This dissertation was born from a confusion which arose when I found myself in graduate school

and saw that the order of learning the philosophical sciences was not given much shrift. The most
remarkable instance of this, of course, is in the way in which we approach the highest philosophical science,
metaphysics. There is widespread disagreement, even among Thomists, over how metaphysics begins. The
order in which the philosophical sciences are presented, moreover, is at times very random. In college,
however, I had been exposed to the works of Charles DeKoninck whose insistence upon the importance of
the order of learning made it clear to me how important it is for a philosopher to be attentive to the natural
order in our knowledge and how serious mistakes are made when one is not.

Thus, my intention here is properly philosophical rather than historical. Using the text of Aquinas’
commentary as a guide, I would like to understand how metaphysics is begun, or first learned. Our interest
is principally with things themselves and not the history of philosophy or even of Thomism. We do, though,
take Thomas and Aristotle as masters in seeking to understand how metaphysics is first learned.

Our method, therefore, in this investigation is, first, to look at the text of the commentary, especially
the early books, for insights into how metaphysics is first constituted by the mind. The reader should know
from the start that our attention is predominantly, or at times even exclusively, upon the primary texts
themselves and not upon the secondary literature. However, while our attention is primarily focused upon
the texts of Thomas and Aristotle as guides to understanding how metaphysics begins, we also look at the
historical intellectual influences which formed and shed light upon Thomas’ thought. More importantly, we
also look at the thought of Thomas as a whole in order to see how the beginning of metaphysics fits into his
entire philosophy. Obviously, if an interpretation of Thomas’ position on the beginning of metaphysics does
not harmonize with the rest of his philosophy, it is likely to be false.

I should clarify some things for the reader at the start.