Suárez on Continuous Quantity

Author(s):  
Jorge Secada
Keyword(s):  
2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 813-820 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Xiong ◽  
Lian-Chun Yi ◽  
Zhonghua Tang ◽  
Xin Zhao ◽  
Shi-Jian Fu

Author(s):  
Tad M. Schmaltz

This chapter focuses on an aspect of Suárez’s metaphysics that is especially relevant to the non-scholastic identification of matter with extension in early modern thought, namely, his account of the nature of the Aristotelian accident of “continuous quantity.” The chapter begins with Suárez’s contribution to a debate within medieval scholasticism between “realist” and “nominalist” views of quantity. One distinctive feature of this contribution is Suárez’s insistence that this accident bears a special relation to impenetrability. There is then a consideration of Suárez’s contribution to a scholastic debate over the mereological relation between wholes and their “integral parts” that pits anti-reductionists against reductionists. The chapter ends with an examination of Suárez’s contribution to scholastic debates over the ontological status of the “indivisible” boundaries of parts, namely, points, lines, and surfaces. Suárez adopts a “moderate realism” that takes boundaries to be really distinct from the parts they limit.


Author(s):  
Tad M. Schmaltz

This book traces a particular development of the metaphysics of the material world in early modern thought. The route it follows derives from a critique of Spinoza in the work of Pierre Bayle. Bayle charged in particular that Spinoza’s monistic conception of the material world founders on the account of extension and its “modes” and parts that he inherited from Descartes, and that Descartes in turn inherited from late scholasticism, and ultimately from Aristotle. After an initial discussion of Bayle’s critique of Spinoza and its relation to Aristotle’s distinction between substance and accident, this study starts with the original re-conceptualization of Aristotle’s metaphysics of the material world that we find in the work of the early modern scholastic Suárez. What receives particular attention is Suárez’s introduction of the “modal distinction” and his distinctive account of the Aristotelian accident of “continuous quantity.” This examination of Suárez is followed by a treatment of the connections of his particular version of the scholastic conception of the material world to the very different conception that Descartes offered. Especially important is Descartes’s view of the relation of extended substance both to its modes and to the parts that compose it. Finally, there is a consideration of what these developments in Suárez and Descartes have to teach us about Spinoza’s monistic conception of the material world. Of special concern here is to draw on this historical narrative to provide a re-assessment of Bayle’s critique of Spinoza.


1978 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 363-368
Author(s):  
Jeanette McCarthy Gallagher ◽  
D. Kim Reid

Three Piagetian-type problems were used to determine: (a) the relation between success on the check test of conservation of continuous quantities and an overt manifestation of reversibility, (b) the relation between that overt manifestation and explanation criteria, and (c) grade and task differences. 48 kindergarten, first- and second-grade children were tested. On two of the three problems conservation was related to the performance-based solution. Explanations accounted for considerable variance even after the effects of judgments had been removed. The second-graders performed significantly better across tasks than did the kindergarten children. It was suggested that both judgment and explanation criteria are needed to assess cognitive structures.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document