structure for 'Objects'    |     alphabetical list of themes    |     unexpand these ideas

9. Objects / C. Structure of Objects / 2. Hylomorphism / b. Form as principle

[form as the guiding principle of an object]

8 ideas
Some forms, such as the Prime Mover, are held by Aristotle to exist without matter [Aristotle, by Gill,ML]
     Full Idea: Aristotle's theory also includes a special group of forms that can exist without matter, of which the Prime Mover is an instance, and these forms are separate not only in account but also in existence.
     From: report of Aristotle (Metaphysics [c.324 BCE]) by Mary Louise Gill - Aristotle on Substance Ch 1
     A reaction: I am curious about her other examples. This must be the closest that Aristotle gets to his teacher's view of the Forms.
A true substance is constituted by some nature, which is a principle [Aristotle]
     Full Idea: Only those objects are substances which are being constituted under, and by, some nature, ..so that this nature, which is a principle rather than an element, is their substance.
     From: Aristotle (Metaphysics [c.324 BCE], 1041b31)
     A reaction: My view is that Aristotle never got to the point of articulating his hylomorphism, so this is just him fishing around, and pointing to where others should investigate. What sort of 'principle'?
Form is the principle that connects a thing's constitution (rather than being operative) [Hill,N]
     Full Idea: Form is the state and condition of a thing, a result of the connection among its material principles; it is a constituting principle, not an operative one.
     From: Nicholas Hill (Philosophia Epicurea [1610], n 35)
     A reaction: Pasnau presents this as a denial of form, but it looks to me like someone fishing for what form could be in a more scientific context. Aristotle would have approved of 'principles'. Hill seems to defend the categorical against the dispositional.
Forms are of no value in physics, but are indispensable in metaphysics [Leibniz]
     Full Idea: The consideration of forms serves no purpose in the details of physics and must not be used to explain particular phenomena. …but their misuse must not lead us to reject something which is so useful to metaphysics.
     From: Gottfried Leibniz (Discourse on Metaphysics [1686], 10), quoted by Robert Pasnau - Metaphysical Themes 1274-1671 24.5
     A reaction: This is a key test for the question of whether metaphysics is separate from science (as Leibniz and Pasnau think), or whether there is a continuum. Is 'substantial form' an illuminating way to undestand modern physics?
Basic particles have a mathematical form, which is more important than their substance [Heisenberg]
     Full Idea: The smallest parts of matter are not the fundamental Beings, as in the philosophy of Democritus, but are mathematical forms. Here it is quite evident that the form is more important than the substance of which it is the form.
     From: Werner Heisenberg (Physics and Philosophy [1958], 04)
     A reaction: Heisenberg is quite consciously endorsing hylomorphism here, with a Pythagorean twist to it.
The peripatetics treated forms and real qualities as independent of matter, and non-material [Alexander,P]
     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.
     From: Peter Alexander (Ideas, Qualities and Corpuscles [1985], 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.
We can treat the structure/form of the world differently from the nodes/matter of the world [Hawthorne]
     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).
     From: John Hawthorne (Causal Structuralism [2001], 2.5)
     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.
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.