Reply Obj. 1:  Although dumb animals do not know the future, yet an animal is moved by its natural instinct to something future, as though it foresaw the future.  Because this instinct is planted in them by the Divine Intellect that foresees the future.

Reply Obj. 2:  The object of hope is not the possible as differentiating the true, for thus the possible ensues from the relation of a predicate to a subject.  The object of hope is the possible as compared to a power.  For such is the division of the possible given in Metaph. v, 12, i.e. into the two kinds we have just mentioned.

Reply Obj. 3:  Although the thing which is future does not come under the object of sight; nevertheless through seeing something present, an animal’s appetite is moved to seek or avoid something future. ________________________

FOURTH ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 40, Art. 4]

Whether Despair Is Contrary to Hope?

Objection 1:  It would seem that despair is not contrary to hope.  Because “to one thing there is one contrary” (Metaph. x, 5).  But fear is contrary to hope.  Therefore despair is not contrary to hope.

Obj. 2:  Further, contraries seem to bear on the same thing.  But hope and despair do not bear on the same thing:  since hope regards the good, whereas despair arises from some evil that is in the way of obtaining good.  Therefore hope is not contrary to despair.

Obj. 3:  Further, movement is contrary to movement:  while repose is in opposition to movement as a privation thereof.  But despair seems to imply immobility rather than movement.  Therefore it is not contrary to hope, which implies movement of stretching out towards the hoped-for good.

On the contrary, The very name of despair (desperatio) implies that it is contrary to hope (spes).

I answer that, As stated above (Q. 23, A. 2), there is a twofold contrariety of movements.  One is in respect of approach to contrary terms:  and this contrariety alone is to be found in the concupiscible passions, for instance between love and hatred.  The other is according to approach and withdrawal with regard to the same term; and is to be found in the irascible passions, as stated above (Q. 23, A. 2).  Now the object of hope, which is the arduous good, has the character of a principle of attraction, if it be considered in the light of something attainable; and thus hope tends thereto, for it denotes a kind of approach.  But in so far as it is considered as unobtainable, it has the character of a principle of repulsion, because, as stated in Ethic. iii, 3, “when men come to an impossibility they disperse.”  And this is how despair stands in regard to this object, wherefore it implies a movement of withdrawal:  and consequently it is contrary to hope, as withdrawal is to approach.

Reply Obj. 1:  Fear is contrary to hope, because their objects, i.e. good and evil, are contrary:  for this contrariety is found in the irascible passions, according as they ensue from the passions of the concupiscible.  But despair is contrary to hope, only by contrariety of approach and withdrawal.