FIFTH ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 12, Art. 5]

Whether Intention Is Within the Competency of Irrational Animals?

Objection 1: It would seem that irrational animals intend the end. For

in things void of reason nature stands further apart from the rational

nature, than does the sensitive nature in irrational animals. But

nature intends the end even in things void of reason, as is proved in

_Phys._ ii, 8. Much more, therefore, do irrational animals intend the

end.

Obj. 2: Further, just as intention is of the end, so is enjoyment.

But enjoyment is in irrational animals, as stated above (Q. 11, A.

2). Therefore intention is too.

Obj. 3: Further, to intend an end belongs to one who acts for an end;

since to intend is nothing else than to tend to something. But

irrational animals act for an end; for an animal is moved either to

seek food, or to do something of the kind. Therefore irrational

animals intend an end.

_On the contrary,_ Intention of an end implies ordaining something to

an end: which belongs to reason. Since therefore irrational animals

are void of reason, it seems that they do not intend an end.

_I answer that,_ As stated above (A. 1), to intend is to tend to

something; and this belongs to the mover and to the moved. According,

therefore, as that which is moved to an end by another is said to

intend the end, thus nature is said to intend an end, as being moved

to its end by God, as the arrow is moved by the archer. And in this

way, irrational animals intend an end, inasmuch as they are moved to

something by natural instinct. The other way of intending an end

belongs to the mover; according as he ordains the movement of

something, either his own or another's, to an end. This belongs to

reason alone. Wherefore irrational animals do not intend an end in

this way, which is to intend properly and principally, as stated

above (A. 1).

Reply Obj. 1: This argument takes intention in the sense of being

moved to an end.

Reply Obj. 2: Enjoyment does not imply the ordaining of one thing to

another, as intention does, but absolute repose in the end.

Reply Obj. 3: Irrational animals are moved to an end, not as though

they thought that they can gain the end by this movement; this

belongs to one that intends; but through desiring the end by natural

instinct, they are moved to an end, moved, as it were, by another,

like other things that are moved naturally.

________________________

Summa Theologica, Part I-II (Pars Prima Secundae) From the Complete American Edition · 第 95 / 746 题