Abstract
This paper examines Aquinas’ and Albert’s respective interpretations of the term “motion” in Damasecene’s definitions of the passion. Although they have a common understanding of the term within an Aristotelian context, they hold differing attitudes toward it: Albert denies that passion is motion, saying that it is quality left from motion, whereas Aquinas affirms the notion of passion as motion. In this paper I expound on the difficulties Albert has with the term and how Aquinas resolves them. I argue that Aquinas successfully addresses the Albert’s difficulties, thus establishing a foundation for a more refined understanding of human psychology in relation to ethical behaviour.