Page - 182 - in The Priority of Locomotion in Aristotle’s Physics

fully k, the end of its coming to be k has been reached. The closer x is to the full being of k the more priority in essence it has. Conversely, the more prior x is in the process of coming to be k, the less prior it is in essence. Suppose that x at t1 has the nutritive capacity, at t2 the sensory one, and at t3 the locomotive one. Accordingly, of the three moments t1–t3, x at t1 has the least priority in being, but the highest in coming to be k. In addition, at this moment it only has the capacity that is of the highest priority ontologi- cally, namely that for nutrition, as it is capable of existing on its own. It is the other way round at t3: x at this point is of the highest priority in essence, but of the lowest in the coming to be k, and has the capacity of the least ontological priority, namely the locomotive capacity, which presupposes that it also has the nutritive and the sensory one. But, as stated by the reversed priority claim, the capacity to locomote is of the highest priority in essence. Following Aristotle’s theory, it is clear that of the soul’s three different capacities to cause any of the three non-substantial changes, the one responsible for locomotion comes to things last. That is, Aristotle is right to claim the second of the two premises of the first argument for locomotion’s priority in essence. But before returning to the discussion of the argument as a whole I would like to point out that the discussion of the development of capacities also adds something to our understanding of the concept of priority in essence. As I will argue now, it shows that there is another criter- ion for saying that x has priority in essence over y. 7.1.5 Another sense of priority in essence As we have seen, x is prior in essence to y, if and only if x fulfils their com- mon essence to a higher degree, i.e., has more of the essential features spe- cific to k than y.44 I have also argued that the essential features may also be called prior to other such features (derivatively). As one can see in Fig.3, x is closer to what it takes to be k when it has locomotion, rather than merely nutrition, which all living beings have in common. This means that x is of higher priority in essence when it has locomotion, because it is an essential part of its nature to have this capacity, and it accordingly fulfils more cri- teria of being k than when it merely has nutrition. For instance, it is more specific for a human being to have locomotion than to have nutrition. Or to put it differently: of the three possible answers to the question what a man is, (a) a living being that has the nutritive capacity, or (b) the sensory one, or (c) the locomotive one, the last is the most precise and presents more of 44 See p.170. 182 Locomotion is prior in essence ISBN Print: 9783525253069 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647253060 © 2014, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen