 […] they said that there seem to be several rationes reales, not only in God, but also in created things. They call these rationes reales in distinction to rationes which consist only of modes of being understood—such are the ratio of universality which the intellect attributes to things that are considered without their individuality, and relations secundum dici which posit nothing &lt;real&gt; in neither of their extremes or at least in the other extreme—just like ‘to be praised or loved’ taken in passive sense posit nothing in the thing praised or loved. Therefore, in distinction to these, they call rationes reales those, the truth of which lies entirely in the thing, so that they are not attributed to things on the basis of various modes of understanding, but rather on the basis of the real nature and truth itself (Summa II q. 7, pp. 134–35).