This is a survey of Aristotle's development of the concept of substance in the Categories and Book VII (Zeta) of the Metaphysics. We begin with the Categories conception of a primary substance as that which is not "in a subject" -- i.e., not ontologically dependent on anything else -- and also not "said of a subject" -- i.e., not predicated of any item beneath it in its categorial tree. This gives us the idea of primary substances as ontologically basic individuals, (...) the fundamental subjects of predication and of change. We then examine the conception of substance in Metaphysics Zeta, where Aristotle is interested not just in the question of what the primary substances are, but in the question of what makes them substances, or, as he would put it, what the "substance OF something" is. The conception of substance that Aristotle ends up with seems (as has been frequently noted) to be threatened with inconsistency, in that Aristotle seems to want to maintain, simultaneously, that (i) substance is form, (ii) form is universal, and (iii) no universal is a substance. Two main approaches toward resolving this inconsistency are considered, and a sketch is provided of how one of these approaches might be fleshed out. On the line I propose, the substantial form of a material compound is predicated accidentally and universally of the matter of that compound, but it is not the substance of the matter of which it is predicated. Rather, it is the substance of itself; but since it is the cause of the compound's being essentially the kind of thing that it is, the substantial form is, in a derivative way, the substance of the compound as well. (shrink)

«Hermeneutic» means interpretation, that is, looking from a point of view. In this study we try to interpret from the vital reason, the method of Ortega y Gasset, his and his disciple Julián Marías, the Aristotelian concept of «substance». If life is the radical reality, as Ortega stresses, and the person its programmatic realization, in Marías’ opinion, a vital reason of the concept of οὐσία, means to discover its capacity to understand human life. We will find, as a matter of (...) fact, that there are four limits, essentially, that distance the philosopher from that comprehension. By them, we will find the core of the greatest contradictions of the Aristotelian thought, that has been subject to intense critics throughout its history. We will concern, especially, on the function of language in the Greek conception of reason, on the interpretations that brought to «being» and «entity» as Aristotle’s thought starting point «Hermenéutica» significa interpretar, mirar desde un punto de vista. En este estudio buscamos interpretar desde la «razón vital», el método de Ortega y Gasset y su discípulo Julián Marías, el concepto aristotélico de «sustancia». Si la vida es la realidad radical, como afirma Ortega, y la persona es su realización programática, según entiende Marías, una razón vital de la οὐσία significa descubrir su capacidad de comprensión para con la vida humana. Encontraremos, entonces, que hay esencialmente cuatro límites que desvían de esa comprensión; mediante ellos, habremos encontrado el núcleo de importantes contradicciones del pensamiento aristotélico que han sido objeto de encendidos debates a lo largo de la historia. Nos centraremos, sobre todo, en la función del lenguaje en la concepción de la razón griega, en los supuestos interpretativos del «ser» y del «ente» como puntos de partida del pensamiento de Aristóteles . (shrink)

This chapter contains sections titled: Introduction Psychê and Life Hylomorphism and the Problem of Body Perception Mental Events and Physical Events Functionalism Belief‐Desire Psychology Problem of Consciousness Active and Passive Intellects Conclusion Notes References and Recommended Reading.

I discuss Aristotle’s views in Metaphysics VII-6 (Z-6) on the issue whether each thing is the same as its essence. I propose a deflationary interpretation according to which Z-6 develops a “logical approach” (logikos) in which “sameness” amounts only to coextensiveness between definiendum and definiens with no attention to more specific issues about ontological and explanatory features of definitions.

My dissertation explores some issues of Aristotle’s philosophy, regarding the functionalist interpretation developed by Hilary Putnam and Martha C. Nussbaum as a valuable starting point. In Chapter One, I analyze some families of interpretations of Aristotle’s “psuchology” proposed in the second half of the 20th century in the context of the philosophy of mind. I show how some aspects of Aristotle’s thought, which are correctly grasped by the dualistic as well as by the physicalist interpretation, are later resumed and harmonized (...) by functionalism into a coherent doctrine. In Chapter Two it is worth to set out an analysis of Aristotle’s hylomorphism. I take into account homonymy, which is traditionally conceived as being in conflict with hylomorphism. I show not only how homonymy is rather a consequence of hylomorphism, but also how it allows to highlight that hylomorphism, if properly conceived, should be regarded as an ontological thesis with predicative consequences. In this regard, I suggest my own definition of hylomorphism. In Chapter Three, I take into account Aristotle’s final causation, comparing it with contemporary naturalism. I hold that teleology demonstrates Aristotle’s anti-reductionism and, in particular, the fact that he attributes causal efficacy to natural forms and ends. I criticize functionalism for having regarded Aristotle’s formal and final causes as being just explanatory, whereas, on the contrary, Aristotle conceives such explanatory character to derive from their genuine causal role. I formulate my own position, which I label as “logical compatibilism”. I hint at how the functional analysis of living organism may establish some points of contact between Aristotle’s and Darwin’s analysis. I recognize that functionalism correctly grasps the functional roles Aristotle attributes to matter and form and that it translates such an account in a valuable philosophical doctrine. Nevertheless, functionalism confines itself within the framework of contemporary philosophy of mind and fails to comprehend Aristotle’s anti-reductionist naturalism as regards biological life and nature in general. (shrink)