This paper examines the philosophical concept of matter, tracing debates from ancient thinkers such as Democritus and Aristotle through early modern philosophers including Descartes, Spinoza, and Bertrand Russell. The paper addresses fundamental questions about whether matter exists independently of perception, what gave rise to it, and how its nature relates to concepts such as God, time, space, and the self. Key positions reviewed include Russell's defense of the objective existence of matter on the basis of instinctive belief, Aristotle's substratum theory, Spinoza's argument that all things exist in and through God, Democritus's atomism, and the challenge that modern cosmology poses to materialist claims about the eternity of the universe.
Stating that matter is whatever entity has mass and occupies space is an oversimplification. The philosophical problem of matter is a complicated one, giving rise to numerous questions—from the nature of its existence to its characteristics and the consequences of these aspects for our conception of the universe, God, and ourselves. People have tried to explain the existence of matter since antiquity through various perspectives, and the debate has not yet concluded.
Taking for granted the fact that matter exists in itself and outside our mechanisms of perception and conception still leaves several important issues to be discussed. For example, what is the origin of matter—in other words, what made it and why? Did it create itself out of necessity, or is there a superior entity (God) that created it? And if there is a God, then was it his will to create matter, or does matter derive from his very existence, independently of his will? Furthermore, if God exists and he is matter, does this mean that matter initially appeared out of nothing? Stating that it appeared out of itself is a self-contradictory claim; therefore, the only remaining option is that matter appeared out of chaos. However, does this mean that chaos is not matter? What happens then to the concept of space? And since time and space are connected, one can continue to ask about time and eternity. Furthermore, the existence and nature of matter have consequences for the conception of the self and for explaining how and why one exists.
These are only several of the questions which arise when analyzing the concept of matter. Various philosophers have tried to answer them, starting with Democritus and Aristotle, continuing with Descartes, Bertrand Russell, Marx, Engels, and others. The scientific contributions of figures such as Newton and Einstein have also played an important part in the development of philosophical debates regarding matter.
Descartes concentrated upon the existence of matter. He stated that everything can be doubted, and it is precisely this philosophical exercise that brings about awareness of the self: Dubito ergo cogito. Cogito ergo sum. The fact that one undergoes experiences proves that one exists, and that is the only certainty one can have.
Russell discusses the possibility of things existing independently and outside of our conception. On one hand, we have sensory data that allows us to perceive the objects surrounding us and other people. However, do things disappear completely when we lack sense data? Since they do not, it can be assumed that there is more to the existence of matter than sense data alone. Even so, one could wonder whether the world is a mere dream, since the data one can trust most is in fact the subjective kind. In addition, one can doubt the existence of everything other than oneself.
The conclusion Russell arrives at is that while it is not illogical to question the objective existence of matter, there is no reason to think that everything is a dream—a result of our will and imagination. On the contrary, common sense and so-called instinctive beliefs lead us to accept the objective existence of matter. Since this simplifies and organizes our experience of the world, it is wiser to accept the truth value of this belief.
If Russell questioned the existence of matter, Aristotle was concerned with its nature. According to him, all things that come into existence must come from a substratum, which is the very nature of matter. Nevertheless, should this underlying matter of the universe be required to come from another, already-existing underlying matter, the judgment becomes self-contradictory. On the other hand, nothing can be generated ex nihilo; therefore, it can only be concluded that in order to exist, matter needs to be possible. However, possibility cannot exist in itself but must be conceived as residing in something else.
Here one can bring Spinoza's conceptions into the discussion. In his view, things can exist either in themselves or in something else. Since God is the only one who can exist through himself and he is infinite, it follows that everything can exist only in and through God. Thus, the existence of matter is inextricably linked to the existence of a superior entity.
"Eternal atoms and a universe without design"
"Big Bang cosmology against eternal universe claims"
The existence of matter, as well as its origin and its nature, represent important philosophical questions with consequences for other issues such as time, space, God, freedom, and the self. Some philosophers argued that a superior entity is needed in order to give rise to matter, while others have maintained the opposite. At the same time, the objective existence of matter has been questioned, yet some believed that our instinctual beliefs are sufficient reason to accept it in order to simplify our existence.
You’re 79% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.