Page - 59 - in The Priority of Locomotion in Aristotle’s Physics
Image of the Page - 59 -
Text of the Page - 59 -
aimed at showing the primacy of locomotion is to compare locomotion to
the other kinds of change in different respects, and here it seems that Aris-
totle, as we have seen, is focusing for some reason on the role locomotion
plays in living things insofar as they may be the source of certain changes.
This also explains why the substantial change of generation—in contrast to
the following four arguments—is not compared to locomotion here,
although it certainly will be necessary to make clear that change in place is
also prior to generation if the thesis that locomotion has priority over all
other kinds of change is to hold.55 But since a living being cannot be
responsible for its own coming to be, generation is simply irrelevant to
showing that locomotion is presupposed by any change of which the animal
may be the source. What Wagner in his criticism therefore takes to be a
weakness of the argument, namely its focusing on processes of growth and
diminution in living beings, indeed seems to be necessary in order to show
what Aristotle wants to show here.56 Aristotle has to focus on the special
kinds of change in magnitude, since, as I will now show, it is unclear or
might even seem wrong that locomotion is also prior with respect to these
special cases of change. In what follows I will therefore present different
reasons that may have compelled Aristotle to focus on quantitative change
in living organisms in this first argument.
First of all it is important to see that the very fact that living beings by
having a nature and a soul are responsible for their growth and alteration
seems in a certain sense to create a problem for the claim that locomotion
is primary, a problem that Aristotle has to face. For, one might think that
growth and alteration in living things for this reason can occur indepen-
dently of locomotion—after all, their nature and soul are sources of this liv-
ing thing’s own changes, and hence of their growth and alteration. Yet, it
might then turn out that growth or alteration in such living beings is prior,
or at least not posterior to locomotion, which would both contradict the
priority claim as it is stated by Aristotle. If this really were the case, one
could rightly object that locomotion against this background surely appears
to be a bad candidate for the primary kind of change. I will now show that
this possible objection first of all may seem to arise in particular with
respect to plants or other non-locomotive animals and that this might make
55 Accordingly Wagner (1967), 688, is mistaken when he claims that it is clear for Aristo-
tle that change in substance cannot be the primary kind of change since this process does not
occur in the supra-lunar sphere. For this does not fit with the fact that Aristotle (as Wagner,
690, is well aware of!) in the fourth argument argues against the claim that generation is pri-
mary and also shows in the second argument that locomotion has priority over generation
and corruption.
56 See Wagner (1967), 688.
The reason for the restriction of the argument’s scope 59
ISBN Print: 9783525253069 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647253060
© 2014, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen
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