In Question 73, Article 2, Aquinas discusses two types of privation: simple/pure and not simple, but retains something of the opposite habit. These distinctions are where Aquinas begins to look at how all sins are not equal. In the opening of his response in Article 2, he looks at what the Stoics and Cicero believed: “was that all sins are equal: from which opinion arose the error of certain heretics, who not only hold all sins to be equal, but also maintain that all the pains of hell are equal”. Aquinas quickly shuts down this belief by introducing the types of privations because the Stoics looked at sins just based off the simple privation type. The simple privation type basically states that privation is looked at as “being” corrupted; so …show more content…
Through this type of privation, it is easy to see how the Stoics saw sins as all equal because there was nothing of the opposite. This is where Aquinas’ second type of privation explains how sins are not all equal. The second privation is not simple, but retains something of the opposite habit and has to do with “becoming” corrupted, rather than “being” corrupted. The example that was given is sickness and how it can relate to vices and sins: “because in them the privation of the due commensuration of reason is such as not to destroy the order of reason altogether; else evil, if total, destroys itself”. Based on the second privation, the gravity of the sin depends on whether one departs more or less from reason. This can be seen in Dante, based on the fact that there are different levels of Hell and how there are punishments that are worse than another. Depending on the gravity of the sin is where one would be placed in Hell, which lines up with Aquinas’ view of sins being compared with another and against the Stoics view. It would not seem just that a sin of lust be treated the same for a sin of heresy or simony, which voluntarily go against the will of
Examining the two works against each other as if it were a debate makes it a bit clearer to compare. Aquinas, reveals his argument under the groundwork that there are essentially two methods of understanding the truth. One being that it can be surmised through reason an logic, and the other being via inner faith. On the surface at this point it could be argued that this ontological determination a bit less convoluted than Anselm, yet I tend to think it could be a bit more confusing. This is what leads him to the claim that the existence of God can be proven by reason alone or “a priori”. Stemming from this belief he formulated his Five Proofs or what he called the “Quinquae Viae”. The first of which is fairly simple based on the fact that something in motion had to have been moved. Agreeing that something set it in motion therefor there must have been a...
Dante Alighieri presents a vivid and awakening view of the depths of Hell in the first book of his Divine Comedy, the Inferno. The reader is allowed to contemplate the state of his own soul as Dante "visits" and views the state of the souls of those eternally assigned to Hell's hallows. While any one of the cantos written in Inferno will offer an excellent description of the suffering and justice of hell, Canto V offers a poignant view of the assignment of punishment based on the committed sin. Through this close reading, we will examine three distinct areas of Dante's hell: the geography and punishment the sinner is restricted to, the character of the sinner, and the "fairness" or justice of the punishment in relation to the sin. Dante's Inferno is an ordered and descriptive journey that allows the reader the chance to see his own shortcomings in the sinners presented in the text.
What are the three principles that Epicurus and Lucretius are arguing for in these passages?
In analyzing this gradient of morality, it is useful first to examine a work from early literature whose strong purity of morality is unwavering; for the purposes of this discussion, Dante’s Inferno provides this model. It is fairly straightforward to discover Dante’s dualistic construction of morality in his winding caverns of Hell; each stern, finite circle of Hell is associated with a clear sin that is both definable and directly punishable. As Dante moves downwards in this moral machination, he notes that
It is hard to place St. Augustine within just one of the levels of Dante’s hell for his sins were varied and not great. Today many of his sins are commonplace. For example, most people attempt to better their own lives without regard of others. They attempt to increase their standard of living and gain more worldly possessions. They are neither good nor evil but are just trying to make a living and keep up in today’s fend-for-yourself society. Before Augustine’s conversion, this was his goal. He was continually searching for “honors, money, (and) marriage” (Confessions, 991). This allows Augustine to be placed in the first area of hell, the Vestibule. It is a place for opportunists such as Augustine was before his conversion. It is a place for the “nearly soulless. . . who were neither for God nor Satan, but only for themselves” (Inferno, 1295). Augustine never intentionally hurt anyone, but his actions were led by his instincts to succeed and gain praise. These actions included kissing up to the Emperor, his study of law and the art of persuasion, and the mocking of newcomers to his profession. Since each of these sins also falls within a different realm of Dante’s hell, they will be discussed later in this paper.
This notion of the suitability of God’s punishments figures significantly in the structure of Dante’s Hell. To readers, as well as Dante himself (the character), the torments Dante and Virgil behold seem surprisingly harsh, possibly harsher than is fair, Dante exclaims this with surprise. He doesn’t actually wonder who decided on these tortures. He knows it was god. What he is questioning is how these punishments are just, since they don’t appear to be just from a human’s point of view which views each punishment together with its conjugate sin only superficially. For example, homosexuals must endure an eternity of walking on hot sand, and those who charge interest on loans sit beneath a rain of fire. At first glance, each one seems too terrible for any sin. However, when the poem is viewed as a whole, it becomes clear that the guiding principle of these punishments is one of balance. Sinners suffer punishment to the degree befitting the gravity of their sin, in a manner matching that sin’s nature. The structures of the poem and of hell serve to reinforce this correspondence.
In Dante’s Inferno, Dante takes a journey with Virgil through the many levels of Hell in order to experience and see the different punishments that sinners must endure for all eternity. As Dante and Virgil descend into the bowels of Hell, it becomes clear that the suffering increases as they continue to move lower into Hell, the conical recess in the earth created when Lucifer fell from Heaven. Dante values the health of society over self. This becomes evident as the sinners against society experience suffering greater than those suffer which were only responsible for sinning against themselves. Dante uses contrapasso, the Aristotelian theory that states a soul’s form of suffering in Hell contrasts or extends their sins in their life on earth, to ensure that the sinners never forget their crimes against God. Even though some of the punishments the sinners in Hell seem arbitrary, they are fitting because contrapasso forces each sinner to re-live the most horrible aspect of their sin to ensure they never forget their crimes against God.
Upon entering hell with Virgil, Dante becomes witness to the true perfection of the justice done to sinners after their earthly life is over. This divine justice inflicted by God chooses to punish the souls in hell in a way very similar or representative to how the souls sinned on Earth. For instance, those guilty of the sin of wrath "tear each other limb from limb" (133), a punishment which directly relates to the actions of the sinners. However, there are also punishments that are more symbolic of the actions of the sinners, such as th...
The first of the two divisions of Hell is Upper Hell. Upper Hell is the area habitated by those committing sins of incontinence or lack of self-restraint. This lack of self-restraint could be in the form of anything from sex to mood. Before delving into the sins of incontinence, one must first look into the first inconsistency of the Inferno. This inconsistency is found in the Vestibule of Hell. The Vestibule of Hell contains the trimmers and the neutrals. Although almost all other sins mentioned in the Inferno are of an ethical, universal standpoint, the ones mentioned here are sins only from the Christian point of view. These neutrals are the people who either showed no partisanship or did not take sides. Lines 37-39 and 46-50 read:
Aquinas' Arguments for the Existence of God In Summa Theologica, Question 2, Article 3, Aquinas attempts to prove the existence of God. He begins with two objections, which will not be addressed here, and continues on to state five arguments for the existence of God. I intend to show that Aquinas' first three arguments are unsound from a scientific standpoint, through support of the Big Bang theory of the creation of the universe. In the first and second arguments Aquinas begins by stating that some things change and that the changes to these things are caused by things other than themselves. He says that a thing can change only if it has a potentiality for being that into what it changes.
II.i.17 ff, Angelo on justice without mercy: "'Tis one thing to be tempted, Escalus,/Another thing to fall. I not deny,/The jury, passing on the prisoner's life,/May in the sworn twelve have a thief or two/Guiltier than him they try. What's open made to justice,/That justice seizes: what know the laws/That thieves do pass on thieves?"--this is unmitigated justice, just as II.i.30-31: "Let mine own judgement pattern out my death, [which Angelo is willing to accept once caught, in V.
Hell usually personifies what would be considered excessive rather than deficiency in Aristotle’s code of ethics because of its background in the Catholic religion. One example of this exists with humility. In the Catholic context, humility stands a virtue that is praised in The Bible (and therefore Inferno) whereas in Nicomachean Ethics humility is a vice to be looked down on. This continues to be the case with many different excesses and virtues for Aristotle. Although some differences between vice and virtue exist in the two texts, the theory that Hell personifies the qualities Aristotle tells us to avoid is still plausible.
Glaucon attempted to prove that injustice is preferable to justice. At first, Glacon agreed with Socrates that justice is a good thing, but implored on the nature of its goodness? He listed three types of “good”; that which is good for its own sake (such as playing games), that which is good is good in itself and has useful consequences (such as reading), and that which is painful but has good consequences (such as surgery). Socrates replied that justice "belongs in the fairest class, that which a man who is to be happy must love both for its own sake and for the results." (45d) Glaucon then reaffirmed Thrasymachus’s position that unjust people lead a better life than just people. He started that being just is simply a formality for maintaining a good reputation and for achieving one’s goals. He claimed that the only reason why a person would choose to be unjust rather than just due to the fear of punishment. This is supported by the story of the shepherd who became corrupted as a result of finding a ring which made him invisible. He took over the kingdom through murder and intrigue since he knew there could be no repercussions for his unjust actions. In addition, Adiamantus stated that unjust people did not need to fear divine punishment since appeals could be made to Gods’ egos via sacrifices. Finally, Glaucon gave an example of the extreme unjust person who has accumulated great wealth and power which he juxtaposed with an extreme moral man who is being punished unjustly for his crimes. Clearly, injustice is preferable to justice since it provides for a more fruitful life.
A tort can be defined as a wrong that interferes with a person’s legally protected interests , whereas, a delict can be defined as a wrongful act causing damage to someone’s personality, family or property. There are many similarities between the Roman law of Delicts and the common law of Torts, including the similarity between the tort of liability for animals and the Actio de Pauperie and the Edict of the Aediles, the tort of trespass to land and the tort of wrongful death which is similar to the delict of wrongful damage to property or the Lex Aquila. The similarity between the tort of trespass to chattels and the delict of theft and robbery, and the similarity between the tort of trespass to the person, in the form of assault and the delict of insult or injuria. However there is only one major difference between the roman law of delicts and the common law of torts, the roman law of delicts has a penal element to its punishment , whereas the common law of torts is strictly a civil and compensatory damages punishment.
A Philosophical Criticism of Augustine and Aquinas: The Relationship of Soul and Body The relationship of the human soul and physical body is a topic that has mystified philosophers, scholars, scientists, and mankind as a whole for centuries. Human beings, who are always concerned about their place as individuals in this world, have attempted to determine the precise nature or state of the physical form. They are concerned for their well-being in this earthly environment, as well as their spiritual well-being; and most have been perturbed by the suggestion that they cannot escape the wrongs they have committed while in their physical bodies.