Generation & Corruption

This is the preface or introductory text spanning all columns.

1 - 1 Our next task is to study coming-to-be and passing-away, distinguishing their causes and defining these processes in general. We will examine growth and alteration, questioning if alteration is the same as coming-to-be or if they are distinct processes. Early philosophers are divided on this: some assert that unqualified coming-to-be is alteration, while others see them as distinct. Those who believe in a single underlying substance view coming-to-be as alteration, while those positing multiple substances, like Empedocles and Anaxagoras, separate the two processes. Anaxagoras sees coming-to-be and passing-away as alteration despite affirming multiple elements.

1 - 2 We must discuss unqualified coming-to-be and passing-away, investigating if and how they occur, and examine growth and alteration. Plato focused only on the coming-to-be of elements, neglecting how compound things like flesh or bones form and how alteration or growth happen. This criticism applies to all predecessors except Democritus, who considered all problems thoroughly and distinguished his method. Most philosophers thought coming-to-be distinct from alteration, associating coming-to-be with association and dissociation of elements and alteration with quality changes. Democritus and Leucippus postulated figures causing alteration and coming-to-be through dissociation and association, addressing many unanswered questions.

This is the preface or introductory text spanning all columns.

1 - 6 Investigating the matter of coming-to-be involves understanding whether elements are eternal or come-to-be, and if they do, whether they transform reciprocally or if one is primary. Pluralist philosophers use dissociation, association, action, and passion to explain this process. Combination, involving touching and interaction, is essential for understanding these changes. Contact occurs when separate magnitudes with position have their extremes together. Action and passion require things to touch, and the nature of touching involves position and place. Movers impart motion either by being moved themselves or by remaining unmoved, leading to diverse interactions.

1 - 7 Next, we discuss action and passion. Most thinkers argue that like cannot affect like, while unlikes can act on each other. Democritus, however, believes agent and patient are identical, meaning action occurs between likes. This conflict arises because each group considers only part of the issue. Contraries, within a single kind, reciprocally act and suffer action. Agent and patient must be identical in kind but contrary in species. This explains why fire heats and cold cools: action changes the patient into the agent. Both views hold some truth, emphasizing the interplay of substratum and contraries.

1 - 8 Some philosophers think the agent acts through pores, explaining sensory perception and combination. Leucippus and Democritus assert that indivisible atoms move in a void, creating coming-to-be and passing-away through contact and separation. Empedocles suggests solids have pores, but this is similar to Leucippus' theory. Problems arise with the idea of indivisible solids and their properties. If properties like heat and cold belong to indivisibles, it leads to paradoxes. Furthermore, the concept of pores is unnecessary; bodies can interact without them if they are naturally adapted for action and passion. Thus, pores are superfluous in explaining interaction.