![]() ![]() But they could still intuit that there was something that they often referred to as form and/or substance that was shared by creatures. We now know that all the similarities we see among creatures are due to DNA and the information encoded in it. All human beings share basic biology, but how they may function as a unity would be far more complex than the preceding examples.Īristotle and the writers that are included in this book had no clue about genetic information. They will behave in a way that suggests a unity. People have often been struck by flocks of birds and schools of fish. It is more apparent that a body is a unity than humanity would be a unity but some relationship between every human being is undoubtedly there but what might unite us is not as clear. I could die and another person could be given my heart, but that person still wouldn’t be me. What makes these function as a unity? I could give a lung and part of my liver to someone else, but that won’t make them me. My body is universal in the sense that it contains a plethora of disparate parts that work together in a complete organism. Syllogistically, while A (eyes) and B (ears) are disparate, they exist in a greater C, that is, a sort of bodily universal. My sense of touch is not my sense of smell. ![]() Is the generic unity a product of greater metaphysical life or soul that unites all of these? Disparate things can function as a unity. But it certainly gave way to a lot of debate. They consist of individuals that exist alone, and their relationship often was seen as being more a product of rationality, not as an apparent unity. Generic universals are not clearly a numerical one. Much debate occurred regarding these categories among the Scholastics. The category “animal” would be even more universal it includes humans as well. Canis would be a grouping that Aristotle would call universal. The genus is called Canis which is simply the Latin word for dog. We certainly can see the similarity between a fox and a German Shepherd, but the differences are still pretty striking, nonetheless. That being said, the relationship is not so clear. Noticing certain similar attributes of animals and recognizing relation seems to be just logical. Aristotle was a categorizer probably the first one to break animals into categories like genus and species. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |