Abstract

My dissertation is an interpretation of the text denoted in the title. The central doctrines of the text at issue are that the form is the source of motion in coming to be; and that the form does not come to be, but the composite entity does. The dissertation is an effort to develop an understanding of these doctrines as anticipatory of the doctrine that form, and hence substance, is actuality. This involves an extended discussion of art or craft and Aristotle's remarks on coming to be by art. The upshot of these remarks is that the artisan's visible ministrations are best understood as the exercise of the knowledge the artisan has in his art. As he produces, the artisan is actively knowing his art. This conception of art issues in an interpretation of the doctrine that the form does not come to be according to which this doctrine is an implicit continuation of the discussion started in chapter iii of Book Z. Chapter iii of Book Z considers and rejects the notion of "subject" as the best notion of substance; in my discussion, some subtleties of Aristotle's view of this conception of substance emerge which imply qualifications on the apparent rejection of it in chapter iii. ;The final task in the dissertation is the analogical application of Aristotle's discussion of art to nature. The perspective provided by consideration of technical production helps articulate a conception of natural forms as actualities whereby the notion of form is linked to changes in the world. This perspective also hints at the compatibility of the two conceptions of substance, i.e., as subject and as essence