Origins of the Trinity Part VI Aristotle [b. 384 BCE – d. 322 BCE] Part I Previously, we looked at Aristotle’s tutor Plato, when we learned about his theory of the “Forms/Ideas” the highest of the “Forms” being the “Good” and how Plato used Parmenides’ metaphysics as a foundation for his own theories…! Aristotle seems to have been the star pupil of Plato, but Aristotle did not accept all of his master’s previous opinions, he rejected Plato’s dualistic notions i.e. the separation of “Form” and the phenomenal world of the senses, the world around us and understood by us, here we see that Aristotle rejects “Dualism” and embraces “Monism” i.e. that “thought/force” was part and parcel of belonging to “Matter” he accepted the Monism of Parmenides… the notion that “thought” is not distinct from “matter”, but part of it and thus considered an “activity of being” thus, the notion that “thought and being” were the same! Unlike Plato, Aristotle believed that “Forms” existed on earth, in the physical, material sphere of man and that the “Forms” were incorporated into everything that constituted the material world! What is going on here! Aristotle theorised that everything in the material world, the physical universe, was made up of both “Form” and “Matter” but there was one exception to this as far as Aristotle was concerned and that was “God” and everything, with the exception of God, was such and it made no difference to Aristotle, whether such “Form” or “Matter” and everything, whether separate or not, Aristotle called “ousia”! The term “ousia” is important when it comes to the Trinity and must not be over-looked or dismissed! (Keep an eye on this word-ousia)! In ‘man’ Aristotle separated the “soul” and “mind” within him, but Aristotle’s notion of “soul” differed from that of Plato, as Plato postulated the invisible part within man, that survived the body at death, Plato taught that the “soul” was a separate part of that which constituted man, thus showing the Dualistic aspect of Plato! On the other hand, Aristotle rejected such a notion and postulated that “soul” was merely a synonym for “life”, the life of man i.e. the spirit and the fleshly body in one! Aristotle saw “mind” as pertaining to man, as either “passive” or “active” – “intellect” what he meant by this was that the “passive intellect” takes in information through the senses, whereas, “active intellect” would then process and act on tat information taken in through those senses! Thus, for Aristotle, the only part that could be separate and immortal was this “active intellect” of man, all else was perishable and died with the body! Aristotle’s Unmoved Mover! Aristotle believed that their was a “Being” that was the Uncaused, the Final Cause, this Being was responsible for all in existence, whether material or immaterial, this Ultimate of Beings did not move, but caused other things to move, this Unmoved Mover was incapable of change or movement; for Aristotle, change or movement was associated with “Matter” (remember what Heraclitus said, in the previous paper) and as “God” the Ultimate Being was incapable of any such change or movement, which to Aristotle meant that which was associated with that which was imperfect, Aristotle postulated that his “Unmoved Mover” the Ultimate Being, God was untainted, unpolluted…i.e. Pure “Form” devoid of any kind of “Matter” ! In Part II of Aristotle: I will be dealing with the most important contribution of Aristotle’s philosophy to the Trinity and that is his use of the term “ousia” of which Aristotle had three understandings or notions and I cannot stress the importance of understanding Aristotle’s use of ousia”, because it is important how to understand it from the Greek philosophical point of view, if this is missed or not understood, then the application of “ousia” to the Trinity will be missed! It is a particular use of Aristotles ousia that the Trinitarians embraced...?
Posted on: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 12:45:59 +0000