Prima Secundae
217. Dividing in Twos and Threes, and the Acts of Law: Command, Prohibit, Permit, Punish (ST I-II q.92 a.2)
Class of 2015-04-23
https://berquistcourse.com/course/theology/11-prima-secundae/217-dividing-in-twos-and-threes-and-the-acts-of-law-command-prohibit/

[0:01] Name of the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit. Amen. Thank you, God. Thank you, guardian angels. Thank you, Thomas Aquinas. deo gratias. God our enlightenment, guardian angels strengthen the lights of our minds, order and illumine our images, and arouse us to consider more correctly. Saint Thomas Aquinas, angelic doctor, and help us to understand all that you have written. Name of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit. Amen.

[0:44] Now in the Summa Contra Gentiles, you have two arguments from what motion, and then one from the what maker, and then you have one like like the fourth argument in the Summa Theologiae, tied up with the what being right. So it's the same three right, except one of them is divided. The one that's divided into two is the one from motion right. While in the case of the Summa Theologiae, it's the one from being right that's divided into two right, and the fifth argument is similar again.

[1:19] So you divide the fifth one against the first four, and the first four you divide into three, and one of the three is subdivided into two. So you have one division of two, and one of the two is divided into three, and one of the three is divided into two. So it's two divisions of two and one of three, right? Okay, not as complicated as categories, right?

[1:43] Okay, there's about eight eight divisions of two or three that he gives there, Thomas. And the ten? How can get ten? I mean, the human mind can't possibly understand a division to ten, can it? Why should there be ten, Saint? Well, Thomas says something is said of something either because of what it is, right, or because of something in addition to what it is that's in it, or by reason of something what outside of it.

[2:18] Okay, so you for example, man is said of you by reason of what you are. You're a man, aren't you? Okay, but let's say you're a cook or a geometer by reason of something in addition to what you are, right? But something that's in you, right? Got some knowledge of how to do a hamburger or something, right? Hot dog, maybe something more advanced, right? Okay, or you know the Pythagorean theorem, right, or something less exalted.

[2:53] But then you're also said to be, say, clothed, right? Huh? Is this reason of what you are? No, clothing is not part of what you are, is it? Unless the clothes make the man. Yeah, but they don't.

[3:09] And they're not even in you like your geometry is, right? Or your health, right? Okay. If you're sometimes healthy and sometimes sick, then health is not what you are, is it? But sometimes it's in you, sometimes not. So there's that kind of a thing, right? So that's the first division Thomas gives. It's into three, right? Now the first of those three substance he doesn't divide anymore, right?

[3:36] In terms of the genera, right? Can divide the genus into its species, but they don't. No, not three higher genera. Now the second one he divides into what? Three, quantity, quality, and what? Relation. But actually, first divides quantity and quality against relation, the absolute against the relative, right? And then he subdivides the absolute into what? Quantity and quality. Quantity being the size of something, right? And quality being the disposition of it, right?

[4:12] Okay. It takes care of everything, right? So you have two divisions into two there, right? A division to three, and then one of them is left to stand by itself, right? It's only one genus, substance. And then the next three are divide the absolute against the relative, and then the absolute into. Now you get four of the ten, right? And then the last ones, usually divide one of the five against the other, one of the six or other against the other five, right?

[4:48] Because it's man's category, right? And being clothed, you know, the other animals are supplied by nature with their clothing, right? Their fur, right? And they don't have any clothing unless you know we dress them up, you know, like in a parade or something, right? And the girls dress up in little kitty cat put them in their their thing. And people those days put a little blanket on a dog or something in the winter when it's cold, right?

[5:20] So that's the curious thing for man, right? A man's category, okay. And then the other five are divided into what? Two and three, right? You have the ones that are based upon extrinsic measure, like you are in this room, right? Okay. Or you are what? Sitting, which is the arrangement of your parts in place, right? And then you're here in the what? Between two and three or something, right?

[5:55] Time, right, but time already has the idea of orders. You don't have to have another category there. But for place, you need place and position, right? Could you could be in this room laying down. You could be in this room standing up. Be in this room sitting down, right? So the arrangement of your parts, which is called position, right? Gets that right? I have to explain to the students that it's based on something outside of you, right?

[6:21] Because if I jump out of the what airplane, I'm going down, right? Am I standing? No, intrinsically my body would be in the same shape as it is now, right? But to be standing, I got to have something outside of me, I'm standing on, right? Okay. And am I sitting now? Oh man, am I sitting? See, although my body is getting in the position of a man sitting, right?

[6:48] The intrinsic arrangement of my body is what like that of a man sitting, but to be sitting, got to have some kind of a support. Thank God.

[7:02] The difference between sitting and squatting, right, as they say, right? Okay. And then you have acting upon undergoing, which are talking about something outside of you that you're acting upon, or something outside of you that you're undergoing something from, right? So am I kicking you and you're being kicked, right? Huh? Am I shoving you and you're being shoved?

[7:30] So you divide those last six into one and five, right? That's a division to two. The five into three and two, that's a division of two, right? And then you divide the two into two, and the three into three. So you got just about eight divisions, right?

[7:53] So I was thinking how we called that third kind of cause the mover, usually Aristotle begins, but then he brings out the maker, right, as being the same kind of cause, right? But there's a distinction between motion, which is the effect of the mover, and form, which is the effect of the what maker. And the but both motion and form are a kind of what act, right?

[8:26] Okay. So I'm able to be in motion now, but when I get up and start walking around, I'm actually in motion, right? And the wood is able to be a chair, but when it gets the form, it's actually a chair, right? Then there's this third act, which is being, right, or existence. God, you know, God's substance and his being are the same thing, but the creatures, they're something different because they get the existence from God.

[8:58] So you have motion, form, being, right? You get three different arguments, right, for the existence of God. But in the Summa Theologiae, you divide the third into two, and in the Summa Contra Gentiles, the first one, motion, into two, right? There's two arguments for motion, to the existence of God. So you're still dividing into two or what? Three, right?

[9:34] When Thomas divides the Bible, right, he divides the Bible into two, right? And on the basis of what I guess John says, right? The law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. So he divides the Old Testament on the basis of the law, right? And usually into two: the law of the King And the law of the father and the law of the Father. Right, and then the New Testament he divides on the basis of grace, huh?

[10:06] The Acts, the origin of grace, which is Christ, in the four Gospels, right? Then the nature of grace, which is the epistles of Saint Paul, and then the effect of grace, which is the Church, right? And that's divided into three: its origin in the Acts of the Apostles, its growth is seen in the canonical epistles of John and Peter and so on, and then its final state in the Apocalypse, right?

[10:36] Okay. If you look at Vatican II when it divides the New Testament, it touches upon Thomas's division because it mentions the Gospels first as being the greatest part of the New Testament, and then the epistles of Saint Paul, and then other ones which talk about the origin and growth and so the Church, right? So you divide into two or what? Three, yeah, yeah.

[11:01] So you can become a fanatic if you want to about two or three, but. Have a nice passage there, and one of the books there of Heisenberg. You know, was probably the greatest scientist after Einstein, right, in the modern world. And he says, in a for a physical system, he says you always need three units. You know, we can decide in which the three units shall be in different ways.

[11:28] He says, but you must have three. He even talks about you know we got in modern physics now these two great constants the the speed of light and the quantum of Max Planck. There must be a third one. He says. I just kind of the way these great minds work, right? Huh? You know, it doesn't actually do that. The newest research says light is not probably a constant speed; it can change.

[11:58] Yeah, well, it's always gives it always questions about these things, you know. You know. So we didn't originally have three laws, you know. We talked about three laws.

[12:21] I mean, that goes back to Aristotle. He divides the the plays up, and he says they have a beginning, middle, and end, right? And then later on, he says two parts. You know, tying the knots and untying them.

[12:48] When he comes back, you know, to dialectic in the third book of wisdom, he says, you know. We first tie the knots and then we untie them, right? That's what Thomas does here, right? He ties at the beginning of each article, you into a number of knots, right? And then he unties them, right? On the basis of the body article, he unties them in the reply to objections, huh?

[13:21] So you agreed? wrote my wrote my doctoral thesis on the three roads in looking knowledge, right? Just three roads, you know, the hard cross. There's a natural road in our knowledge, huh? The road from the senses into reason, huh? And then there's a common road of reasoned out knowledge, which is studied in logic, huh? And then the third road or roads, huh, is the private roads of the what reasoned out knowledge, the particular kinds, huh?

[14:13] So the way of defining in natural philosophy and the way of defining in geometry and the way of defining in wisdom are all different, huh? And the way you judge in all three is different, and the order of consideration or determination is different.

[14:33] Natural philosophy goes from the general to the particular and towards what matter. Wisdom goes just opposite towards the immaterial, right? And to some extent from the less universal to the more universal. And I always take as a beautiful example that is the ninth book of wisdom, you know, where he takes up act and ability in terms of motion, right? And then in the middle part he expands act, you know, to form and to operation and all these other things.

[15:06] And so going in a sense from the less universal to the more universal. When he takes up substance there in book seven and eight, he deals with material substance first, right? And then he ascends to universal understanding of substance, which prepares the way, you know, for talking about the immaterial substance, so far as our weak mind can know them, right? So,

[15:37] okay. Let's look now at question 92, Article 2. Whether the acts of law are suitably assigned. Says, where did we just left off? To the second one goes forward. Thus, it seems that the acts of law are not suitably assigned. In this, that is said that it's an act of the law to what? Command. To prohibit, I guess. To permit, and to what? Punish, right? Okay.

[16:22] For, first objection now. For every law is a what? Common precept, as the legis consultus says, right? Huh? This must be some great book of the Middle Ages, right?

[16:39] But it's the same thing to command as to what? What? Precept. Precept yeah. Therefore, the other three are what? Superfluous, right? Moreover, second objection: the effect of law is to lead those subject to it to the good. But counsel is about a greater good than precept.

[17:18] Precept is like another word for imperare, right? Commandment, right? Precept, precepts of the law. We use that word sometimes in our speech, not too common a word.

[17:30] Yeah. So counsel is about a greater good than the precept, right? So you had the young man there, right? Who wanted to say, "What more can I do?" Right? Huh? He was kind of flattened by what Christ suggested, right? Okay. Therefore, it more pertains to the law to give counsel than to what? Command, right? Sure, the law to be concerned about the greater good, right? Huh?

[18:03] Moreover, just as some man is what? Incited to the good through what? Punishments, so also through awards. Therefore, just as to punish is laid down to be an effect of the law, so also to what? Reward, huh?

[18:24] That makes sense to me. Because I'm only a nitwit, you know, not a wit. You know. Moreover, the intention of the legislator is to make men what good, as has been said above. But the one who only by the fear of punishments obeys the law is not good, is he? For the servile, slavish fear, which is the fear of what punishments, right? Although it makes someone do something good, it does not, however, make him do it well, right?

[19:05] As Augustine says, huh? How well he says those things, Augustine does, and he said, well, although it makes a man do what is good, it doesn't make him do it well, right? Okay. Therefore, it does not seem to be proper to law that it what punishes somebody, right? Because that's not going to make you good, right? You're just doing because you're afraid of being punished, right? It's like the marine guy going behind you and saying, you know, he says, you know, those video my son's got all these books, you know, the different military people, you know, on about patrolling.

[19:42] And he said, I'll be there behind you, you know, with this gun. You go forward. We'd also be a you know a dead hero rather than a you know dead dead coward, right? So we'd go forward. But else, under Christ, yeah. But you know how much of that goes on, right? Even Washington, was, I heard him threaten that once. Once, you know, you know one of the books on Washington I was reading.

[20:10] Yeah, interesting. But against this is what the famous Isidore says, right? Huh? In the fifth book of etymologies, huh? People make a joke about they think some of the etymologies are not correct, but okay.

[20:33] For every law, either permits something as a what? Strong man asks for a what? Reward, or it what? Yeah, that no one is illicit to ask for the marriage of the sacred virgins, right? Even the Romans had sacred virgins, right? Okay. Or it punishes, huh? As who strikes somebody, I guess, right? What's the word caedet now? They have that. Okay. She said that commits murder would be put to death Okay.

[21:13] Capite plectata right? Takes off his head. Now what does Thomas say Well, let's see what he says here. Okay, see if he can untie this horrible mess that he's created, right? Huh?

[21:39] Answer should be said that just as a what? Enunciation is a what? Saying of reason, right? By way of enunciating, right? Now I like myself in English, you know. I don't like the word enunciation. I like the word statement, right? Huh? Okay. You make a statement. You state something to be so, right? Huh? Or not so, right? Huh? Okay. That's more pertaining to the looking reason, right?

[22:08] Huh? But practical reason, huh? The laws are saying of reason, but by way of what? Commanding, I guess, right? Huh? Praecipiendi right? What did he use? We're commanding there. Is that the way he translated it? Commanding something. Yeah. Okay.

[22:31] Now it's proper to reason that leads one into something from something. Okay. Now what part of the definition of reason that our teacher, the wit Shakespeare, has? Huh?

[22:52] Yeah, discourse. Yeah, because discourse is from one thing to another, right? Huh? Okay. So it's proper to reason, right? Huh? That it leads one to something from something, right? Okay.

[23:07] So, you know, in logic, the discourses we study most of are defining and reasoning, right? And in the art of counting and calculation, right? You know, talk about adding, subtracting, multiplying, dividing, right? But you're being led from one number to quite another number, right?

[23:30] Whence, just as in the demonstrative sciences, the sciences that show something, right? It's interesting how the the etymology of the word demonstration is what

[23:45] showing. And the same with the Greek word for demonstration is apodixis, right? But apodixis from showing, right? Huh? Now you ever seen the the slogan there from Missouri? Yeah, I'm Missouri, kind of show me, right? It's kind of you know demanding rigor, you know, show me that it's so, right? Huh? Okay, show me that God exists, right? You know, I'm, you know, or show me that that the soul is immortal or something, right?

[24:16] Huh? Or even show me the Pythagorean theorem, right? American pragmatism at its best, he could say. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. Once I had a sumption there sitting in on the the math math professor's course calculus course, you know. And I said to him, I noticed in the beginning there you used the Pythagorean theorem. He says, yes. And I said, now can you really teach calculus without the Pythagorean theorem?

[24:43] And he says, no. He says, now how many of your students could demonstrate Pythagorean theorem? Probably very few. So what are you doing? What are you doing? But it's very easy, he says.

[24:59] Anyway, okay. So the word demonstration comes from the Latin word to show, right? Huh? Okay. So in demonstration, you show the mind that it must be so, right? Huh? Okay. Aristotle defines a demonstration, or apodixis, says a what syllogism, right? Making us know the cause and that of which it is the cause and that it cannot be what otherwise, right? Okay. And these demonstrations to see are those in what geometry and arithmetic, right?

[25:40] But there are demonstrations elsewhere. Whence, just as in demonstrative sciences, reason is led that into what Assenting to the conclusion through certain what beginnings, right? So also, right?

[26:02] One is led into what? Assenting to the precept of the law, to command of the law, through something, right? Okay. So he's talking about what's common to what? The works of reason, right? That is proper or private reason that it induces us into something from something else, right? Okay. That's true of both looking reason, right, which leads you into the conclusion from the premises, right? And what?

[26:34] Practical reason, right? Where something leads you into obeying the what? Command, right? So this is from this to that, right? You're being led into obeying the command from this, whatever that is, right? Okay.

[26:55] Okay. Now the precepts of the law, he says, are about human what? Acts, huh? In which law directs us, huh? This has been said above, huh? But there are what? Three, huh? Thomas, shame on you, shame on you. Okay. Three.

[27:30] Okay. There are however three differences of human acts. This is a distinction that Thomas sees, right? A distinction of three or into three. For as has been said above, some acts are good from their genus, from their kind, huh? And these are the acts of the what? Virtues, right? So a courageous act, right? A just act, huh? A temperate act. These are good from their what? Genus, huh?

[28:06] And in regard to these, there is laid down this act of the law, which is he takes it as a synonym, huh? Praecipere vel imperare to command or to what? I don't know if we have two words in English, huh? What are they?

[28:25] Yeah. You're kind of taking the Latin word there, right? Okay. For the law commands all the acts of the virtues, as is said in the fifth book of the what? Ethics, right? That's the book where Aristotle talks about justice, right?

[28:48] Where you're obeying the law, right? Which commands all the virtues, huh? Now of course our laws may be very imperfect, right? I mean there's some laws against intemperance, right? Like like driving under the influence, right? Or raping somebody, right? Or something that sort, right? Huh? Okay. Um, there are laws about what justice, aren't there? Paying your your debts and so on, right? Okay. Not sending you to prison anymore, I guess.

[29:20] But punished, right? Okay. And there are laws about what soldiers being courageous in time of battle, right? Yeah. Get punished, right? Court-martialed, right? Coward. It's one book I read the book of Patton on because he always cusses guys out. You yellow-bellied cowards, you know. He's got all these these strong words, you know.

[29:54] So strong, you know, Eisenhower kind of forced him to apologize or something. But anyway, okay. Some acts are bad from their what genus, right? And these are the acts of the what vices that are opposed to the what virtue, right? So a cowardly act, right, is opposed to the virtue of what justice, right? And it's based upon a vice called cowardice, right? Okay. Or intemperate act, right? Intemperance is a form of, of vice, right?

[30:36] So, the acts that are acts of virtue are commanded by the law, right? The acts of the vices are what prohibited, right? Okay. Okay.

[30:53] Okay. So he says some acts are bad from their genus, right? As the acts that are vicious, right? The acts of some vice. Now, when you study the vices, instead of the moral vices, there's always two opposed to one virtue, right?

[31:12] So, say take take courage, which is the most known virtue. The one Aristotle begins with. One exceeds courage, and that's called foolhardiness, right? And then the other one is what cowardness, right? Okay. Okay. Um, Aristotle says in the case of temperance, you know, the one that's in defect is so rare we don't have a name for it. But for want of a lack of a name, I'd call him a puritan or something, right?

[31:41] Okay. So they don't drink or something, you know? They don't kiss or something, right? Okay. So they go to kind of a defect, right? They don't enjoy these things as much as they should, right? But the main problem is the intemperance, right? The one who goes more, right? Okay. So when we speak of intemperance, we're thinking of the what excess, right? Not of the defect. Okay.

[32:12] Okay. So there's more bad acts than good acts, possible, right? Okay. Okay. Now some from their genus, right, are indifference, right? And with respect to these, the law has what is called what permissive, right? Okay.

[32:48] So does the law command me to do this? huh Not in that situation Does it command me to do this? Is this an act of justice or an act of courage or? Or is it indifferent, right? Is it really good or bad this act?

[33:11] So the law what doesn't command this, doesn't prohibit it. You shall not do this. You'll be punished if you do this, right? But it what permits, right? So by paying my debts, it commands me to do that, right? And driving under influence, right? It prohibits that, right? Okay. Yes, sir. Robbing, right? Prohibits robbing, right? That's against justice, right? Okay.

[33:43] Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay. But that to which it the law leads us in, right? It's going back to what he said about reason, right? Reason wants to lead you into this through something else, right? Okay. Um, that to which the law leads us into that which it what, that it be obeyed, is the fear of what punishment, right? And as regards this, it was laid down the effect of the law, which is to what punish, right?

[34:30] Okay. So how many acts does he have here in the this body this article? What? No, he had command, right? An act that is good in kind is commanded, right? The acts of all the virtues are commanded, right? Then some what ones are what? Punished. Prohibited. Prohibited, yeah. Prohibited is not the same as punishment, right? Okay. And then some are permitted, right? Okay. But now this fourth thing, right?

[35:10] We should be divided against the first three, right? Because the first three are saying what you must do this act, or you can't do this act, or you're allowed to do this act, right? Yeah. While the punishment is something else, right? This is the something else which you want to lead them to obey the what law, where the law gets its its its strength, right? Because if you didn't have this fear of punishment, right, then you wouldn't what, and especially if you're not too good, right, or you're too young to know why it's good to obey the law, right?

[35:49] Okay. So you know, I I drove down the other day there, twelve hours from, took about twelve hours Thursday night to get from. Williamsburg to Worcester to Shrewsbury, right? Twelve hours, and twelve hours going down, right? But you have a lot of experience of being on the highway at that time, right? You know, you're going five miles over the speed limit, and other people are passing you, so they must be going ten miles over the speed limit.

[36:27] I was going down one time from Quebec, you know, to go up there, and eight hour drive from Quebec down to Worcester, you know. So I was going about five miles over the speed limit, and the state trooper stopped me, right? And it was only five miles over, so he was not going to give me anything like that. And I just told me you're good. And then he just walking away, and he looked at me and said, "You've been drinking."

[36:47] And I said, "No, sir. I drove down from Quebec, and you know, well, that's why I'm tired, you know." He said, "Okay, there's a McDonald's right. I mean, there's a Dunkin' Donuts like that around the corner there." He said, "Get some, yes, sir." It was kind of funny the way he looked, you know, because I suppose my, you know, when you're driving, you know, it's night time.

[37:08] It's night time. I was coming down from Quebec, you're getting all the light of the cars, you know, your eyes get kind of, you know. I suppose he just looked and he says, you know, it looks a little bit like, you know, the guy's been drinking, right, and so on. And I remember you know being downtown Worcester there and waiting to cross the street, you know, and I'd see the cop there.

[37:29] There was kind of the streetlight flashing. I'm just I'm just following somebody walking across the street, you know. And I was kind of watching the policeman the way he worked, you know. You can see there's something kind of bulging, like somebody had a gun or something, you know. But he just took off like that, you know, huh? And my wife had one of her friends was married to a cop, you know.

[37:52] You could tell a prostitute just like that, you know, Just to be out on the street. And but there's there, you get all these things, you know, huh? Because my wife worked a lot of time with brain injured people too, you know. And these brain injured people, you know, sometimes the cops make a mistake because they they kind of act kind of what, look like they're tipsy, you know, because they're because their brain isn't functioning, you know, they act looks like they're they're drunk or something, you know, and they're not drunk at all, you know, but but most part, I mean, the cops, you know, pick up on things, you know, signs that people have been drinking, that they've been on drugs, or something else

[38:35] that they've been doing, they're carrying a gun, they're carrying concealed weapons, you know, and so on. So notice, huh? That fourth one is really given forth because it stands against the other three, doesn't it? In the distinction, right? Okay. Because the first three are saying this is an act. That you must do, you know. This is an act you must not do, right? This is one that's the third.

[39:09] That's all the possibilities, isn't there? Right? Yeah. But then there's another thing that the law does, which is to what? To punish, which is what? To make you obey the law, right? Yeah. So it kind of stands out by itself, right? It's a separate what? Thing, right? Okay.

[39:37] When Thomas, you know, divides logic up and takes logic in the broad sense of rational philosophy, as he calls it, right? And how the mind is led, you know, sometimes from something that is certain, you know, to see something else to be certain, that's demonstration. Sometimes it's led, you know, from an opinion, right? To something that's only probable. Right, and sometimes it's even weaker. It's led to suspect something, right?

[40:08] Okay. When Thomas talks about dialectic and rhetoric, dialectic leads one to what? Kind of believes something, but not to be certain about it, right? And rhetoric, rhetoric argument is weaker. It gives you a suspicion, right?

[40:30] And then he finally gets down to poetry, right, where one is led to what? Conclude something by the way it's what represented, right? You know, which almost seems what illogical, right? Because someone might say, you know, are young lovers this way because Shakespeare represented them that way, Romeo and Juliet? Or do we say, you know, the reverse? The Shakespeare represented young lovers well because of what we know about young lovers in in real life.

[41:05] You know, the people are led by a likeness. You know, people, you know, see a movie, you know, presenting something historical, and that's the way they think the things were. You know, and

[41:20] during the war, you know, the Hollywood was cooperating with the government there, and they'd give a movie, you know, about how nice things are in Russia, you know, and people going to church and everything, Hotsy totsy you know, and people think, oh, it's wonderful over there, you know, it's it's not so at all, right? You know.

[41:43] But it's always something of reason, though, to lead somebody from this to to that, right? Okay. So that's pretty good what he did, though, isn't it? Though three acts, right? And the three things that the law does for these three acts, right? But then the law also has to have what? Power to coerce you to obey it, right? And it does that by what? Punishing, right? So you see somebody else being punished, right?

[42:16] He's obeying. So when I was a little boy there, I was visiting my grandmother and my aunt Helen, and Aunt Helen taking over the old family store, and I was down there, you know, had these little toadstools to sit on, you know, with their little counter with things, and I was spinning them. you know and telling my my aunt crazy. Well, the little town of of Watertown, Minnesota, had one cop in town, right?

[42:42] So the cop walks into the store and sits down, or it's a coke, right? He's thirsty. My aunt had had it with me, you know, so she says look at this little boy who's been, you know, running these stools?" and?" Oh, he says, "I guess we can put him in jail for a day." He says. Boy, did I sober up, right? Just, just, just the. We kind of joke about it because I guess my my aunt didn't realize really scared.

[43:07] the wits out of me, you know. Kind of you know it's a little kid I didn't know what to expect, you know. That was just being a being a little rascal, you know.

[43:19] But that's that fourth thing that he says here, right? Huh? You know. So I was kind to obey my aunt, right? Let alone the government, right?

[43:32] Okay. Now, what about the reply to the first objection here, right? Let's compare the words here, right? Every law is a common precept, right? Huh? Okay. The first, therefore, should be said that just as to seize from the bad has the aspect of something good, right? So also prohibition has a certain what? Of a command, right? Huh? Okay.

[44:19] And according to this, taking precept largely, Thomas often will say that, right? Huh? Universally, law is said to be a what? Precept, right? Okay. So what do we have when you got the the Ten Commandments, right? You know, some of them are to do good, like honor your father and mother, right? Huh? And some are what? Commands to not, right? Yeah. So in the in the broad sense, you know, you can call a prohibition a command, right?

[44:55] Okay. But in the strict sense, command is more something you're supposed to do, right? Huh? Okay. So we're more apt to say things like "command you to do something" than "I command you not to do something," right? And we might use the other word "prohibit," you know, for that. Now I was reading Thomas there in the. This week, question of the day, very tightly this morning there, and it's the whole question on on liberum arbitrium, right?

[45:26] Huh? And the first article is whether man has liberum arbitrium with the beasts have it, right? Then the third article is whether God has it, right? Huh? Well, the church fathers, speak of liberum arbitrium, like we said there with

[45:45] Augustine and so on. Ah, they use the word reason, right? Okay. Of course, the objection says, "For reason is what discourse, right? What discourse is? Well, God doesn't have any discourse; He sees everything all at once. Therefore, there can't be any *liberum arbitrium what thomas says, large right? You can take reason largey for what? This immaterial knowing power, right? Understanding, right? Although strictly speaking, reason is but the ability for discourse right but the ability for discourse, right?

[46:22] And therefore, it's something that man alone has; the beast doesn't have it. Too high for the beast, and too low even for the angels, let alone for God, right? But he says, even in in his divine names, there, Dionysius has the word reason as one of the divine names, right? Then you're taking it in the what? Large sense, right? Okay.

[46:46] Well, the same thing here, right? You might say, yeah, we might distinguish command from what? Yeah, but then in a broader using the word command, we might say you're commanded to do some things, and you're commanded not to do other things, right? Okay. But maybe more strictly, we'd say you're commanded to do good things, and prohibited from doing what? Bad things, right?

[47:12] To the Ten Commandments, they command us to what? Honor your father and mother, right? Do they command us to not murder? Or would you say more that they prohibit you from murder and from theft and so on, right? Adultery, then.

[47:32] Okay. That's the question now in the word, right? But it's always a problem in these arguments because the words are what? Sometimes taken strictly, and sometimes taken in a looser way, right? Okay.

[47:52] Sometimes people use the word knowledge in the strict sense, where you're certain of what you're saying, right? Do you know that to be so, or just saying it so, you know?

[48:06] But sometimes use knowledge in a looser sense, right? It's interesting to see the precision with which, Thomas Aristotle look at language, the use of language, and then you look at what Orwell was so concerned about: vulgarization, if that's the right word, of the English language, and language in general, with this sort of political, religion, of uh socialism of various sorts, communism being the most virulent. But how language was twisted.

[48:42] Yeah, misuse of words is very common, you know. Yeah. Which has gotten, you know, it's very much entrenched now within the cultures of the West. Yeah.

[48:55] Even someone said, you know, the ancients thought the sun went around the earth, right? Today we all know the earth turns on its axis. Well, in the strict sense of knowing, do we all know that?

[49:08] It's not obvious, right? And even even today we still speak of the sun rising, the sun setting, as if it's more natural to speak that way, you know. But even if we accept that the earth is turning on its axis, we don't. Once we don't have the evidence for this, right? They're just taking it as common opinion now, right? Nice to say, you know, it says in the Declaration of Independence, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."

[49:39] Now, if I had gotten up in slave-owning Rome or slave Athens and said, "We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal," what are you talking about? Some men are born free, some are born slaves. Some are born intelligent, some are born, you know, nitwits, and so on. Not born equal, What? Who could possibly, you know. But all kinds of things, you know. We see, we all know nowadays, you know.

[50:08] We all know Earth warming is, you know, a problem, right? The greatest problem, Obama tells us, you know, that we face, you know. Yeah, it was according to weather underground, is that even though there was freakishly cold weather in the northern hemisphere, but all around this is one of the warmest years we've ever had, planetarily speaking. And I don't know, just seems to be a huge propaganda there, whether it's true or not.

[50:38] And if it's true, you know, does it really mean that there's real dangerous human caused warming, or is it just one of these trends that you see throughout history, natural? Now to the second objection about counsel, right? the second, should be said that to consult is not the what, the private act of law, but it can pertain also to a private what, person to take counsel, right?

[51:08] Of whom it does not belong to what, establish a law or to establish a law, right? Whence also the apostle, meaning Saint Paul, in the first epistle to the Corinthians, when he gives a certain what counsel, right? He says, "ego dico non Dominus," right? I say not the what, the Lord, right? And therefore it is not laid down among the what effects of what law.

[51:45] So, should I go to this college? You take counsel, right? huh? Kids, kind of, you know, sometimes they go and visit more than one college for they beat up on one place, right? Now, to marry this person, you know, better take some counsel about that.

[52:05] My mother used to say, you know, you're of age, you can make up your mind. She says, but my mother's got a right to say whether she thinks this this girl's right for you or not.

[52:16] Right to tell you what she thinks. Okay, we all need counsel, right? Now, people looking what they can do in life, you know. Okay, that's not a question of law, right? When you take counsel, okay.

[52:35] To the third, what about reward, right? Okay. To the third, should be said that also to reward can pertain to anyone, right? Okay, so the school has a reward for somebody there, the prize, right? Okay. But to punishment does not pertain except to the minister or the servant of the what law, right? By whose authority punishment is inferred, huh? And therefore, to reward is not laid down an act of the law, but only to punish, right?

[53:10] So we think of that, right? That there's all kinds of punishments, you know, for, you know, if I park, I shouldn't park. Won't be punished as much as if I have a moving violation, right? Right, because it's more dangerous a moving violation, right? I go over the speed limit or something of this sort, right? And there's all kinds of punishments attached to the laws, but the rewards attached to obeying the law.

[53:36] If you're driving the left side of the street, you're going to be punished, right? On a two-way street. But now if I go the right side, will I be rewarded? You know. Congratulations. If we find you driving the right side of the street, we will reward you, of course. But no, you can see the reward is not really so much the characteristic of law, is it? And we do in private, right?

[54:05] Parents often, you know, promise the kids if they get a, you know, an A in their course or a B in their course, whatever is, you know, shows they've worked hard, right? Then they can get this reward, right? You know, you were rewarded that way when you were a kid. Parents, parents, huh? Champagne. Yeah. I got an A in math. Of course, I didn't get to drink all the champagne because I was so young.

[54:32] That was my joking sort of request for reward. Yeah, yeah. I go down town with my mother there when I was before I started going to kindergarten, and if I behave myself, then we could stop at the candy counter and pick something out, right? That's a reward, you know, for not driving her crazy, you know, like most little boys that drive their mothers crazy when they're shopping, right?

[55:06] Now, what about this punishment idea? Is this making people good? You know. To the fourth, it should be said that through this, that someone begins to be accustomed to avoiding evils and to what fulfilling the good on account of the fear of punishment. He is sometimes led to this point that he what enjoys, right? And does it from his own what will, right? As he gets accustomed to doing these things, right?

[55:36] And then sometimes he will what continue because he enjoys doing this now, right? Okay. Have the habit of it. Yeah, yeah. And according to this, law also by punishing leads us to this that men become what good, right? Okay, so it's not entirely a dead end, right? Like the argument was trying to say.

[56:03] Okay, now we come to the laws, and you can take them up one by one now. In particular, right? Do a little break here before we go on to the next one there.