Greco-Christian stream·Opera Omnia Sancti Thomae (Complete Works of Thomas Aquinas)·Summa Theologiae·Prima Pars·Q98. The preservation of the species
Source context
- Theme
- continuation of species through reproduction as a natural teleological principle in the state of original justice
Steiner
- GA 94, 1906-07-02Steiner distinguishes the animal principle of species-preservation from the human principle of individuality, noting that for humans it is not the species but the individuality — the essential core of the human being — that persists through birth and death.
- GA 90a, 1904-08-23Steiner identifies a species-forming force concentrated in the germ that, through the law of form, governs inherited substance and maintains species-continuity across generations.
- GA 90a, 1906-06-18Steiner draws a structural correspondence between the law of reincarnation and the law of preservation of the species, treating both as expressions of form-continuity operating at different levels of existence.
- GA 9, c01_1-4Steiner observes that the materials composing a living body are in continual flux while the species-form remains constant during life and is transmitted to descendants, so that it is the species-form that determines the combination of substances.
- GA 69b, 1910-11-14Steiner asserts that the essence of human soul-life is not directed toward preservation of the species but toward the development of the soul-spiritual, contrasting two currents operative in human existence.
- GA 62, 1912-12-05Steiner addresses the question linked to preservation of the human species as a whole, locating within species-life what is inherited and transmitted across generations.
Cross-tradition
- Aristotelian biologyAristotle's De Anima and De Generatione Animalium ground species-preservation in the nutritive soul's capacity to reproduce the form, a principle Aquinas draws on directly in Q98 to explain generation in the state of innocence.
- Neoplatonic emanationismThe Neoplatonic principle that lower realities participate in and perpetuate the forms communicated from higher ones provides structural cross-tradition congruence with Aquinas's account of species-integrity as a participation in divine creative intention.
Q98. The preservation of the species
Article 1
[I.q.98.a.1.arg.1] It would seem there would have been no generation in the state of innocence. For, as stated in Phys. v, 5, "corruption is contrary to generation." But contraries affect the same subject: also there would have been no corruption in the state of innocence. Therefore neither would there have been generation.
[I.q.98.a.1.arg.1] Ad primum sic proceditur. 4. Videtur quod in statu innocentiæ non fuisset generatio. « Generationi » enim « corruptio est contraria, » ut dicitur in V Phys., text. 54. Contraria autem sunt circa idem. In statu autem innocentiæ non fuisset corruptio. Ergo neque generatio.
[I.q.98.a.1.arg.2] Further, the object of generation is the preservation in the species of that which is corruptible in the individual. Wherefore there is no generation in those individual things which last for ever. But in the state of innocence man would have lived for ever. Therefore in the state of innocence there would have been no generation.
[I.q.98.a.1.arg.2] 2. Præterea, generatio ordinatur ad hoc quod conservetur in specie quod secundum individuum conservari non potest; unde in illis individuis quæ in perpetuum durant generatio non invenitur. Sed in statu innocentiæ homo in perpetuum absque morte vixisset. Ergo in statu innocentiæ generatio non fuisset.
[I.q.98.a.1.arg.3] Further, by generation man is multiplied. But the multiplication of masters requires the division of property, to avoid confusion of mastership. Therefore, since man was made master of the animals, it would have been necessary to make a division of rights when the human race increased by generation. This is against the natural law, according to which all things are in common, as Isidore says (Etym. v, 4). Therefore there would have been no generation in the state of innocence.
[I.q.98.a.1.arg.3] 3. Præterea, per generationem homines multiplicantur. Sed multiplicatis dominis, necesse est fieri possessionum divisionem ad evitandam confusionem dominii. Ergo, cum homo sit institutus dominus anima-lium, facta multiplicatione humani generis per generationem, secuta fuisset divisio do-talitatem lignum vitæ conferebat? Quæritur; sed juxta Bonaventuram utraque pars satis probabiliter potest sustineri. mini; quod videtur esse contrarium juri naturali, secundum quod omnia sunt communia, ut Isidorus dicit, Etym., lib. V, cap. iv, § 1, col. 199, t. 3. Non ergo fuisset generatio in statu innocentiæ.
[I.q.98.a.1.sc] It is written (Genesis 1:28): "Increase and multiply, and fill the earth." But this increase could not come about save by generation, since the original number of mankind was two only. Therefore there would have been generation in the state of innocence.
[I.q.98.a.1.sc] Sed contra est quod dicitur Genes., 1, 28: Crescite et multiplicamini, et replete terram. Hujusmodi autem multiplicatio absque nova generatione fieri non potuisset; cum duo tantum fuerint primitus instituti. Ergo in primo statu generatio fuisset.
[I.q.98.a.1.co] In the state of innocence there would have been generation of offspring for the multiplication of the human race; otherwise man's sin would have been very necessary, for such a great blessing to be its result. We must, therefore, observe that man, by his nature, is established, as it were, midway between corruptible and incorruptible creatures, his soul being naturally incorruptible, while his body is naturally corruptible. We must also observe that nature's purpose appears to be different as regards corruptible and incorruptible things. For that seems to be the direct purpose of nature, which is invariable and perpetual; while what is only for a time is seemingly not the chief purpose of nature, but as it were, subordinate to something else; otherwise, when it ceased to exist, nature's purpose would become void.
Therefore, since in things corruptible none is everlasting and permanent except the species, it follows that the chief purpose of nature is the good of the species; for the preservation of which natural generation is ordained. On the other hand, incorruptible substances survive, not only in the species, but also in the individual; wherefore even the individuals are included in the chief purpose of nature.
Hence it belongs to man to beget offspring, on the part of the naturally corruptible body. But on the part of the soul, which is incorruptible, it is fitting that the multitude of individuals should be the direct purpose of nature, or rather of the Author of nature, Who alone is the Creator of the human soul. Wherefore, to provide for the multiplication of the human race, He established the begetting of offspring even in the state of innocence.
[I.q.98.a.1.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod in statu innocentiæ fuisset generatio ad multiplicationem humani generis: alioquin peccatum hominis fuisset valde necessarium ex quo tantum bonum consecutum est. Est ergo considerandum quod homo secundum suam naturam est constitutus quasi medium quoddam inter creaturas corruptibles et incorruptibles; nam anima ejus est naturaliter incorruptibilis, corpus vero naturaliter corruptibile. Est autem considerandum quod alio modo intentio naturæ fertur ad corruptibles et ad incorruptibles creaturas. Id enim per se videtur esse de intentione naturæ, quod est semper et perpetuum; quod autem est solum secundum aliquod tempus non videtur esse principaliter de intentione naturæ, sed quasi ad aliud ordinatum; alioquin, eo corrupto, naturæ intentio cassaretur. Quia igitur in rebus corruptibilibus nihil est perpetuum et semper manens, nisi species; bonum speciei est de principali intentione naturæ, ad cujus conservationem naturalis generatio ordinatur. Substantiæ vero incorruptibles manent semper non solum secundum speciem, sed etiam secundum individua: et ideo etiam ipsa individua sunt de principali intentione naturæ. Sic igitur homini ex parte corporis, quod corruptibile est, secundum naturam suam competit generatio; ex parte vero animæ, quæ incorruptibilis est, competit ei quod multitudo individuorum sit per se intenta a natura, vel potius a naturæ auctore, qui solus est humanarum animarum creator; et ideo ad multiplicationem humani generis generationem in humano genere statuit etiam in statu innocentiæ.
[I.q.98.a.1.ad.1] In the state of innocence the human body was in itself corruptible, but it could be preserved from corruption by the soul. Therefore, since generation belongs to things corruptible, man was not to be deprived thereof.
[I.q.98.a.1.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod corpus hominis in statu innocentiæ, quantum erat de se, corruptibile erat; sed potuit praeservari a corruptione per animam. Et ideo non fuit homini substrahenda generatio, quæ debetur corruptibilibus rebus.
[I.q.98.a.1.ad.2] Although generation in the state of innocence might not have been required for the preservation of the species, yet it would have been required for the multiplication of the individual.
[I.q.98.a.1.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod generatio in statu innocentiæ, etsi non fuisset propter conservationem speciei, fuisset tamen propter multiplicationem individuorum.
[I.q.98.a.1.ad.3] In our present state a division of possessions is necessary on account of the multiplicity of masters, inasmuch as community of possession is a source of strife, as the Philosopher says (Politic. ii, 5). In the state of innocence, however, the will of men would have been so ordered that without any danger of strife they would have used in common, according to each one's need, those things of which they were masters--a state of things to be observed even now among many good men.
[I.q.98.a.1.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod in statu isto, multiplicatis dominis, necesse est fieri divisionem possessionum: quia « communitas possessionis est occasio discordiae, » ut Philosophus dicit in II Polit., cap. v. Sed in statu innocentiæ fuissent voluntates hominum sic ordinatæ, quod absque omni periculo discordiae communiter usi fuissent, secundum quod unicuique eorum competetet, rebus quæ eorum dominio subdebantur; cum hoc etiam modo apud multos bonos viros observetur.
JSON: /api/sources/opera-omnia-aquinas/summa-theologiae/prima-pars/q098.json