Aristotle chapter in “Reality.”
The chapter on Aristotle in Westphal and Levenson’s (1994) book, Reality, presents an argument based on Aristotle’s (384- 322 B.C) work. The philosopher is believed, far and wide, to be more empirically minded than Plato, his teacher. Considered “the greatest mind of antiquity,” Aristotle was the most significant intellectual authority when it came to the sciences and philosophy. The chapter attempts at logically ascertaining the answer to the question of what is real, in the end, outlining the defining traits of ultimate reals or substances (p. 45). In this essay, the main arguments put down in the book on Aristotle’s views, and thoughts will be dealt with.
The predicate’s definition, as well as name, should predict the topic. ‘Man,’ for example, predicates individual men, with the species name ‘man’ applied to individuals, as the word ‘man’ is utilized to describe the individual; the word’s definition predicates individual men as well, as the individual is animal as well as man. Therefore, the definition, as well as the species name, can predicate the individual. Meanwhile, concerning components of a subject, often, neither the definition nor the name can be predicated of that they exist in. The definition can never be predicted, but nothing exists in some instances to prevent name usage.
All things except for primary substances can either exist within or be predicated of some primary substance, which becomes clear when referring to distinct occurring instances. ‘Animal’ predicates the human (‘man’) species, and hence, individual men, since, if no individual existed to the predicate, it would be utterly non-predicable of the human (‘man’) species. Once again, color exists in the body, and thus within individual bodies, since if no individual bodies existed wherein it existed, it could not exist – in fact, it could not ever exist in the body. Hence, all things with the exception of primary substances are either being predicated of or existing within, primary substances. Should the last be non- existent, it would not be possible for any other thing to exist.
When it comes to secondary substance, the species more accurately prove to be substance as compared to the genus, as it is associated more directly with...
This is because, if any individual ought to explain primary substances, he/ she would be rendering a more informative account, which would be more relevant to the given subject, by defining the species as opposed to the genus. Hence, he/ she would be providing a more informative explanation of the person through making the following statement. In essence, he was a man, and not he was an animal, as the former explanation is, to a greater extent, characteristic of the individual, whereas the latter description is overly generic. Once again, a man rendering a description of an individual tree’s nature will provide a more informative account through citing the species (i.e., ‘tree’) as opposed to citing its genus (i.e., ‘plant’).
The most proper term for ‘primary substances’...…such statements be sufficient when it comes to the topic of substance.
The substance is Aristotle’s topic of inquiry, as the causes and rules that are sought belong to the substance. If our universe is regarded as a whole, the very first component of it would be substance, which adheres simply due to serial succession. From this perspective as well, substance comes first, and subsequently, quality and quantity.
Sensible substances can be changed, not if the change occurs due to intermediates or opposites, as well as not from every opposite (as the voice isn’t white but doesn’t, consequently, become white), but due to the conflicting state since contraries don’t change.
A point to be borne in mind here is that neither form nor matter comes into being – here, Aristotle implies the last form and matter. Because all things that change are some things and are altered by something. The thing that transforms it constitutes the immediate mover; the matter represents the thing altered, and the form refers to the thing it is transformed into. Substances are of three kinds – the matter, ’this’ in its appearance (as every single thing marked by contact rather than organic unity makes up substratum and matter, as all these makeup matters, with the very last matter being the matter of something that, in a total sense, is a substance); nature that is a positive state or ‘this’ toward which a shift occurs; and, lastly, the specific substance comprising of the above two.…
