Metaphysica 21 (2):179-197 (2020)
AbstractHylomorphism is the Aristotelian theory according to which objects are composites of form and matter. Form is what unifies the various parts of an object – the matter – into a cohesive whole. Some contemporary hylomorphists argue their theory applies beyond the realm of concreta, and that it explains the unity of various abstract entities. Not everyone agrees. Recent criticism alleges that hylomorphism fails to explain the unity of certain abstract entities, namely, complex properties – properties with other properties as proper parts. Here, I both respond to this criticism and show that and how hylomorphism extends to the domain of complex properties. By discussing hylomorphism’s applicability to the hitherto unchartered domain of complex properties, I hope to defend its credentials as a general mereological theory.
Similar books and articles
A Paradox of Matter and Form.Maegan Fairchild - 2017 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 6 (1):33-42.
Are Matter and Form Parts? Aristotle’s and Neo-Aristotelian Hylomorphism.Gabriele Galluzzo - 2018 - Discipline Filosofiche 28 (1):65-87.
World Enough and Form: Why Cosmology Needs Hylomorphism.John G. Brungardt - 2019 - Synthese (Suppl 11):1-33.
Three Concerns for Structural Hylomorphism.Jeremy Skrzypek - 2017 - Analytic Philosophy 58 (4):360-408.
Reassessing Logical Hylomorphism and the Demarcation of Logical Constants.Catarina Dutilh Novaes - 2012 - Synthese 185 (3):387 - 410.
Animals, Animal Parts, and Hylomorphism: John Duns Scotus’s Pluralism About Substantial Form.Thomas M. Ward - 2012 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 50 (4):531-557.
Habits, Potencies, and Obedience.Mark K. Spencer - 2014 - Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 88:165-180.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
The Four-Category Ontology: A Metaphysical Foundation for Natural Science.Edward Jonathan Lowe - 2006 - Clarendon Press.