In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

1 1. For biographical information, see James A. Weisheipl, Friar Thomas D’aquino: His Life, Thought, and Works (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1983); Simon Tugwell, “Thomas Aquinas: Introduction,” in Albert and Thomas: Selected Writings, ed. Simon Tugwell (Mahwah, N.J.: Paulist Press, 1988); and Jean-Pierre Torrell, Saint Thomas Aquinas, Vol. 1: The Person and His Work (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1996). When there are discrepancies in these accounts, I follow Torrell. 2. For this account of liberum arbitrium in medieval thought, see J. B. Korolec , “Free Will and Free Choice,” in The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy, ed. Norman Kretzmann, Anthony Kenny, and Jan Pinborg (Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1982), 630–34. The term predates medieval theology and had been used in classical literary and legal formulations to indicate the power to decide or the freedom to act; see Daniel Westberg, Right Practical Reason: Aristotle, Action, and Prudence in Aquinas (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994), 81–82. A classic and still unmatched study is Odon Lottin, “Libre arbitre et liberté depuis saint Anselme jusqu’à la fin du XIIIe siècle,” in Psychologie et morale aux XIIe et XIIIe siècles, vol. 1, 2nd ed. (Gembloux: J. Duculot, 1957), 11–389. I n t roduc t ion Aquinas: Historical and Intellectual Background Thomas Aquinas was born at Roccasecca, midway between Rome and Naples, probably in 1225.1 He was an oblate at the Benedictine abbey of Monte Cassino and then a student at Naples . After becoming a Dominican friar he spent the rest of his life studying, teaching, and writing in Cologne, Paris, Rome, and other Italian locations. He died in 1274 at Fossanova, south of Rome, on his way to the Council of Lyon. Aquinas was not teaching in a vacuum, and the questions of freedom, identity, and happiness that concern us here were already much discussed in the thirteenth century. The cluster of problems concerning human freedom and action that are debated by contemporary English-speaking philosophers under the title “freedom of the will” were discussed in the Middle Ages under the heading liberum arbitrium, free decision or free judgment .2 It was a matter of debate whether the will or some other faculty was the bearer of this freedom—if it existed at all. Before 2 = introduction the thirteenth century various aspects of human freedom had been distinguished (by Bernard of Clairvaux, John of La Rochelle, Odo Regaldus, and others). In the early part of the thirteenth century William of Auxerre argued that free decision is essentially an act of reason; Philip the Chancellor that it is principally a matter of the will (although reason and will are in substance the same faculty but two different activities); and an anonymous writer from the same period that it is a third power distinct from both. The relation of reason, will, and freedom of decision remained a major topic throughout the century. It became characteristic of Dominican writers to associate freedom closely with reason, and of Franciscans to locate it more in the will. Happiness, beatitudo, was another concept with a long history.3 There was a theological conviction, much influenced by Augustine, that true happiness is to be found only in the contemplation of God in the world to come. There can be no happiness in this world because “all men, so long as they are mortal, are also necessarily wretched.”4 For the most part, prior to the thirteenth century, the Boethian concept of happiness that grew out of this attitude was generally accepted: the fragility of earthly things admits of no perfect condition; and human happiness is to be found only in another world where multiplicity is made one and fragility is exchanged for permanence.5 Yet Aristotelian and even some Christian conceptions of human nature also understood happiness as the perfection of human nature, in which human achievements must play some part. Is there such a thing as a purely human good that can be attained by one’s own actions? What connection do our present attempts to find fulfillment have with a future fulfillment that will transform our very existence? There seemed to be a need to distinguish between different types of happiness. It was William of Auxerre (died 1231) who first made the theological distinction between perfect happiness, experienced by the saints in heaven, and imperfect happiness , which we can taste here in the present. It was against this background that Aquinas developed...

Share