DETERMINING THE INDETERMINATE:  A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE THOMISTIC ARGUMENT FOR EXTENSIONLESS PRIME MATTER AND PROPOSAL OF VARIOUS THEORIES OF EXTENDED PRIME MATTER

Alexander McQuibban

doi:10.48204/2805-1815.6062

Submitted October 24, 2024

Published 2024-10-25

Artículos de investigación y ensayos filosóficos

No. 4 (2024): Analítica

DETERMINING THE INDETERMINATE: A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE THOMISTIC ARGUMENT FOR EXTENSIONLESS PRIME MATTER AND PROPOSAL OF VARIOUS THEORIES OF EXTENDED PRIME MATTER

Alexander McQuibban ⁺⁻

DOI https://doi.org/10.48204/2805-1815.6062

PDF (Español (España))

References

DOI: 10.48204/2805-1815.6062

Published: 2024-10-25

How to Cite

McQuibban , A. (2024) “DETERMINING THE INDETERMINATE: A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE THOMISTIC ARGUMENT FOR EXTENSIONLESS PRIME MATTER AND PROPOSAL OF VARIOUS THEORIES OF EXTENDED PRIME MATTER”, Analítica, (4), pp. 71–84. doi: 10.48204/2805-1815.6062.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Abstract

Reconciling the permanence of existence with the existence of change is a long-standing metaphysical puzzle. Some, following Aristotle, resolve this tension by positing ‘prime matter’, a bedrock which grounds all change. Saint Thomas Aquinas argued prime matter had to be purely potential, thus completely indeterminate and extensionless. This article charitably reconstructs and critically assesses Aquinas’ view, arguing it is far too restrictive. Prime matter need only be maximally potential and determinable, allowing it to take on certain determinate properties. I argue extension is an obvious candidate property and propose five theories positing extended prime matter: (1) a subtle revision of Aquinas' own view, (2) a hylomorphic approach which attributes to prime matter an ‘elastic’ extension, (3) a minimally/infinitesimally extended prime matter inspired by ancient atomism and late-renaissance/early-modern corpuscularianism, (4) a maximally/infinitely extended prime matter influenced by Advaita Vedanta, and (5) a pluralist approach reminiscent of Aristotle's elements. Crucially, by allowing prime matter a determinate characteristic, each proposal demystifies Thomistic prime matter which one could otherwise charge with being so characterless as to slip into the ‘nothingness’ which terrified the Eleatics and motivated the introduction of prime matter in the first place.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ackrill, J.L. (1987). A New Aristotle Reader. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv7h0scz.
Aquinas, T. (1949). On Being and Essence (Translated with an introduction and Notes by Armand Augustine Maurer). Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies.
Aquinas, T. (1955). Summa Contra Gentiles: Book One: God (Translated, with an Introduction and Notes by Anton C. Pegis). University of Notre Dame Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvpj7fpk
Berryman, S. (2005). Ancient Atomism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/Entries/atomism-ancient/
Bigotti, F. (2020). Corpuscularianism. In D. Jalobeanu and C.T. Wolfe, Encyclopedia of Early Modern Philosophy and the Sciences (pp. 1-13). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20791-9_133-1
Brower, J.E. (2011). ‘Matter, Form, and Individuation’. In B. Davies and E. Stump, The Oxford Handbook of Aquinas (pp. 85-103). Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195326093.013.0008
Dimas, P., Falcon, A. & Kelsey, S. (eds). (2022). Aristotle: On Generation and Corruption Book II: Introduction, Translation, and Interpretative Essays. Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/9781009239936.016
Graham, D.W. (1987). The Paradox of Prime Matter. Journal of the History of Philosophy, 25(4), 475-490. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/hph.1987.0063
Guthrie, W.K.C. (1962). A History of Greek Philosophy: Volume 2, the Presocratic Tradition From Parmenides to Democritus. Cambridge University Press.
Kent, M.A. (2006). Prime matter according to St. Thomas Aquinas. https://www.proquest.com/openview/4d7830975d94f14b0eb4da5d8c259baf/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
Mishra, R.K. (2015). ‘Advaita Vedanta Tatwa and Adi Sankaracharya’. Pratidhwani the Echo, IV(II), 40-44.
Oord, T.J. (2014). Theologies of Creation: Creatio Ex Nihilo and Its New Rivals. Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315884240
Pasnau, R. (2011). Matter and Extension. In R. Pasnau, Metaphysical Themes. Oxford University Press (pp. 1274-1671). https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199567911.003.0004.
Skrzypek, J.W. (2019). Accidental Forms as Metaphysical Parts of Material Substances in Aquinas’s Ontology. In Skrzypek, J. W., Oxford Studies in Medieval Philosophy, VII (pp. 67-114). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198845515.003.0003.
Soars, D. (2021). ‘Creation in Aquinas: ex nihilo or ex deo?’. New Blackfriars, 102(1102), 950–966. https://doi.org/10.1111/nbfr.12603
Studtmann, P. (2004) Aristotle’s Category of Quantity: A Unified Interpretation. Apeiron, 37(1), 69–91. https://doi.org/10.1515/APEIRON.2004.37.1.69
Wasilewska, E. (2000). Creation Stories of the Middle East. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.