Abstract
In GC I.1 Aristotle criticizes the monists and pluralists for accepting positions that eliminate either generation or alteration, and in GC I.4 he defends the existence of both. Thus, he must believe that his account is immune to those objections he raises against his predecessors, but it is difficult to reconstruct these objections, and so difficult to discern how Aristotle distinguishes his own account from theirs. In this paper, I propose a new reconstruction of these objections, and I show how Aristotle’s own account is immune to them so reconstructed. On my interpretation, Aristotle argues that neither the monists nor the pluralists can explain the generation of a substance. The monists cannot explain how an ultimate subject of predication–one mark of substance–is generated. The pluralists cannot explain how a being that can alter–another mark of substance–is generated. I subsequently show how Aristotle’s own account in GC I.4 sufficiently diverges from his predecessors to allow something that is both generable and alterable.
Bibliography
Barney, Rachel (2012): “History and Dialectic (Metaphysics A3, 983a24–4b8).” In: Carlos Steel (ed.), Aristotle’s Metaphysics Alpha: Symposium Aristotelicum. Oxford University Press, pp. 66–104.Search in Google Scholar
Broadie, Sarah (2004): “On Generation and Corruption I.4: Distinguishing Alteration.” In: de Haas – Mansfeld eds. (2004), pp. 123–150.10.1093/oso/9780199242924.003.0006Search in Google Scholar
Brunschwig, Jacques (2004): “On Generation and Corruption I.1: A False Start?” In: de Haas – Mansfeld, eds. (2004), pp. 25–63.10.1093/oso/9780199242924.003.0003Search in Google Scholar
Burnyeat, M. F. (2004): “Introduction: Aristotle on the Foundations of Sublunary Physics.” In: de Haas – Mansfeld, eds. (2004), pp. 7–24.10.1093/oso/9780199242924.003.0002Search in Google Scholar
Charlton, William (1992): Aristotle’s Physics: Books 1 and 2. Clarendon Press (1st ed: 1970).Search in Google Scholar
de Haas, Frans – Mansfeld, Jaap, eds. (2004): Aristotle: On Generation and Corruption, Book I. Clarendon Press.10.1093/oso/9780199242924.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Furth, Montgomery (1988): Substance, Form, and Psyche: An Aristotelean Metaphysics. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511552557Search in Google Scholar
Gill, Mary Louise (1991): Aristotle on Substance: The Paradox of Unity. Princeton University Press.10.1515/9780691222219Search in Google Scholar
Henry, Devin (2019): Aristotle on Matter, Form, and Moving Causes: The Hylomorphic Theory of Substantial Generation. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108646680Search in Google Scholar
Irwin, Terence and Gail Fine (1995): Aristotle: Selections. Hackett Pub. Co.Search in Google Scholar
Joachim, Harold H. (1992): Aristotle on Coming-to-Be and Passing-Away. Hildesheim: G. Olms (1st ed.: 1926)Search in Google Scholar
Jones, Barrington (1974): “Aristotle’s Introduction of Matter”, The Philosophical Review 83, pp. 474–500.10.2307/2183916Search in Google Scholar
Krizan, Mary (2018): “Mixing and the Formation of Homoeomers in on Generation and Corruption 2.7”, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 54, pp. 187–226.10.1093/oso/9780198825128.003.0006Search in Google Scholar
Morison, Benjamin (2002): On Location: Aristotle’s Concept of Place. Oxford University Press.10.1093/0199247919.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Pfeiffer, Christian (2018): Aristotle’s Theory of Bodies. Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198779728.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Politis, Vasilis (2004): Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Aristotle and the Metaphysics. Routledge.10.4324/9780203647424Search in Google Scholar
Ross, W. D. (1936): Aristotle’s Physics. Clarendon Press.10.1093/actrade/9780198141099.book.1Search in Google Scholar
Sedley, David (2004): “On Generation and Corruption I. 2.” In: de Haas and Mansfeld, eds. (2004), pp. 65–89.10.1093/oso/9780199242924.003.0004Search in Google Scholar
Seel, Gerhard (2012): “The Logical and Semantic Background of Aristotle’s Argumentation.” In: Stefano Maso, Carlo Natali, and Gerhard Seel (eds.), Reading Aristotle: Physics VII.3: “What Is Alteration?” Parmenides Publishing, pp. 121–129.Search in Google Scholar
Shields, Christopher John (1992): “Review of Mary Louise Gill, Aristotle on Substance: The Paradox of Unity”, The Philosophical Review 101, pp. 840–44.10.2307/2185930Search in Google Scholar
Solmsen, Friedrich (1958): “Aristotle and Prime Matter: A Reply to Hugh R. King”, Journal of the History of Ideas 19, pp. 243.10.2307/2707937Search in Google Scholar
Whiting, Jennifer E. (1984): “Individual Forms in Aristotle.” PhD thesis, Cornell University.Search in Google Scholar
Williams, C. J. F. (1982): Aristotle’s de Generatione et Corruptione. Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Titelseiten
- Articles
- Persuasion of the Laws in Plato’s Crito: When Does It Happen?
- The Descent of Reason: Reading Plato’s Cave as Psychic Drama
- Both Generable and Alterable in Aristotle’s On Generation and Corruption I.1 & I.4
- The Boogeyman in the Closet: A Cognitive-Behavioral Account of Epicurean Emotions
- Reviews
- 10.1515/rhiz-2024-0005
- Reviews
- Barbara M. Sattler, The Concept of Motion in Ancient Greek Thought: Foundations in Logic, Method, and Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2020. x + 427 pp.
Articles in the same Issue
- Titelseiten
- Articles
- Persuasion of the Laws in Plato’s Crito: When Does It Happen?
- The Descent of Reason: Reading Plato’s Cave as Psychic Drama
- Both Generable and Alterable in Aristotle’s On Generation and Corruption I.1 & I.4
- The Boogeyman in the Closet: A Cognitive-Behavioral Account of Epicurean Emotions
- Reviews
- 10.1515/rhiz-2024-0005
- Reviews
- Barbara M. Sattler, The Concept of Motion in Ancient Greek Thought: Foundations in Logic, Method, and Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2020. x + 427 pp.