Aranguren Echevarria, Javier: Philosophical Anthropology: a reflection on the eccentric character of

the human. McGRAW-HILL, Spain, 2003.

CHAPTER 2
Live, feel: the degrees of life [31]

1. OF BODIES AND THEIR COMPOSITION FIRST

1.1. Exchange rates: substance and accident

What type of structure do bodies have? Is there any kind of composition in them? Can we...
to go beyond that information from our senses and to unravel the ontological principles of
that which our senses know? The answer is affirmative. [...] To achieve this, a good
An alternative is to stop and think about a phenomenon that affects all bodies that enter the realm.
from our experience: the movement.
The study of motion reveals the ontological structure of physical bodies; that is, in that
Through the use of reason, the principles of material reality become transparent.
to become aware of what happens in change (something stops being to become something else), one can discover
What is left, what remains, thus accounting for what is there.
One way of movement is the one that occurs, for example, in local translation. […] It is a
typical example of accidental movement: a change of circumstances in which the thing is
it remains unchanged.
The study of accidental movements brings us closer, in this way, to a first distinction:
the one that exists between substance and accidents. Substance comes from sub-stare, to remain beneath.
Besides the accidental change, there is another possibility: that what mutates is not a circumstance, but
the thing itself, the substantial. That is to say, that something stops being what it is and becomes something else. A
A typical example is the process by which paper burns...
This is a second way to understand change, often referred to as substantial change. In it, the
what ceases to be what it was […] to become something different... Something that was a certain
what is no longer is, and instead something that was is. But in that change there is no annihilation, but rather it
there is a continuous process. In substantial change, 'something ceases to be what it was to become'
another thing," but the "something" remains: in every substantial movement there is a principle that grants
continuity...
If it were not so, at some point in the process there would be nothing. However, nothing cannot
cause nothing (the swimming is), so the transformation into ash could not take place. The paper
it becomes ash, it transforms into something else, but at no point are there leaps: in the change
substantial changes the definition of the thing (and therefore the thing itself, the body that was paper
now it is another type of body that is ash) but at the same time something remains (that in which
the change occurs, and it is such that it has the virtuality of ceasing to be paper to become ash.

1.2. Form and matter, co-principles of bodies

Starting from this analysis, which is based on the observation of an absolutely everyday process, it
He can come to realize the initial composition of the bodies. For that, Aristotle uses the
terms, form, and matter (first). The form is precisely what something is: the definition, the
essence of something, what makes something what it is. For that reason, the form also
understand as an act; that is to say, it is the principle of reality that updates ( organizes) the matter of a
in such a way that that matter is such a thing and not another. The form is the act of the body that makes a body
be that body and not another.
Matter would be what remains in substantial change. It is not easy to obtain a definition of
raw material (or primary), as it is one of the fundamental concepts, and the possibility
Going back in definitions is limited. An interesting way to do it is the following.
expression: 'Matter is what, without being something, is also nothing' (J. Choza). […] Matter is not something
because being something (being a certain thing and not another) belongs to the form, to the act of a body;
but it is not negligible because the study of substantial change indicates its presence as that
that remains in all change, since nothing - we insist - causes anything. For this reason to the
Matter is called potency, in contrast to how form is called act: what is in act.
it is already "something determined"; what is in potential can be many things. Matter has the
power, the ability to be one thing and another, as a result of the way that the
update, from the organizational principle that it has.

...what is matter?, and what is form? The key to the Aristotelian proposal, and its greatest
difficulty, it lies in understanding that this question is not appropriate. Why? Because neither the subject
neither is the form anything, but rather what exists in the material world are precisely the bodies:
the formalized matter. In truth, bodies have that primary composition of matter and
shape, but what it is, is precisely that compound, the body. In other words: in the world
matter does not exist forms without matter,[...]. Likewise, raw material is not given, but rather always
All matter is updated (formalized) in some way: all raw material is 'something.
"determined", although in the first composition of everything determined (that is, of any
In the body of the cosmos, there is a principle of composition that we call precisely matter.
First, a principle that can be said as a result of the analysis of substantial change, change in which
it necessarily has to do something that lasts.

For that reason, in the substantial change, what changes is the form: the act, the verbal action, the
definition, the essence, what the thing is. Form and matter, act and potency, those are the components.
last (or first) of physical reality.

2. THE BODIES AND THE LIVING BODIES

2.1 Natural bodies and artificial bodies: being and unity

And what types of bodies make up physical reality? A first distinction would be that of
artificial bodies and natural bodies. The former, the result of the action of man's hand, are
In reality, an aggregate of natural bodies, and they are defined by the type of function they perform.
In artificial beings, function grants them being or, better said, they are what they are to the extent
in what they function. But the most typical thing about them is that both their use and their unity are accidental:
they do not have within themselves anything that makes them one, that endows them with a self, and for that reason their
reality is so tenuous.
It is said that Theseus's ship ran aground on the shore, lying on the beach. The men
they decided to preserve it as a reminder of the heroic actions that had taken place in it. But
the sea is a poor friend of conservation, and the force of the waves, the algae and mollusks that cling to the hull
they began to damage the ship which gradually started to deteriorate. To prevent it, the
men began to replace the most damaged parts with new ones, but such was the devotion that
they felt for the ship that they did not want to throw away the removed wood, and they stored it in a safe place and
Dry. After some time, some inhabitants of the city started to rebuild the ship from
of those old woods, which had also increased in number, for the decay of the ship
it was the complete era back then. At one point, they came across two ships of Theseus,
the new one and the old one. Now, which one was the new one, the one that was by the shore, or the one that
Had he built in the city?; And what was the true ship of Theseus, the one that had been repaired?
little by little, or the one that had just been built with remedies? Some even doubted that
Such a boat would have existed.
What is the problem with the ship? That its entity is minimal, just like its unit.
also. There is an ecological saying that goes, "something is in the same measure as it is one." If the
The unity of a being is accidental, its being is too.
2.2. Natural bodies: the living and the inert

Natural bodies can, in turn, be divided into two types: inert and living.

It seems that entities are primarily bodies, and among them, natural bodies: these
they constitute, in effect, the principles of all the others. Now, among natural bodies, there are those that have
life exists and some do not have it; and we usually call life self-nourishment, growth, and aging.
Aristotle: On the Soul, Book II, 412a10-15)

What distinguishes natural bodies? In a radical way, whether they are alive or not.
And what is the difference between one and the other? Precisely that, life. Living is not something accidental.
for the living: it does not happen that it is alive and then it is not, but rather the living precisely encodes
his entity in living. [...] As Aristotle himself says: 'for the living being, to live is the same as
...
And it actually turns out that in the material world, living beings are living bodies.
The distinction that Aristotle refers to is precisely this: inert body, living body. The
What lives is a body, the living being is a body that has life in potential. In other words:
The mode of the body of a living being is always living... [...] To live -it is insisted- is the same as being for the
living being: a living being is what it is (substance, something concrete) to the extent that it is alive, in the
as far as it is a living body.

3. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LIVING BEING [38]

we must pause to describe the specific characteristics of living beings to

3.1. Self-movement: something more than changing place

The first thing that catches attention in the living is movement. [...] The inert does not move, and in
I change what I live yes. [...]...what I live moves itself and from itself. A warning: this does not
It means that in every living being there is conscious movement. [...] Automovement does not point to both
to know that one moves like the fact that, in reality, there are things that change
not only by the action of the external but by themselves and from themselves.
This movement 'from oneself' does not mean that it is a voluntary movement. The will
it is a specific power of the human soul: it seems important not to anthropomorphize the whole of
the real.[...] In the case of the human being, the perspective is enriched: their physical growth is from within,
analogous to that of a tree [...]; it can also move due to more or less responsive answers.
conditional; but, moreover, he himself becomes an efficient cause and not only a formal one of his actions.
to the extent that one sets goals and establishes objectives for oneself. This possibility is often
call freedom.
What kind of movement can occur in the living being? [...] A radical movement is generation.
Alongside it is the process of decline and malnutrition: both involve a change.
constant ("life is in movement"), which occurs in the living being from the very living being,
making part of the surrounding world its own (that is feeding: that something incorporates into itself what was before
It was strange, although at the cost of the destruction of that thing) and developing in it.
In addition to generation, growth and nutrition can also take place.
local movement. [...] One type of self-movement more […] is that which is done not from the
necessity, but from voluntary decision. In the activity of the will, the level of
independence from material determinations seems much greater, and the fact that
be oneself who sets one's own goals allows for the realization of the possibility that
with the human being strict novelties appear in the universe, because through it they occur
completely new actions.
3.2. Unit: against fragmentation

The second characteristic of the living corresponds to a scholastic phrase that has already been used.
reference previously: 'something is to the same extent that it is one.'
The unity of the living being is stronger than that which exists in the inert world, and for that reason, its being as well.
The less unity, the less degree of being, and one dies less.

3.3. Perfeccionamiento: siempre más// Autorrealización

Another characteristic inherent in all living beings - alongside movement and unity - is that their existence is
It takes place within a process of improvement or self-realization. Growth is, in
good measure, the execution of the genetic program itself: makes explicit the implicit [...] means
to grow. [a living being is not completed]. "It is born, grows, reproduces, dies." It acquires
things, loses others, learns about the surroundings either in a physical way (nutrition) or in a
immaterial or intentional manner (sensation and knowledge).
A human being has an indefinite capacity for perfection, to the point that one can assert
that "nothing human is foreign to me" because everything is a potential object of his interest...

3.4 Immanence: the reality of a within

...the living being has within it from which self-motion, growth, and nourishment are executed. The
the fundamental distinction with respect to the inert is that in the living being, in a more or less subtle way,
There is always oneself. This is the only way by which everything mentioned above can be sustained. In front
to the disintegration of the inert (its unity is only accidental), in the living there is an order, a
program, a balance, that coincides with the being, the being one and the development of that same living being.
What does the notion of itself imply? That some of the operations that the living being exercises are redundant.
for their own benefit, they have in the living their origin (their cause) and the effect benefits the same
living.[...] The actions whose consequences remain with the same subject can be called
immanent actions. The origin of the word is the Latin expression manere-in, to remain within.
What is inherent to every living being is that there is an inside within all.
...the degrees of immanence vary.

3.5. "For the living, to live is the same as to be"

These four characteristics [...] are not accidents for the living being. Moreover, the only way to
talk about a living being from these four principles.
"For the living, to live is the same as to be" (Aristotle). Living is not a characteristic that
is added to a certain body; for example, to the body of a dog, but only exists such
body and such dog because, in effect, that dog is alive. There is dog to the extent that there is dog
alive. Among the living, it is the same to say 'body' as 'living body': life is not an accident:
the dog is what it is in the first place by being alive.
If it is not an accident, then life coincides with the substantial nature of the living being: for the living being, the only
substantial change is to start living (generation) or to stop doing so (corruption). Throughout
Throughout its entire life journey, we can talk about accidental changes (from embryo to fetus, from fetus to baby, from
baby to young, from young to adult), but the unity and interiority of the living being is maintained from the
beginning of that perfective self-movement which consists of living. The doctrine of the genetic program
results in accordance with that proposal: it changes the level of implementation of the program; but, from the
from beginning to end, the genetic code (the individual, the substance) remains.
In the living there is a novelty compared to what is not alive. That novelty is the addition of the
activity, of the capacity to act -and with that to cease- that exists in the living.

4. The VITAL PRINCIPLE

So far, we have seen the characteristics of the living. The observation of the
bodies have allowed us to distinguish between inert bodies and living ones. Both coincide
precisely in being bodies. In this way, if we ask ourselves 'what makes something alive',
we can already answer that this is not the body...[43]The two agree on corporeality, they
they differ in life. How is it possible for one body to be alive and another not?
The response comes to us reminding us of what was said about the substantial change.[...] In the change, it was said
What remains is matter and what changes is the way a certain matter was.
organized. The principle of organization is called form: form is what makes that
something is what it is, its essence, definition, principle of order, what causes a certain
entity is to be such and not another. In the case of the living being, that formal principle is called alma.
What is the soul? A principle that organizes the body in such a way that this body has life.
act of a body that has potential life. That by which a body is such that it moves itself
same, has unity, perfects or grows and has a self or immanence.
The notion of soul is, in reality, simple: soul is the name we give to the principle that organizes
a body in such a way that this body is alive. And since what we organize is the form, it is said
also that, in the living being, the soul is the form of the body. It is important to note two things. The
First, the notion of the soul proposed has nothing to do with motives of a spiritual nature or
religious. In our case, it is said both of a man and of a plant or of any
animal. Simply put, if it happens that a being moves itself, we will say that it has a soul.
...the word soul solely as the principle of life of the living being, by which such body is
organized in such a way that it is a living body; it is a body that, in potential, has life, it is a body
that it is only body to the extent that it lives ('for the living, to live is to be').

Anima forma corporis, the soul is the form of the body. This Latin adage helps us to point to the
second characteristic that I wanted to point out. Namely: the soul is the form of the body, of the material of
living being. That means that she herself is not material, but the principle of organization of the
matter. Therefore, by definition, the soul is immaterial, whether it is that of man, as
from that of a plant or that of an animal. What has been said may surprise, especially those who
They think of spiritual matters as the same as material ones. But it is not the same: the spiritual persists.
after the destruction of the compound, or it even exists without any composition... The immaterial does not.
It is simply discussed of immaterial because it is being said that this (the soul, the form) is the
principle of order of matter.
...the soul is the form, the act, what makes that body what it is. The soul is intrinsic to the being.
living, as is the body. One cannot think of the living without one or the other. Soul and body are
they relate not as two things do (for they are not), but as co-principles of what is.
thing: the living one.
The bodies have a basic composition of shape and matter. In living bodies, this principle
We formally call it the soul, and for that reason it is said that 'the soul is the form of the body'. The soul is what
the same as the form. It should therefore be remembered that a key point is: neither the form nor the matter are real,
but both are co-principles of the material reality that is made up of bodies. That is,
there is no raw material, but rather all matter has a certain organization (it is something determined),
and that is why it is always given under a certain formality or update. In a similar way, every form is in
a matter. What is real are bodies. In the case of living beings, the same happens: there are no souls.
vegetables waiting to find a suitable stalk, but rather what exists are bodies
living beings that are plants.