top of page

Whether Falsity is in the Intellect?

Thank you for subscribing to Annotated Thomist...check back each day for a new section of St. Thomas' corpus, annotated and summarized. (FREE TRIAL FOR NEW SUBSCRIBERS!!!)

AT is also available to donors of $10 or more on Patreon or SubscribeStar along with all of the other benefits (daily bonus videos, bonus articles, PDFs, etc.

If you need more personalized help reading the Summa, I am available for 1-on-1 sessions, here.

cf., ST.I.Q58.A5; ST.I.Q85.A6; Sent.I.D19.Q5.A1.Rep7; SCG1.C59; SCG3.C108; QDeVer.Q1.A12; Peri.Bk1.L3; DeAn.Bk3.L11; Metaph.Bk6.L4; Metaph.Bk9.L11

In this question, as was said, St. Thomas first denies that falsehood formally exists in things. Thus, by consequence, it must exist in us. Further, in the second article, he has denied that it formally exists in our senses (with the appropriate qualifications given above), THUS the only place left to inquire about is in the intellect.

Now, one can distinguish between three acts of the intellect, 1. Simple Apprehension, 2. Judgment, 3. Argument. One apprehends the what-ness of a thing, then he makes judgments about it, then he draws conclusions from this by combining with other judgments.

Want to read more?

Subscribe to to keep reading this exclusive post.

37 views0 comments


לא היה ניתן לטעון את התגובות
נראה שהייתה בעיה טכנית. כדאי לנסות להתחבר מחדש או לרענן את הדף.
bottom of page