Page - 16 - in The Priority of Locomotion in Aristotle’s Physics
Image of the Page - 16 -
Text of the Page - 16 -
the theory of nature which Aristotle had developed step by step in previous
books; however, this view, as we shall see, is not unproblematic if we keep
in mind how the book which we today call the Physics came down to us,
and if we take a closer look at its content.
At the same time it was pointed out that Book VIII has a special status
among the eight books of this work, since introducing the theory of a first
and eternal unmoved mover goes beyond what usually belongs to the scope
of natural philosophy and in this sense was even taken to mark the transi-
tion from philosophy of nature to metaphysics.4 Yet, the question exactly
what role Book VIII plays in the Physics as it has come down to us, that is,
its connection to the seven preceding books may not be easily answered
and in fact has been the subject of scholarly debate since ancient times.
One reason for this certainly lies in the fact that the arrangement of the
eight books into one work which we today call the Physics was not, as scho-
lars seem to agree, accomplished by Aristotle himself.5 As I will show in
more detail later, it is for this reason that one first of all has to become clear
on the question which of the different books in fact need to be considered
as the closer context of Book VIII. Traditionally, the form and composition
of the work called Φυσικὴ ἀκρόασις was taken to be the outcome of the
editorial work done by Andronicus of Rhodes. According to Porphyry6
Andronicus was the first to collect and edit Aristotle’s writings, which, as
the traditional view holds, eventually led to the Corpus Aristotelicum as we
now have it.7
Based on the testimonies of Strabo and Plutarch8, the traditional view
argues that Aristotle’s so-called esoteric writings9 were ultimately brought
4 For the latter see Jaeger (1955), 314–315, who argues that Book VIII in this sense “steht
außerhalb der Physik” and occupies an exceptional position, as it belongs to natural philoso-
phy in one sense, but to the field of metaphysics in another. Also von Arnim (1931), 30,
Wagner (1967), 275, Zekl (1988), XXXVI, Graham (1999), xiii-xiv, and Flashar (2004), 263,
emphasize the special status of Book VIII. Apart from these observations, which are based on
the content, Book VIII is taken to be a later addition to the other books, for instance by Jaeger
(1955), 314–315, and Ross (1936), 10.
5 See for instance Jaeger (1955), 315, Wagner (1967), 277–278, Brunschwig (1991), 24–25,
and Barnes (1997), 65–66. Yet, as Brunschwig (1991), 28 and 36, correctly indicates, this does
not necessarily imply that Aristotle did not have an overall plan for the Physics in mind.
6 Porphyry was instructed by his teacher Plotinus to arrange and edit his writings after his
death, and for this reason put them into a systematic order, since prior to this the only order
they had was that of their publication. In chapter 24 of his Life of Plotinus Porphyry writes
that in his work on Plotinus’ writings he imitated Andronicus of Rhodes who “divided the
works of Aristotle […] into treatises, collecting related material into the same place” (Vit.
Plot. 24, 6–11, Transl. Barnes (1997), 37).
7 See for instance Düring (1957), 413–25. Also Barnes (1997), 37–39.
8 See Barnes (1997), 2–3.
9 The so-called esoteric writings of Aristotle were only used in the Lyceum, the school
16 The importance of the primary kind of change
ISBN Print: 9783525253069 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647253060
© 2014, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen
The Priority of Locomotion in Aristotle’s Physics
- Title
- The Priority of Locomotion in Aristotle’s Physics
- Author
- Sebastian Odzuck
- Editor
- Dorothea Frede
- Gisela Striker
- Publisher
- Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co
- Date
- 2014
- Language
- English
- License
- CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
- ISBN
- 9783647253060
- Size
- 15.5 x 23.2 cm
- Pages
- 238
- Categories
- Geisteswissenschaften
- Naturwissenschaften Physik
Table of contents
- 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