Abstract
The intention of this essay is to examine the accounts of indignation in the philosophical psychologies of Aristotle and Aquinas, and, in particular, Aquinas's criticism of Aristotle's evaluation of the ethical significance of this emotion.It is argued that Aquinas holds the truth concerning the nature of indignation not to be obtainable on the grounds of theological neutrality.The reason for this is that the philosophical account of indignation calls for a forthrightly theistic reflection on the ultimate meaning of this emotion.Thus, the account of nemesis within philosophical psychology finds its completion only in theodicy.The paper concludes with a reflection on the criticism that Aquinas's devaluation of indignation could undercut the emotional basis of the virtue of justice.