more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
The peripatetic philosophers, in spite of their disagreements, all treated forms and real qualities as independent of matter and not to be understood in material terms.
Gist of Idea
The peripatetics treated forms and real qualities as independent of matter, and non-material
Source
Peter Alexander (Ideas, Qualities and Corpuscles [1985], 54)
Book Ref
Alexander,Peter: 'Ideas, Qualities and Corpuscles' [CUP 1985], p.54
A Reaction
This is the simple reason why hylomorphism became totally discredited, in the face of the 'mechanical philosophy'. But there must be a physical version of hylomorphism, and I don't think Aristotle himself would reject it.
| 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] |