An (Apparent) Exception in the Aristotelian Natural Philosophy: Antiperistasis as Action on Contrary Qualities and its Interpretation in the Medieval Philosophical and Medical Commentary Tradition

Q3 Arts and Humanities
Aurora Panzica
{"title":"An (Apparent) Exception in the Aristotelian Natural Philosophy: Antiperistasis as Action on Contrary Qualities and its Interpretation in the Medieval Philosophical and Medical Commentary Tradition","authors":"Aurora Panzica","doi":"10.21071/refime.v29i1.15134","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores the scholastic debate about antiperistasis, a mechanism in Aristotle’s dynamics described in the first book of Meteorology as an intensification of a quality caused by the action of the contrary one. After having distinguished this process from a homonymous, but totally different, principle concerning the dynamics of fluids that Aristotle describes in his Physics, I focus on the medieval reception of the former. Scholastic commentators oriented their exegetical effort in elaborating a consistent explanation of an apparently paradoxical process like the intensification of a quality by the opposite one. From the fourteenth century onwards, most of the commentators resorted to the theory of the multiplication of species, according to which each entity acts through the emission of simulacra of the objects (species) that spread spherically in the medium. When these rays encounter an obstacle, such as a contrary quality, they are pushed back towards their source. The reflection of the species determined by the surrounding and opposite quality produces a concentration of the first one, which is therefore intensified. Another distinctive feature of the scholastic interpretation of Aristotle’s antiperistasis is the convergence between the discussions on inorganic and organic matter, physical and medical discourse. This convergence found its most significant expression in the adoption of the model described in the first book of Aristotle’s Meteorology to the biological context of Hippocrates’s Aphorisms I, 15. Following Galen’s exegesis of this passage, medieval commentators established a link between physics and medicine substantially extraneous to Aristotle’s theory.","PeriodicalId":52211,"journal":{"name":"Revista Espanola de Filosofia Medieval","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Espanola de Filosofia Medieval","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21071/refime.v29i1.15134","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper explores the scholastic debate about antiperistasis, a mechanism in Aristotle’s dynamics described in the first book of Meteorology as an intensification of a quality caused by the action of the contrary one. After having distinguished this process from a homonymous, but totally different, principle concerning the dynamics of fluids that Aristotle describes in his Physics, I focus on the medieval reception of the former. Scholastic commentators oriented their exegetical effort in elaborating a consistent explanation of an apparently paradoxical process like the intensification of a quality by the opposite one. From the fourteenth century onwards, most of the commentators resorted to the theory of the multiplication of species, according to which each entity acts through the emission of simulacra of the objects (species) that spread spherically in the medium. When these rays encounter an obstacle, such as a contrary quality, they are pushed back towards their source. The reflection of the species determined by the surrounding and opposite quality produces a concentration of the first one, which is therefore intensified. Another distinctive feature of the scholastic interpretation of Aristotle’s antiperistasis is the convergence between the discussions on inorganic and organic matter, physical and medical discourse. This convergence found its most significant expression in the adoption of the model described in the first book of Aristotle’s Meteorology to the biological context of Hippocrates’s Aphorisms I, 15. Following Galen’s exegesis of this passage, medieval commentators established a link between physics and medicine substantially extraneous to Aristotle’s theory.
亚里士多德自然哲学中的一个(明显的)例外:反蠕动作为对立性质的作用及其在中世纪哲学和医学评论传统中的解释
本文探讨了学术界关于反均衡的争论,亚里士多德的动力学中的一种机制在第一本《气象学》中被描述为由相反的性质的作用引起的性质的强化。在将这一过程与亚里士多德在《物理学》中描述的关于流体动力学的同名但完全不同的原理区分开来之后,我将重点放在中世纪对前者的接受上。学术评论家们把他们的训诫工作导向于对一个明显矛盾的过程进行一致的解释,比如相反的品质强化了一个品质。从十四世纪开始,大多数评论家都求助于物种增殖理论,根据该理论,每个实体都通过在介质中球形传播的物体(物种)的模拟物的发射而起作用。当这些射线遇到障碍物时,例如相反的质量,它们会被推回源。由周围和相反的质量决定的物种的反射产生了第一种物质的浓度,因此这种浓度会增强。学术界对亚里士多德反乌托邦理论的另一个独特解释是,关于无机物和有机物、物理和医学话语的讨论是一致的。这种趋同最重要的表现是将亚里士多德的《气象学》第一本书中描述的模型与希波克拉底的《格言I》15的生物学背景相结合。在盖伦对这段话的注释之后,中世纪的评论家建立了物理学和医学之间的联系,这与亚里士多德的理论基本无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Revista Espanola de Filosofia Medieval
Revista Espanola de Filosofia Medieval Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
48
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信