Material Objects in Confucian and Aristotelian Metaphysics

Rooney, James Dominic

doi:10.5040/9781350276376

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since relations are not parts of substances, such an explanation shows that explanations needn't proceed mereologically. 16 See also James Dominic Rooney (2022), who argues that anyone committed to some form of restricted composition counts as a hylomorphist. deflationary terms, as 'principles of unity' that bear a non-mereological relation to substances (Johnston 2006), or as mental projections onto matter (Evnine 2016, Goswick 2018, Sattig 2015, or as abstract roles or offices that portions of matter occupy (Shields 2019).…”

Section: Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

Do substances have formal parts?

Renz

2023

Philosophical Books

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hylomorphism is the Aristotelian theory according to which substances are composed of matter and form. If a house is a substance, then its matter would be a collection of bricks and timbers and its form something like the structure of those bricks and timbers. It is widely agreed that matter bears a mereological relationship to substance; the bricks and timbers are parts of the house.But with form things are more controversial. Is the structure of the bricks and timbers best conceived as a part of the house, or is it related to the house in some non-mereological fashion? Kathrin Koslicki argues that substances have formal parts, that forms are best conceived as bearing a mereological relation to substances. This paper shows that her argument fails, given the traditional and plausible distinction between substances and accidental unities. I close with a brief suggestion for a non-mereological construal of forms.

show abstract

Section: Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

Do substances have formal parts?

Renz

2023

Philosophical Books

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Forms are not emergent powers

Renz

2023

Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hylomorphism is the Aristotelian theory according to which substances are composites of matter and form. If my house is a substance, then its matter would be a collection of bricks and timbers and its form something like a structure that unites those bricks and timbers into a single substance. Contemporary hylomorphists are divided on how to understand forms best, but a prominent group of theorists argue that forms are emergent powers. According to such views, when material components are arranged appropriately, a novel substance emerges with the power to impose unity on its components through time. I argue that these accounts of form fall prey to a bootstrapping problem, and so, suffer from issues of redundancy, given plausible assumptions about inherence. In their place, I suggest an ontologically minimalist conception of forms as collective manifestations of the powers of matter.

show abstract

Is metaethical naturalism sufficient? A Confucian response to problems of meaning

Rooney

2024

Asian Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Material Objects in Confucian and Aristotelian Metaphysics

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Do substances have formal parts?

Do substances have formal parts?

Forms are not emergent powers

Is metaethical naturalism sufficient? A Confucian response to problems of meaning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About