Descartes Spinoza Leibniz - The Concept of Substance in Seventeenth-Century Metaphysics 笛卡尔斯宾诺莎莱布尼兹 - 十七世纪形而上学的物质概念

DESCARTES,SPINOZA,LEIBNIZ

Theconceptofsubstanceinseventeenth-centurymetaphysics

R.S.Woolhouse

LondonandNewYork

-iii-

ToShirley

Firstpublished1993

byRoutledge

11NewFetterLane,LondonEC4P4EE

SimultaneouslypublishedintheUSAandCanada

byRoutledge

29West35thStreet,NewYork,NY10001

©1993R.S.Woolhouse

Typesetin10on12pointBaskervilleby

Computerset,Harmondsworth,Middlesex

PrintedinGreatBritainbyClaysLtd.,St.Ivesplc

Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthisbookmaybereprinted

orreproducedorutilizedinanyformorbyanyelectronic,

mechanical,orothermeans,nowknownorhereafter

invented,includingphotocopyingandrecording,orinany

informationstorageorretrievalsystem,without

permissioninwritingfromthepublishers.

BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData

Woolhouse,R.S.

Descartes,Spinoza,Leibniz:TheConceptofSubstancein

Seventeenth-CenturyMetaphysics

I.Title

111

LibraryofCongressCataloginginPublicationData

Woolhouse,R.S.

Descartes,Spinoza,Leibniz:theconceptofsubstanceinseventeenth-

centurymetaphysics/RogerWoolhouse.

p.cm.

Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.

1.Substance(Philosophy)2.Descartes,René,1596-1650.3.Spinoza,

Benedictusde,1632-1677.4.Leibniz,GottfriedWilhelm,Freiherr

von,1646-1716.

I.Title.

BD331.W861993

111′.-dc20

92-33547

ISBN0-415-09021-00-415-09022-9(pbk)

-iv-

Contents

Acknowledgements

vi

Editionsandabbreviations

vii

1Introduction

1

2DescartesandSubstance

14

3SpinozaandSubstance

28

4LeibnizandSubstance

54

5Descartes,Spinoza,andLeibniz,andExtendedSubstance

75

Introduction

75

Descartesandextendedsubstance

78

Spinozaandextendedsubstance

88

Leibnizandextendedsubstance

94

6Descartes,Spinoza,andLeibniz,andtheMechanicsofExtendedSubstance

102

Descartes

102

Spinoza

115

Leibniz

116

7Causation,OccasionalismandForce

134

8Descartes,Spinoza,andLeibniz,andThinkingSubstance

150

9ExtendedSubstanceandThinkingSubstancerelated:'thenatureoftheunionbetweenbodyandmind'

164

10UncreatedandCreatedSubstance:GodandtheWorld

190

Bibliography

199

Index

209

-v-

EditionsandAbbreviations

DESCARTES

ParticularWorks

B

'ConversationwithBurman',asinJohnCottingham(trans.)(1976)Descartes'ConversationwithBurman,Oxford:ClarendonPress.

Med

MeditationsonFirstPhilosophy,asinCSM2.

PP

PrinciplesofPhilosophy,asinCSM1andMM.(Unlessindicatedotherwise,allquotationsfromPParefromCSM1.)

PS

ThePassionsoftheSoul,asinCSM1.

Rep

RepliestoObjectionstotheMeditations,asinCSM2.

Editions

AT:

CharlesAdamandPaulTannery(eds)(1897-1913)OeuvresdeDescartes,13vols.,Paris:Cerf(reprinted(1957-8)Paris:Vrin).

CSM

JohnCottingham,RobertStoothoff,andDugaldMurdoch(trans.)(1985)ThePhilosophicalWritingsofDescartes,2vols,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

K

AnthonyKenny(trans.anded.)(1970)Descartes:PhilosophicalLetters,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

MM

ValentineRodgerMillerandReeseP.Miller(trans.andeds.)(1983)RenéDescartes:PrinciplesofPhilosophy,Dordrecht:Reidel.

-vii-

SPINOZA

Particularworks

DPP

Descartes''PrinciplesofPhilosophy',asinC.

E

Ethics,asinC.(Referencestothisareoftheform'2P13D',i.e.DemonstrationofProposition13ofpart2.OtherabbreviationsareS,scholium;A,axiom;Pref,preface;Def,definition;C,corollary;E,explanation.

Ep

Correspondence,asinC(Eps1-29)andW.

TGM

ShortTreatiseonGodandMan,asinC.

TPT

Theologico-PoliticalTreatise,asinEl.

Editions

C

E.M.Curley(trans.anded.)(1985)TheCollectedWorksofSpinoza,vol.1,Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress.

El

R.H.M.Elwes(trans.)(1883)TheChiefWorksofSpinoza,2vols,London:Bell(reprinted(1951)NewYork:Dover).

W

A.Wolf(trans.anded.)(1928)TheCorrespondenceofSpinoza,London:Allen&Unwin.

LEIBNIZ

Particularworks

DM

DiscourseonMetaphysics,asinL.

LA

CorrespondencewithArnauld,asinH.T.Mason(trans.anded.)(1967)TheLeibniz-ArnauldCorrespondence,Manchester/NewYork:ManchesterUniversityPress/Barnes&Noble.

NE

NewEssaysonHumanUnderstanding,asinRB.

T

Theodicy,asinH.

Editions

AG

RogerAriewandDanielGarber(trans.)(1989)G.W.Leibniz:PhilosophicalEssays,IndianapolisandCambridge,MA:Hackett.

-viii-

E

J.E.Erdmann(ed.)(1840)G.G.LeibnitiiOperaPhilosophiaeQuaeExtant,2vols,Berlin,G.Eichler.

G

C.I.Gerhardt(ed.)(1875-90)PhilosophischenSchriften,7vols,Berlin:Weidmann.

GM

C.I.Gerhardt(ed.)(1849-55)MathematischeSchriften,7vols,BerlinandHalle:H.W.Schmidt.

Gr

G.Grua(ed.)(1948)G.W.Leibniz:Textesinédits,2vols,Paris:PressesUniversitairesdeFrance.

H

E.M.Huggard(trans.)(1951)Leibniz'Theodicy:EssaysontheGoodnessofGod,theFreedomofMan,andtheOriginofEvil,London:Routledge&KeganPaul.

L

LeroyL.Loemker(trans.anded.)(1969)Leibniz:PhilosophicalPapersandLetters,2ndedn,Dordrecht-Holland:Reidel.

La

AlfredGideonLangley(trans.)(1949)Leibniz:NewEssaysConcerningHumanUnderstanding,TogetherwithanAppendixConsistingofSomeofhisShorterPieces,LaSalle,IL:OpenCourt.

LP

G.H.R.Parkinson(trans.anded.)(1966)Leibniz:LogicalPapers,Oxford:ClarendonPress.

Lt

RobertLatta(trans.anded.)(1898)Leibniz:TheMonadologyandotherPhilosophicalWritings,London:OxfordUniversityPress.

PM

G.H.R.ParkinsonandMaryMorris(trans.andeds)(1973)Leibniz:PhilosophicalWritings,London:Dent.

RB

PeterRemnantandJonathanBennett(trans.andeds)(1981)G.W.Leibniz:NewEssaysonHumanUnderstanding,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Wi

PhilipP.Wiener(trans.anded.)(1951)Leibniz:Selections,NewYork:Scribner's.

-ix-

1

Introduction

Modernphilosophyisusuallytakentodatefromtheseventeenthcentury,andRenéDescartes(1596-1650)isoftennamedasitsfather.ThisneednotmeanthatDescarteswasthefirstnoteworthyandidentifiably'modern'philosopher.ThomasHobbes(1588-1679)hasclaimstheretoo.WhatitdoesmeanisthatDescartesmorethanotherswasresponsibleforthestyle,theshape,andthecontentofmuchsubsequentphilosophy-atfirstontheContinent,andtheninEngland.1Hisdistinctionbetweenextendedandthinkingsubstance,hisproofsofhisownexistenceandofthatofagoodGod,hisaccountofthematerialworldasoneofextendedmatterinmotion,allstirredupcontroversyanddiscussionwhosewavesrockedtheremainderoftheseventeenthcenturyandtroubledmostoftheeighteenth,andwhoseripplesarestilldiscernibletoday.Contemporaryreports,frombothsidesoftheEnglishChannel,testifytooneaspectofhisimportance:hisfreshnessandnewness.AccordingtoChristianHuygens,theDutchmathematician,astronomer,andphysicist,

WhatgreatlypleasedinthebeginningwhenthisphilosophybegantoappearisthatoneunderstoodwhatM.desCarteswassaying,whiletheotherphilosophersgaveuswordsthatmadenothingcomprehensible,suchasqualities,substantialforms,intentionalspecies,etc.Herejectedmoreuniversallythananyotherbeforehimthisirrelevantparaphernalia.Butwhatespeciallyrecommendedhisphilosophy,isthathedidnotstopshortatgivingadisgustfortheold,buthedaredtosubstitutecausesthatcanbeunderstoodofallthereisinnature.

(trans.Dugas1958:312)

-1-

Itwastothesame'justly-admiredgentleman'thatJohnLockesaidheowed'thegreatobligationofmyfirstdeliverancefromtheunintelligiblewayoftalkingofthephilosophyinuseintheschoolsinhistime'(1823:4.48).

InthesetestimonialstoDescartes'sinfluenceontheseventeenthcenturyhis'new'philosophyiscontrastedwithan'official',Scholastic,or'school'philosophy-aphilosophyfilledwithideaswhichhadbeguntoseemunintelligible.ThisolderphilosophybelongstoabroadlyAristoteliantradition,anditistheexplicitrejectionofthistradition,andoftheauthorityofAristotle,thatmarksforDescartes,andformanyofhiscontemporariesandsuccessors,theirownsenseoftheir'modernity'.

TwopeopleforwhomDescartes'sphilosophysetanew,post-AristotelianscenewereBenedictSpinoza(1632-77)andGottfriedLeibniz(1646-1716).LeibnizsaysthatSpinoza'onlycultivatedcertainseedsinthephilosophyofDescartes'(G2.563)andthathisphilosophyis'anexaggeratedCartesianism'(T359).AsforDescarteshimself,heissomeone'whosegeniusiselevatedalmostaboveallpraise'.He'certainlybeganthetrueandrightway',andsaid'excellentandoriginalthings'.YetLeibniz'spraisehaditslimits:thoughgoingsofarastobe'theentrancehalltothetruth',Descartes'sphilosophy'missedthemark'anddidnotquitemakeit.2Leibniz'sdisagreementswithitaredeep.SpinozatoohadhiscriticismsofDescartes,3andDescartes'sownfollowerswerekeen,ontheologicalgrounds,todispelanyideathatSpinozamightbeoneofthem.4Noneofthis,however,preventedthedevelopmentofatraditionwhichpicturesbothSpinozaandLeibnizas'Cartesians'.5

Initsdiscussionofthemetaphysicalviewsofthesethreeimportantseventeenth-centuryphilosophersthisbooksupposesthatthereareintrinsicrelationsbetweenthem.ButitformulatesnogeneralconclusionsaboutwhetherSpinozaandLeibnizareorarenot'Cartesians'.Itsimplyproceedsontheassumption-anassumptiontobejudgedbyitsfruits-thattheveryshapeorconceptualcontent,andnotthemereverbaldress,6ofmanyofSpinoza'sideashaveCartesianonesasabackground;andthat(whetherdirectly,orindirectlyviaSpinoza)thesameistrueofLeibniz.

Spinozawas18whenDescartesdied,andtheyneithermetnorcorresponded.In1663,however,hepublishedanexpositionofDescartes'sinfluentialPrinciplesofPhilosophy(1644).Thiswas

-2-

designedastuitionmaterialforapupiltowhom,Spinozasays,'Ididnotwanttoteachmyownopinionsopenly'(Ep13/C207),andSpinozaagreedwithfriendsthatheshould'warn...ReadersthatIdidnotacknowledgealltheopinions...asmyown,sinceIhadwrittenmanythings...whichweretheveryoppositeofwhatIheld'(Ep13/C207).Neverthelessitsveryexistencebetokensadeepunderstandingof,andconcernwith,Cartesianism.ItisnosurprisethatSpinoza'sownphilosophyinhisEthics(1677)showskeenawarenessofDescartes's.

FourteenyearsyoungerthanSpinoza,Leibnizwasonly4whenDescartesdied.Theyhadquasi-personalcontactwhenLeibnizmetDescartes'sfriendandliteraryexecutor,ClaudeClerselier,whoshowedhimsomeofDescartes'sunpublishedpapers.7ButlikeanyotherEuropeanphilosopherofthetime,LeibnizreadandstudiedDescartes,andinthe1690shetoohadplanstopublishanassessmentofDescartes'sPrinciplesofPhilosophy8ThisassessmentwouldhavebroughttogetherallthewaysinwhichDescartes,soneartothetruth,hadyet'missedthemark'(L432),andallthecriticismsLeibnizhaddevelopedovertheyears,andoutofwhichhisownpositiveviewshademerged.HisrelationshiptoDescartesiswell-summedupinaletterof1680:

IesteemMrDescartesalmostasmuchasonecanesteemanyman,andthoughthereareamonghisopinionssomewhichseemfalsetome...thisdoesnotkeepmefromsayingthatweowenearlyasmuchtoGalileoandtohiminphilosophicalmattersastothewholeofantiquity.

(L273)

AsforSpinozaandLeibniz,theybothcorrespondedandmet.In1671,inanexchangeoflettersonoptics,9SpinozaofferedtosendLeibnizhisrecentlypublishedTractatusTheologico-Politicus.Later,in1675,LeibnizwassuggestedtoSpinozaassomeone'veryexpertinmetaphysicalstudies'(Ep70/W339),andhenceassomeonetowhomthemanuscriptoftheEthics,thencirculatingamongSpinoza'sfriends,mightusefullybeshown.Spinoza,whoseTractatusTheologico-Politicus(1670)hadalreadybecomeinfamous,considered'itimprudenttoentrustmywritingstohimsosoon'(Ep72/W431),andaskedthatmorebelearntaboutLeibniz'scharacter.Intheevent,LeibnizmetwithSpinozainHollandthenextyearand,hereported,'spokewithhimseveraltimesandforverylong'(L167);accordingtonoteshemadeatthe

-3-

time,atleastsomeofthediscussionconcernedtheEthics.Spinozadiedthenextyear,andwhentheEthicswaseventuallypublishedLeibnizmadefurtherdetailednotes.10Manyofthesearecritical,asaremostofthecommentsonSpinozawhicharescatteredthroughhiswritings.LikeothersatthetimeLeibnizthoughtthatSpinoza'sideasweredangeroustoreligion;hisviewofthenatureofGodandcreationinparticular.HeoftenexplicitlycontrastshisowndoctrineswithSpinoza's.AletterhewroteonthepublicationofSpinoza'sEthicsgivesanassessmentoftherelationshipbetweentheirideas:

Ihavefoundthereanumberofexcellentthoughtswhichagreewithmyown,assomeofmyfriendsknowwhohavealsolearnedfromSpinoza.ButtherearealsoparadoxeswhichIdonotfindtrueorevenplausible.As,forexample,thatthereisonlyonesubstance,namelyGod;thatcreatures[createdthings]aremodesoraccidentsofGod....Iconsiderthisbookdangerousforthosewhowishtotakethepainstomasterit.

(L195)

Thisbookdiscussesthemetaphysicsofthesethreephilosophers.Specifically,itfocusesonwhatDescartes,Spinoza,andLeibnizsayabout'substance'.'[F]ailuretounderstandthenature'ofthisis,saysLeibniz,'thecauseof[Descartes's]errors'(L433)andofSpinoza's'paradoxes'(L195).Butwhatis'metaphysics'?Whatis'substance'?

Theterm'metaphysics'originatedasthetitleofsomeofAristotle'sbooks.ThoughAristotlehimselfcalledthesubjectmatterofthesebooks'firstphilosophy',itappearsthatinearlyeditionsofhisworkstheywerearrangedinorderafterhisbookPhysics;sothey,andhencetheirsubjectmatter,cametobeknownasMetaphysics('after','above',or'beyond'thePhysics).Onepartof'firstphilosophy'asconceivedbyAristotlewasthestudyof'beingasbeing'(Met1003a20),astudywhichconcernsthequestionwhatbeingis.Thisquestion,saysAristotle,'wasraisedofoldandisraisednowandalways,andisalwaysthesubjectofdoubt';andheaddsthatthequestion'Whatisbeing?''isjustthequestion,whatissubstance?'(Met1028b3).ThequestionsarethesamebecausetheGreekfortheEnglishword'substance'(Latin:substantia)isousia,whichcomesfromtheGreekverbfor'tobe'.

-4-

Onenaturalwaytounderstandthequestionwhatbeingorsubstanceis,andonewhichfitsmuchofwhatAristotlesays,isasarequestforanaccountofwhatisreal.'Whatdoesrealitycomprise?'(Stead:66),arecentwriteronAristotleputsit.So,asAristotleremarks,'substance'or'being'is'thoughttobelongmostobviouslytobodies'(Met1028b9);thesearewhataremostnaturallypickedoutasconstitutiveofreality.'[W]esaythatnotonlyanimalsandplants...aresubstances,butalsonaturalbodiessuchasfireandwaterandearth.'Butwhetherthisinitial,'mostobvious',thoughtisright,whetherthesereallyaresubstances,is,saysAristotle,somethingwhich'mustbeconsidered'(Met1028b8-16).

ToaconsiderableextentAristotlethinksthethoughtiscorrect,thoughonthewaytothisconclusionhegivesalengthyaccountofjustwhatitisaboutanimals,plants,andnaturalbodiesthatconstitutestheirbeingorsubstantiality.Moreover,ashepointsout,somepeoplehavethoughtotherwise.VariousearlierGreekphilosophershadthoughtthatrealityconsistsultimatelyinsomethingotherthanthesethings,somethingofwhichthesethingsaremerelythesurfacephenomena.Somehadheldthatthereisonebasicsubstanceorultimatelyrealbeing:accordingtoThalesthisis'water';accordingtoParmenidesitisaneverlasting,motionless,andhomogeneous'One'.Somehadheldthatthereismorethanonebasicsubstanceorultimatelyrealbeing:accordingtoEmpedoclestheworldasweknowitisproducedfromfour'roots'or'elements'-Fire,Air,Earth,Water-workedonbythetwoprinciplesofLoveandStrife;accordingtotheatomistssuchasDemocritusitisaresultofthechancemovementsandcollisionsofdifferentlyshapedindivisibleatoms.

TheancientGreekinterestinmetaphysics,anditscorequestionaboutsubstanceorbeing,issharedbythephilosophersoftheseventeenthcentury.Infactitisoneoftheircentralconcerns.AccordingtoLeibniz,'theconsiderationofsubstanceisofthegreatestimportanceandfruitfulnessforphilosophy'(NE151);andthesewordscouldserveasamottonotonlyforhisworkbutalsoforthatofDescartesandSpinoza.Healsosays,inanarticle'Onthecorrectionofmetaphysicsandtheconceptofsubstance',thatunlikeDescartes'saccount,whichledtoerror,his'issofruitfulthattherefollowfromitprimarytruths,evenaboutGodandmindsandthenatureofbodies-truthsheretoforeknowninpartthoughbarelydemonstrated,andunknowninpart,butof

-5-

thegreatestutilityforthefutureintheothersciences'(L433).Leibniz'sestimationoftheimportanceoftheconceptofsubstanceiscorrect.Whathesaysfollowsfromhisaccountistheheartofnearlythewholeofhisphilosophy;andSpinoza'sgreatwork,theEthics,isessentiallynothinglessthanalengthyelaborationofthedefinitionofsubstancewithwhichitallbutopens.AsforDescartes,thoughhiswritingsarenotsoclearlystructuredasametaphysicsofsubstance,hecertainlydevelopsoneatlength,andmanyofhisphilosophicalviewsconnectwithit;withoutit,SpinozaandLeibnizwouldnothavewrittenastheydid.

Besidessharinganinterestinthequestionwhatsubstanceorbeingis,thephilosophersoftheseventeenthcenturyalsoretaintheoriginalAristotelianideaofmetaphysicsas'first'orfoundationalphilosophy.ThisisvividlypresentedintheprefacetoDescartes'sPrinciplesofPhilosophy,wherethewholeofphilosophyisportrayedasatree:'Therootsaremetaphysics,thetrunkisphysics,andthebranchesemergingfromthetrunkarealltheothersciences'(CSM1.186).Theideaofmetaphysics-'thisregalscience'(L432)-asthefoundationorsourceofotherbranchesofknowledgeistakenupbyLeibniztoo.Sciencessuchasphysicsdependonit:'thelawsofmechanics...flow...frommetaphysicalprinciples'(trans.MacDonaldRoss:146);they'cannotbeadvancedwithoutmetaphysicalprinciples',principleswithoutwhich'generalphysicsisentirelyincomplete'(trans.MacDonaldRoss:154).

Giventheactualoriginoftheterm'metaphysics',itisjustacoincidencethatamainconcernof'firstphilosophy',asunderstoodanddevelopednotonlybyAristotlebutalsointheseventeenthcentury,canbethoughtofasmetaphysicalorbeyondphysicsinthesenseofbeingmorebasic,abstractandgeneralthanphysics.Physics,wemightsay,tellsusaboutthedetailsoftheworld'sphenomena;metaphysicsaboutwhatunderliesthosephenomena,whatthereality,being,orsubstantialityoftheworldbasicallyorultimatelyconsistsin.Thus,tounderstandthedetailedworkingsoftheworld,allthephenomenaandappearanceswhichitpresentstous,istounderstandthemintermsofthepropertiesandactivitiesofthesubstanceswhichconstitutetheworld.But,inthecontextofthephilosophyoftheseventeenthcentury,itisaparticularlynicecoincidence.Thatcenturysawtheemergenceanddevelopmentofwhatwenowknowasmodernscience.ItsawthepublicationofJohannesKepler'sNewAstronomy

-6-

orCelestialPhysics(1609),WilliamHarvey'sAnatomicalEssayontheMotionoftheHeartandBlood(1628),GalileoGalilei'sDialoguesontheTwoChiefSystemsoftheWorld(1632),andIsaacNewton'sTheMathematicalPrinciplesofNaturalPhilosophy(1687).Itsawthedevelopmentofthetelescopeandthemicroscope.ItsawthefoundationofscientificsocietiessuchastheRoyalSocietyofLondonfortheAdvancementofExperimentalKnowledge(1660s);anditsawtheworkofoccupantsofthe'HallofScientificFame',suchasRobertBoyle,RobertHooke,andChristianHuygens.LaterchaptersofthisbookwillshowhowthemetaphysicsofDescartes,Spinoza,andLeibniznotonlyprovidegeneralbackgroundconceptionsoftheworldasdescribedindetailbythemoreparticularsciences,butalsocontributequitedirectlytothetheoreticalfoundationsofseventeenth-centuryphysicsandmechanics.

EventhoughtherejectionofAristotlemarksforthephilosophersoftheseventeenthcenturytheirownsenseoftheir'modernity',theyhardlyfreethemselvesfromtheScholastictraditioncompletely.LeavingasidethefactthatLeibnizevenwishedtoreinstatesomeelementsofAristotelianism,itisclearthattheso-called'newphilosophers'inheritedfromAristotlethegeneralconceptionofakindofinvestigationcalled'firstphilosophy'or'metaphysics',and,alongwiththatconception,theideathatoneofitscentralconcernsistogiveanaccountofwhatisultimatelyreal.Moreover,theydidnotjusttakeupAristotle'squestion,'Whatissubstanceorbeing?'Theywereinfluencedbyhisanswerstoo.ManyofthefeaturesandmuchofthedetailofAristotle'sdoctrinesonsubstancearepresent,ofteninasomewhatprogrammatic,sloganisedformintheseventeenth-centurydiscussions.Soweneedtohavesomeimpressionofthe'Aristotelian'ideastheywerefamiliarwithbeforeweturntoDescartes's,Spinoza's,andLeibniz'smetaphysicsofsubstance.

'Someimpression'isallwecanhopeforhere.Foronething,Aristotle'sowndiscussionsinhisCategoriesandMetaphysicsarelengthy,detailed,andwrittenatdifferenttimes.Thereismuchscholarlydisputeaboutthem,andquitepossiblythereisnosingle,unified,coherent,andconsistentinterpretationtobegiven;11theyare,afterall,lecturenotesratherthanfinishedproductions.Foranotherthing,Aristotledidnotspeakdirectlytotheseventeenthcentury.Hisideascamedownthroughthemediumofcenturies

-7-

ofdiscussion,commentary,interpretation,amendment.MedievalScholasticphilosophers,suchasOckhamand,inparticular,Aquinas,arecentralfiguresinthisprocess.

OneinfluentialthemewhichcameoutofAristotle(asatMetaphysics1017bl4andCategories2all)isthatofsubstanceasthatwhichisthesubjectofpredicatesandnotitselfthepredicateofanythingelse.Avariationofthisistheidea-'themostdistinctivemarkofsubstance',Aristotlecallsit(Cat4al0)-thatsubstancesarewhatundergoorunderliechange.'[O]neandtheself-samesubstance,whileretainingitsidentity,isyetcapableofadmittingcontraryqualities...atonetimewarm,atanothercold'(Cat4a19-21).

Accordingly,particularthings,suchasthemanSocratesorthehorseBucephalus,becomeprimeexamplesofsubstances.'Substancesaremostproperlysocalled,becausetheyunderlieandarethesubjectsofeverythingelse'(Cat2b39).SocratesandBucephalushavepropertiesandqualities(theyhavethingspredicatedofthem),andarenotthemselvesthepropertiesorqualitiesofanythingelse.Moreover,theirpropertiesandqualitiescanchangeovertime.Qualitiescouldnotexistwithoutthem;qualitiesgettheirrealitybybeingqualitiesofotherthingswhicharesubstantialandrealinthemselves.Theactivityofwalking,orthestateofhealth,isnot'self-subsistentorcapableofbeingseparatedfromsubstance'(Met1028a23).Ifsubstances'didnotexist,itwouldbeimpossibleforanythingelsetoexist'(Cat2b6).

Butthoughitthusleadstotheideaof'substance'as'individualsubstance'(totheideaofthemanSocrates,orthehorseBucephalus,asexemplificationsofbasicrealities),thethemeofsubstanceasthesubjectofpredicatesandaswhatunderlieschangedoesnotalwaysstopthere.ApassageintheMetaphysicsglossestheideathatsubstanceisthesubjectofpredicationbytalkingofsubstanceas'theultimatesubstratum,whichisnolongerpredicatedofanythingelse'(1017b23).Thismightbereadasmeaningnotonlythatqualities,suchasahorse'scolour,arenotsubstances,butalsothattheindividualhorseitselfisnotultimatelyasubstanceeither.Thehorseitselfwouldthenbetheresultofpredicatingthecharacteristicsofequinityofsomepredicatelessultimatesubstratum.ThiscertainlyistheideathathasbeentakenfromlaterpassagesintheMetaphysicswheresubstanceis'theultimatesubstratum[which]isofitselfneitheraparticularthingnorofaparticularquantitynorotherwisepositivelycharac-

-8-

terised'(1029a24).Accordingtothisconceptionofit,'substance'wouldbeexemplifiedbywhatiscalledmatter-ofwhichAristotlesays,'ifthisisnotsubstance,itbafflesustosaywhatelseis.Whenallelseisstrippedoffevidentlynothingbutmatterremains'(Met1029al0-ll).

Elsewhere(inbooksZandHoftheMetaphysics)'matter'figures,notassubstanceitself,conceivedofasultimatesubstratum,butasoneelementinatwo-foldanalysisofsubstanceconceivedofasindividualsubstantiality.Aparticularthing,suchasahouse,isacomposite,ofmatter,suchasbricksandtimber,disposedorarrangedinoraccordingtoacertainfarm;abowlorstatueisacompositeofmattersuchasbronze,formedinacertainway.Sofar,ofcourse,bronzeisstillmatterofacertainkind;itismatteronlyrelativetotheformofthebowl.Onemightgofurther,therefore,andthinkofthebronzemerelyas'secondarymatter',matterwhichisitselfacompositeofmorebasicmatter,andtheformofbronze.PossiblyAristotlehimselfdidnotintendthis,butitiscertainlysuggestedbyhistalkof'strippingalloffuntilmerematterremains,anditisencouragedbyAquinas'laterdoctrineofultimate,basicmateriaprima.Thisso-called'hylomorphic'analysisofindividualsubstancesintomatter(Greek:hyle)andform(morphe)wascentraltoAquinas'metaphysicsinthemiddleages,andahighlysignificantitemoftheintellectualinheritanceoftheseventeenthcentury.Weshouldlookintoitfurther.

'Individualsubstances'aresometimesspokenofas'primary'or'firstsubstances',asopposedto'secondsubstances',thekindsorspeciesofwhichtheyareindividuals-theindividualsubstanceBucephalusisanindividualofasecondary