{"id":6491,"date":"2016-04-22T15:44:42","date_gmt":"2016-04-22T15:44:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2016\/04\/22\/bare-particulars-and-prime-matter-similarities-and-differences\/"},"modified":"2016-04-22T15:44:42","modified_gmt":"2016-04-22T15:44:42","slug":"bare-particulars-and-prime-matter-similarities-and-differences","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2016\/04\/22\/bare-particulars-and-prime-matter-similarities-and-differences\/","title":{"rendered":"Bare Particulars and Prime Matter: Similarities and Differences"},"content":{"rendered":"

This entry continues the discussion of prime matter begun here<\/a>. That post is a prerequisite for this one.<\/span><\/p>\n

Similarities between Bare Particulars and Prime Matter<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

S1. Bare particulars in themselves are property-less while prime matter in itself is formless.   The bare particular in a thing is that which exemplifies the thing's properties.  But in itself it is a pure particular and thus 'bare.'  The prime matter of a thing is the thing's ultimate matter and while supporting forms is itself formless.<\/span><\/p>\n

S2. Bare particulars, though property-less in themselves, exemplify properties; prime matter, though formless in itself, is formed.<\/span><\/p>\n

S3. There is nothing in the nature of a bare particular to dictate which properties it will exemplify.  This is because bare particulars do not have natures.  Correspondingly, there is nothing in the nature of prime matter to dictate which substantial forms it will take. This is because prime matter, in itself, is without form.<\/span><\/p>\n

S4.  Bare particulars, being bare, are promiscuously combinable with any and all first-level properties. Thus any bare particular can stand in the exemplification nexus with any first-level property.  Similarly, prime matter is promiscuously receptive to any and all forms, having no form in itself.<\/span><\/p>\n

S5.  Promiscuous combinability entails the contingency of the exemplification nexus.  Promiscuous receptivity entails the contingency of prime matter's being informed thus and so.<\/span><\/p>\n

S6. Bare particulars are never directly encountered in sense experience.  The same holds for prime matter.  What we encounter are always propertied particulars and formed matter.<\/span><\/p>\n

S7. A bare particular combines with properties to make an ordinary, 'thick' particular.  Prime matter combines with substantial form to make a primary (sublunary) substance.<\/span><\/p>\n

S8. The dialectic that leads to bare particulars and prime matter respectively is similar, a form of analysis that is neither logical nor physical but ontological.  It is based on the idea that things have ontological constituents or 'principles' which, incapable of existing on their own, yet combine to from independent existents.  Hylomorphic analysis leads ultimately to prime matter, and ontological analysis in the style of Bergmann and fellow travellers leads to bare or thin particulars as ultimate substrata.<\/span><\/p>\n

Differences Between Bare Particulars and Prime Matter<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

D1. There are many bare particulars each numerically different from every other one.  In themselves, bare particulars are many.  It is not the case that, in itself, prime matter is many.  It is not, in itself, parceled out into numerically distinct bits.<\/span><\/p>\n

D2. Bare particulars are actual; prime matter is purely potential.<\/span><\/p>\n

D3. Bare particulars account for numerical difference.  But prime matter does not account for numerical difference. (See Feser's manual, p. 199)  Prime matter is common and wholly indeterminate.  Designated matter (materia signata<\/em>) is the principle of individuation, i.e., differentiation.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nRelated articles<\/span><\/legend>\n
\n
\"\"<\/a>Bare Particulars versus Aristotelian Substances<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>Van Inwagen, Properties, and Bare Particulars<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>Van Inwagen: No Truck with Tropes or Constituent Ontology Generally<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>J. P. Moreland on Constituent Ontology: Is Exemplification a Spatial Container Relation?<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>A Question for Trope Theorists<\/a><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>Reply to Ken Hochstetter on Divine Simplicity<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/fieldset>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This entry continues the discussion of prime matter begun here. That post is a prerequisite for this one. Similarities between Bare Particulars and Prime Matter S1. Bare particulars in themselves are property-less while prime matter in itself is formless.   The bare particular in a thing is that which exemplifies the thing's properties.  But in itself … Continue reading “Bare Particulars and Prime Matter: Similarities and Differences”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[21,565,487,418,362],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6491","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-aporetics","category-bergmann-gustav","category-constituent-ontology","category-matter","category-scholasticism-new-and-old"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6491","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6491"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6491\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6491"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6491"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6491"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}