In Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae article one and two, he demonstrates the concepts of: goodness in human actions, man’s objective of happiness, and how a human’s good action contributes to partaking in God. The Aquinas’ main argument is simply that what actions make it good or bad.
In first article begins with the question regarding if our actions we as humans are good. The answer that Aquinas provides is a yes due to that every act of a man does is good and evil does not come from the virtue of good. In conclusion, no act of a man does is evil. Also the per se effect supports that no action is evil. Then in John 3.20 says, “that everybody who does evil hates the light. Therefore, some actions of man are evil”1 . This scripture connects with the question of what it means to be good by having …show more content…
The answer to that question is no because the actions does not obtain goodness or badness from the object. An object is a thing and evil cannot come in a form of a thing. Therefore, a human action does neither have goodness or badness from an object. Then Aquinas offers a short argument on that a man’s happiness is account for partaking of God. He referenced from Osee 9.10 “ And they became abominable, as those things were which they loved’. But a man becomes abominable to God because of the evil of his activity”4 Aquinas continues to explain that happiness is a perfect good, Aquinas means with perfect good is that “objectively capable of satisfying the whole desire of man”. the object of the will is the complete good because we are capable of perceiving the very meaning of goodness itself, and hence able to perceive the difference between goodness itself and the limited share in goodness that everything created has. Basically, the only truly complete good is God. The only way to achieve happiness is attaining God and nothing
In first article begins with the question regarding if our actions we as humans are good. The answer that Aquinas provides is a yes due to that every act of a man does is good and evil does not come from the virtue of good. In conclusion, no act of a man does is evil. Also the per se effect supports that no action is evil. Then in John 3.20 says, “that everybody who does evil hates the light. Therefore, some actions of man are evil”1 . This scripture connects with the question of what it means to be good by having …show more content…
The answer to that question is no because the actions does not obtain goodness or badness from the object. An object is a thing and evil cannot come in a form of a thing. Therefore, a human action does neither have goodness or badness from an object. Then Aquinas offers a short argument on that a man’s happiness is account for partaking of God. He referenced from Osee 9.10 “ And they became abominable, as those things were which they loved’. But a man becomes abominable to God because of the evil of his activity”4 Aquinas continues to explain that happiness is a perfect good, Aquinas means with perfect good is that “objectively capable of satisfying the whole desire of man”. the object of the will is the complete good because we are capable of perceiving the very meaning of goodness itself, and hence able to perceive the difference between goodness itself and the limited share in goodness that everything created has. Basically, the only truly complete good is God. The only way to achieve happiness is attaining God and nothing