An Argument against a One World Soul using Aquinas' 76th Question of the Summa Theologica as a model.
St. Thomas Aquinas, in question 76 of the Summa Theologica, argues for and convinces the reader of the existence of one universal intellect. Our modern translation of this might be Jung's description of archetypal knowledge. When the argument is dissected, it is difficult to refute the idea that all of humanity shares enough commonalities of temperament, instinct, desire and need that the reality of a universal intellect, a shared oneness, is not hard to accept. There is enough of a commonality of human experience that, separate from religion or any other delimiting factor, we can readily see that, independent of God, humanity universally prefers some things to others (pleasure to pain, comfort to discomfort, satiety to hunger, security to danger). These are representatives of our inner innate drives and exist whether we perceive a single unifying God, multiple Gods, or no God at all. The fact that the Atheist and the Catholic both prefer the same things mentioned above indicates that the intellect is separate from the soul and from God. The argument over the existence of a universal Soul, however, takes on a much different element. There are three arguments for the existence of a universal soul, and there are three counter arguments which will, it is hoped, demonstrate that unlike a universal intellect, each person maintains their own individual and wholly unique soul. The question, then, being pondered is, whether the soul is multiplied according to the number of bodies.
