i, 1), that the object defined comes in our knowledge before the parts of its definition. Ergo universalia sunt posterius nota quoad nos. Sed universaliora sunt partes definitionis minus universalium, sicut animal est pars definitionis hominis. quod definitum prius cadit in cognitione nostra quam partes definitionis. Praeterea, philosophus dicit, in I Physic. Therefore they are known secondarily by us. 2: Further, the composition precedes the simple in relation to us. Praeterea, composita sunt priora quoad nos quam simplicia. Therefore the universals are secondarily known as regards our intellect. But universals come first as regards their nature, because that is first which does not involve the existence of its correlative ( Categor. For what is first and more known in its own nature, is secondarily and less known in relation to ourselves. Objection 1: It would seem that the more universal is not first in our intellectual cognition. ![]() Ergo universalia sunt posteriora in cognitione nostri intellectus. Sed universalia sunt priora secundum naturam, quia prius est a quo non convertitur subsistendi consequentia. Quia ea quae sunt priora et notiora secundum naturam, sunt posteriora et minus nota secundum nos. Videtur quod magis universalia non sint priora in nostra cognitione intellectuali. Utrum magis universalia sint priora in nostra cognitione intellectuali Whether the more universal is first in our intellectual cognition? Ad tertium sic proceditur.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |