THIRD ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 64, Art. 3]

Whether the Intellectual Virtues Observe the Mean?

Objection 1: It would seem that the intellectual virtues do not

observe the mean. Because moral virtue observes the mean by

conforming to the rule of reason. But the intellectual virtues are in

reason itself, so that they seem to have no higher rule. Therefore

the intellectual virtues do not observe the mean.

Obj. 2: Further, the mean of moral virtue is fixed by an intellectual

virtue: for it is stated in _Ethic._ ii, 6, that "virtue observes the

mean appointed by reason, as a prudent man would appoint it." If

therefore intellectual virtue also observe the mean, this mean will

have to be appointed for them by another virtue, so that there would

be an indefinite series of virtues.

Obj. 3: Further, a mean is, properly speaking, between contraries, as

the Philosopher explains (Metaph. x, text. 22, 23). But there seems

to be no contrariety in the intellect; since contraries themselves,

as they are in the intellect, are not in opposition to one another,

but are understood together, as white and black, healthy and sick.

Therefore there is no mean in the intellectual virtues.

_On the contrary,_ Art is an intellectual virtue; and yet there is a

mean in art (Ethic. ii, 6). Therefore also intellectual virtue

observes the mean.

_I answer that,_ The good of anything consists in its observing the

mean, by conforming with a rule or measure in respect of which it may

happen to be excessive or deficient, as stated above (A. 1). Now

intellectual virtue, like moral virtue, is directed to the good, as

stated above (Q. 56, A. 3). Hence the good of an intellectual virtue

consists in observing the mean, in so far as it is subject to a

measure. Now the good of intellectual virtue is the true; in the case

of contemplative virtue, it is the true taken absolutely (Ethic. vi,

2); in the case of practical virtue, it is the true in conformity

with a right appetite.

Now truth apprehended by our intellect, if we consider it absolutely,

is measured by things; since things are the measure of our intellect,

as stated in _Metaph._ x, text. 5; because there is truth in what we

think or say, according as the thing is so or not. Accordingly the

good of speculative intellectual virtue consists in a certain mean,

by way of conformity with things themselves, in so far as the

intellect expresses them as being what they are, or as not being what

they are not: and it is in this that the nature of truth consists.

There will be excess if something false is affirmed, as though

something were, which in reality it is not: and there will be

deficiency if something is falsely denied, and declared not to be,

whereas in reality it is.

The truth of practical intellectual virtue, if we consider it in

relation to things, is by way of that which is measured; so that both

in practical and in speculative intellectual virtues, the mean

consists in conformity with things. But if we consider it in relation

to the appetite, it has the character of a rule and measure.

Consequently the rectitude of reason is the mean of moral virtue, and

also the mean of prudence--of prudence as ruling and measuring, of

moral virtue, as ruled and measured by that mean. In like manner the

difference between excess and deficiency is to be applied in both

cases.

Reply Obj. 1: Intellectual virtues also have their measure, as

stated, and they observe the mean according as they conform to that

measure.

Reply Obj. 2: There is no need for an indefinite series of virtues:

because the measure and rule of intellectual virtue is not another

kind of virtue, but things themselves.

Reply Obj. 3: The things themselves that are contrary have no

contrariety in the mind, because one is the reason for knowing the

other: nevertheless there is in the intellect contrariety of

affirmation and negation, which are contraries, as stated at the end

of _Peri Hermen[e]ias._ For though "to be" and "not to be" are not in

contrary, but in contradictory opposition to one another, so long as

we consider their signification in things themselves, for on the one

hand we have "being" and on the other we have simply "non-being"; yet

if we refer them to the act of the mind, there is something positive

in both cases. Hence "to be" and "not to be" are contradictory: but

the opinion stating that "good is good" is contrary to the opinion

stating that "good is not good": and between two such contraries

intellectual virtue observes the mean.

________________________

Summa Theologica, Part I-II (Pars Prima Secundae) From the Complete American Edition · 第 414 / 746 题