more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
It does not seem altogether arbitrary to treat the structure of the world (the 'form' of the world) in a different way to the nodes in the structure (the 'matter' of the world).
Gist of Idea
We can treat the structure/form of the world differently from the nodes/matter of the world
Source
John Hawthorne (Causal Structuralism [2001], 2.5)
Book Ref
Hawthorne,John: 'Metaphysical Essays' [OUP 2002], p.223
A Reaction
An interesting contemporary spin put on Aristotle's original view. Hawthorne is presenting the Aristotle account as a sort of 'structuralism' about nature.
| 16095 | Some forms, such as the Prime Mover, are held by Aristotle to exist without matter [Aristotle, by Gill,ML] |
| 15853 | A true substance is constituted by some nature, which is a principle [Aristotle] |
| 16640 | Form is the principle that connects a thing's constitution (rather than being operative) [Hill,N] |
| 16761 | Forms are of no value in physics, but are indispensable in metaphysics [Leibniz] |
| 17544 | Basic particles have a mathematical form, which is more important than their substance [Heisenberg] |
| 15956 | The peripatetics treated forms and real qualities as independent of matter, and non-material [Alexander,P] |
| 15128 | We can treat the structure/form of the world differently from the nodes/matter of the world [Hawthorne] |
| 16612 | Hylomorphism may not be a rival to science, but an abstract account of unity and endurance [Pasnau] |