Many Christians, like Augustine of Hippo, accepted Plotinus as the greatest of the pagan philosophers. Parts of Plotinus` Six Enneads were translated into Arabic as Aristotle`s theology, leading to a flowering of Aristotle`s philosophy in the Islamic world. This Islamic version of Aristotle eventually reached the University of Paris and the attention of scholastic philosophy and the work of Thomas Aquinas. It can be assumed that Earth is the only establishment of conscious life in the galaxy and perhaps at much larger space-time scales of the universe today. Is there life and spirit in space? If so, what attribute can they be? If we assume that the universe is infinite, it is difficult to imagine that life is pure coincidence, the possession only of the overfavored Earth. In any case, we have no reason to feel oppressed by a feeling of loneliness in the infinite vastness of the universe. Therein lies the darkness of matter, the definitive absence of being, the absolute limit at which the expansion of the universe – of the One through decreasing degrees of reality and increasing degrees of diversity – ends. Because of its complete negativity, this matter is for Plotinus the principle of evil; In any case, we can see that Aristotle`s initial contrast between matter and form quickly becomes complex once hylomorphism leaves the realm of change. Although they were introduced as contrasting concepts capable of explaining change and substantial generation in the absence of generation ex nihilo, any simple opposition between form and matter proves difficult to maintain once it is used in its later applications. Nevertheless, as Aristotle suggests and as many of his followers have argued, hylomorphism turns out to be no less elastic than explanatory power in a variety of explanatory roles. There is an exegetical problem in attributing to Aristotle this definitive way of understanding composition, and that is that it seems to contradict the opinion he expresses in Metaphysics VIII 6, 1045a7-10 and VII 17, 1041a26 that a form unites a connection. The problem is how to understand the role of time in unifying connection through form: it cannot be just another element that must be unified, because the time in which matter exists plays no role in the resulting unity.
If we try to make the form unite a certain part of the matter into many different things, depending on when the union takes place, we also encounter the difficulty that such a process no longer deserves the title of “union”, because the result is many objects, not just one. In fact, we can reformulate the problem without even mentioning composition: if a common form is to unite common matter into one and the same, and Socrates and Callias have the same form and matter, they are one and the same. Since Aristotle (and many neo-Aristotelians) would certainly not be willing to abandon the unifying role of form, this does not seem to be a viable solution. According to the traditional interpretation, here we have the assertion that x and y are numerically identical (or “one in number”) if and only if they have the same matter (or the matter of x is “one” with the matter of y). An alternative reading assumes that this passage is more about unity than individuation: Aristotle would say that x is numerically an if and only if the matter of x is one, where the matter of a thing “one” means that it is a continuous piece (e.g., of bones). The principle of indestructibility and indestructibility of matter is of great importance for the formation of a worldview and methodology. Guided by this principle, science has discovered the laws of conservation of mass, energy, load, parity and other fundamental laws that have allowed us to achieve a deeper and more complete understanding of processes in different areas of nature. The crucial laws of scientific knowledge also oppose us to idealistic views such as creationism. Some scientists claim, for example, that atoms are “created” out of thin air from time to time, that is, at one point some atoms that make up matter supposedly do not exist, but the next moment they exist after appearing out of nowhere.
Quantum electrodynamics and quantum field theory further corroborate vacuum by conceiving it as a unit in which there are “virtual” pairs of particles and antiparticles that can be brought into an observable (real) state at the expense of an adequate amount of energy. A vacuum thus understood is certainly not nothing, but simply an “observable void of matter”. Using Heisenberg`s uncertainty principle, such matter can be observed provided that the required energy DE is extracted from the vacuum itself in time less than h/DE, where h is Planck`s constant. A similar quantum fluctuation of a vacuum, according to some authors, is responsible for the creation of the entire universe from a “quantum vacuum,” a claim that seeks to replace the metaphysical act of creation. However, a “quantum vacuum” is not a “nothing”, but a pre-existing entity in which particle-antiparticle pairs (matter) and the act necessary for their extraction are practically present. The extremism of these processes of ontological interpretation, mass-matter on the one hand and energetic radiation on the other, has led to a double reductionism, materialism and energetic. All of this has a historical motive. He developed the ideal form of Socrates into a theory aimed at explaining existence through the composition of matter and form. He understood matter as a passive possibility that something could be achieved by an active ingredient, a substantial form, which gives it a real existence. The theory of matter and form became known as hylomorphism. Although Aristotle clearly criticizes Plato here, it may be that his point of view is simple, that Plato was not clear enough, that primordial matter can never exist outside the elements, and that he did not give good reasons for its introduction, not that he was wrong to believe it.
But what is a concept? In the two previous approaches, there is a tendency to use two techniques, that of approximation on the one hand and that of modeling on the other hand. The “technique of approximation” goes back in some sense to the empiricist concept of David Hume (1711-1766). A term is a kind of “singular vague” date, and we try to achieve this indeterminacy of the singular in terms of generalization by introducing a permissible margin of error that allows several objects to fall into the approximate pattern, not just one. The “modeling technique” is certainly less rudimentary than that of approximation and is based on a process of “abstraction” (but first carried out by a human mind) aimed at identifying common elements at several singular dates. 4. Matter and spirit: philosophical-theological aspects. Unlike physics and the natural sciences, philosophy throughout its history has included not only the study of the sensual world, but also an analysis of man`s inner experience, fundamentally characterized by his intelligence and will. This analysis, in addition to the concepts of primary and secondary matter, led to a completely immaterial principle, often called spirit or soul. Aristotle used the term “soul” to designate the substantial form of living entities, distinguishing vegetative, sentient and rational faculties, sharing the first two capacities with other animals, the latter being unique to human persons. At this stage of the discussion, another old problem arises, that of the “vacuum” (cf.
A. Strumia, Il problema della creazione e le cosmologie scientifiche, 1992). What is a vacuum cleaner? Can it exist? A more precise use of terminology can save us from some misunderstandings that have more than once misled many famous people. From a metaphysical point of view, a void is in the absolute sense “the emptiness of the entity” and as such can be identified with “nothing” (“non-entity”, “non-thing”), a concept invented to identify things that do not exist. Metaphysically, emptiness does not exist by definition, because what exists, by the mere fact that it exists, is an entity. A void, understood in the absolute, is therefore an absolute and total negation of being. A void in the relative sense, not as absolute negation, but only as relative negation, is the “deprivation” of something in a particular subject and not the total negation of the subject.
