Doing and Being Done: The Definitional Primacy of the Active Power in <i>Metaphysics</i> Θ 1

Abstract In Metaphysics Θ 1, Aristotle claims that the active power is definitionally prior to the passive power. Commentators have been puzzled by this claim, because the definitions appear, and seemingly should be, symmetric. However, their attempts to address this difficulty are dissatisfying, for commentators have not adequately appreciated what the difficulty is: they show (at most) how every kind of active power can be definitionally prior to every kind of passive power, but do not address how the active power as such can be definitionally prior to the passive power as such . We undertake three tasks. First, we clarify the puzzle, demonstrating that it is the claim that the active power as such is definitionally prior to the passive power as such that stands in need of justification. Second, we defend a reading of the definitions which dissolves the appearance of symmetry. Third, we explain why the view that the active power is prior to the passive is philosophically attractive.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Apeiron
Published
2025-02-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1515/apeiron-2023-0111
Primary Topic
Classical Philosophy and Thought
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Doing and Being Done: The Definitional Primacy of the Active Power in Metaphysics Θ 1

E. R. Perry, Landon Hobbs
Apeiron
Classical Philosophy and Thought
article

Doing and Being Done: The Definitional Primacy of the Active Power in Metaphysics Θ 1

E. R. Perry, Landon Hobbs
article en

Abstract

Abstract In Metaphysics Θ 1, Aristotle claims that the active power is definitionally prior to the passive power. Commentators have been puzzled by this claim, because the definitions appear, and seemingly should be, symmetric. However, their attempts to address this difficulty are dissatisfying, for commentators have not adequately appreciated what the difficulty is: they show (at most) how every kind of active power can be definitionally prior to every kind of passive power, but do not address how the active power as such can be definitionally prior to the passive power as such . We undertake three tasks. First, we clarify the puzzle, demonstrating that it is the claim that the active power as such is definitionally prior to the passive power as such that stands in need of justification. Second, we defend a reading of the definitions which dissolves the appearance of symmetry. Third, we explain why the view that the active power is prior to the passive is philosophically attractive.

ApeironVol. 58(2)
Palo Alto Institute (US), Concordia University (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 96%
Classical Philosophy and Thought
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.