Mine and Mine Alone. The Particularity of the Aristotelian Substance and its Relation to the Soul
Keywords:
soul, particularity, universality, substance, ontologyAbstract
In this paper, we seek to develop an analysis of the Aristotelian theory of substance, specifically of the discussion about its particularity or universality. We will first review the statement of the problem as it appears in Categories. We will then take the discussion to Metaphysics, specifically book Z, where a further developed and elaborated view of the ideas presented by the philosopher can be found compared to the Organon. From there we will review the universalist and particularist views to evaluate them on their merit and try to determine which of the two turns out to be more adequate for Aristotelian ontology. Finally, we will review some possible solutions to the
problem of cognizability presented by the particularist view and attempt to clarify
these problems in light of the application it has when the conflict is transposed to the
problem of the soul in De Anima.
References
Ackrill, J. L. (1972-3). Aristotle’s Definitions of Psuchê. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 73. 119-133. http://doi.org/10.1093/aristotelian/73.1.119
Albritton, R. (1957). Forms of Particular Substances in Aristotle’s Metaphysics. The Journal of Philosophy, 54 (22). 699-708. http://doi.org/10.2307/2021934
Aristotle. (2016). De Anima. Trans. C. Shields. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Aristotle. (1995). Categories. Trans. J. L. Ackrill. Princeton, USA: Princeton University Press.
Aristotle. (1995). De Interpretatione. Trans. J. L. Ackrill. Princeton, USA: Princeton University Press.
Aristotle. (1995). Metaphysics. Trans. W. D. Ross. Princeton, USA: Princeton University Press.
Aristotle. (1995). Posterior Analytics. Trans. J. Barnes. Princeton, USA: Princeton University Press.
Athanasopoulos, C. (2010). Ousia in Aristotle’s Categories. Logique et Analyse, 53 (210). 211-243. Retrieved from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44084946
Baylis, C. (1970). Universals, Communicable Knowledge, and Metaphysics. In M. Loux (Ed.), Universals and Particulars: Reading in Ontology (50-62). Notre Dame, France: University of Notre Dame Press.
Bostock, D. (1991). Aristotle. Metaphysics: Books Z and H. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Bolton, R. (1978). Aristotle’s Definitions of the Soul: “De Anima” ii- 1-3. Phronesis, 23 (3). 258-278. https://doi.org/10.1163/156852878X00154
Caston, V. (2009). Phantasia and Thought. En Anagnostopoulos, G. (ed.) A Companion to Aristotle (322-334). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Charlton, W. (1972). Aristotle and the Principle of Individuation. Phronesis, 17 (3). 239-249. https://doi.org/10.1163/156852872x00051
Cohen, S. (2009). Substances. En Anagnostopoulos, G. (Ed.), A Companion to Aristotle (197-212). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Cohen, S. (1984). Aristotle and Individuation. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 14 (10). 41-65. https://doi.org/10.1080/00455091.1984.10715871
Frede, M. (1987). Essays in Ancient Philosophy. Minneapolis, USA: University of Minnesota Press.
Furth, M. (1988). Substance, Form, and Psyche: An Aristotelian Metaphysics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Galluzzo, G. (2013). Universals in Aristotle’s Metaphysics. In R. Chiaradonna, R., G. Galuzzo (Eds.) Universals in Ancient Philosophy (209-253). Pisa, Italy: Edizioni della Normale.
Gill, M. L. (1989). Aristotle on Substance: The Paradox of Unity. Princeton, USA: Princeton University Press.
Hartman, E. (1976). Aristotle on the Identity of Substance and Essence. The Philosophical Review, 85 (4). 545-561. https://doi.org/10.2307/2184278
Heinaman, R. (1979). Aristotle’s Tenth Aporia. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie, 61 (3). 249-270. https://doi.org/10.1515/agph.1979.61.3.249
Hoffman, J. & Rosenkrantz, G. (1997). Substance: Its Nature and Existence. London, UK: Routledge.
Irwin, T. (1988). Aristotle’s First Principles. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
Kar, E. (2018). Doctoral Thesis: Universality and Particularity of Aristotelian Substances. University of Bristol, UK.
Lear, J. (1994). Aristóteles. El deseo de comprender. Madrid, España: Alianza Editorial.
Leiva, M. (2023). Uno para todos y todos para uno: un análisis del monopsiquismo de Siger de Brabante. Grecorromana, Revista Chilena de Estudios Clásicos, V. 90-105. Retrieved from: https://grecorromana.files.wordpress.com/2024/01/08.-matias-leiva-uno-para-todos-ytodos-para-uno-un-analisis-del-monopsiquismo-en-el-aristotelismoradical-de-siger-de-brabante.pdf
Leszl, W. (1972). Knowledge of the Universal and Knowledge of the Particular in Aristotle. The Review of Metaphysics, 26 (2). 278-313. Retrieved from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20126209
Mesquita, A. (2012). Types of Predication in Aristotle (Posterior Analytics I 22). Journal of Ancient Philosophy, 6 (2). 1-27. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.1981-9471.v6i2p1-27
Shields, C. (2016). Aristotle. De Anima. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
Sellars, W. (1957). Substance and Form in Aristotle. The Journal of Philosophy, 54 (22). 688-699. https://doi.org/10.2307/2021933
Whiting, J. (2023). Body and Soul: Essays on Aristotle’s Hylomorphism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Whiting, J. (1991). Metasubstance: Critical Notice of Frede-Patzig and Furth. The Philosophical Review, 100 (4). 607-639. https://doi.org/10.2307/2185176
Witt, Ch. (1989). Substance and Essence in Aristotle. An Interpretation of Metaphysics VII-IX. London, UK: Cornel University Press.
Woods, M.J. (1967). Problems in Metaphysics Z, Chapter 13. En J. Moravcsik, J. (ed.) Aristotle. A Collection of Critical Essays (215-238). London, UK: Macmillan.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Eidos
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term "Work" shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
The Author shall grant to the Publisher a nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons 3.0 License Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported CC BY-NC 3.0, or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions: (a) Attribution: Other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;(b) Noncommercial: Other users (including Publisher) may not use this Work for commercial purposes;
4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
5. Authors are permitted, and Eidos promotes, to post online the preprint manuscript of the Work in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work is expected be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Eidos's assigned URL to the Article and its final published version in Eidos.
