This essay deals with Simon Evnine’s amorphic hylomorphism (i.e., the view that objects are not just the sum of their parts, even if forms are not real components), and the bearings that considerations about modality might have on it. It is suggested that the assumption of amorphic hylomorphism makes an account of modality extensionally incorrect in the domain of natural, non-organic objects (NNOs). It is further argued that, in the case of NNOs, the existence of real forms should be accepted and this conclusion is claimed to be consistent with scientific knowledge, on the basis of substance gradualism (i.e., the view that forms are real principles of unification that operate at different levels of material constitution).
Substance, Form, and Modality
gabriele de anna
2018-01-01
Abstract
This essay deals with Simon Evnine’s amorphic hylomorphism (i.e., the view that objects are not just the sum of their parts, even if forms are not real components), and the bearings that considerations about modality might have on it. It is suggested that the assumption of amorphic hylomorphism makes an account of modality extensionally incorrect in the domain of natural, non-organic objects (NNOs). It is further argued that, in the case of NNOs, the existence of real forms should be accepted and this conclusion is claimed to be consistent with scientific knowledge, on the basis of substance gradualism (i.e., the view that forms are real principles of unification that operate at different levels of material constitution).I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
