FOURTH ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 58, Art. 4]

Whether Justice Is in the Will As Its Subject?

Objection 1: It would seem that justice is not in the will as its

subject. For justice is sometimes called truth. But truth is not in

the will, but in the intellect. Therefore justice is not in the will

as its subject.

Obj. 2: Further, justice is about our dealings with others. Now it

belongs to the reason to direct one thing in relation to another.

Therefore justice is not in the will as its subject but in the reason.

Obj. 3: Further, justice is not an intellectual virtue, since it is

not directed to knowledge; wherefore it follows that it is a moral

virtue. Now the subject of moral virtue is the faculty which is

"rational by participation," viz. the irascible and the

concupiscible, as the Philosopher declares (Ethic. i, 13). Therefore

justice is not in the will as its subject, but in the irascible and

concupiscible.

_On the contrary,_ Anselm says (De Verit. xii) that "justice is

rectitude of the will observed for its own sake."

_I answer that,_ The subject of a virtue is the power whose act that

virtue aims at rectifying. Now justice does not aim at directing an

act of the cognitive power, for we are not said to be just through

knowing something aright. Hence the subject of justice is not the

intellect or reason which is a cognitive power. But since we are said

to be just through doing something aright, and because the proximate

principle of action is the appetitive power, justice must needs be in

some appetitive power as its subject.

Now the appetite is twofold; namely, the will which is in the reason

and the sensitive appetite which follows on sensitive apprehension,

and is divided into the irascible and the concupiscible, as stated in

the First Part (Q. 81, A. 2). Again the act of rendering his due to

each man cannot proceed from the sensitive appetite, because

sensitive apprehension does not go so far as to be able to consider

the relation of one thing to another; but this is proper to the

reason. Therefore justice cannot be in the irascible or concupiscible

as its subject, but only in the will: hence the Philosopher (Ethic.

v, 1) defines justice by an act of the will, as may be seen above (A.

1).

Reply Obj. 1: Since the will is the rational appetite, when the

rectitude of the reason which is called truth is imprinted on the

will on account of its nighness to the reason, this imprint retains

the name of truth; and hence it is that justice sometimes goes by the

name of truth.

Reply Obj. 2: The will is borne towards its object consequently on

the apprehension of reason: wherefore, since the reason directs one

thing in relation to another, the will can will one thing in relation

to another, and this belongs to justice.

Reply Obj. 3: Not only the irascible and concupiscible parts are

_rational by participation,_ but the entire _appetitive_ faculty, as

stated in _Ethic._ i, 13, because all appetite is subject to reason.

Now the will is contained in the appetitive faculty, wherefore it can

be the subject of moral virtue.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part II-II (Secunda Secundae) Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province · 第 395 / 1128 题