This paper is about the history of a question in ancient Greek philosophy and medicine: what holds the parts of a whole together? The idea that there is a single cause responsible for cohesion is usually associated with the Stoics. They refer to it as the synectic cause (αἴτιον συνεκτικόν), a term variously translated as ‘cohesive cause,’ ‘containing cause’ or ‘sustaining cause.’ The Stoics, however, are neither the first nor the only thinkers to raise this question or to propose a (...) single answer. Many earlier thinkers offer their own candidates for what actively binds parts together, with differing implications not only for why we are wholes rather than heaps, but also why our bodies inevitably become diseased and fall apart. This paper assembles, up to the time of the Stoics, one part of the history of such a cause: what is called ‘the synechon’ (τὸ συνέχον) – that which holds things together. Starting with our earliest evidence from Anaximenes (sixth century BCE), the paper looks at different candidates and especially the models and metaphors for thinking about causes of cohesion which were proposed by different philosophers and doctors including Empedocles, early Greek doctors, Diogenes of Apollonia, Plato and Aristotle. My goal is to explore why these candidates and models were proposed and how later philosophical objections to them led to changes in how causes of cohesion were understood. (shrink)

This book investigates what change is, according to Aristotle, and how it affects his conception of being. Mark Sentesy argues that change leads Aristotle to develop first-order metaphysical concepts such as matter, potency, actuality, sources of being, and the teleology of emerging things. He shows that Aristotle’s distinctive ontological claim—that being is inescapably diverse in kind—is anchored in his argument for the existence of change. -/- Aristotle may be the only thinker to have given a noncircular definition of change. When (...) he gave this definition, arguing that change is real was a losing proposition. To show that it exists, he had to rework the way philosophers understood reality. His groundbreaking analysis of change has long been interpreted through a Platonist lens, however, in which being is conceived as unchanging. Offering a comprehensive reexamination of the relationship between change and being in Aristotle, Sentesy makes an important contribution to scholarship on Aristotle, ancient philosophy, the history and philosophy of science, and metaphysics. (shrink)

Each thing is fundamental. Not only is no thing any more or less real than any other, but no thing is prior to another in any robust ontological sense. Thus, no thing can explain the very existence of another, nor account for how another is what it is. I reach this surprising conclusion by undermining two important positions in contemporary metaphysics: hylomorphism and hierarchical views employing so-called building relations, such as grounding. The paper has three main parts. First, I observe (...) hylomorphism is alleged by its proponents to solve various philosophical problems. However, I demonstrate, in light of a compelling account of explanation, that these problems are actually demands to explain what cannot be but inexplicable. Second, I show how my argument against hylomorphism illuminates an account of the essence of a thing, thereby providing insight into what it is to exist. This indicates what a thing, in the most general sense, must be and a correlative account of the structure in reality. Third, I argue that this account of structure is incompatible not only with hylomorphism, but also with any hierarchical view of reality. Although hylomorphism and the latter views are quite different, representing distinct philosophical traditions, I maintain they share untenable accounts of structure and fundamentality and so should be rejected on the same grounds. (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)