Combining Philosophers

Ideas for Bonaventura, Robert Pasnau and Epictetus

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     choose another area for these philosophers

display all the ideas for this combination of philosophers


11 ideas

9. Objects / C. Structure of Objects / 2. Hylomorphism / a. Hylomorphism
Corpuscularianism rejected not only form, but also the dependence of matter on form [Pasnau]
     Full Idea: What marks the rise of the corpuscularian movement is not just the rejection of form, but the rejection of matter as dependent on form.
     From: Robert Pasnau (Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 [2011], 04.5)
     A reaction: The point was that matter required form to have any kind of actual existence, but now matter can stand on its own.
9. Objects / C. Structure of Objects / 2. Hylomorphism / b. Form as principle
Hylomorphism may not be a rival to science, but an abstract account of unity and endurance [Pasnau]
     Full Idea: Hylomorphism admits of an alternative formulation, as an explanatory schema at a different level of analysis, not competing with corpuscular-mechanistic theory, but accounting for abstract features of the world - notably unity and endurance of substances.
     From: Robert Pasnau (Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 [2011], 06.1)
     A reaction: Pasnau is clearly sympathetic. As a view of why normal objects have unity and persist over time it is almost the only decent theory around. Hawley, for example, struggles to explain how 'stages' of a thing are linked. Classical mereology is silly.
9. Objects / C. Structure of Objects / 2. Hylomorphism / c. Form as causal
Hylomorphism declined because scholastics made it into a testable physical theory [Pasnau]
     Full Idea: Scholastics lost their grip on hylomorphism as a metaphysical theory, conceiving of it as a concrete, physical hypothesis about causal forces. Once form and matter were made subject to empirical research, their days were inevitably numbered.
     From: Robert Pasnau (Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 [2011], 06.1)
     A reaction: Pasnau seems to make a sharp distinction between science, and a separate realm he labels 'metaphysical'. You can't keep causation out of Aristotelian hylomorphism. The defence is that it is at a higher level of generality than science.
Scholastics made forms substantial, in a way unintended by Aristotle [Pasnau]
     Full Idea: The conception of form as somehow substantial took on new life among scholastic Aristotelians, and was developed in ways that Aristotle himself never suggested.
     From: Robert Pasnau (Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 [2011], 24.1)
     A reaction: This is music to we modern neo-Aristotelians, because scholasticism was rightly dumped in the 17th C, but we can go back and start again from what The Philosopher actually said.
Scholastics began to see substantial form more as Aristotle's 'efficient' cause [Pasnau]
     Full Idea: The whole scholastic conception of substantial form came to have more and more in common with an Aristotelian efficient cause.
     From: Robert Pasnau (Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 [2011], 24.2)
     A reaction: Aristotle, of course, identified the form with the 'formal cause [aitia]', which is the shape of the statue, rather than the efficient cause, which is the sculptor.
9. Objects / C. Structure of Objects / 2. Hylomorphism / d. Form as unifier
Aquinas says a substance has one form; Scotists say it has many forms [Pasnau]
     Full Idea: Aquinas subscribes to the unitarian doctrine that a single substance has just a single substantial form, but authors like Scotus subscribe to a plurality of substantial forms.
     From: Robert Pasnau (Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 [2011], 24.1)
     A reaction: The Scotists seem to think that qualities themselve can have forms. I take it that Aristotle would have agreed with Aquinas.
9. Objects / C. Structure of Objects / 4. Quantity of an Object
Scholastic Quantity either gives a body parts, or spreads them out in a unified way [Pasnau]
     Full Idea: On one version of Quantity realism it is what makes a body have parts; on another version, it is what makes the body's parts be spread out in a continuous and unified way.
     From: Robert Pasnau (Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 [2011], 14.1)
9. Objects / C. Structure of Objects / 7. Substratum
There may be different types of substrate, or temporary substrates [Pasnau]
     Full Idea: The substratum thesis says …perhaps there is a different subject for different kinds of changes, and perhaps what endures through one kind of change will be corrupted by another.
     From: Robert Pasnau (Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 [2011], 02.5)
A substratum can't be 'bare', because it has a job to do [Pasnau]
     Full Idea: A completely bare substratum seems not just incoherent but also unable to carry out the function for which it is intended - to be a substratum.
     From: Robert Pasnau (Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 [2011], 03.3)
If a substrate gives causal support for change, quite a lot of the ingredients must endure [Pasnau]
     Full Idea: When the substratum thesis is grounded on the idea that the ingredients must endure through the change, if they are to play a causal role, then it is natural to suppose that quite a lot of the ingredients must endure.
     From: Robert Pasnau (Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 [2011], 02.5)
     A reaction: Aristotle sharply distinguishes alteration from substantial change, but as the substrate gets thinner, the boundary between those two would blur.
A substrate may be 'prime matter', which endures through every change [Pasnau]
     Full Idea: The 'conservation thesis' about substrates says that there is a single, most basic substrate that endures through every material change, something we call 'prime matter'.
     From: Robert Pasnau (Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 [2011], 02.5)