Prima Secundae
106. Aquinas on Fear, Part 2: Fear of Fear, Sudden and Irremediable Evils, and the Causes of Fear (Summa I-II Q.42 a.4–6, Q.43)
https://berquistcourse.com/course/theology/11-prima-secundae/106-aquinas-on-fear-part-2-fear-of-fear-sudden-and-irremediable/

[0:00] What with fear itself is able to be feared, right? Now, what do we have this in there for? This is inspired by FDR. Nothing is fear but fear itself, huh?

[0:12] To the fourth one goes forward. Thus, it seems that fear is not able to be what feared, huh? For everything that is feared, by fearing is what guarded. Lest it be lost, right? Just as the one who fears to lose health, by fearing he guards it, right? If therefore fear were feared, by fearing one would what keep himself? Must be fearful. Yeah, which seems to be what unfit, yeah.

[0:56] Fear fearing. Moreover, fear is a certain flight, but nothing flees itself. Therefore, fear does not fear fear. We have fun It goes along with this. huh The question. Moreover, fear is about the future, but the one who fears already has fear.

[1:35] Therefore, he cannot fear fear. But against this is that a man is able to love love, right? And to what? Pain about pain. Yeah. Therefore, also for like reason he can fear fear, right?

[2:00] I answer: It should be said that as has been said, that alone has the aspect of something terrible or fearful that arises from a what extrinsic cause, not over what arises from our own what will will.

[2:20] Now, fear partly arises from an extrinsic cause and is partly subject to what will a will. Now it is arising from an extrinsic cause, in so far as it's a passion that follows upon the imagining of a imminent evil, right?

[2:44] And on account of this, one is able to what fear fear Lest what bring upon you the bring upon you the necessity of fearing. Yeah, on account of the.

[3:05] congruousness. Ingru the ink maybe coming in or something. Some excelling evil, right? But it's subject to the will, in so far as the lower appetite obeys reason. Hence, a man is able to what repel fear, right? Yeah. The threatening, threatening advance of some great. And according to this, fear cannot be feared, as Augustine says in the Book of 83 Questions.

[3:43] But because the arguments which are induced, right, someone could use to show that fear is in no way feared. Therefore, why not to what? Fond to them, right?

[4:07] To the first effort, should be said that not every fear is what. One fear. Yeah. But according to diverse things which are feared, there are diverse what. Fears. Nothing, therefore, prevents but that by one fear someone preserves himself from what. Other fear. And thus guards himself. That fear by that fear. Yeah. So by the one fear, he kind of limits the other or something. Yeah, the man who's afraid of being considered a coward, you mean?

[4:47] So he goes into battle, you mean, or what? What does that mean? There's good people, I guess. He's afraid. He doesn't want to lose his money, but he's afraid of looking like a stingy old jerk that gives some alms to somebody or something. I don't know if that's a good example.

[5:20] Remember in grade school, everybody said I'd forget a shot, you know. There was some cowardy there, you know. It wasn't me, but there was some guy who couldn't face up to that. Yeah. I'm going to say. Ouch. Yeah, that that was. I hate that one. Yeah. That one really hurts. Yeah, I tried to get the thing in the arm, and then. Yeah. That's the most sensitive part, right?

[5:49] Your hands are busy. Yeah. But that's what. That's what I was thinking about my nose, my situation, my nose. You know, ask for the cross during Lent, and God sends me this problem with my nose, and all I do is complain about it. Yeah, what a wimp! I mean, are you afraid to show fear, right? Some people, I guess, yeah. No, that keep you from fearing, maybe.

[6:22] Not altogether. You know, people talk kind of rapidly because they're afraid. You know, Whistling past the graveyard. The second should be said that it is a different fear by which one fears the what imminent evil, right? And another fear, right, by which one fears the fear itself of the imminent evil. right? Mm-hmm. It does not follow then that the same thing what is itself, or the same as a flight from itself.

[7:16] Yeah, because there's different things. Yeah. Second, It's like the, old thing you know, I know what a circle is, and I know that I know what a circle is, right? I know that I know that I know what a circle is, right? But all different knowings, right?

[7:44] Because some of they say you know are in love with love, right? But then it's the same love. And therefore, he says to the third objection: on account of diversity of fears by a present fear, a man can fear a future fear. Now, whether there's sudden things or more fear, right?

[8:34] Do they translate repentinas by sudden, or how do they translate? To the fifth, then one goes forward. Thus, it seems an insolita. I guess that'd be uncustomary things, right?

[8:49] Unusual things and and sudden things are not more terrible, right? Well, you know, you read about the army there. You know, surprise, you know, right? You tend to you panic more, right? Surprise when you're surprised.

[9:08] For just as hope is about the good, so fear is about the bad. But experience makes for a what increase of hope in the good. Therefore, it also makes for increase of fear in the bad. More of the philosopher says in the second book of the rhetoric that those what more fear. Well, they more fear who not sharp anger, what? Yeah, but are mild in what? Astute What is astute Cunning, cunning.

[9:59] Okay, okay, okay. So Shakespeare uses a lot. Okay, he says Shakespeare is saying. I mean, Aristotle saying that they are more feared, right? Not those who are what quick to anger, but those who are mild and what cunning, right? Okay, yeah. What does Caesar say about uh fearing? uh Yeah, Betrayal or uh fearing cashew, say, right? Now, lean.

[10:45] But it stands that those who are of great anger, right, Acute anger, More have sudden what Motions, right? Huh? Therefore, those things which are sudden are less what terrible, right?

[11:05] More of those things which are subita, that's sudden, I guess. Are able less to be what considered, right? But some things are what more more feared. The more what they are considered. Once a philosopher says in the third book of ethics that some seem to be a brave on account of ignorance, right?

[11:36] Which if they if they knew if they knew what something was and which they what looked on, they would flee. They would flee, eh? Therefore, repentina are minus less feared, right? But against this is what Augustine says in the second book of the Confessions that fear what unaccustomed, yeah, insolita and the sudden exhortation it abhors them, I guess. Um, things that are what opposed to what they are loved, right?

[12:18] Huh? And do when what they endanger security, yeah. What endangering, what endangering security, safetyism? Fear startled at things unaccustomed and sudden which endanger things beloved and takes for thoughts for their safety. Okay, yes, that takes thoughts. Well, Thomas says the answer should be said that has been said above that the object of fear is something bad imminent that is not easily what repelled, huh? Now this can happen from two things: one from the magnitude of the evil, right?

[13:08] And from the what the weakness of one fearing. Yeah. Now, for towards both of these operates or acts something that is unaccustomed and sudden, and sudden, right? Because it makes for this that the imminent evil appears what greater, greater, right? Huh? Not greater. For all bodily things, both good and bad, the more they are considered, the less they what appear, huh? Tell that to your friend.

[13:48] And therefore, on account of the what length, length, yeah, the pain, yeah, the pain of the present evil is mitigated, as is clear through Tullius in the third of the Tusculan Questions, huh?

[14:07] So also from premeditation, you might say, is lessened the fear of the future what evil. Secondly, because something unaccustomed and sudden makes for the what weakness of the one fearing, right? Huh? Because insofar as it subtracts remedies, which a man is able to prepare to repel the future evil, right? Huh? Which cannot be when unprovided or unforeseen, the evil occurs, right? It says that both causes there, right?

[14:48] The magnitude of the evil, right, seems to be greater, and the what? Yeah, the the weakness of the one period. Yeah. So the first, therefore, should be said that the object of hope is the good which someone is able to obtain, right? Huh? And therefore, those things which increase the power of man are apt to what increase hope. hope, and for the same reason to diminish what fear.

[15:27] Fear. Because fear is about an evil to which one is not easily able to resist, right? Because therefore, experience makes a man more potent to operating; therefore, it increases hope. So also it diminishes what the fear. The second should be said that those who have acute anger do not what hide it, right? Huh? And therefore, the harms that are bestowed from them are not so sudden, but that they are foreseen.

[16:22] Yeah. But men who are what mild and cunning, you said this. Hide their anger. Why? Why does this make me think of our president?

[16:37] And therefore, the harm which is imminent from them cannot be foreseen, huh? And it happens without being foreseen, right? And account of this, the philosopher says that such share more. Well, didn't Caesar say something like that? in? Julius Caesar, there, right? Huh? He kind of warned Mark Antony about Cassius, right? Huh? No, you know, I don't. You know, I don't have any fear. Caesar said, "Of course, but if I could feel fear, you know, that doesn't amount to fear, right?"

[17:19] Of course, a lot of times, even kind of fair man has got a sense of anger, though. Yeah. You can't get away from it. To third, it should be said that

[17:52] per se loquendo, speaking per se, bodily goods or evils. Right. In the beginning, appear what Greater. greater. The reason for which is that each thing appears greater set alongside its contrary.

[18:14] Hence, when someone at once transits from poverty to wealth, right? On account of the pre-existing poverty, he more estimates what riches, Their wealth. yes. they're more attached to their wealth, right? And a contrary, right? The rich, at once devolving into poverty, they more what? Fear it, right? No, we're afraid of it.

[18:44] An account of this, a sudden evil is more feared because it more seems to be what? It more seems to be evil. Yeah. But it can be an account of some what? Accident that the magnitude of something bad is hidden, as when the enemy hide themselves insidiously, right? And then it is true that the bad, from a diligent consideration, becomes more what? Terrible, right? Hidden, right?

[19:24] We're going through some texts there on Wednesday night. these two guys texts on the fallacy of the accident, right? Yeah, you know, great people, Plato and Averroes and the modern philosophers, you know, are all falling into these things, right? So the more you consider this fallacy, the more you realize the danger of it, right? The more it's to be feared. You have to consider, you know, how many have been deceived by it.

[19:59] Greater minds, mind. You know, I got thinking about the the fallacy of the of the equivocation, right? Which Aristotle says is the most common of fallacies. And sometimes, you know, the Greek commentators, you know, they'll they'll give something example of a man. two men have the same name, right? They're confused. But you know, if you keep your eyes and ears open. You realize down through history, how often this has happened that men have been confused, right?

[20:29] At the same time, I'd be reading the life of Columbus there, you know, and and I guess there were a lot of people with the same name, right? And to give examples of all the confusion that people had gotten because because Columbus had an uncle maybe with the same name, or you know, a cousin with the same name, and so on. And so there's abundant reason, you know, to confuse these people and attribute to the great historical Columbus, you know, it belonged to his uncle or to his cousin or something, you know.

[20:59] So, apparently, it's quite common, you know, that historians have been led astray by these. Not only historians. I remember there was a commercial a bunch of years ago, maybe for American Express credit card. Yeah. I don't remember. I'm going to make up a name. I'll say Frank Sinatra, some famous, famous name. You know, and there's some guy out there doing that. You know, usually American Express commercials have some American.

[21:22] Yeah. Right away, you know who they are. Yeah. Advertises. There's this guy you don't recognize him at all. I don't know who he is. It's just, hi, I'm Frank Sinatra. Blah blah blah. Yeah, that's the guy's real name. People mix me up with him all my life. They think I'm joking. No, it's my real name. Whether those things against which there is no remedy are more feared. This is kind of strange.

[21:58] Take this aside. To the sixth, then one goes forward. Thus, it seems that those things which do not have a remedy are not more what feared, right?

[22:12] Because for fear is required that there remains some hope of what salvation. But in in bad things which have no remedy, there remains no hope of salvation. Therefore, such bad things in no way are what feared.

[22:34] Well, can you fear going to hell? No remedy. This is a you can't you can't fear something that's already come on. No, but I'm not afraid. I'm not. I'm not in hell, right? Can I fear hell? There's no future. I can't. Well, yeah. I can't avoid it now, but if I get there, I think of myself as being in hell. Which is the Thomas the. We'll wait.

[23:05] I don't know. I just kick it up there. The way to get there. Moreover, to the evil of death, right? No remedy can be what found or used. For there is not, according to nature, some return from death to what life.

[23:35] But nevertheless, death is not most of all feared, as the philosopher says in the second book of the rhetoric. That he said it was. Okay.

[23:46] Therefore, those things are not more feared which have no remedy, right? Or the philosopher says in the first book of the ethics that that is not more good which is longer in existence, right? Than that which is of one day. Nor is that what which is perpetual than that which is not perpetual.

[24:14] Therefore, for the same reason, neither is there any what greater evil. But those things which do not have any remedy do not seem to differ from other things except on account of their length, their perpetuity. Therefore, on account of this, they are not worse or more feared.

[24:37] But against this is what the philosopher says in the second book of the rhetoric that all things that are what more terrible. In some way, I guess. Excuse me. That if they feel right, they cannot be corrected, right? Huh? Or of which there is no what? Help. Yeah, and not easy, right? Well, I answer Thomas says that the object of fear is the bad, whence that which makes for the increase of bad makes for the increase of what?

[25:12] Fear. Fear. But bad is increased not only according to what the kind of evil it is, right? But also according to circumstances, as he said above when he talked about circumstances, right? But among other circumstances, length

[25:34] or perpetuity more seem to make for the increase of what evil, right? Huh? For those things which are in time, according to the duration of time, are in some way what measured, right?

[25:53] Whence, if to suffer something in such a length of time is bad, to suffer the same in twice the time, apprehended as what double evil. Yeah. King David had to choose his punishment. Three years, or three months, or three days.

[26:20] And according to this reason, to undergo something for an infinite time, right? Huh? Which is perpetual to suffer, has in some way an infinite what Increase. increase, huh? But bad things, after they come, are not able to what have remedy, are not easily, right? They are taken then as being perpetual or what? Long. And therefore they are most of all what fear, huh? Now

[26:56] to the first there about the need for hope, right? For fear. The first therefore it should be said that the remedy of something bad is twofold. One through which is impeded the future evil, lest it what come out there. And such a remedy taken away takes away hope, and consequently what takes away what fear, huh? Whence about such a remedy now we do not speak, right? Huh?

[27:27] The other remedy of the bad is by which the bad that is already present is removed, and about such a remedy we now what speak.

[28:16] Well, it means it means you can in some way have some hope that that you remove it, right? And therefore, there could be fear, right? If you remove the remedy, hope is taken away of avoiding it. By consequence, fear. If any fear is taken away, or fear is left, by consequence, Tim would mean fear follows if you take away your hope, then your fear is left. Yeah.

[28:42] I'm not. I don't understand. No, he said the evil has already happened to you, right? You can't have fear of that because you can't have hope that that evil is not be there if it is there, right? If you're talking about removing that evil, right? Then there could be some hope of removing it, right? And therefore, there could be fear, right? That you might not be able to remove it.

[29:04] Mm hmm But there could be some I'm trying to understand the first one. The first example is what he says we're not talking about, but he he says all this about it. That's not talking about.

[29:17] Anyways, well, now the second thing, although death is an irremediable evil, nevertheless, because it's not imminent, it is not what feared, right? Now, to the third, Aristotle is talking about something that is per se good, right? Which is good according to its what species, right?

[29:53] And thus, something does not become more good in account of what length or perpetuity, but in account of the nature of the good itself. Can anybody take a break after this? Okay. The cause of timor. Merciful.

[30:25] Then we ought to consider about the cause of fear, right? And about this, are asked two things: whether the cause of fear is love, right? Whether the cause of fear is a defect, right? Notice the difference between that and the article or question on the causes of love, right? Because there you deal with the that's the first emotion really, love, right? So you have the good is the first cause of love, right?

[30:53] And the object, right? Here they have the object here, then they have another thing about cause in in some sense other than the object, right? And it's because the passions are irascible, presuppose the concupiscible right? But even the passions that are concupiscible presuppose love, you know the other ones.

[31:14] So the first one goes forward it thus. Okay, but you didn't finish the first thing. Whether the cause of love is a fear is love, and whether the cause of fear is what some defect or something, or other.

[31:30] To the first, one goes forward thus. It seems that love is not a cause of fear. For that which introduces something is its cause, but fear introduces the love of charity, as Augustine says, "Super Canonicum

[31:51] Joannis." Therefore, fear is a cause of love and not the reverse. Moreover, the philosopher says in the second book of rhetoric that those things are most of all feared from which we expect to To approach. Yeah. Some evils to us, right? And through this, that from some we expect evil, right? We are more provoked to hate than to love, right? Therefore, fear is more cause of hate than from love.

[32:30] Let's go talking about a different connection there between hate and that and love, right? Because the love of one's own good, I guess, makes one fear what's going to interfere, right? But then you might hate the one who's

[32:49] going to. Moreover, it has been said above those things which are from us ourselves, right? They're in our power, I guess, right? Do not have the definition of terrible, right? But those things which are from love, most of all, come from the inward part of the heart, right? Intimo cordis. Therefore, fear is not caused from what? Love.

[33:22] But again, this is what Augustine says in the book on the eighty-three questions. There should be no doubt that what? No other is the cause of fearing than that which we love, right? Either that what? Having attained it, we might lose it, or that we might what? Lose it. when we... Not attain, but Not attain. We hope, right? Therefore, every fear is caused from this that some is loved.

[33:53] Love, therefore, is a cause of what? Fear. Now, answer. It should be said that the objects of the passions of the soul have themselves to them, as do forms to natural things or artificial things. Why is that? Because the passions of the soul receive their species from their what? Object. Just as the foresaid things receive their species from their what? Forms.

[34:31] Just therefore, as whatever is a cause of the form is a cause of the thing constituted through it, right? So the carpenter or something, right? So also whatever, in whatever way, is a cause of the object is a cause of the what? Passion. Now it happens that something is a cause of the object, either by way of being an efficient cause, or by way of a what?

[35:00] Material disposition. Just as the object of pleasure is a good apparent that is suitable, right? But joined, the cause of which is that which makes the what? Conjunction, right? Or what makes what? The appropriateness or goodness. Yeah. Or the appearance of the goodness. But the cause, by way of a material disposition, is the habitus, or whatever disposition according to which something what comes about as being suitable to something, or appearing what?

[35:46] That good which is joined to it, right? Thus, therefore, in the thing proposed here, the object of fear is a evil estimated, right? Future. Near to which is what? Not easy to resist. Yeah. And therefore, that which is able to what? Bring such an evil. Yeah, is the efficient cause of the object of fear, and consequently of the what? Fear.

[36:21] But that to which someone is so disposed that something be such to it is a cause of fear and its object by way of a material disposition. Yeah. And in this way, love is a cause of fear. From this, that someone loves some good, it follows that what deprives him of such a good is for him what? Evil. Yeah. Bad. And consequently, that he what fears is something bad, right?

[36:54] Okay. To the first, therefore, it should be said, huh? That just as fear per se and primo regards what some evil that one flees from, right? But that is opposed to some good that is what loved, huh? And thus per se fear arises from what? Love. Yeah.

[37:26] Secondarily, it regards that to which such an evil comes, right, huh? And thus, prudently, sometimes fear induces love. Insofar as the man who fears to be what punished by God observes his what commands, and thus he begins to hope, and hope introduces what love, huh?

[37:57] That's what they see when they talk about the three cardinal, I mean, three theological virtues, right? That faith introduces one to hope, and hope to what love, huh? Here he's

[38:13] saying fear prepares the way for hope, and hope for what? Love. huh? I suppose if you believe in fear. then that you believe in your words. The old man there in the public, there, you know, huh? And he's saying, you know, he's getting old and he's getting to one of those some kind of settling things after after death, right? And then you think they're right side of the gods, right?

[38:47] Yeah. And so he's going out to sacrifice to the gods, right, rather than to partake of the philosophical conversation with Socrates. The second should be said that the one from whom one expects something bad is first what? Had in hate, right?

[39:20] But after one what begins to hope for good things from him, then he begins to be what? Loved. Yeah. Therefore, the good to which is contrary what? The bad, which is feared from the beginning, was loved. Yeah, it's not good though, right?

[39:47] He's talking about the good that the oh oh to which is contrary to evil that is feared, right? But someone had God in hate because he fears to be punished by Him, right?

[40:15] Nasty character that God, right? Punish you for enjoying yourself, right? You know, sometimes on Saturday I turn on the CNN. You know where they have the interview with people who've written books recently, right? And sometimes it's interesting, you know, if it's an interesting book, you know. But having turned on last Saturday was it, and they had Gary Wills on. I realized how perverse he's become, you know.

[40:52] Really, this is the the pundit, you know, the talking head about Washington politics. Is that Gary Wills No, I don't. That you know, I mean, I think years ago Gary Wills, he was very young. He was kind of a, you know, kind of a bright guy, you know, and he had good style and so on. And I think he he went to National Review, right? And I think he had a falling out with the National Review people, you know.

[41:13] You see that he used to wear the bow tie. I don't know. No, no, no, There was some guy like that. And then he started, you know, writing different books, you know, and so on, and what late the sweet birds sang, you know, that book there about the church. But anyway, really perverse yesterday because he's got a book on you know the priesthood. You know, do we need it?

[41:32] You know, something like that is the title, you know. And he didn't think that the apostles were priests or anything like that. This is kind of a subsequent invention. I don't know where it is. Okay. And he thinks, you know, you know how Ambrose was elected by kind of the people, right? You know. That's why we should go back to that. Yeah, and it's been usurped by by by the by the Pope and so on, you know, and so on.

[41:56] And he says, you know, the Vatican should be treated with the disrespect that that it deserves, and so on. He went on and on and on. One thing after another, like that I I I didn't I haven't followed his career. I remember reading his books. I hear about him from time to time, you know, and he's you know kind of a famous. I've heard the name, but I get mixed up with this other guy named Will's, who's a political talking head.

[42:19] Yeah, yeah. But no, I think George Will. I think it's George. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, unless it's Gary Will's. No, I've heard the name, but I don't know much about. Pretty perverse, though, you know. The ways of all flesh. Yeah. Because he says, you know, he's talking about contraception. He says, well, well, no priest, you know. talks about against that now, you know. They don't take that seriously anymore, you know.

[42:44] They never did. Yeah, Who cares? Yeah, Yeah. I remember what Flannery O'Connor said when somebody asked her about this was back in the late fifties, before it went into detail, and the church's position on contraception

[42:57] was clear already. Everybody knew it. And this gal wrote to Flannery O'Connor saying. Why does the church bother with these kind of questions? Anyways, don't they have more lofty spiritual things to talk about and this kind of stuff? And she said, "what could be more spiritual than to say, 'Don't do this because it's wrong. ' What could be more spiritual? Don't do it. It's evil."Okay.

[43:36] Okay. Now the third question, right? Article two. Oh, that we do. Is it the third? The response here? Yeah. That happened here. To the third, should be said that that ratio proceeds about what is a cause of the terrible evil by way of what efficient cause, right? But love is the cause of it by way of a what? Terrible evil. Yeah. It's kind of strange a language, isn't it?

[44:06] We can love that way. I suppose he means that by the love you have for this good, right? You are disposed to feel fear for what threatens to deprive you of that good, huh? That you don't

[44:31] love that is going to deprive you of it, huh? This is kind of an application that common thing that love is the source of all the other passions. Actually, in Summa Contra Gentiles, Thomas argues, you know, that there's pleasure in God first, and then he reasons on that among other arguments that there has to be love in God, right? Because pleasure is in the possession of the good that you love, right?

[45:01] So there must be love in God too. It's kind of interesting, huh? You know, you you know, we always quote Saint John, you know, God is love, you know, as a but that's kind of obvious, yeah. Yeah, yeah. But and then soon soon as he texts it, I say God is pleasure, right? But but but Thomas actually argues that there's pleasure in God before he argues that there's love in God in Summa Contra Gentiles.

[45:26] Kind of interesting, huh? Yeah. He's kind of following on the fact that there's a perfection of operation in God, right? And that's followed by pleasure, right? Then pleasure presupposes love, so there must be love in God too, you know.

[45:45] Whether the cause of fear is defect, huh? The second one goes forward. Thus, it seems that a defect is not the cause of of fear.

[45:59] For those who have power are most of all feared, right? Hitler. Yeah. But defects are what contrary to power. There you go. Therefore, defects is not the cause of what. Yeah. Unless it's your car. Yeah. That's more in the side now. The efficient cause, right? The driving here, right? Yeah. Yeah

[46:23] If your car is deficient, you might fear to drive it. Yeah. Moreover, those who are now already what decapitated, I guess, or most of all defects.

[46:39] But such do not fear, as is said in the second book of the rhetoric. Right. Therefore, defect is not the cause of fear. Right.

[46:53] That's a present evil rather than a future evil. Moreover, to what? Deteriorate. What is that? Deteriorate. Going to battle or something. Yeah, from fortitude comes from fortitude, right? Not from defect. In beginning of section three. So men compete with one another for strength. Okay, they compete. They fear those

[47:22] who fight for the same thing, right? As is said in the second book of rhetoric. Therefore, defect is not the what cause of fear, right?

[47:35] But against this is that the what causes of what contraries are the causes of contraries, right? Huh? Always go back to what, Empedocles, right? Love and hate are the causes of the coming together and separation of the elements, right? There you go.

[47:57] Okay. Tragedy and comedy, right? This guy. Contrary effect. This biker guy I knew he had tattooed on his knuckles he had L O V E over here, H A T E over here. That's the whole of life, right there, between those two.

[48:21] But wealth and strength and the multitude of friends and power exclude what fear, right? Huh? As is said in the second book of the rhetoric. Therefore, from some defect of these, fear is what cause. I got no friends. Got no power. Got no money. Got no money. I'm a weak man. I don't think I seem to fear that, huh?

[48:49] The old, the old Charles Atlas advertisements when I was a kid, you know. Kick sand on the guy. Yeah, he's out on the beach with his girl, and he gets kick sand, and of course he doesn't can't defend the girl, you know. So he goes out and gets Charles Atlas, and develops this thing, gets some rubber, and then he hits the heck out of the guy.

[49:09] Pretty simple, simple ad, yeah. One guy who had been in the army there, and of course this guy kept challenging him all the time, right? He beat the heck out of him each time he challenged him. I think I go out and exercise for another, you know, few months and charge him again and get beat up again.

[49:35] Answer should be said that has been said above, that there can be taken a twofold cause of fear, right? Huh. One by way of a material disposition, on the side of the one who what fears. Another by way of the efficient cause, on the side of the one who what. Feared. Yeah. Now as regards the first defect, per se speaking, is a cause of fear, right? Huh.

[50:07] For from the defect of some power, right, it happens that one is not able easily to repel an imminent evil, right? Huh. But nevertheless, for causing fear, is required a defect with some what. Measure. For a lesser defect, right? Huh. Which causes fear of future evil, than a defect that falls upon a what. Present evil about which there is sadness, right? Huh.

[50:42] And still a what. Greater defect. If wholly, right, the sense of the evil is what taken away, or the love of the good whose contrary is what feared, huh?

[51:02] As regards the second thing, power and strength, per se speaking, is a cause of fear. For from this that something is apprehended as harmful or is being powerful, it happens that its effect is not able to be what repelled.

[51:23] It can happen nevertheless, per accidens, that some defect on this side causes fear, in so far as from some defect it happens that someone wishes to what.

[51:38] To injure somebody. Yeah. An account, of, for example, injustice, or because before he was what injured, or because he fears to be what injured. Yeah.

[51:54] So the first objection says that ratio proceeds from the about the cause of fear on the side of the efficient cause, right? Last night defect. The weak guy is challenging me, right? Okay. Um. Now those the second objection those who are already what. Decapitated. Yeah. Are in the. Sufferance of a present evil, right? And therefore, this defect exceeds the measure of what? Fear Fear That's one way of putting it

[52:34] Yeah that's what we're doing. Yeah, like like that. The king's still sounding now, right? To the third, it should be said that those what? Competing. Competing fear not an account of power, which by which they are able to what? Compete. Yeah. But an account of the defect of power, right? From which it happens that what? They don't have confidence of overcoming them. Yeah. Wait.

[53:16] What's the saying? What was the saying? That on account of the lack of power, owing to which they are not confident of victory. Not confident of victory. Why they put the saying? I don't know. Maybe they don't have confidence in themselves or something. That they say they themselves will superaturus that they will be over overcome. Yeah.

[53:42] Should we stop there or what? I think so. Maybe so. Yeah. Yeah.