David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Phronesis 52 (2):139-187 (2007)
Myles Burnyeat has argued that in De Anima II.5 Aristotle marks out a refined kind of alteration which is to be distinguished from ordinary alteration, change of quality as defined in Physics III.1-3. Aristotle's aim, he says, is to make it clear that perception is an alteration of this refined sort and not an ordinary alteration. Thus, it both supports his own interpretation of Aristotle's view of perception, and refutes the Sorabji interpretation according to which perception is a composite of form and matter where the matter is a material alteration in the body. I argue that Burnyeat's interpretation of II.5 should be rejected for a number of reasons, and offer a new interpretation of the distinctions drawn in the chapter, and the relations between them. I conclude that the chapter provides no evidence against the Sorabji view or for Burnyeat's view. Aristotle's assertion that perception is a refined kind of alteration means that it is the kind of alteration that preserves and is good for the subject of that alteration. There is no inconsistency in the thought that perception is a refined alteration of this sort while it, or its matter, is an ordinary alteration
|Keywords||PERCEPTION ARISTOTLE POTENTIALITY ACTUALITY|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Errol G. Katayama (2011). Soul and Elemental Motion in Aristotle's Physics VIII 4. Apeiron 44 (2):163-190.
Similar books and articles
Charlotte Witt (2003). Ways of Being: Potentiality and Actuality in Aristotle's Metaphysics. Cornell University Press.
John Bowin (2011). Aristotle on Various Types of Alteration in De Anima II 5. Phronesis 56 (2):138-161.
Jeffrey D. Gower (2011). The King of the Cosmos. Epoché: A Journal for the History of Philosophy 15 (2):415-434.
Henry P. Stapp (2009). Quantum Collapse and the Emergence of Actuality From Potentiality. Process Studies 38 (2):319-339.
Mary Louise Gill (2004). Part I: Analysis of Dynamic Categories: Aristotle's Distinction Between Change and Activity. [REVIEW] Axiomathes 14 (1-3):3-22.
Robert Heinaman (2007). Actuality, Potentiality and "De Anima II.5". Phronesis 52 (2):139 - 187.
Asle H. Kiran (2012). Technological Presence: Actuality and Potentiality in Subject Constitution. [REVIEW] Human Studies 35 (1):77-93.
Brian Calvert (1976). Aristotle and the Megarians on the Potentiality-Actuality Distinction. Apeiron 10 (1):34 - 41.
Craig R. Smith (1970). Actuality and Potentiality: The Essence of Criticism. Philosophy and Rhetoric 3 (3):133 - 140.
John Bowin (2012). Aristotle on 'First Transitions' in De Anima II 5. Apeiron 45 (3):262-282.
Rosamond Kent Sprague (2004). Ways of Being: Potentiality and Actuality in Aristotle's Metaphysics, by Charlotte Witt. Ancient Philosophy 24 (1):219-221.
M. F. Burnyeat (2002). "De Anima" II 5. Phronesis 47 (1):28 - 90.
John P. Lizza (2010). Potentiality and Persons at the Margins of Life. Diametros 26:44-57.
Added to index2010-08-31
Total downloads54 ( #83,040 of 1,935,154 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #146,219 of 1,935,154 )
How can I increase my downloads?