Aristotle Form And Matter Essay

matter allows us to account for sensible substances in ways that neither the Pre-Socratics nor the Platonists and Pythagoreans could. By making a substance “something yet again,” Aristotle allows us the ability to dismiss the problems faced by Plato (in reference to accounting for a form’s ability to change), and also the issues of infinite regresses faced by the Pre-Socratics. However, form and matter themselves are not “things” in the same way that a substance is a thing. Form and matter are different ways of talking about one thing (form and matter become the attributes of a sensible substance), and in this way they (when compounded) are one thing with different aspects. As we will see with the next candidate, the definition of a substance …show more content…
5; both definitions presume that anything accidental lacks a sense of necessity. For example (as is shown in the first definition) it is not essential that a man who is digging a hole to plant a seed find buried treasure, however if he should then it would be considered accidental because it was not his intention to search for treasure (1025a13). The definition of the accidental is as follows, “…whatever attaches to a subject, but not because it was this subject, or the time this time, or the place this place, will be an accident.” (1025a23). This means that anything attached to a substance that is not essential to its being a substance (e.g., a man being pale, a person being a male or female, etc.) shall be regarded as being an accidental feature. It is the first definition that will be applied (along with its contrary, e.g., that which is essential) to form, matter, and substance itself. The second definition given for accident simply says that certain things that are attached to a substance in virtue of itself (e.g., “two right angles attach[ed] to the triangle” 1025a31), but not essential for the substance to exist, shall be too regarded as