Could all phenomena be substances? — Benj96
For most people, the words "substance" and "substantial" are referring to solid matter (Quanta -- tangible stuff). But Aristotle's Primary Substance was described as more like immaterial Essence (intrinsic quality necessary for existence; Qualia -- mental stuff).It just seems space has too much going on to be considered immaterial or nothing or without substance. — Benj96
Any solid object is mostly space - as you say. And yet any empty space is also "substantial" in having a temperature, a gravity field - the various other measures that suggest the presence of material properties. — apokrisis
But Aristotle's Primary Substance was described as more like immaterial Essence (intrinsic quality necessary for existence; Qualia -- mental stuff). — Gnomon
Aristotle was uncomfortable with Plato's notion of supernatural Forms, yet he still applied the same term to natural things. And the distinction is moot, since he used the metaphysical term "Soul" to describe the "form" component of all beings. So "Form" is both Matter and Mind/Soul, both Potential and Actual. I try to make a distinction, to avoid confusion, by capitalizing the Platonic ideal "Form" (qualities we conceive), as contrasted with real "forms" (things we perceive).Surely what Aristotle meant by prime matter is one of the most fraught debates in metaphysics. But it can’t be cashed out as mental stuff. Nor even, immaterial essence. — apokrisis
Substance was used before mass was properly identified and defined. It is now no more than philosophers continuing a bad habit. — Banno
"Mass" is not matter per se, but a measure of a quality or property of Matter (i.e. inertia). Aristotle's "Substance" is also an evaluated quality (what kind of thing) of Matter (physical object). "To measure" (from mensura = mind) is to convert a material thing into a mental or mathematical quality (value). Mass is a measure of Substance only in the sense of Qualia. Philosophers have a "bad habit" of trying to understand the essence of material objects (things). :smile:Substance was used before mass was properly identified and defined. It is now no more than philosophers continuing a bad habit. — Banno
What's "going on" is Potential (Virtual), the statistical possibility of Actual (Real). — Gnomon
Aristotle was uncomfortable with Plato's notion of supernatural Forms, yet he still applied the same term to natural things. And the distinction is moot, since he used the metaphysical term "Soul" to describe the "form" component of all beings. — Gnomon
Surely what Aristotle meant by prime matter is one of the most fraught debates in metaphysics. But it can’t be cashed out as mental stuff. Nor even, immaterial essence.
It is more like a fluctuation or the least possible notion of a material action or efficient cause, in my view.
Peircean Firstness or tychism in other words. — apokrisis
Obviously, therefore, the substance or form is actuality. According to this argument, then, it is obvious that actuality is prior in substantial being to potency; and as we have said, one actuality always precedes another in time right back to the actuality of the eternal prime mover.
But actuality is prior in a stricter sense also; for eternal things are prior in substance to perishable things, and no eternal thing exists potentially. The reason is this... — Aristotle, Metaphysics 1050b
Aristotle does in fact use the expressions “prime matter” (prôtê hulê) and “primary underlying thing” (prôton hupokeimenon) several times ... The mere fact that he uses the phrase is inconclusive, however, since, he makes it explicit that “prime matter” can refer either to a thing’s proximate matter or to whatever ultimately makes it up:
Nature is prime matter (and this in two ways, either prime in relation to the thing or prime in general; for example, in the case of bronze works the bronze is prime in relation to them, but prime in general would be perhaps water, if everything that can be melted is water). (1015a7–10)
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/form-matter/#PrimMatt
What do we use for the unit of substance? — Banno
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.