Quaestio 166 Question 166 De studiositate Studiousness Deinde considerandum est de studiositate, et curiositate sibi opposita. Circa studiositatem autem quaeruntur duo. We must next consider studiousness and its opposite, curiosity. Concerning studiousness there are two points of inquiry: Primo, quae sit materia studiositatis. (1) What is the matter of studiousness? Secundo, utrum sit pars temperantiae. (2) Whether it is a part of temperance? Articulus 1 Article 1 Utrum materia studiositatis sit proprie cognitio Whether the proper matter of studiousness is knowledge? Ad primum sic proceditur. Videtur quod materia studiositatis non sit proprie cognitio. Studiosus enim dicitur aliquis ex eo quod adhibet studium aliquibus rebus. Sed in qualibet materia debet homo studium adhibere, ad hoc quod recte faciat quod est faciendum. Ergo videtur quod non sit specialis materia studiositatis cognitio. Objection 1: It would seem that knowledge is not the proper matter of studiousness. For a person is said to be studious because he applies study to certain things. Now a man ought to apply study to every matter, in order to do aright what has to be done. Therefore seemingly knowledge is not the special matter of studiousness. Praeterea, studiositas curiositati opponitur. Sed curiositas, quae a cura dicitur, potest esse etiam circa ornatum vestium, et circa alia huiusmodi quae pertinent ad corpus, unde apostolus dicit, Rom. XIII, carnis curam ne feceritis in desideriis. Ergo studiositas non est solum circa cognitionem. Obj. 2: Further, studiousness is opposed to curiosity. Now curiosity, which is derived from cura (care), may also refer to elegance of apparel and other such things, which regard the body; wherefore the Apostle says (Rom 13:14): Make not provision (curam) for the flesh in its concupiscences. Praeterea, Ierem. VI dicitur, a minori usque ad maiorem, omnes avaritiae student. Sed avaritia non est proprie circa cognitionem, sed magis circa possessionem divitiarum, ut supra habitum est. Ergo studiositas, quae a studio dicitur, non est proprie circa cognitionem. Obj. 3: Further it is written (Jer 6:13): From the least of them even to the greatest, all study covetousness. Now covetousness is not properly about knowledge, but rather about the possession of wealth, as stated above (Q. 118, A. 2). Therefore studiousness, which is derived from study, is not properly about knowledge. Sed contra est quod dicitur Prov. XXVII, stude sapientiae, fili mi, et laetifica cor meum, ut possis respondere sermonem. Sed eadem studiositas est quae laudatur ut virtus, et ad quam lex invitat. Ergo studiositas proprie est circa cognitionem. On the contrary, It is written (Prov 27:11): Study wisdom, my son, and make my heart joyful, that thou mayest give an answer to him that reproacheth. Now study, which is commended as a virtue, is the same as that to which the Law urges. Therefore studiousness is properly about knowledge. Respondeo dicendum quod studium praecipue importat vehementem applicationem mentis ad aliquid. Mens autem non applicatur ad aliquid nisi cognoscendo illud. Unde per prius mens applicatur ad cognitionem, secundario autem applicatur ad ea in quibus homo per cognitionem dirigitur. Et ideo studium per prius respicit cognitionem, et per posterius quaecumque alia ad quae operanda directione cognitionis indigemus. Virtutes autem proprie sibi attribuunt illam materiam circa quam primo et principaliter sunt, sicut fortitudo pericula mortis, et temperantia delectationem tactus. Et ideo studiositas proprie dicitur circa cognitionem. I answer that, Properly speaking, study denotes keen application of the mind to something. Now the mind is not applied to a thing except by knowing that thing. Wherefore the mind’s application to knowledge precedes its application to those things to which man is directed by his knowledge. Hence study regards knowledge in the first place, and as a result it regards any other things the working of which requires to be directed by knowledge. Now the virtues lay claim to that matter about which they are first and foremost; thus fortitude is concerned about dangers of death, and temperance about pleasures of touch. Therefore studiousness is properly ascribed to knowledge. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod circa alias materias non potest aliquid recte fieri, nisi secundum quod est praeordinatum per rationem cognoscentem. Et ideo per prius studiositas cognitionem respicit, cuicumque materiae studium adhibeatur. Reply Obj. 1: Nothing can be done aright as regards other matters, except insofar as is previously directed by the knowing reason. Hence studiousness, to whatever matter it be applied, has a prior regard for knowledge. Ad secundum dicendum quod ex affectu hominis trahitur mens eius ad intendendum his ad quae afficitur, secundum illud Matth. VI, ubi est thesaurus tuus, ibi est et cor tuum. Et quia ad ea quibus caro fovetur, maxime homo afficitur, consequens est quod cogitatio hominis versetur praecipue circa ea quibus caro fovetur, ut scilicet homo inquirat qualiter homo optime possit carni suae subvenire. Et secundum hoc, curiositas ponitur circa ea quae ad carnem pertinent, ratione eorum quae ad cognitionem pertinent. Reply Obj. 2: Man’s mind is drawn, on account of his affections, towards the things for which he has an affection, according to Matt. 6:21, Where thy treasure is, there is thy heart also. And since man has special affection for those things which foster the flesh, it follows that man’s thoughts are concerned about things that foster his flesh, so that man seeks to know how he may best sustain his body. Accordingly curiosity is accounted to be about things pertaining to the body by reason of things pertaining to knowledge. Ad tertium dicendum quod avaritia inhiat ad lucra conquirenda, ad quod maxime necessaria est quaedam peritia terrenarum rerum. Et secundum hoc, studium attribuitur his quae ad avaritiam spectant. Reply Obj. 3: Covetousness craves the acquisition of gain, and for this it is very necessary to be skilled in earthly things. Accordingly studiousness is ascribed to things pertaining to covetousness. Articulus 2 Article 2 Utrum studiositas sit temperantiae pars Whether studiousness is a part of temperance? Ad secundum sic proceditur. Videtur quod studiositas non sit temperantiae pars. Studiosus enim dicitur aliquis secundum studiositatem. Sed universaliter omnis virtuosus vocatur studiosus, ut patet per philosophum, qui frequenter sic utitur nomine studiosi. Ergo studiositas est generalis virtus, et non est pars temperantiae. Objection 1: It would seem that studiousness is not a part of temperance. For a man is said to be studious by reason of his studiousness. Now all virtuous persons without exception are called studious according to the Philosopher, who frequently employs the term studious (spoudaios) in this sense (Ethic. ix, 4, 8, 9). Therefore studiousness is a general virtue, and not a part of temperance. Praeterea, studiositas, sicut dictum est, ad cognitionem pertinet. Sed cognitio non pertinet ad virtutes morales, quae sunt in appetitiva animae parte, sed magis ad intellectuales, quae sunt in parte cognoscitiva, unde et sollicitudo est actus prudentiae, ut supra habitum est. Ergo studiositas non est pars temperantiae. Obj. 2: Further, studiousness, as stated (A. 1), pertains to knowledge. But knowledge has no connection with the moral virtues which are in the appetitive part of the soul, and pertains rather to the intellectual virtues which are in the cognitive part: wherefore solicitude is an act of prudence as stated above (Q. 47, A. 9). Therefore studiousness is not a part of temperance. Praeterea, virtus quae ponitur pars alicuius principalis virtutis, assimilatur ei quantum ad modum. Sed studiositas non assimilatur temperantiae quantum ad modum. Quia temperantiae nomen sumitur ex quadam refrenatione, unde magis opponitur vitio quod est in excessu. Nomen autem studiositatis sumitur e contrario ex applicatione animae ad aliquid, unde magis videtur opponi vitio quod est in defectu, scilicet negligentiae studendi, quam vitio quod est in excessu, scilicet curiositati. Unde, propter horum similitudinem, dicit Isidorus, in libro Etymol., quod studiosus dicitur quasi studiis curiosus. Ergo studiositas non est pars temperantiae. Obj. 3: Further, a virtue that is ascribed as part of a principal virtue resembles the latter as to mode. Now studiousness does not resemble temperance as to mode, because temperance takes its name from being a kind of restraint, wherefore it is more opposed to the vice that is in excess: whereas studiousness is denominated from being the application of the mind to something, so that it would seem to be opposed to the vice that is in default, namely, neglect of study, rather than to the vice which is in excess, namely curiosity. Wherefore, on account of its resemblance to the latter, Isidore says (Etym. x) that a studious man is one who is curious to study. Therefore studiousness is not a part of temperance. Sed contra est quod Augustinus dicit, in libro de moribus Eccle., curiosi esse prohibemur, quod magnae temperantiae munus est. Sed curiositas prohibetur per studiositatem moderatam. Ergo studiositas est pars temperantiae. On the contrary, Augustine says (De Morib. Eccl. 21): We are forbidden to be curious: and this is a great gift that temperance bestows. Now curiosity is prevented by moderate studiousness. Therefore studiousness is a part of temperance. Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, ad temperantiam pertinet moderari motum appetitus, ne superflue tendat in id quod naturaliter concupiscitur. Sicut autem naturaliter homo concupiscit delectationes ciborum et venereorum secundum naturam corporalem, ita secundum animam naturaliter desiderat cognoscere aliquid, unde et philosophus dicit, in I Metaphys., quod omnes homines naturaliter scire desiderant. I answer that, As stated above (Q. 141, AA. 3, 4, 5), it belongs to temperance to moderate the movement of the appetite, lest it tend excessively to that which is desired naturally. Now just as in respect of his corporeal nature man naturally desires the pleasures of food and sex, so, in respect of his soul, he naturally desires to know something; thus the Philosopher observes at the beginning of his Metaphysics (i, 1): All men have a natural desire for knowledge. Moderatio autem huius appetitus pertinet ad virtutem studiositatis. Unde consequens est quod studiositas sit pars potentialis temperantiae, sicut virtus secundaria ei adiuncta ut principali virtuti. Et comprehenditur sub modestia, ratione superius dicta. The moderation of this desire pertains to the virtue of studiousness; wherefore it follows that studiousness is a potential part of temperance, as a subordinate virtue annexed to a principal virtue. Moreover, it is comprised under modesty for the reason given above (Q. 160, A. 2). Ad primum ergo dicendum quod prudentia est completiva omnium virtutum moralium, ut dicitur in VI Ethic. Inquantum igitur cognitio prudentiae ad omnes virtutes pertinet, intantum nomen studiositatis, quae proprie circa cognitionem est, ad omnes virtutes derivatur. Reply Obj. 1: Prudence is the complement of all the moral virtues, as stated in Ethic. vi, 13. Consequently, insofar as the knowledge of prudence pertains to all the virtues, the term studiousness, which properly regards knowledge, is applied to all the virtues. Ad secundum dicendum quod actus cognoscitivae virtutis imperatur a vi appetitiva, quae est motiva omnium virium, ut supra habitum est. Et ideo circa cognitionem duplex bonum potest attendi. Unum quidem, quantum ad ipsum actum cognitionis. Et tale bonum pertinet ad virtutes intellectuales, ut scilicet homo circa singula aestimet verum. Aliud autem est bonum quod pertinet ad actum appetitivae virtutis, ut scilicet homo habeat appetitum rectum applicandi vim cognoscitivam sic vel aliter, ad hoc vel ad illud. Et hoc pertinet ad virtutem studiositatis. Unde computatur inter virtutes morales. Reply Obj. 2: The act of a cognitive power is commanded by the appetitive power, which moves all the powers, as stated above (I-II, Q. 9, A. 1). Wherefore knowledge regards a twofold good. One is connected with the act of knowledge itself; and this good pertains to the intellectual virtues, and consists in man having a true estimate about each thing. The other good pertains to the act of the appetitive power, and consists in man’s appetite being directed aright in applying the cognitive power in this or that way to this or that thing. And this belongs to the virtue of studiousness. Wherefore it is reckoned among the moral virtues. Ad tertium dicendum quod, sicut philosophus dicit, in II Ethic., ad hoc quod homo fiat virtuosus, oportet quod servet se ab his ad quae maxime inclinat natura. Et inde est quod, quia natura praecipue inclinat ad timendum mortis pericula et ad sectandum delectabilia carnis, quod laus virtutis fortitudinis praecipue consistit in quadam firmitate persistendi contra huiusmodi pericula, et laus virtutis temperantiae in quadam refrenatione a delectabilibus carnis. Sed quantum ad cognitionem, est in homine contraria inclinatio. Quia ex parte animae, inclinatur homo ad hoc quod cognitionem rerum desideret, et sic oportet ut homo laudabiliter huiusmodi appetitum refrenet, ne immoderate rerum cognitioni intendat. Ex parte vero naturae corporalis, homo inclinatur ad hoc ut laborem inquirendi scientiam vitet. Quantum igitur ad primum, studiositas in refrenatione consistit, et secundum hoc ponitur pars temperantiae. Sed quantum ad secundum laus huius virtutis consistit in quadam vehementia intentionis ad scientiam rerum percipiendam, et ex hoc nominatur. Primum autem est essentialius huic virtuti quam secundum. Nam appetitus cognoscendi per se respicit cognitionem, ad quam ordinatur studiositas. Sed labor addiscendi est impedimentum quoddam cognitionis, unde respicitur ab hac virtute per accidens, quasi removendo prohibens. Reply Obj. 3: As the Philosopher says (Ethic. ii, 93) in order to be virtuous we must avoid those things to which we are most naturally inclined. Hence it is that, since nature inclines us chiefly to fear dangers of death, and to seek pleasures of the flesh, fortitude is chiefly commended for a certain steadfast perseverance against such dangers, and temperance for a certain restraint from pleasures of the flesh. But as regards knowledge, man has contrary inclinations. For on the part of the soul, he is inclined to desire knowledge of things; and so it behooves him to exercise a praiseworthy restraint on this desire, lest he seek knowledge immoderately: whereas on the part of his bodily nature, man is inclined to avoid the trouble of seeking knowledge. Accordingly, as regards the first inclination studiousness is a kind of restraint, and it is in this sense that it is reckoned a part of temperance. But as to the second inclination, this virtue derives its praise from a certain keenness of interest in seeking knowledge of things; and from this it takes its name. The former is more essential to this virtue than the latter: since the desire to know directly regards knowledge, to which studiousness is directed, whereas the trouble of learning is an obstacle to knowledge, wherefore it is regarded by this virtue indirectly, as by that which removes an obstacle. Quaestio 167 Question 167 De curiositate Curiosity Deinde considerandum est de curiositate. Et circa hoc quaeruntur duo. We must next consider curiosity, under which head there are two points of inquiry: Primo, utrum vitium curiositatis possit esse in cognitione intellectiva. (1) Whether the vice of curiosity can regard intellective knowledge? Secundo, utrum sit in cognitione sensitiva. (2) Whether it is about sensitive knowledge? Articulus 1 Article 1 Utrum circa cognitionem intellectivam possit esse curiositas Whether curiosity can be about intellective knowledge? Ad primum sic proceditur. Videtur quod circa cognitionem intellectivam non possit esse curiositas. Quia secundum philosophum, in II Ethic., in his quae secundum se sunt bona vel mala, non possunt accipi medium et extrema. Sed cognitio intellectiva secundum se est bona, in hoc enim perfectio hominis videtur consistere, ut intellectus eius de potentia reducatur in actum, quod fit per cognitionem veritatis. Dionysius etiam dicit, IV cap. de Div. Nom., quod bonum animae humanae est secundum rationem esse, cuius perfectio in cognitione veritatis consistit. Ergo circa cognitionem intellectivam non potest esse vitium curiositatis. Objection 1: It would seem that curiosity cannot be about intellective knowledge. Because, according to the Philosopher (Ethic. ii, 6), there can be no mean and extremes in things which are essentially good. Now intellective knowledge is essentially good: because man’s perfection would seem to consist in his intellect being reduced from potentiality to act, and this is done by the knowledge of truth. For Dionysius says (Div. Nom. iv) that the good of the human soul is to be in accordance with reason, whose perfection consists in knowing the truth. Therefore the vice of curiosity cannot be about intellective knowledge. Praeterea, illud per quod homo similatur Deo, et quod a Deo consequitur, non potest esse malum. Sed quaecumque abundantia cognitionis a Deo est, secundum illud Eccli. I, omnis sapientia a domino Deo est. Et Sap. VII dicitur, ipse dedit mihi horum quae sunt scientiam veram, ut sciam dispositionem orbis terrarum et virtutes elementorum, et cetera. Per hoc etiam homo Deo assimilatur, quod veritatem cognoscit, quia omnia nuda et aperta sunt oculis eius, ut habetur ad Heb. IV. Unde et I Reg. II dicitur quod Deus scientiarum dominus est, ergo, quantumcumque abundet cognitio veritatis, non est mala, sed bona. Appetitus autem boni non est vitiosus. Ergo circa intellectivam cognitionem veritatis non potest esse vitium curiositatis. Obj. 2: Further, that which makes man like to God, and which he receives from God, cannot be an evil. Now all abundance of knowledge is from God, according to Ecclus. 1:1, All wisdom is from the Lord God, and Wis. 7:17, He hath given me the true knowledge of things that are, to know the disposition of the whole world, and the virtues of the elements, etc. Again, by knowing the truth man is likened to God, since all things are naked and open to His eyes (Heb 4:13), and the Lord is a God of all knowledge (1 Kgs 2:3). Therefore however abundant knowledge of truth may be, it is not evil but good. Now the desire of good is not sinful. Therefore the vice of curiosity cannot be about the intellective knowledge of truth. Praeterea, si circa aliquam intellectivam cognitionem posset esse curiositatis vitium, praecipue esset circa philosophicas scientias. Sed eis intendere non videtur esse vitiosum, dicit enim Hieronymus, super Danielem, qui de mensa et vino regis noluerunt comedere ne polluantur, si sapientiam atque doctrinam Babyloniorum scirent esse peccatum, nunquam acquiescerent discere quod non licebat. Et Augustinus dicit, in II de Doctr. Christ., quod, si qua vera philosophi dixerunt, ab eis sunt, tanquam ab iniustis possessoribus, in usum nostrum vindicanda. Non ergo circa cognitionem intellectivam potest esse curiositas vitiosa. Obj. 3: Further, if the vice of curiosity can be about any kind of intellective knowledge, it would be chiefly about the philosophical sciences. But, seemingly, there is no sin in being intent on them: for Jerome says (Super Daniel 1:8): Those who refused to partake of the king’s meat and wine, lest they should be defiled, if they had considered the wisdom and teaching of the Babylonians to be sinful, would never have consented to learn that which was unlawful: and Augustine says (De Doctr. Christ. ii, 40) that if the philosophers made any true statements, we must claim them for our own use, as from unjust possessors. Therefore curiosity about intellective knowledge cannot be sinful.