Seite - 153 - in The Priority of Locomotion in Aristotle’s Physics
Bild der Seite - 153 -
Text der Seite - 153 -
But does this explanation really make clear that locomotion is prior in
time in general in spite of the fact that it is posterior in the sense stated by
the objection? Although everything said so far seems to fit together very
well with what is stated in the passage as a whole, and it is certainly correct
that there must be some generator that performs locomotion in order to
cause the coming to be of its offspring, one could say that this temporally
prior locomotion again presupposes the coming to be of the generator in
the first place. In other words, the fact that x’s father moves from place A to
place B before, and in order to, make x come into being does not show that
this kind of locomotion is prior in time to coming to be in general. Such an
occurrence certainly is earlier than the respective coming to be in the same
way as my father, my grandfather, and my great grandfather are prior to
me; but this does not make clear that there is a way in which locomotion
may be said to have temporal priority in general over the other kinds of
change, especially with respect to coming to be, because in a species’ eternal
chain of beings there will always be such a process of coming to be that is
prior in time to the locomotion and which some member of this species
performs.
In order to solve this problem it is helpful again to consider the context
of this passage: the passage presents one of the five arguments for the prior-
ity of locomotion. This claim is essentially connected to the discussion in
Phys. VIII 1–6 in which Aristotle shows that change must be eternal and
that therefore a first unmoved mover has to exist. In fact, Aristotle is inter-
ested in showing that locomotion is the primary kind of change for the sake
of showing that only this kind of change can be directly caused by the first
unmoved mover. But how is the fact that locomotion seems to have tem-
poral posteriority connected to this greater context? That there certainly is
such a connection is indicated by what Aristotle presents as the basic reason
for the general temporal priority of change in place, namely the fact that
eternal things can only undergo this kind of change. But in what way does
this help to show that locomotion indeed is prior in time in general despite
the fact that in a certain sense locomotion may be said to be the last of
changes in this respect as well? Aristotle clearly does not think that claiming
that eternal things, like for instance the heavenly bodies, can only change in
this way is enough to explain how the objection may be reconciled with the
claim about locomotion’s primacy in time, for otherwise he would have
stopped after writing the first two lines of this passage.
In order to solve this problem one has to have in mind that the things
that are undergoing eternal locomotion are not just arbitrary things in the
cosmos, but rather things that without exception play a fundamental role in
the processes that occur in it. The first principle of eternal locomotion is
the first unmoved mover. The eternal circular locomotion of which it is the
direct source, i.e. that of the outermost sphere, again is the cause of all other
Coming to be presupposes an earlier locomotion 153
ISBN Print: 9783525253069 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647253060
© 2014, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen
The Priority of Locomotion in Aristotle’s Physics
- Titel
- The Priority of Locomotion in Aristotle’s Physics
- Autor
- Sebastian Odzuck
- Herausgeber
- Dorothea Frede
- Gisela Striker
- Verlag
- Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co
- Datum
- 2014
- Sprache
- englisch
- Lizenz
- CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
- ISBN
- 9783647253060
- Abmessungen
- 15.5 x 23.2 cm
- Seiten
- 238
- Kategorien
- Geisteswissenschaften
- Naturwissenschaften Physik
Inhaltsverzeichnis
- Acknowledgements 9
- 1. Introduction 10
- 2. The importance of the primary kind of change 14
- 3. Change in quality and quantity of living beings depends on loco-motion, but not vice versa 42
- 4. Locomotion necessarily accompanies each of the other kinds of change, but not vice versa 71
- 4.1 Overview 71
- 4.2 What changes in quantity changes with respect to place 73
- 4.3 What undergoes generation or corruption changes with respect to place 89
- 4.4 What changes in quality changes with respect to place 98
- 4.4.1 Overview 98
- 4.4.2 What does it mean that condensation and rarefaction are principles of quality? 100
- 4.4.3 Every alteration involves a change in the four basic qualities 104
- 4.4.4 Every change in the four basic qualities involves con- densation or rarefaction 108
- 4.4.5 Condensation and rarefaction are forms of aggregation and segregation 110
- 4.4.6 What changes in quality changes with respect to place 112
- 4.4.7 Conclusion 113
- 4.5 Conclusion 113
- 5. All changes depend on the first locomotion, but not vice versa 115
- 6. Locomotion has temporal priority 144
- 6.1 Overview 144
- 6.2 Locomotion has priority in time, since it is the only change eternals can undergo 146
- 6.3 Objection: Locomotion is the last of all changes in perishable things 148
- 6.4 Coming to be presupposes an earlier locomotion 150
- 6.5 The locomotion of the sun as a cause of generation 154
- 6.6 Conclusion 162
- 7. Locomotion is prior in essence 164
- 7.1 Locomotion is prior in essence, since it is last in coming to be 164
- 7.2 Locomotion alone preserves its subject’s essence 186
- 7.2.1 Overview 186
- 7.2.2 Locomotion does not change its subject’s being 188
- 7.2.3 Locomotion preserves its subject’s essence best 190
- 7.2.4 Making x depart from its essence by being part of a change in essence? 195
- 7.2.5 Change in quality or quantity in principle may result in a change in essence 202
- 7.3 Conclusion: Locomotion’s priority in essence 207
- 8. Conclusion 211
- Bibliography 220
- List of Abbreviations 223
- Index Locorum 221
- Index Nominum 223
- Index Rerum 221