Need help on a basic Aristotelian metaphysics question

[Lepanto]

Can someone please explain to me (or provide links for reliable info) on the Aristotelian metaphysics behind the inter-related terms: essence, substance, accidents, etc.

I’m not really looking for apologetics on the Eucharist or an explanation of transubstantiation, per se, just a better understanding of the technical language that’s used to discuss it.

Thank you!

 

[Lyfaber]

I don’t know of a link off-hand, but here goes.

Essence: ‘what’ something is, expressed by a definition. the essence of man is “rational animal”.

substance. being per se, that exists in virtue of itself.
accidents. being in another, requires the existence of something else for its own existence.

Substance and accident are the two main divisions of Aristotle’s Categories. 9 of the categories are of accidents.

Horrible complications arise when such things are applied to the case of the eucharist; defintions such as these will change as Aristotelian philosophy wasn’t set up to deal with such things.

so Aquinas will change the definition of accidents to something which is accustomed to inhere in something else (he does the same with substance). Duns Scotus thinks that accidents themselves do not inhere in virtue of being accidents, but by having a further accident of ‘inherence’ added to them. Scotus also further divides accidents into absolute (quantity and quality)and relative (the remaining 7).

For a brief intro try Paul Spades paper “the warp and woof of metaphysics” on his “medieval logic and philosophy” webpage.

best,
Faber

 

[Truthstalker]

Peter Kreeft’s the Summa of the Summa might be helpful to you. He is a philosophy professor who understands both Aquinas and our cultural philosophical illiteracy. Good intro to this stuff with a glossary and explanations, although I’ve muttered that a glossary of the glossary might be nice.