Page - 46 - in The Priority of Locomotion in Aristotle’s Physics

it is stated here still does not make clear in what way change in magnitude presupposes alteration and, indeed, it seems that Aristotle presupposes that the reader is acquainted with his understanding of growth as it is laid out in GC I 5 and de An. II 4, because there the same claims are made in the con- text of a more detailed explanation of what happens when growth occurs.9 According to the account in GC I 5, a process of growth may be explained in the following way. All growth occurs in virtue of something being added.10 What is added—this is called food (τροφή)—is contrary to that to which it is added, in the sense that for example moist food is added to something dry, the flesh of the growing thing.11 The food is unlike that to which it is added, since it is different and a separate thing that is charac- terised by contrary qualities. This is the reason for claiming (2), that is, for saying that the contrary, i.e. the moist food that is added, is food for its con- trary, namely for the dry flesh to which it is added and which it increases in size.12 In this way claim (2) is plausible, since it refers to the fact that the food is unlike the body of which it is supposed to become a part in the pro- cess of growth. But as claim (1) asserts, growth does not only occur in virtue of “what is unlike”, but at the same time takes place through “what is like”. While the former was explained by the fact to which claim (2) referred, the latter will become clearer by what is stated in claim (3), which says that “everything is added to its like by becoming alike.” What Aristotle means to say here is that in order for something to grow, that which is added and that, as we have seen, is unlike the growing thing needs to be transformed so that it may become an integral part of that to which it is added. The food therefore in principle needs to be capable of becoming a part of the whole to which it is added. The food that is supposed to make an animal grow, for instance, must potentially be flesh, although in the moment it is consumed it still is something else and unlike flesh.13 One could say that the food needs to be of such quality that it can be assimilated by the growing thing’s body. Hence, when an infant swallows a stone, this does not lead to growth, i.e. to the stone’s integration into the infant’s body, for the stone is not potential flesh in the sense that it cannot be transformed into a part of the infant’s body. A piece of apple that I feed the infant, however, by means of digestion 9 For claim (1) see GC I 5, 322a4f., for claim (2) 321b35–322a1, for claim (3) 322a5f., and for claim (4) 322a1–3. For Aristotle’s account of growth in living organisms as it is presented in de An. II 4 see 416a19–b31. 10 See GC I 5, 321a18–22 and 321b22–24. 11 See GC I 5, 321b35–322a3. 12 See GC I 5, 321b35–322a3. 13 See GC I 5, 322a5–6 46 Change in quality and quantity of living beings ISBN Print: 9783525253069 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647253060 © 2014, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen