What do scholastics mean by "matter"?

[fakename]

I used to think that it meant “whatever a thing is composed of” but this is not so for the angels are composed of things but not of matter.

So then what is matter and how is it different from potentiality?

 

[Evoken]

• Material substances are composed of both matter and form.
• Immaterial substances such as angels are not, and may be called rather “pure forms”.

With this in mind, matter is that of which a (material/physical) thing is made of. Both matter and form are intrinsic principles, as it were, of material/physical being.

Potency refers to the capacity for change or determination in a thing.

Hope that helps.

 

[Katholish]

I used to think that it meant “whatever a thing is composed of” but this is not so for the angels are composed of things but not of matter.

So then what is matter and how is it different from potentiality?

Matter is anything have parts. I think you understanding was correct, but you claim that angels are “composed of things” is throwing you off. Angels are not composed of anything. They are what is known as a simple substance, and have no parts. I don’t know what you were thinking their parts might have been, but if it was Intellect and Will, those are not parts, but rather powers. Powers might be called “aspects” of a thing, but they do not “compose” it in any way.

 

[fakename]

They’re composed of potential and actuality. So in my incorrect understanding I would call the potentiality the matter (since all potentiality is matter et vice versa) and the actuality would be the form,

 

[Katholish]

Something cannot be composed of potency. Potency is a capacity for a thing to change, it is not an element which can combine with something else. Only things which have a potency to be indepedent existing things can be elements of composition.

When we say something material is that which has parts, we imply that it is divisible. It is something which can be broken down into simpler elements. Certain powers, capacities, qualities, quantities, aspects, or features of things, however, do not have a potency for individual existence.

Hence, things which are not elements of composition (i.e. do not qualify as parts) are: Form, “being material”, color, intellect, will, being in relation, being a substance, having accidents, powers, potencies, or capacities. That is not a comprehensive list, but just some things that come to mind.

Now, how does potency relate to matter? Potency is not the same thing as matter at all. However, matter, by nature of being disvisible, always has potency. In many things, matter accounts for all of the potency that a thing has. While matter may be the primary sourece of motency in material things, immaterial things have a different source of potency, and that is powers. Powers like intellect and will have their own potency which is not derived from matter (because intellect and will, and any being with intellect and will, are immaterial).

 

[fakename]

Something cannot be composed of potency. Potency is a capacity for a thing to change, it is not an element which can combine with something else. Only things which have a potency to be indepedent existing things can be elements of composition.

But from the Summa:

Therefore if there be no matter, and supposing that the form itself subsists without matter, there nevertheless still remains the relation of the form to its very existence, as of potentiality to act. And such a kind of composition is understood to be in the angels; and this is what some say, that an angel is composed of, “whereby he is,” and “what is,” or “existence,” and “what is,” as Boethius says.

 

[Katholish]

But from the Summa:

Therefore if there be no matter, and supposing that the form itself subsists without matter, there nevertheless still remains the relation of the form to its very existence, as of potentiality to act. And such a kind of composition is understood to be in the angels; and this is what some say, that an angel is composed of, “whereby he is,” and “what is,” or “existence,” and “what is,” as Boethius says.

St. Thomas is using composition in an analogous way here . Actually, the article you are quoting from the Summa (Article 2, Question 50 or the Prima Pars) is the one that answers your original question. St. Thomas is explaining that angels have potency even though they do not have matter.

 

[twinc]

one of the greatest achievements of Science was the dematerialisation of matter - but it still hangs around in the background as dark matter,invisible matter,hidden matter etc - we still have not learnt or grasped or are even willing to accept that we have fallen into a fallen world of materiality and physicality - this is the illusion and delusion for the world is really a mental and spiritual world - twinc

 

[Asimis]

…we still have not learnt or grasped or are even willing to accept that we have fallen into a fallen world of materiality and physicality - this is the illusion and delusion for the world is really a mental and spiritual world - twinc

What you are claiming here amounts to gnosticism, an error.

 

[Verbum_Caro]

Matter is anything have parts.

Katholish,

I’m a little confused by this. I think I can understand it if you mean “Composed material things have parts” but I’m not sure about the idea of “matter” having parts. I was thinking that the OP was asking about the concept of “prime matter”, uninformed, and without accidents. I’m not sure about parts here.

Also, looking at it another way, isn’t there possibly some sort of fundamental material unit that isn’t composed of parts?

VC

 

[fakename]

Katholish,

I’m a little confused by this. I think I can understand it if you mean “Composed material things have parts” but I’m not sure about the idea of “matter” having parts. I was thinking that the OP was asking about the concept of “prime matter”, uninformed, and without accidents. I’m not sure about parts here.

Also, looking at it another way, isn’t there possibly some sort of fundamental material unit that isn’t composed of parts?

VC

And on a related note, is prime matter a substance? Is it an accident?

Also, is it not true that prime matter is non-existent without some actually existing thing (that is, prime matter cannot pre-exist the substances we encounter everyday but must be co-existent with them)?

Finally, how is it that potential being exists as a seperate type of being opposed to actual, possible, and impossible being? Can something potential have potency as its act?

 

[twinc]

And on a related note, is prime matter a substance? Is it an accident?

Also, is it not true that prime matter is non-existent without some actually existing thing (that is, prime matter cannot pre-exist the substances we encounter everyday but must be co-existent with them)?

Finally, how is it that potential being exists as a seperate type of being opposed to actual, possible, and impossible being? Can something potential have potency as its act?

 

[twinc]

matter as solidity or substance has never been seen or known to be real for its existence is a bluff - fallen and mesmerised mankind accepts the mirage/maya as real and rejects the real - the feeling of substantiality and/or solidity are not in the thing perceived but in the perceiver - mankind is in a state of trance and mesmerised and must awaken to this truth - twinc

 

[twinc]

What you are claiming here amounts to gnosticism, an error.

perhaps then you can give the answer that the world waits for with bated breath - firstly one has to know what is or is not gnosticism and if one does not really know what is really being postulated here for I have already stated that matter has been dematerialised and its existence is a bluff and we live in a vice versa world of matter over mind whilst it is of course mind over matter that really matters - so no matter except as the substance of a boil - twinc