Thursday, February 18, 2010

1a 2ae q17 a2: Whether command belongs to irrational animals? No.

Impossibile est quod in brutis animalibus, sit aliquo modo imperium, quia in quibus non est ratio; sed ordinare est proprius actus rationis.

It is impossible that brute animals should command in any way, because they are devoid of formal aspect; but to direct is the proper act of aspectual apprehension.

Aliter invenitur impetus ad opus in brutis animalibus, et aliter in hominibus. Homines enim faciunt impetum ad opus per ordinationem rationis, unde habet in eis impetus rationem imperii.

Impulse to action is in brute animals otherwise than in man. For the impulse of man to action arises from the direction of formal aspect; wherefore his impulse has the formal aspect of command.

In brutis autem fit impetus ad opus per instinctum naturae, quia scilicet appetitus eorum statim apprehenso convenienti vel inconvenienti, naturaliter movetur ad prosecutionem vel fugam. Unde ordinantur ab alio ad agendum, non autem ipsa seipsa ordinant ad actionem. Et ideo in eis est impetus, sed non imperium.

On the other hand, the impulse of the brute animal arises from anatomical imperatives; because as soon as they apprehend the fitting or the unfitting, their appetite is moved naturally to pursue (+) or to avoid (-). Wherefore they are directed by another to act; and they themselves do not direct themselves to act. Consequently in them is impulse but not command.

In brutis animalibus corpus quidem habet unde obediat, sed anima non habet unde imperet, quia non habet unde ordinet. Et ideo non est ibi ratio imperantis et imperati; sed solum moventis et moti.

The body of the brute animal is competent to obey; but its soul is not competent to command, because it is not competent to direct. Consequently there is no formal aspect there of commander and commanded; but only of mover and moved.