Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>Cause</strong>, principle and unity<br />
is constituted and does not constitute, is remade but does not remake, he<br />
held it worthless compared to matter, which is stable, eternal, progenitor<br />
and mother. And this happens, inevitably, to those who do not know what<br />
we do.<br />
DICSONO. The point has been very well examined. But it is time to turn<br />
from this digression back to our problem. We now know how to distinguish<br />
matter from form, as much from the accidental form (whatever it may be)<br />
as from the substantial form. We must still look into its nature and its reality.<br />
But first, I would like to know whether, in view of the great union that<br />
this world soul and universal form has with matter, one could not admit<br />
that other mode of philosophizing, belonging to those who do not separate<br />
the act from the essence of matter, and who understand matter as a divine<br />
thing, and not as something so pure and formless that it cannot form and<br />
clothe itself.<br />
TEOFILO. It is not easy, because absolutely nothing operates on itself<br />
alone, and there is always some distinction between an agent and what is<br />
produced or that on which the action and operation work. For that reason,<br />
it is good to distinguish matter from soul in the body of nature, and in the<br />
soul to distinguish the idea of the species. 15 Hence we affirm that in this<br />
body there are three things: first, the universal intellect inherent in things;<br />
second, the soul that vivifies all; and third, the substratum. But we shall not<br />
refuse the name of philosopher to someone who follows his own bent and<br />
takes this formed body, or (as we prefer to call it) this rational animal, and<br />
then begins to take as first principle, in some sense, the constituents of this<br />
body, such as air, earth, fire, or even the ethereal region and the astral<br />
region, or spirit and body, or the void and the plenum (though not the void<br />
in Aristotle’s sense), or yet another convenient way. Such a philosophy, it<br />
seems to me, does not deserve to be repudiated, especially when, no matter<br />
what basis is presupposed or what form of construction is contemplated,<br />
it helps to improve speculative science and knowledge of natural<br />
things, as was, indeed, done by many ancient philosophers. For it is a sign<br />
of an ambitious, presumptuous, envious and vain mind to wish to persuade<br />
others that there is only one way to investigate and to attain knowledge of<br />
nature, and it is the sign of a madman or man without reason to believe that<br />
this way lies within himself alone. So that, although we should always<br />
rather prefer, honour and practise the most resolute and constant, the most<br />
contemplative and dignified way, and the most lofty method of inquiry, we<br />
15 The universal intellect, mentioned in the following sentence.<br />
62