This chapter discusses Aquinas’s account of the freedom of the judgment of choice. It claims that, on his view, this judgment is free because it is up to us whether or not we assent to its propositional content, which Aquinas takes to be a means-end-relating precept. It examines what explains our ability to freely assent to a precept. It argues that this is explained by the logical structure of the precept that the agent assents to. In particular, the precept in question must fail to establish a necessary relation between a given means and the ultimate end. A precept fails to do this if it (1) relates an expedient, but non-necessary means to a non-ultimate end, or (2) a necessary means to a non-ultimate end, or (3) an expedient, but non-necessary means to the ultimate end. It also argues that the logical structure of the precept alone is not enough to guarantee our freedom of assent. An agent must also understand that a precept fails to establish a necessary relation between a means and the ultimate end in order to freely assent to it. To grasp this structure, the agent has to engage in a kind of higher-order judgment.

This chapter is the first of four investigating Aquinas’s view that choice is a hylomorphically structured act that inherits its preferential character from a previous judgment of reason. This chapter deals with the judgment preceding choice. The hallmark of this judgment is that it is free. It does not yet investigate this judgment’s free character in this chapter. Rather, here the groundwork is established for its discussion in Chapter 3 by clarifying what a practical judgment generally speaking is, for Aquinas. It argues that, on his view, a practical judgment involves two components, namely, a propositional content and an attitude of assent. It shows that the propositional content in question is an ought-statement or what Aquinas calls a “precept,” where the force of the ‘ought’ is not deontological, but rather means-end-relating. Thus, on Aquinas’s view, the chapter argues, to say that X ought to be done is to say that X ought to be pursued as a means for the sake of some end Y. It also shows that Aquinas draws a distinction between two types of means, expedient and necessary ones, and two types of ends, ultimate and non-ultimate ones, which yields four different types of precepts.