Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    If substance were merely formal, Aristotle's distinction ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Substance is a formal concept with a central structural role in our conceptual scheme, not merely a name for certain important kinds of things in the world.

    If substance were merely formal, Aristotle's distinction between primary and secondary substance would collapse into a purely logical taxonomy.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Primary substance (individual objects) has ontological independence; secondary substance (species/genus) exists only in thought and language.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If substance were purely formal, the distinction between what exists independently and what exists only as conceptual categories would vanish.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Aristotle's hylomorphism requires matter as a real principle; pure formality cannot account for individual material particulars.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Aristotelian primary substances (e.g., 'this horse') are already formal essences; their thisness (haecceity) is a principle of form, not matter.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A logical taxonomy need not be merely formal—species and genera carve nature at real joints reflecting genuine metaphysical kinds and structures.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The primary/secondary distinction remains substantive even if both are formal: one is instantiated in individuals, the other exists only universally.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Modality & Possibility1 linkedPersonal Identity1 linked

    Related

    A logical taxonomy need not be merely formal—species and genera carve nature at ...Aristotelian primary substances (e.g., 'this horse') are already formal essences...Aristotle's hylomorphism requires matter as a real principle; pure formality can...If substance were purely formal, the distinction between what exists independent...
    +3 moreShow less
    Primary substance (individual objects) has ontological independence; secondary s...Substance is a formal concept with a central structural role in our conceptual s...The primary/secondary distinction remains substantive even if both are formal: o...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit