PHI 2323 Lecture 12

From Notes
Jump to navigation Jump to search

« previous | Wednesday, September 25, 2019 | next »


Review from Last Lecture's Craziness on Existence

substance
exists in itself
accident
exists as a property or "attachment" to something else
in potency
something that could be
in act
something that exists right now
form
the "what-it-is" of a thing in act
initially understood as "shape" or "look" (to describe the form of a dog, you would draw a dog)
matter
the interior cause, source, "that-from-which"
initially understood as the stuff of artificial things (bronze in statue, silver in bowl, wood in chair)
extends to stuff of natural things (flesh and bone)
privation
an initial lack of a form (e.g., "unmusical" in "an unmusical man becomes a musical man")

Existence and Change

  • General form: "non-…" becomes "…"
    • How can something "become" its opposite?
    • It's the things that change, not the "what-it-is"
    • Hence change requires a composite: a part that changes, and a part that is unchanging

Example: hard butter becomes soft butter

  • hard and soft are accidental forms
  • butter remains the same through the change
    • on its own, it is in potency for its hardness and softness, hence it is the matter
      • more specifically, since butter is in potency to the accidental existence of its hardness/softness, it is subject

Another Example: non-athletic Mr. Matteoli becomes athletic Mr. Matteoli

  • non-athletic is privation
  • non-athletic and athletic are both accidental forms for Mr. Matteoli who is matter (more specifically, subject) to these forms.

A Substantial Change: Freddie the cat is run over by a tractor and becomes Freddie the flat (i.e., non-cat)

  • cat and non-cat are substantial forms
  • What is the matter? (pun not intended!)
    • Must endure through change, yet be in potency to both cat and non-cat
    • This is what is called prime matter
    • prime matter is the subject of substantial change, and therefore makes up every substance.

Aristotle, De Anima

  • Aristotle gives a definition to the soul: "The soul is something of a body"
    • not very descriptive, but seems true nonetheless
    • prior definition: "The soul is the cause of life within the living body"
    1. (nearly) every operation of the soul occurs through and in the body
    2. the soul is not the body because the body still hangs around after death (i.e., after soul goes away)

Aristotle will argue:

  1. the soul is substance
  2. the soul is form
  3. the soul is first actuality
  4. the body is a natural body
  5. the body is a natural body composed of tools (could also be translated as "organs")

Hence the goal: the soul is the first actuality of a natural body composed of tools