No Substances in a Substance.

In this paper I analyze the most controversial thesis of Aristotelian substantialism, namely, that substances cannot be composed of other substances. I call this position the Mereological Limitation Thesis (MLT). I find MLT valid and defend it. My argument for MLT is a version of the argument from t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Philosophia Vol. 49; no. 5; pp. 2243 - 2264
Autor principal: Piwowarczyk, Marek
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature Nov2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=153978469&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 153978469
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00483893
        1VPF
      jtl: Philosophia
      issn: 00483893
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Nov2021
      vid: 49
      iid: 5
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        153978469
        10.1007/s11406-021-00358-y
      ppf: 2243
      ppct: 21
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 617KB
      tig:
        atl: No Substances in a Substance.
      aug:
        au: Piwowarczyk, Marek
        affil: The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland
      su:
        Aristotelianism (Philosophy)
        Ingarden, Roman, 1893-1970
        Metaphysics
        Philosophers
        Denkel, Arda
      sug:
        subj:
          Aristotelianism (Philosophy)
          Ingarden, Roman, 1893-1970
          Metaphysics
          Philosophers
          Denkel, Arda
      keyword:
        Accidents
        Compound substances
        Form
        Identity-dependence
        Matter
        One-many problem
        Parts
      ab: In this paper I analyze the most controversial thesis of Aristotelian substantialism, namely, that substances cannot be composed of other substances. I call this position the Mereological Limitation Thesis (MLT). I find MLT valid and defend it. My argument for MLT is a version of the argument from the unicity of substantial form. Every substance can have only one substantial form, thus, if some substances compose the object O, then what binds them is only a set of their accidental forms (relations) and in the result thereof O is not a substance (O is not informed by a substantial form). I argue against the relativization of the substantiality of forms to the level of composition by showing that substantial forms must be absolutely identity-independent. In the last section I specify the ontological status of parts of substances and argue that they are spatially distributed bundles of accidents of a compound substance itself.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Philosophia is a copyright of Springer, 2021. All Rights Reserved.
      item: Philosophia
      holder: Springer Nature
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2021
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N