A Synchronic Justification for Aristotle's Commitment to Prime Matter
Phronesis 54 (4):326-345 (2009)
| Abstract | The current debate over Aristotle's commitment to prime matter is centered on diachronic considerations found in his theory of substantial change. I argue that an appeal to this theory is not required in order to establish his commitment to the existence of prime matter. By drawing on Physics II.1's conception of what it is for an element to have a nature - that is, to have an inner source of movement and rest - I introduce a synchronic justification for the existence of prime matter. By trading on the relationship between the thing that has a source of change and the source it has , I show that something that has a source in itself cannot be identical with its source, and that a type of matter that has no nature of its own (a kind of prime matter) is required to block this identification at the level of the elements. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,664 |
| External links |
|
| Through your library | Configure |
H. M. Robinson (1974). Prime Matter in Aristotle. Phronesis 19 (1):168-188.
H. M. Robinson (1974). Prime Matter in Aristotle. Phronesis 19 (1):168-188.
Charles Huenemann (2004). Spinoza and Prime Matter. Journal of the History of Philosophy 42 (1):21-32.
Jonathan Beere (2006). Potentiality and the Matter of Composite Substance. Phronesis 51 (4):303-329.
James G. Snyder (2008). The Theory of Materia Prima in Marsilio Ficino's Platonic Theology. Vivarium 46 (2):192-221.
Paul Studtmann (2006). Prime Matter and Extension in Aristotle. Journal of Philosophical Research 31:171-184.
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-10-03Total downloads74 ( #11,111 of 549,012 )Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #15,082 of 549,012 )How can I increase my downloads? |

