Aristotle
source, they possess the divine element in very different degrees,
and are very unequal in comparative worth and dignity. The lowest
variety, or nutritive soul--the only one possessed by plants, among
which there is no separation of sex[146]--is contained potentially in
the seed, and is thus transmitted when that seed is matured into a
new individual. In animals, which possess it along with the sensitive
soul and among which the sexes are separated, it is also contained
potentially in the generative system of the female separately; and
the first commencement of life in the future animal is thus a purely
vegetable life.[147] The sensitive soul, the characteristic of the
complete animal, cannot be superadded except by copulation and the
male semen. The female, being comparatively impotent and having less
animal heat, furnishes only the matter of the future offspring; form,
or the moving, fecundating, cause, is supplied by the male. Through
the two together the new individual animal is completed, having not
merely the nutritive soul, but also the sentient soul along with
it.[148]
[Footnote 146: Ibid. I. xxiii. p. 731, a. 27.]
[Footnote 147: Aristot. De Generat. Animal. II. iii. p. 736, b. 12.]
[Footnote 148: Ibid. I. ii. p. 716, a. 4-17; xix. p. 726, b. 33; xx.
p. 728, a. 17; xxi. p. 729, b. 6-27.]
Both the nutritive and the sentient souls have, each of them
respectively, a special bodily agency and movement belonging to them.
But the Noûs, or the noëtic soul, has no partnership with any similar
bodily agency. There is no special corporeal potentiality (to speak
in Aristotelian language) which it is destined to actualize. It
enters from without, and emanates from a still more exalted influence
of that divine celestial substance from which all psychical or
vitalizing heat proceeds.[149] It is superinduced upon the nutritive
and sentient souls, and introduces itself at an age of the individual
later than both of them. Having no part of the bodily organism
specially appropriated to it, this variety of soul--what is called
the Noûs--stands distinguished from the other two in being perfectly
separable from the body;[150] that is, separable from the organized
body which it is the essential function of the two lower souls to
actualize, and with which both of them are bound up. The Noûs is not
separable from the body altogether; it belongs essentially to the
divine celestial body, and to those luminaries and other divine
beings by whom portions of it are tenanted. Theorizing
contemplation--the perfect, unclouded, unembarrassed, exercise of
the theoretical Noûs--is the single mental activity of these
divinities; contemplation of the formal regularity of the Kosmos,
with its eternal and faultless rotations, and with their own
perfection as participating therein. The celestial body is the body
whereto Noûs, or the noëtic soul, properly belongs;[151] quite apart
from the two other souls, sentient and nutritive, upon which it is
grafted in the animal body; and apart also from all the necessities
of human action, preceded by balanced motives and deliberate
choice.[152]
[Footnote 149: Ibid. II. iii. p. 736, b. 27: [Greek: lei/petai de\
to\n nou=n mo/non thu/rathen e)peisie/nai, kai\ thei=on ei)=nai
mo/non; ou)the\n ga\r au)tou= tê=| e)nergei/a| koinônei= sômatikê\
e)ne/rgeia.] The words [Greek: thei=on ei)=nai _mo/non_] must not be
construed strictly, for in the next following passage he proceeds to
declare that _all_ [Greek: psuchê/, psuchikê\ du/namis] or [Greek:
a)rchê/], partakes of the divine element, and that in this respect
there is only a difference of degree between one [Greek: psuchê\] and
another.]
[Footnote 150: Ibid. p. 737, a. 10: [Greek: o( kalou/menos nou=s]. De
Animâ, II. ii. p. 413, b. 25; iii. p. 415, a. 11.]
[Footnote 151: Respecting [Greek: to\ a)/nô sô=ma], see the copious
citations in Trendelenburg's note ad Aristot. De Animâ, II. vii.;
Comm. p. 373.]
[Footnote 152: Aristot. Ethic. Nikom. X. viii. p. 1178, b. 20:
[Greek: tô=| dê\ zô=nti tou= pra/ttein a)phê|rême/nô|, e)/ti de\
ma=llon tou= poiei=n, ti/ lei/petai plê\n theôri/as? ô(/ste ê( tou=
theou= e)ne/rgeia, makario/têti diaphe/rousa, theôrêtikê\ a)\n
ei)/ê.]--See also Metaphysic. [Greek: L]. v. p. 1074, b. 26-35.]
From this celestial body, a certain influence of Noûs is transferred
to some of the mortal inhabitants of earth, water, and air. Thus a
third or noëtic soul--or rather a third noëtic function--is added to
the two existing functions, sensitive and nutrient, of the animal
soul, which acquires thereby an improved aptitude for, and
correlation with, the Formal and Universal. We have already stated
that the sensitive soul possesses this aptitude to a certain extent;
it receives the impression of sensible forms, without being impressed
by the matter accompanying them. The noëtic function strengthens and
sharpens the aptitude; the soul comes into correlation with those
cogitable or intellective forms which are involved in the sensible
forms;[153] it rises from the lower generalities of the Second
Philosophy, to the higher generalities of the First Philosophy.
[Footnote 153: Aristot. De Animâ, III. viii. p. 432, a. 6: [Greek:
e)n toi=s ei)/desi toi=s ai)sthêtoi=s ta\ noêta/ e)stin.]]
As the sentient or percipient soul is the form or correlate of all
perceivables, and thus identified with them in nature, all of them
having existence only in relation to it,--so the cogitant or
intellective soul is the form or correlate of all cogitables, all of
which exist relatively to it, and only relatively.[154] It is in fact
the highest of all forms--the Form of Forms; the mental or subjective
aspect of all formal reality.
[Footnote 154: Ibid. p. 432, b. 2: [Greek: o( nou=s ei)/dos ei)dô=n
kai\ ê( ai)/sthêsis ei)=dos ai)sthêtô=n.]]
Such at least is the tendency and purpose of that noëtic influence
which the celestial substance imparts to the human soul; but it is
realized only to a very small degree. In its characteristic
theorizing efficacy, the godlike Noûs counts for a small fraction of
the whole soul, though superexcellent in quality.[155] There are but
few men in whom it is tolerably developed, and even in those few it
is countervailed by many other agencies.[156] The noëtic function in
men and animals exists only in companionship with the two other
psychical functions. It is subservient to the limits and conditions
that they impose, as well as to the necessities of individual and
social action; to all that is required for "acting like a man,"
according to the Aristotelian phrase. Man's nature is complex, and
not self-sufficing for a life of theorizing contemplation, such as
that wherein the celestial inmates pass their immortality of
happiness.[157]
[Footnote 155: Aristot. Ethic. Nikom. X. vii. p. 1177, b. 34: [Greek:
ei) ga\r kai\ tô=| o)/gkô| mikro/n e)sti, duna/mei kai\ timio/têti
polu\ ma=llon pa/ntôn u(pere/chei.]
[Footnote 156: Aristot. De Memor. et Remin. i. p. 450, a. **18.]
[Footnote 157: Aristot. Ethic. Nikom. X. vii. p. 1177, b. 26: [Greek:
o( de\ toiou=tos a)\n ei)/ê bi/os krei/ttôn ê)\ kat'
a)/nthrôpon].--viii. p. 1178, b. 6: [Greek: deê/setai ou)=n toiou/tôn
pro\s to\ a)nthrôpeu/esthai.]--ix. p. 1178, b. 33: [Greek: ou)k
au)ta/rkês ê( phu/sis pro\s to\ theôrei=n]. Compare similar
sentiments in Aristot. Metaphys. A. ii. p. 983, a. 1.]
We have thus to study the noëtic function according to the
manifestations of it that we find in man, and to a certain extent in
some other privileged animals. Bees, for example, partake in the
divine gift to a certain extent; being distinguished in this respect
from their analogues--wasps and hornets.[158]
[Footnote 158: Aristot. De Gen. Animal. III. x. p. 760, a. 4: [Greek:
o)/ntos de\ _perittou= tou=_ ge/nous kai\ i)di/ou tou= tô=n
melittô=n].--p. 761, a. 4: [Greek: ou) ga\r e)/chousin] (wasps and
hornets) [Greek: ou)de\n thei=on, ô(/sper to\ ge/nos tô=n melittô=n.]
It is remarkable that [Greek: peritto/s], the epithet here applied by
Aristotle to bees, is the epithet that he also applies to men of
theoretical and speculative activity, as contrasted with men prudent
and judicious in action (see Metaphys. A. ii. p. 983, a. 2; also
Ethic. Nikom. VI. vii. p. 1141, b. 6). Elsewhere he calls bees
[Greek: phro/nima] (Metaphys. A. i. p. 980, b. 22). See a good note
of Torstrick (on Aristot. De Animâ, III. p. 428, a. 10), p. 172 of
his Commentary. Aristotle may possibly have been one among the
philosophers that Virgil had in his mind, in Georgics, iv. 219:--
"His quidam signis, atque hæc exempla secuti,
Esse apibus partem divinæ mentis, et haustus
Æthereos dixere: Deum namque ire per omnes
Terrasque, tractusque maris, coelumque profundum," &c.]
In these and other animals, and in man to a still greater degree, the
theorizing activity exists; but it is either starved, or at least has
to deal with materials obscure, puzzling, conflicting; while, on the
other hand, the practical intellect becomes largely developed,
through the pressure of wants and desires, combined with the teaching
of experience. In Aristotle's view, sensible perception is a separate
source of knowledge, accompanied with judgment and discrimination,
independent of the noëtic function. Occasionally, he refers the
intellectual superiority of man to the properly attempered
combination and antagonism of heat in the heart with cold in the
brain, each strong and pure;[159] all the highly endowed animals (he
says) have greater animal heat, which is the essential condition of a
better soul;[160] he reckons the finer sense of touch possessed by
man as an essential condition of the same intellectual result.[161]
Sensible perception in its five diverse manifestations, together with
its secondary psychical effects--phantasy and memory, accumulates in
the human mind (and in some animals) a greater or less experience of
particular facts; from some of which inferences are drawn as to
others unknown, directing conduct as well as enlarging
knowledge.[162]
[Footnote 159: Aristot. De Generat. Animal. II. vi. p. 744, a. 11-31:
[Greek: dêloi= de\ tê\n eu)krasi/an ê( dia/noia; phronimô/taton ga/r
e)sti tô=n zô=|ôn a)/nthrôpos.] We may remark that Aristotle
considers cold as in some cases a positive property, not simply as
the absence or privation of heat (De Partibus Animal. II. ii. p. 649,
a. 18). The heart is the part wherein the psychical fire (as it were)
is kept burning: [Greek: tê=s psuchê=s ô(/sper e)mpepureume/nês e)n
toi=s mori/ois tou/tois] (Aristot. De Vitâ et Morte, iv. p. 469, b.
16). Virgil, in the beautiful lines of his Second Georgic (483),
laments that he is disqualified for deep philosophical studies by the
want of heat round his heart:--&P "Sin, has ne possim naturæ accedere
partes, Frigidus obstiterit circum præcordia sanguis," &c.]
[Footnote 160: Aristot. De Respirat. xiii. p. 477, a. 16.]
[Footnote 161: Aristot. De Animâ, II. ix. p. 421, a. 21.]
[Footnote 162: Aristot. Metaphys. A. i. pp. 980-1.]
All this process--a perpetual movement of sense and memory--begins
from infancy, and goes on independently of Noûs or the noëtic
function properly so called; which grows up gradually at a later age,
aided by the acquisition of language and by instruction conveyed
through language. The supervening Noûs presupposes and depends upon
what has been thus treasured up by experience. Though, in the
celestial body. Noûs exists separately from human beings, and though
it there operates _proprio motu_ apart from sense, such is not the
case with the human Noûs; which depends upon the co-operation, and is
subject to the restrictions, of the complicated soul and body
wherewith it is domiciled--restrictions differing in each individual