I see this as Aquinas saying perfection being added as we(humans) see it in time and the number of species is to be understood as us(humans) knowing God knows the number of species from eternity
but as strangely off-topic also.
The answer to objection# 3 saying ...."Consequently it was not fitting that God should make the soul without the body from the beginning: for as it is written (Wisdom 1:13-16): “God made not death . . . but the wicked with works and words have called it to them.”
It makes this on topic
I appreciate you views on this interesting topic
The God Who knows the number of species, and the number of hairs on our heads, certainly can be expected to know the number of human souls He created right at the beginning. Or so it seems to me. Still this is not a provable statement!
Question about traducianism: is the "breath of Life" — spirit —equivalent to "soul?" The Scriptures tell us God breathed Adam alive; that is, made what He formed of the dust to live; and that original breath of life was something that Adam passed on to his progeny over all the human generations until now; and if spirit = soul, that would mean that Adam himself creates the souls of his offspring upon their physical conception. And they in turn do likewise WRT their offspring. This definitely does not work for me. But perhaps I haven't understood traducianism well enough. I guess the matter turns on whether spirit = soul or not. I'm not clear on this question.
Neither do I think I'm a "creationist" in the sense that I believe God specially creates each man body and soul at physical conception in time. Or did I misunderstand that notion as well?
Just to complicate matters further, here are some lines from St. Anselm, Archbishop of Cantebury that I find particularly interesting:
Those things which were created from nothing had an existence before their creation in the thought of the Creator.It is in Anselm's sense that I conceive of the pre-existence of souls — i.e., in the timeless Mind of God Creator. This is more a Platonic than an Aristotelian notion. Or so it seems to me.
BUT I seem to see a truth that compels me to distinguish carefully in what sense those things which were created may be said to have been nothing before their creation. For, in no wise can anything conceivably be created by any, unless there is, in the mind of the creative agent, some example, as it were, or (as is more fittingly supposed) some model, or likeness, or rule. It is evident, then, that before the world was created, it was in the thought of the supreme Nature, what, and of what sort, and how, it should be. Hence, although it is clear that the being that were created were nothing before their creation, to this extent, that they were not what they now are, nor was there anything whence they should be created, yet they were not nothing, so far as the creator's thought is concerned, through which, and according to which, they were created. — Monologium, Chapter X.
This topic truly is fascinating, dear brother in Christ! Thank you so very much for your excellent contributions to this discussion!