The Physics, Vol. II (Books V-VIII)
- Language:
- English
- Status:
- Complete work
- Authorship:
- Written by the author
- Condition of the text:
- Clean text
- Extent:
- ~130,000 words · 630 passages
Cite this work
- APAAristotle. (n.d.). The Physics, Vol. II (Books V-VIII). SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/en/works/aristotle/the-physics-vol-ii-books-v-viii
- MLAAristotle. "The Physics, Vol. II (Books V-VIII)." SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/en/works/aristotle/the-physics-vol-ii-books-v-viii.
- ChicagoAristotle. The Physics, Vol. II (Books V-VIII). SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/en/works/aristotle/the-physics-vol-ii-books-v-viii.
What it is about
The second volume of Aristotle's Physics, Books V to VIII: the theory of continuous motion and the proof of a first mover.
Context and history
The first volume, also in the catalogue, deals with change, nature, the four causes, place, void and time. This one goes on with the classification of motions, with continuity and divisibility — here is the answer to Zeno's paradoxes about Achilles and the tortoise — and ends with Book VIII, which argues that motion never began and that there must be a first mover which moves without being moved. That last book is the one medieval theology turned into a proof of the existence of God, which Aristotle did not intend: his first mover creates nothing and takes care of no one.
Editorial context, not a citable source: unlike the passages of the work itself, these statements cannot be checked against the corpus.
wards. We have already examined the nature af ἡ movement’ (in its extended sense, including ‘ modification’ and ‘expansion or contraction’) and have now to note that ὁ shape’ and “‘ state’ and ‘ place’ are the ‘ whence’ and ‘whither’ of change, but are immovable in themselves It is important, however, to note that these immovable points of starting and arriving are just as subject to the distinctions of ‘incidental,’ ‘in virtue of a part,’ and ‘primary and integral,’ as the movements are (Ὁ 16-22). Summary (Ὁ 22-26). Dismissing the indeterminate incidental cases and confining ourselves to proper and primary ὁ changes,’ we note that they ‘reside solely in the primary and integral subject that experiences the change, and must be in the direction From one opposite to the other, both opposites being declared in positive (not negative) terms (Ὁ 26-35). This last point must be elaborated. To speak of the ‘ nathot’ as the primary and integral ἡ subject’ that undergoes the change would be idle. For ‘ knowledge,’ or ‘ sound’ or ‘angularity’ are ‘not-hot’; and though “ not-hotness’ may incidentally undergo change when any of these things Ἷ ARGUMENT (contenued) Ἷ ARGUMENT (contenued) do, it cannot be the proper and integral subject of the change. Taking the“ subject,’ then, to be a positive and not a negative, though the predicate may be a negative, we seem to have three possibilities. The change (for instance) might be from ‘ hot to cold,’ from ‘ hot to not-hot,’ or from ‘ not-hot to hot,’ or JSrom ‘ not-hot to not-cold.’ Obviously the last of these falls out, for it would include such changes as that from ‘ treble to triangular ’ (Ὁ 35-225 a 12). The forms from * hot to not-hot ’ and its inverse are significant if the negation in one term is specific, and is confined to what is posited by the other term, and if the subject is potentially capable of renouncing or acquiring (as the case may be) the shape, state, or pl