished to the, what, first, huh? Especially if to the second there is a greater, what, anger, right, huh? For the anger which, or the anger which excites the anger for the first, seems, in comparison to the second injury, which is estimated to be greater, to be smaller than nothing at all. Yeah. Larry Stahl talks about the, you know, that when they were punishing the generals and that sort of thing, they were really severe at the first guy, then the second guy said they were lesser with him, you know, because they were angrious a little bit, what? Appeased. Appeased, yeah, yeah. Don't the older brothers or the older children complain that the younger ones are not disciplined as much as they were? I heard that all the time, parents, or kids. We hear that sometimes with school teachers, too, that the first years they teach a class, they're really tough, they get a lot of work. Later years, they don't give as much work to the students. Yeah. That was Hickson's class, my sister had a lot more work to do than we did. My class came along and he just got... Everyone thought of that I gave. No, not quite, though. It wasn't as tough. It didn't require as much. My sister-in-law, though, she was teaching in kind of a rough high school day. She really stripped on the first part, you know, but then she had to really control the class later in the year. We know those teachers who started out being soft. They were in trouble all year long. Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's into it. Article 3 now, whether anger maximae impidiat ratione susum. To the third one proceeds thus, it seems that anger does not impede reason. Makes me think of Karl Marx, you know. I used to read Karl Marx, you know, and you could see, it seemed like to be seething against the capital system and so on, right? Real anger, you know. So much you could sense it in the very reading of his words, right? The man has a full use of his reason, right, when he has that anger. At school, there was an environmentalist group that was giving a talk, and it was a very charismatic, very sanguine, really good guy who was the speaker, but he was controlled by the head of this group who was seething with anger. And he was so angry about the whole environmental issues, most of which were a little dubious, but he was so controlling of the speaker, and he's sitting back in the audience, he's like cracking them right in the middle of his talk. And it was just bizarre. He's lost in college, too. So, another example. Yeah, it was in the church report today there about the professor there at California, Southern California, you know, really attacking the Republicans, you know, but just vitriolic, you know. Yeah, yeah. He just, oh. Okay. Now, that which is with reason does not seem to be an impediment of reason, right? Remember how he said that before, right? But anger is with reason, as is said in the Seventh Book of the Ethics, right? There you go. So, one has a reason to be angry, right? Even though it may not be reasonable. Therefore, anger does not impede reason, huh? Moreover, the more reason is impeded, the more its manifestation is what is diminished, huh? But the philosopher says in the Seventh Book of the Ethics that the angry man is not a, what, insidious in reacting. He doesn't know how he can conceal himself or something. Yeah. But he's manifest, right, huh? Therefore, anger does not seem to impede the use of reason, just as cupiscence, which is insidious, right? As is said there, right, huh? Moreover, the judgment of reason becomes more evident from the joining of the, what, contrary, because contraries lay alongside each other more, what, shine forth, right? But from this also, anger, what, increases, huh? The philosopher says in the Seventh Book of the Rhetoric that more men are angry if, what, contraries preexist as the honored if they are, what, dishonored, right? And thus about others. Therefore, from the same thing, both anger increases and the judgment of reason is, what? Yeah. Therefore, anger does not, therefore, impede the judgment of, what? Reason, huh? Against this is what Gregory says in the Fifth Book of the Moralia. That anger subtracts, I guess, the light of the intelligence, huh? I blacked out. That's what they say. You've got to hear it. To the point, right? Yeah. You blacked out. When it confounds, right, the mind by what? Moving it, I guess? Yeah, right. Commotion, I'd say. Yeah. Well, I answer, Thomas says, that the mind or the reason, although it does not use a body organ in its own, what, act, right? Nevertheless, because it needs for its act certain sense powers, whose acts are impeded by the body being disturbed, right? It is necessary that the disturbances, the body disturbances, also impede the, what, judgment of reason, right? As is clear in the drunkenness and even in, what, sleep, where you don't have control of your images. But it's been said before, that's why he did it in the article before, that anger, most of all, causes this body disturbance around the heart. So much so that even it is derived to the exterior members, right? Passes out to them. Whence anger among the other passions manifestly impedes the judgment of reason. According to that is Psalm 30, now. My eye is disturbed, but in what? Anger, right? Psalm 6, he says, also, I find that this hand, yeah, yeah, my eye is disturbed from anger or wrath of indignation. My eye is troubled. Well, to the first one, about it being with reason, right, huh? To the first, therefore, it should be said that from reason is the beginning of anger as regards the, what? The emotion of the time, right? Yeah. Which is the formal aspect in anger, right? But the passion of anger preoccupies on the perfect judgment of reason, takes the place of it, right? As it were, not perfectly hearing, what? Reason, right? On account of the commotion of heat violently or quickly impelling it, right, huh? Which is the material aspect in, what? Anger, right? And he describes this in peace, the, what? Judgment of, what? Reason, right, huh? So when the word anger is applied to God metaphorically, right? What aspect is it of anger, right? That's the reason, right? But not the idea of the bodily, right? There's not a bodily aspect there, right? But the formal aspect is there, right? It's just like when you carry these names of the emotions over to the acts of the will, right? You kind of drop out the bodily aspect, huh? He, for sure, when you apply them to God and metaphorically. The second, it should be said that the angry man is said to be manifest, not because it is manifest to him what he ought to do, but because he operates openly, right? Manifestly. Not seeking any, what? Secrecy. Yeah. Which partly happens on account of the impediment of reason, which does not, which is not able to discern what should be, what? Hidden. Hidden. And what should be made manifest. Nor even is he able to, what? Think of hiding. The ways of hiding, right? Yeah, the ways of hiding. Okay. Okay. It's like a bull in a china shop. It's kind of interesting there about Iago right now. Is Iago motivated more by anger or by hate of Othello? Yeah. I wish. Is he more motivated by anger or by hate of Othello? Yeah, I think so, yeah. Like just as Stalin says, you've got to hate your opponent, right, in order to overcome him, right? Mm-hmm. See? So, I mean, the anger would impede him more in carrying out his plans, right? The way hatred would, like Stalin said. I mean, the anger would impede him, right? I mean, the anger would impede him, right? And he doesn't, he's not manifest to Iago, I mean, he's not manifest to Othello, or Iago's manifest to Iago, I mean himself to Othello, it's brought out later on by the testimony of Iago's wife, right? That Iago, you know, is made manifest, but not to himself, right? Like an angry man would do, right? Better to have somebody angry with you than hating you. I forget the exact words here. William F. Buckley, they were talking about some of his enemies, though, you know, about their inveterate hate, you know? Yeah, yeah. He just... The tenacism, the tenacity. Yeah, tenaciously of will, I think is the word that he used, yeah, which is more hate than anger, you know, experiencing their tenaciously of will. Partly from the, what, expansion of the heart, right, huh, which pertains to magnanimity, which anger, what? Makes. Yeah. And that fits Coriolanus there, right, huh? Yes. Yeah. Whence about the magnanimous man said, huh, in the, the philosophy says in the fourth book of the ethics, that he's a manifest hater and lover, right? And he manifestly says and does, huh, Coriolanus does, right? But concupiscence is said to be hidden and insidious, huh, because for the most part, huh, the delightful things that are desired have a certain... Yeah, turpitude, huh? And it shouldn't soften us, huh? Which a man wishes to be hidden, right? And those things which are of reality and excellence, of which mode are the, what, revenge? A man seeks to be, what, manifest, huh? That's, you know, good understanding there of these different vices, huh? You ever see Thomas' Disputed Questions, de malo, right? I always say that's the greatest understanding of evil that exists, huh? De malo, huh? But he starts off with, you know, evil in general, what it is, you know, there's a lack and so on, and all the way down to the different vices, you know, and the capital vices and so on, and the kingdoms of the vices, right? Capital vices needing its own army of... Yeah, what, the success of tyranny is in the vices. Yeah, yeah. To theory it should be said, as has been said, huh? The emotion of anger begins from reason, right, huh? And therefore, according to the same, the addition of, what? Or laying aside of contrary to contrary, aids the judgment of reason and increases the, what, anger, right, huh? When someone has honor or wealth, right, and afterwards incurs the, what, loss, loss, that loss appears, what, greater, right? So during the Great Depression, they're 29, they're jumping out of the things there on Wall Street, jumping out the window and so on. So, both in account of the vicinity, the contrary, and also because it was not opined, huh? Unexpected, yeah. And therefore it causes greater, what? Sadness. Just as great goods coming about, when unexpected, huh, cause more, what? Pleasure. Pleasure, right, huh? And therefore, according to the growth of the preceding sadness, there's constantly growth also of the, what? Anger. Anger, yeah. Anger. Anger. Anger. We'll take another article here before we take our break. Their anger most of all causes what? Silence? Taki-turning. What? Taki-turning. Taki-turning. Taki-turning. Is that the... Taki-turning. It's kind of exciting. Taki-turning. Taki-taki-turning. What? Oh, wait. It's a Taki-turning. Yeah, yeah. But it's one of the translations, okay. Do you think it's a Taki-turning, of course, because it's Taki-turning or Silas? Is it the same thing? No, Taki-turning is more a judicious use of speech. Silas is just... Taki-turning, I think. It's holding speech. Taki-turning. It's holding speech. To the fourth one proceeds thus, it seems that anger does not cause... Taki-turning, right? Taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki Taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki-taki sometime. Moreover, from this that the custody of reason fails, it happens that man breaks forth in verba in ordinati, the sort of words. Whence it is said in Proverbs 25, that just as a what? Open city. City. Without walls. Without the walls. That's right. So is the man who is not able to restrain or to... Speaking his spirit. Yeah, speaking his spirit. Yeah. But anger most of all impedes the judgment of reason, as has been said. Therefore, most of all makes one slow out to disordered words. Therefore, it does not cause taciturnity, right? Moreover, it's said in Matthew chapter 12, from the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks, right? But through the anger, the heart is most of all disturbed, right? Therefore, most of all, it causes lucruci. Therefore, it does not cause taciturnity. It's interesting, huh? But again, this is what Gregory says in the fifth book of Moralia, that anger closed off through silence, right, burns, what, more vehemently within the mind, huh? That's how they, you know, sometimes they increase the heat of a fire, you know, they can, there's a way to not put out a fire, but you can close it up so that it actually gets more intense. Like the barbecue. Well, they make charcoal that way. You start to burn wood, and then you're able to bury it somehow, so it actually continues to burn, but it's somehow, I don't know, something like that. At least there's an image in my mind. That's how you do it with a barbecue. It's called it a thing in the first place. Yeah, and then it's ready. We should test that out. I answer, it should be said, that anger, as has been said, is with reason and impedes reason, right? That's not a contradiction, is it? No. And from both sides, or both parts, it is able to what? Cause taciturnity. Yeah. For on the side of reason, when the judgment of reason is, what, to that extent vigorous, that although it does not be affection from a disordered desire of revenge, nevertheless it prevents the... Oh, from disordered. From disordered speech, yeah. Once Gregory says in the fifth book of Moralia, sometimes anger, the soul being disturbed, as the word from judgment indicates, what? Silence. Silence, huh? Supposed to count to ten. What is it? Did you quote, does Jefferson said, you know, count to ten? If very angry, count to 100, you know? Something like that. But on the side of this being an impediment of reason, right, huh? Because, as has been said, the disturbance of anger extends even to the, what, exterior memories, and most of all to those memories in which, more expressly, there shines up a vestige of the heart, as in the eyes, in the face, and in the tongue. Once, as has been said, the tongue, what? Goes before itself. Yeah. Falls over itself. Yeah. Yeah. The face becomes ignited and the eyes sasperated. Irritated. It can be, therefore, so great a disturbance of anger that it altogether impedes the tongue from the use of speaking. And then there follows taciturnity, right, huh? Hmm. Yeah. So. Can I watch yourself around this, Thomas, right? He'll see right through you, right? Whether you erupted words or whether you are taciturn with him, right, huh? Shakespeare's kind of metaphor there in the sinus there, where he speaks of anger. I mean, if reason is being angry because his advice is not being taken, that's now abandoned the man, right? And now he's like a madman, right? Kind of funny, you know, applying anger is almost to the reason itself. First, huh? To the first, therefore, it should be said that the growth of anger sometimes goes as far as to what? Impeding reason from uses. Yeah. And sometimes further it proceeds to the impeding the emotion of the tongue and of the other what? Member. Yeah. And to this also is clear the solution to the what? Second. Second, right, huh? To the third, it should be said that the disturbance of the heart sometimes can abound as far as this, that through a disordered motion of the heart, there is impeded a motion of the exterior members. And then there is cause, taciturnity, and the immobility of the exterior members. And sometimes even, what? Watch out, that old man, right? He gets too angry and he collapses, right? The heart attack, whatever it is. That's the pattern I've said. Hmm? Yeah, that's the Joan of the Proverbs. I'm angry enough to die. That's pretty angry. If however, there's not so great a disturbance, then for the abundance and the disturbance of the heart, there follows a what? Speech of the mouth. Yeah, yeah. Again, Thomas distinguishes, right? When it makes you silent, right? And then it makes you say too much. Okay, so you take a little break now, here. Okay, so you take a little break now. Okay, so you take a little break now. Okay, so you take a little break now. Okay, so you take a little break now. Okay, so you take a little break now. Okay, so you take a little break now.