Disputationes metaphysicae
Francisco Suárez (1548–1617)
Disputationes metaphysicae, in quibus universa naturalis theologia ordinate traditur, et quaestiones omnes ad duodecim Aristotelis libros pertinentes accurate disputantur
First published 1597
Francisco Suárez's fifty-four metaphysical disputations, the systematic metaphysics of the late scholastic tradition, first published at Salamanca in 1597. This edition gives the Latin of the prooemium and all fifty-four disputations — the first part on being and its passions (I–XI), the second on its causes (XII–XXVII), and the third on the division of being into infinite and finite, substance and the nine kinds of accident, and beings of reason (XXVIII–LIV) — with the transcription's apparatus of variant readings from the 1597, 1600, 1605, 1614, 1751 and 1861 editions, and the facsimile of the 1597 print.
Prooemium
Disputatio I: ON THE NATURE OF FIRST PHILOSOPHY OR METAPHYSICS
Sectio I: WHAT THE OBJECT OF METAPHYSICS IS
Sectio II: WHETHER METAPHYSICS IS CONCERNED WITH ALL THINGS ACCORDING TO THEIR PROPER NOTIONS
Sectio III: WHETHER METAPHYSICS IS ONLY ONE SCIENCE
Sectio IV: HOW MANY ARE THE FUNCTIONS OF THIS SCIENCE, WHAT ITS END, AND WHAT ITS USEFULNESS
Sectio V: WHETHER METAPHYSICS IS THE MOST PERFECT SPECULATIVE SCIENCE, AND TRUE WISDOM
Sectio VI: WHETHER AMONG ALL THE SCIENCES METAPHYSICS IS MOST OF ALL DESIRED BY MAN WITH NATURAL APPETITE
Disputatio II: ON THE ESSENTIAL NOTION OR CONCEPT OF BEING
Sectio I: WHETHER BEING IN SO FAR AS IT IS BEING HAS IN OUR MIND ONE FORMAL CONCEPT COMMON TO ALL BEINGS
Sectio II: WHETHER BEING HAS ONE CONCEPT OR OBJECTIVE FORMAL NOTION
Sectio III: WHETHER THE NOTION OR CONCEPT OF BEING IS IN REALITY AND BEFORE THE INTELLECT IN SOME WAY PRESCINDED FROM ITS INFERIORS
Sectio IV: IN WHAT THE NOTION OF BEING IN SO FAR AS IT IS BEING CONSISTS, AND HOW IT BELONGS TO THE INFERIOR BEINGS
Sectio V: WHETHER THE NOTION OF BEING TRANSCENDS ALL THE NOTIONS AND DIFFERENCES OF THE INFERIOR BEINGS, SO THAT IT IS INTIMATELY AND ESSENTIALLY INCLUDED IN THEM
Sectio VI: HOW BEING IN SO FAR AS IT IS BEING IS CONTRACTED OR DETERMINED TO ITS INFERIORS
Disputatio III: ON THE ATTRIBUTES OF BEING IN COMMON AND ITS PRINCIPLES
Sectio I: WHETHER BEING IN SO FAR AS IT IS BEING HAS SOME ATTRIBUTES, AND OF WHAT KIND THEY ARE
Sectio II: HOW MANY ARE THE ATTRIBUTES OF BEING, AND WHAT ORDER THEY KEEP AMONG THEMSELVES
Sectio III: BY WHAT PRINCIPLES THE ATTRIBUTES CAN BE DEMONSTRATED OF BEING, AND WHETHER AMONG THEM THIS IS THE FIRST: IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE SAME THING AT THE SAME TIME TO BE AND NOT TO BE
Disputatio IV: ON TRANSCENDENTAL UNITY IN COMMON
Sectio I: WHETHER TRANSCENDENTAL UNITY ADDS TO BEING SOME POSITIVE NOTION, OR ONLY A PRIVATIVE ONE
Sectio II: WHETHER ONE FORMALLY EXPRESSES ONLY THE NEGATION WHICH IT ADDS OVER BEING, OR SOMETHING ELSE
Sectio III: HOW MANIFOLD UNITY IS IN THINGS
Sectio IV: WHETHER UNITY IS AN ADEQUATE ATTRIBUTE OF BEING, AND ON THE DIVISION OF BEING INTO ONE AND MANY
Sectio V: WHETHER THE DIVISION OF BEING INTO ONE AND MANY IS ANALOGOUS
Sectio VI: HOW ONE AND MANY ARE OPPOSED
Sectio VII: WHETHER ONE IS PRIOR TO MANY, AND INDIVISION TO DIVISION
Sectio VIII: WHETHER THE DIVISION OF BEING INTO ONE AND MANY IS THE FIRST OF ALL
Sectio IX: WHETHER TRANSCENDENTAL UNITY IS NUMERICAL UNITY, OR WHAT IT IS
Disputatio V: ON INDIVIDUAL UNITY AND ITS PRINCIPLE
Sectio I: WHETHER ALL THINGS WHICH EXIST OR CAN EXIST ARE SINGULAR AND INDIVIDUAL
Sectio II: WHETHER IN ALL NATURES THE INDIVIDUAL AND SINGULAR THING, AS SUCH, ADDS SOMETHING OVER THE COMMON OR SPECIFIC NATURE
Sectio III: WHETHER SIGNATE MATTER IS THE PRINCIPLE OF INDIVIDUATION IN MATERIAL SUBSTANCES
Sectio IV: WHETHER THE SUBSTANTIAL FORM IS THE PRINCIPLE OF INDIVIDUATION OF MATERIAL SUBSTANCES
Sectio V: WHETHER THE PRINCIPLE OF INDIVIDUATION IS THE EXISTENCE OF THE SINGULAR THING
Sectio VI: WHAT, FINALLY, THE PRINCIPLE OF INDIVIDUATION IS IN ALL CREATED SUBSTANCES
Sectio VII: WHETHER THE PRINCIPLE OF INDIVIDUATION OF ACCIDENTS IS TO BE TAKEN FROM THE SUBJECT
Sectio VIII: WHETHER IT IS REPUGNANT THAT TWO ACCIDENTS DIVERSE ONLY IN NUMBER BE AT THE SAME TIME IN THE SAME SUBJECT ON ACCOUNT OF THEIR INDIVIDUATION
Sectio IX: WHETHER IT IS REPUGNANT TO THE INDIVIDUATION OF ACCIDENTS THAT SEVERAL DIFFERING ONLY IN NUMBER BE SUCCESSIVELY IN THE SAME SUBJECT
Disputatio VI: ON FORMAL AND UNIVERSAL UNITY
Sectio I: WHETHER THERE IS IN THINGS SOME FORMAL UNITY DISTINCT FROM NUMERICAL UNITY AND LESS THAN IT
Sectio II: WHETHER THE UNIVERSAL UNITY OF THE NATURE, DISTINCT FROM FORMAL UNITY, IS IN THINGS BEFORE THE OPERATION OF THE MIND
Sectio III: WHETHER THE COMMON NATURE OF ITSELF HAS SOME UNITY OF PRESCISSION OUTSIDE THE INDIVIDUALS, AND BEFORE THE OPERATION OF THE MIND
Sectio IV: WHAT THE APTITUDE TO BE IN MANY IS IN THE UNIVERSAL NATURE
Sectio V: WHETHER UNIVERSAL UNITY ARISES FROM THE OPERATION OF THE INTELLECT, AND HOW THE DIFFICULTIES POSITED TO THE CONTRARY ARE TO BE SATISFIED
Sectio VI: BY WHAT OPERATION OF THE INTELLECT THINGS BECOME UNIVERSAL
Sectio VII: WHETHER UNIVERSALS ARE REAL BEINGS, CORPOREAL, SUBSTANTIAL OR ACCIDENTAL, AND WHAT CAUSES THEY HAVE
Sectio VIII: HOW MANIFOLD THE UNIVERSAL, OR ITS UNITY, IS
Sectio IX: HOW THE UNITY OF GENUS AND DIFFERENCE ARE DISTINGUISHED IN THE THING, BOTH AMONG THEMSELVES AND FROM SPECIFIC UNITY
Sectio X: WHETHER THE METAPHYSICAL ABSTRACTS OF GENERA, SPECIES AND DIFFERENCES CAN TRULY BE PREDICATED OF ONE ANOTHER
Sectio XI: WHAT THE PRINCIPLE OF FORMAL AND UNIVERSAL UNITY IS IN THINGS
Disputatio VII: ON THE VARIOUS KINDS OF DISTINCTIONS
Sectio I: WHETHER BESIDES THE REAL DISTINCTION AND THE DISTINCTION OF REASON THERE IS SOME OTHER DISTINCTION IN THINGS
Sectio II: BY WHAT SIGNS OR MODES THE VARIOUS GRADES OF THE DISTINCTION OF THINGS CAN BE DISCERNED
Sectio III: HOW SAME AND DIVERSE ARE COMPARED BOTH AMONG THEMSELVES AND TO BEING
Disputatio VIII: ON TRUTH, OR THE TRUE, WHICH IS AN ATTRIBUTE OF BEING
Sectio I: WHETHER FORMAL TRUTH IS IN THE COMPOSITION AND DIVISION OF THE INTELLECT
Sectio II: WHAT THE TRUTH OF KNOWLEDGE IS
Sectio III: WHETHER THE TRUTH OF KNOWLEDGE IS ONLY IN COMPOSITION AND DIVISION, OR ALSO IN SIMPLE CONCEPTS
Sectio IV: WHETHER THE TRUTH OF KNOWLEDGE OR OF THE INTELLECT IS NOT IN IT UNTIL IT JUDGES
Sectio V: WHETHER THE TRUTH OF KNOWLEDGE IS ONLY IN THE SPECULATIVE INTELLECT OR ALSO IN THE PRACTICAL
Sectio VI: WHETHER TRUTH IS IN DIVISION EQUALLY AS IN COMPOSITION
Sectio VII: WHETHER THERE IS SOME TRUTH IN THINGS WHICH IS AN ATTRIBUTE OF BEING
Sectio VIII: WHETHER TRUTH IS SAID FIRST OF THE TRUTH OF KNOWLEDGE RATHER THAN OF THE TRUTH OF THE THING, AND IN WHAT WAY
Disputatio IX: ON FALSITY OR THE FALSE
Sectio I: WHAT AND WHERE FALSITY IS, AND WHETHER IT IS A PROPERTY OF BEING
Sectio II: WHAT THE ORIGIN OF FALSITY IS
Sectio III: WHENCE THE DIFFICULTY OF ATTAINING TRUTH ARISES
Disputatio X: ON THE GOOD, OR TRANSCENDENTAL GOODNESS
Sectio I: WHAT THE GOOD OR GOODNESS IS
Sectio II: HOW MANIFOLD THE GOOD IS
Sectio III: WHICH GOOD IT IS THAT IS CONVERTIBLE WITH BEING AS ITS ATTRIBUTE
Disputatio XI: ON EVIL
Sectio I: WHETHER EVIL IS SOMETHING IN THINGS, AND HOW MANIFOLD IT IS
Sectio II: HOW MANIFOLD EVIL IS
Sectio III: WHERE AND WHENCE EVIL IS, OR WHAT CAUSES IT HAS
Sectio IV: WHY EVIL IS NOT NUMBERED AMONG THE ATTRIBUTES OF BEING
Disputatio XII: ON THE CAUSES OF BEING IN GENERAL
Sectio I: WHETHER CAUSE AND PRINCIPLE ARE ALTOGETHER THE SAME
Sectio II: WHETHER THERE IS SOME COMMON NOTION OF CAUSE, AND WHAT AND OF WHAT KIND
Sectio III: HOW MANIFOLD CAUSE IS
Disputatio XIII: ON THE MATERIAL CAUSE OF SUBSTANCE
Sectio I: WHETHER IT IS EVIDENT BY NATURAL REASON THAT THERE IS IN BEINGS A MATERIAL CAUSE OF SUBSTANCES, WHICH WE NAME PRIME MATTER
Sectio II: WHETHER THE MATERIAL CAUSE OF GENERABLE AND CORRUPTIBLE SUBSTANCES IS ONE OR MANIFOLD
Sectio III: WHETHER THE FIRST AND ONLY MATERIAL CAUSE OF GENERABLE SUBSTANCES IS SOME SIMPLE BODY OR INTEGRAL SUBSTANCE
Sectio IV: WHETHER PRIME MATTER HAS SOME ACTUAL ENTITY, INGENERABLE AND INCORRUPTIBLE
Sectio V: WHETHER MATTER IS PURE POTENCY, AND IN WHAT SENSE THIS IS TO BE TAKEN
Sectio VI: HOW MATTER CAN BE KNOWN
Sectio VII: WHAT MATTER CAUSES
Sectio VIII: THROUGH WHAT MATTER CAUSES
Sectio IX: WHAT THE CAUSALITY OF MATTER IS
Sectio X: WHETHER A SUBSTANTIAL MATERIAL CAUSE IS FOUND IN INCORRUPTIBLE BODIES
Sectio XI: WHETHER THE MATTER OF INCORRUPTIBLE BODIES IS OF THE SAME NOTION AS THAT OF THE ELEMENTS
Sectio XII: WHICH MATTER IS MORE PERFECT, THE HEAVENLY OR THE ELEMENTAL
Sectio XIII: OF WHAT KIND IS THE CAUSALITY OF THE MATTER OF INCORRUPTIBLE BODIES
Sectio XIV: WHETHER IN INCORPOREAL THINGS THERE CAN BE A SUBSTANTIAL MATERIAL CAUSE, AND HOW QUANTITY IS COMPARED TO THIS MATERIAL CAUSE
Disputatio XIV: ON THE MATERIAL CAUSE OF ACCIDENTS
Sectio I: WHETHER THERE IS A TRUE MATERIAL CAUSE OF ACCIDENTS
Sectio II: WHETHER SUBSTANCE AS SUCH CAN BE THE IMMEDIATE MATERIAL CAUSE OF ACCIDENTS
Sectio III: WHICH SUBSTANCE CAN BE THE MATERIAL CAUSE OF ACCIDENTS
Sectio IV: WHETHER ONE ACCIDENT CAN BE THE PROXIMATE MATERIAL CAUSE OF ANOTHER
Disputatio XV: ON THE SUBSTANTIAL FORMAL CAUSE
Sectio I: WHETHER THERE ARE SUBSTANTIAL FORMS IN MATERIAL THINGS
Sectio II: HOW THE SUBSTANTIAL FORM CAN COME ABOUT IN MATTER AND FROM MATTER
Sectio III: WHETHER IN THE EDUCTION OF THE SUBSTANTIAL FORM MATTER MUST PRECEDE IN TIME
Sectio IV: WHETHER THE FORM, WHILE IT IS EDUCED FROM MATTER, COMES ABOUT PER SE
Sectio V: WHAT IS THE PROPER NOTION OF THE SUBSTANTIAL FORM AND ITS PROPER CAUSALITY IN ITS GENUS
1. The description of form in genus.—From what has been said of the existence of substantial form and of the mode in which it comes about, it can easily be understood what it itself is and what mode of causing it has; but we can comprehend each in this brief description: form is a certain simple and incomplete substance which, as the act of matter, constitutes with it the essence of the composite substance. In which description substance is posited in place of genus, in the way in which it is distinguished by the Philosopher into matter, form and composite. And by that particle this form is distinguished from accidental ones, which are not substances; it can also be distinguished from substantial modes; for, although these are reduced to the predicament of substance, they are nevertheless not substances in that propriety; whence neither are they enumerated by Aristotle in that partition, because they are not properly substantial entities, as is the form, which by this reason is called substance. But simple and incomplete is added in order that by the former particle it may be separated from composite substance, but by the latter from separated substances, which sometimes are wont to be called assisting forms, as those which move the heavenly bodies, which in truth do not exercise the function of formal cause but some efficiency; wherefore they are not substantial forms as we are now speaking of them.
2. How the form is said to be the act of a physical body.—The remaining part of the definition distinguishes the form from matter, which too is a simple and incomplete substance, yet as potency; but the form as the primary act of that potency. And therefore Aristotle, De Anima II, defined the soul to be the act of a physical body, etc. Which definition can easily be accommodated to form in common if by the name of act we understand substantial act, as it must be understood, and only say that form is the act of a physical body, taking away the remaining part which separates the soul from the forms of inanimate things. But by physical body we can understand either matter itself, in so far as it is the other part of the natural composite, which, in order that it be informed by the form, is always supposed in the order of nature in its genus of cause affected by quantity and some proximate dispositions, and by that reason can be called a physical body; or we can also understand by physical body the natural being itself which consists of matter and form, whose act the form is said to be as constituting it; in which way Aristotle too defined it to be the act of the living, or that by which we live. Each relationship, then, we have explained in the said part of our description; for the substantial form is so an incomplete substance that it is the act of matter—act (I say) either actually informing or by its nature instituted to inform matter, for words (as they say) in definitions express aptitude, and so the rational soul is comprehended, even if it is separated from the body. And hence it consequently has that with matter it composes the essence of the natural being, which is composite substance; and therefore Aristotle, Physics II, c. 3, says that form is the notion of the essence or quiddity, that is, which completes the essence of the natural composite and distinguishes it essentially and quidditatively from others.
3. And hence the causality of form too has been explained; for, because the form is essentially act, therefore it intrinsically includes a transcendental relationship to that whose act it is and to the actuation which it exercises in it; and therefore the notion of form can scarcely be declared except through the relationship to its causality. In which we can consider those four things which we expect in every cause, namely the formal principle of causing, the condition necessary for causing, the causation itself, and the effect which is caused, all of which are to be explained one by one, as we did in matter, although, the things said there being supposed, they can be dispatched more briefly here.