|
|
||
 |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
A Brief Introduction into the Nature of Reality by Jonathan Dolhenty, Ph.D. PART SIX
We have considered thus far the most general aspects of being which are found in common in all beings. These were the transcendental and general properties of being. We now turn to some special aspects of being. These will show us some lines of division which run through creation. There are three metaphysical windows which we can utilize to help us in this investigation: intelligibility, action, and existence. The Intelligibility Window There is a twofold aspect in every being: every being has existence, either actual or possible, and every being has an essence, that which makes it what it is and differentiates it from other beings. Existence is simply the declaration about a being "that it is." Essence is simply the declaration about a being "what it is." Even before we reflect on reality, we are intuitively aware of reality. This awareness is fundamental and primary and is the starting point of all reflection. Existence cannot be proved, it just is. Deny existence and there is nothing and, in fact, no possibility of rational discussion at all since there is no existence to discuss. I raise this latter point because, believe it or not, some philosophers have questioned the fact of existence. Other philosophers, while accepting the fact of existence, have maintained that we can't really know anything about it for sure. Both of these positions are self-defeating and not worth a serious response. Deny existence or that existence can be known and all possibility of rational discussion ceases. The basic constitution of a being is called its essence. The essence gives us the "whatness" of the being and realizes the fact that this being has an intelligible structure that we can know in some way. This essence allows us to differentiate this being from any other being. The Action Window The concepts of act and potency are vital to an understanding of true metaphysics and, yet, they are among the most misunderstood concepts in all philosophy. Some of this difficulty may arise from the fact that the terms act and potency cannot, strictly speaking, be defined. Act and potency are immediate divisions of being, and in order to be defined the term being would have to be included in their definition. Being is an inclusive class all of itself and the only concept outside of being is nothing, which cannot be used, of course, to differentiate one being from another. So what are talking about with regard to the concepts of act and potency? First of all, a real being that exists is actual being; it is actualized; it is, so to speak, in act. Secondly, a real being that can exist but does not is potential being; it exists potentially; it is not yet actualized or in act. If a being really exists, it is actual, and this actuality is a perfection. We are using the term perfection here to mean fulfillment. A being that actually exists is fulfilled. If a being is existible but doesn't yet exist, it is potential, and potentiality is an imperfection, an unfulfillment. Let's illustrate this with a simple example. We have before us a block of marble. This marble is an actually existing being; it is in act. It is an individual existent and a true reality. Within this block of marble, however, is a statue of Thomas Jefferson. This statue does not yet actually exist because the sculptor has not yet begun his work. The statue is only potentially in the marble. The statue is a possible being; it can exist and eventually will exist. The statue is not yet perfected or fulfilled. When the sculptor is finished with the marble and the statue of Thomas Jefferson is realized, the statue will be an actual being; it will itself be in act. It will no longer be potential. The statue will be perfected and fulfilled and will be an actually existing individual being. Now you may tempted to ask: "There are other statues also potentially in that block of marble, are there not?" And the answer is, yes. There is potentially a statue of David, or General Robert Lee, or Moses, or Catherine the Great. For that matter, a sculptor might choose to make a statue of a lion or an elephant. All of these statues are potentially in the marble. They all have potential being but not, of course, actual being. This brings us to the concept of full reality. We can say that the full reality of any being is what it actually is plus all its potential ways of being. Keep in mind that the term being means anything that is not nothing. Therefore, the term being must include all potentialities as well as actualities. We can now see that all being is divided into act and potency. If, however, a being has no possibilities in its constitution, then we say it is pure act, that is, the full actuality of being is exhausted. There is only one being that manifests this and that is God. We refer metaphysically to God as Pure Act because, of course, there are no potentialities in God in the way in which we speak of potentialities in finite beings. The concepts of act and potency help us to explain the concept of change. What is change in its most general meaning? It is simply the actualization of the potential as such. Change is not the potency of things nor the act of things. It is something in between, something incomplete. It is incomplete because the being toward which the change is moving is not yet fully actualized and the being undergoing change cannot be said to be changed until the new way of being is achieved. A being can only be in one of three dispositions: it is in act only, it is in potency only, or it is somewhere in between act and potency. Let's go back to our block of marble. The block of marble is actualized; it is in act, an actually existing being. Potentially it is a statue of Thomas Jefferson, but the statue is only a potential or possible being, not an actualized being. When the sculptor finishes the statue, the statue is now actualized; it is in act, an actual existing being. Between the actualization of the statue and its mere potentiality in the block of marble, change occurs. It is a progression from potentiality to actuality. The imperfect stage in this progression is what we call the state of change. A being in pure act has never undergone change and cannot undergo change. A being in pure act has no imperfections and cannot be unfulfilled. There is no state of change possible for such a being. There is, of course, only one being to which this applies. God, as Pure Act, is never metaphysically in a state of change. The Existence Window A third way of considering being is to consider it in its mode of existence outside our intellects. In this way we find that all being is either being which exists on its own or being which exists in another being in such a way that it has no existence apart from that being. This brings us to the division of being into substance and accident. A substance is a being whose nature is such that it exists in itself. It is an independent center of existence. An accident, or accidental being, is a being whose nature it is to exist in another being as in a subject. We are all constantly aware of substances around us. We perceive a tree outside our window. We discuss our schoolwork with our teacher, a human being. We pet our dog or play with our cat. The tree, the human being, the dog, and the cat are examples of substances. Each one exists on its own as an independent reality. We are also aware of other beings which cannot exist independently of some subject. The brown in the trunk of the tree, the intelligence and understanding of our teacher, the bark of our dog, and the playfulness of our cat do not exist apart from the substances in which these beings are manifested. The brownness in the trunk of the tree cannot exist in itself. Intelligence and understanding must exist in some being; they do not exist in themselves as independent beings. The bark of our dog and the playfulness of our cat are beings which must exist in some other being; in this case, our dog and our cat. Now I need to make sure we're clear on one very important point regarding the concept of substance. Substance as such cannot be perceived by our senses; it is an inferred insight known only by our intellect. Substance as such cannot be pictured or imagined. You cannot take a photograph of a substance as such. Many people try to manufacture a pictorial image in their minds of metaphysical concepts, such as substance, and, when they fail to do so, pronounce metaphysical concepts to be meaningless or just plain nonsense. The fact that we can't "picture" a metaphysical concept should not seem all that strange to us. Have you ever seen a "picture" of honesty? Have you tried to photograph generosity? Can you draw a model of truthfulness? When was the last time you touched justice? To be sure, you can see a picture of an act of honesty taking place, or you can photograph an act of generosity occurring, or you can draw an occasion of truthfulness taking place, and you even touch a person in the act of being just. But, of course, you can't perceive honesty, generosity, truthfulness, justice, and a host of other concepts in and of themselves. These concepts as such exist only in our minds, although they have a foundation in reality. We do, of course, perceive beings which are substances, but it is the color, the shape, the taste, and so on, which are known by our senses. Our intellect goes behind the sense phenomena and sees that there is a being which is the subject in which the accidental beings exist. Common sense tells us that the brownness in the trunk of the tree and the playfulness in our cat cannot exist in themselves but must exist in some other being. That other being is the substance: the trunk of the tree and our cat. We have seen, then, that being can be divided into substances, which are independent realities existing in themselves, and into accidents, which are dependent realities necessarily existing in some other being. Look around you at reality, ponder it in depth, and see if that makes sense. Accidents, or accidental being, can be classified into nine categories. The nine accidents are: quantity, quality, relation, action, passion, place, time, posture, and habit. For a reality to be classified under any of these nine headings, it must be a single, real, finite being. When we add substance to these nine accidents, we have the ten categories of being. To be a substance, of course, it must be a single, real, finite being. I've said that to fall within one of these ten categories, a being must be a single being. Take "dog" for example. A dog is a single being and a substance. "Good dog" falls under two categories: dog, a substance, and goodness, an accident of quality. A being must also be a real being, and not a logical being (one that exists only in the mind). A being must also be a finite being. There is only one Infinite Being and this Being is not to be listed, labeled, or classified. Listing, labelling, and classifying express limits and bounds, and Infinite Being is without limits and bounds. But isn't God, the Infinite Being, classified under the category of substance? Well, yes, of course God is a substance, an independently existing real being. Remember, however, that being is an analogous concept, and it is only by analogy that we can say that God is a substance. And we must also note that God, as Infinite Substance, is not capable of being marked by accidents or accidental beings. The Ten Categories Described Substance is a reality, bodily or spiritual, which by its nature can exist as itself. It supports accidental beings in their existence. It is an answer to the question: "Who or what is this thing?" Examples: "The dog is an animal; John is a lawyer; the dandelion is a plant." The following nine accidental beings are attributes of a being. They cannot exist in themselves but inhere in another being, a substance. Quantity is an accidental being proper to bodies and is the extension of bodies in space. It is the answer to the question: How big or how much is it?" Examples: "The radio antenna is thirty feet high; my cat weighs fifteen pounds; this is a two-quart bottle." Quality is an accidental being which determines the sort or king of a thing. It is the answer to the question: "What sort of thing is it?" Examples: "This petunia is red; my teacher is intelligent; this pencil is round." Relation is an accidental being which determines a things in its standing to or towards another. It is an answer to the question: "To what or whom does it refer?" Examples: "My brother is older than I; these two animals are similar; those two are equals." Action is an accidental being which determines a reality as doing something, as producing an effect. It is an answer to the question: "What does it do?" Examples: "My dog is chewing a bone; he is talking now; her brother drives the truck." Passion (or reaction) is an accidental being which determines a reality as undergoing something, as affected by some action. It is an answer to the question: "What is happening to it?" Examples: "The boy was struck by a bat; his brother was shot; the airplane crashed." Place (or where) is an accidental being which determines a reality as to position with reference to other realities. It is an answer to the question: "Where is it?" Examples: "Tom went downtown; I live in Oregon; the book is in the bookcase." Time (or when) is an accidental being which determines a reality in its position with reference to before and after. It is an answer to the question: "When, at what point of time?" Examples: "My sister was here last year; the plane lands in one hour; today is March the first." Posture is an accidental being which determines its subject with reference to the arrangement or disposition of its own parts. It is an answer to the question: "In what attitude or position?" Examples: "The building is leaning; the cat is running; the tree lies prone on the ground." Habit (or habitus) is an accidental being which determines its subject with reference to its clothing, equipment, or physical adjuncts. It is an answer to the question: "How surrounded, equipped, or how conditioned?" Examples: "Peter wears gloves; that judge is bearded; my sister is disgusted with herself."
Enrich Your Life With a Philosophy Book... Enrich Your Life With a Philosophy Magazine...
|
|||||||
|
Main Page & Index |
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|||
|
T A N D P O I N T S |
Intelligibility |
Existence - Actual or Potential - "that a thing is or can be" Essence - "Whatness" of a thing |
|
|
Existence |
Substance - A being whose nature is to exist in itself Accident - A being whose nature it is to exist in another |
||
|
Action |
Act - In the realm of bodies, it is called the "form" Potency - In the realm of bodies, it is called the "matter" |
||
|
|
|||
|
|
||
|
Being in Itself |
|
Being in Another |
|
How big, How much? |
||
|
What sort of thing? |
||
|
Refers to what or whom? |
||
|
What does it do? |
||
|
What is done to it? |
||
|
Where is it? |
||
|
When in time? |
||
|
What attitude, position? |
||
|
How surrounded, equipped? |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
[Homepage] [Newsletter] [Search] [Support the Academy] [Link to Us] [Contact the Academy] [Citing Articles from Our Website] [Privacy Policy & Disclaimer]
Copyright 1998-99, 2000-01, & 2002-03 by The Radical Academy. All Rights Reserved.