The Prima Secundæ Partis Q. 6 A. 8 Aquinas Literary Analysis

790 Words4 Pages
The Prima Secundæ Partis Q.6, A.8 Aquinas discusses whether ignorance causes involuntariness. Aquinas questions this, and he spends most or all of the eighth article explaining this concept. In the context of the text is that involuntariness is to act against one’s will, and ignorance is the lack of knowledge. Both of these terms are somewhat related. Objection two claims that sins imply ignorance and ignorance causes involuntariness. This leads to the idea that every sin is involuntary. The reply to objection two seems to work because the text provides examples of three kinds of ignorance: concomitant, consequent, and antecedent. This kinds of ignorance suggests that not every ignorance declines our knowledge and do not cause involuntariness.…show more content…
Basically, it is accidental. The text uses the example of the man, foe, and stag. The point is even the man has planned to murder his foe. For the reason of getting revenge, and the man kills the stag instead. This situation is accidental because the man did not mean to kill the stag. This type of ignorance is nor did evil or he sin because the situation is not murder. Consequent ignorance is a cause of action since it is supposed to happen. The agent known about what is happening, and the agent does not care to know what happen. The Prima Secundæ Partis Q.6, A.8 reply claims that ignorance is consequent. It can be two ways of voluntary acts, First, because the act of the will is brought to bear on the ignorance: as when a man wishes not to know, that he may have an excuse for sin…Secondly, ignorance is said to be voluntary, when it regards that which one can and ought to know. Consequent ignorance is known as the “affected” ignorance. The “affected” ignorance provide the knowledge to prevent a person to do their actions. . Finally, the last kind of ignorance is antecedent. Antecedent ignorance is the cause of action. If ignorance does not exist, then the action can be done. The text provided the example of the man and the “slays a passer-by”. The modern example of this can make this clearer. For example, a driver of a car at night who is responsible, yet knocks down a pedestrian. The driver known the pedestrian was there, he would not have run over him. In this way, the ignorance was the cause of the action. If a person is ignorant, but he or she does not know it being ignorant is not a sin. Because how someone can have the knowledge to be able to correct themselves. Although, if a person choses to be ignorance without correcting their mistakes it is considered a sin. Overall, the reply from Prima Secundæ Partis Q.6, A.8 states that ignorance of choice is voluntary, not

    More about The Prima Secundæ Partis Q. 6 A. 8 Aquinas Literary Analysis

      Open Document