METAPHYSICS

Whoever, therefore, posits that the universe is one and that there is a single nature acting as matter—and that this matter is corporeal and possesses magnitude—clearly errs in many ways. For they only posit elements for bodies, but not at all for incorporeal things, even though incorporeal things also exist. And while they attempt to state the causes of generation and corruption, and to give accounts for the nature of all things, they do away with the cause of motion. Likewise, by failing to posit substance as the cause of anything, nor the quiddity original: "quid est"; the essential "what-it-is" of a thing, and furthermore by easily asserting that any of the simple bodies (except for earth) is the principle, they do not consider the mutual generation between them. I am speaking of fire, earth, water, and air. For some of these arise from one another through union, and others through separation. This makes a great difference regarding which is "prior" and "posterior" Aristotle distinguishes between what is "prior in nature" (more fundamental) and "prior in time" (what appears first). For that which is most elemental would seem to be that from which others first arise by union. Such a thing would surely be that which consists of the smallest parts and is the finest of bodies.

72

¶ Therefore, those who establish fire as the principle speak most consistently with this reasoning. And every one of the others also confesses that the element of bodies is of such a kind.

73

¶ For this reason, none of the later thinkers who proposed a single element considered earth to be that element, evidently because of the large size of its parts.

74

¶ However, each of the other three elements has had its own proponent: for some say this principle is fire, some water, and some air. But why do they not also speak of earth, as most people do? For men commonly say that all things are earth. Hesiod also

Hesiod.

says that earth was the first of bodies; it so happens that this is a very common and popular opinion.

75

¶ According to this reasoning, then, if anyone should name any of these except fire, or should posit something denser than air but subtler than water, he would certainly not be speaking correctly. But if that which is posterior in generation is prior in nature—and that which is digested and joined together is posterior in generation—then the contrary of these would be true: water would be prior to air, and earth would be prior to water.

It is clear, then: all those who posit the universe itself to be one, and a single nature to be its matter—and this as something corporeal and having magnitude—err in many ways. For they posit only the elements of bodies, but they do not posit elements of incorporeal things, which nonetheless exist. And as they set out to discuss the causes of generation or corruption, and speak of the universe in a naturalistic way, they remove the principle of motion. Furthermore, they posit that substance and the essence original: "ipsum quid est" are the cause of nothing. Moreover, they easily claim that

12

any of the simple bodies except earth is the principle, without considering how they cause their mutual birth—I mean fire, air, water, and earth. For some arise from one another by gathering together, and others by scattering. This matters greatly for the question of which is prior or posterior. For by some logic, that would

13

seem to be the greatest element of all from which elements first arise by gathering. Such a thing is that which has the smallest parts and is the most subtle of bodies. ¶ Wherefore, those who posit fire as the principle would speak most in accordance with this reasoning. And each of the others confesses that the element of other bodies is of such a nature. ¶ For none

14

of those who say there is one principle judged earth to be the element, because of the magnitude of its parts, as is evident. ¶ But each of the three other elements has had someone to judge it the principle. For some say it is fire, some water, and some air. But why do they not also speak of earth, as many people believe? For they say all things are earth. Hesiod also says that earth was the first of bodies to be born. So ancient and so common has this opinion been. ¶ By this reasoning, therefore, neither if someone should name one of these except fire, nor if someone should posit something denser than air but subtler than water, could he be speaking correctly. But if that which is later in birth is prior in nature, and that which is refined and gathered together is later in generation, then the opposite of these things truly happens: for water will be prior to air, and earth will be prior to water.