Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Appetites, Matter and Metaphors: Aristotle, Physics I, 9 (192a22–23), and Its Renaissance Commentators

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Francis Bacon on Motion and Power

Abstract

By exploring the world of pre-modern and early modern scholastic Aristotelianism, this chapter outlines one of the likely metaphysical backgrounds against which Bacon developed his views on material appetites. By material appetites, he meant a set of original tendencies in nature, inherent in every part of matter. When we take into consideration the context of late scholastic and Aristotelian philosophy, Bacon’s position emerges out of an exceedingly variegated landscape of philosophical solutions, a true sylva sylvarum of conceptual differences, deliberate borrowings and tacit accretions. As someone who during his philosophical apprenticeship must have waded into the dense forest of Aristotelian arguments in translations and commentaries, Bacon was acquainted with the distinctive Aristotelian unease about material appetite. As is well known, in Aristotle’s metaphysics matter is presented in terms of inert substratum. Furthermore, while Aristotle argued that appetite might denote life at both an inanimate (ἔφεσις) and animate (ὄρεξις) level, no form of intentional and ‘orektic’ teleology could be assigned to inanimate nature given the unintentional character of natural purposiveness. Through elaborating an original notion of material appetite, Bacon overcame classic scholastic objections and redefined traditional ontological divisions between matter, unsentient drive and conscious desire.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Bacon 1996, 112: ‘nos in hac ipsa historia Caelestium, ad nostram normam facta et congesta, spem per se ponere veritatis circa caelestia inveniendae; sed multo magis in observatione communium passionum et desideriorum materiae in utroque globo’.

  2. 2.

    For a recent example in which the unity of the Aristotelian tradition is taken seriously with respect to perhaps the most fundamental discipine of the arts course (logic-->), see Dvořák and Novák 2007 (thanks to -->Paul Richard Blum --> for discussing this work with me).

  3. 3.

    Compare --> the discussion of Kant’s -->transcendental illusion by Smith 1995 (3–4) and Grier 2007.

  4. 4.

    For a discussion of --> the relationship -->between edification and knowledge-->, see Andersson 2009a (‘Appendix: On Edification’).

  5. 5.

    The most recent synthesis is Hasse 2010. More relevant to the current enquiry is Des Chene --> 1996, 202 and Leijenhorst 2002, 197–198. More specialized studies include: Aertsen 1996; Barnett 1935; Matula 2002; Wallace 1967.

  6. 6.

    On hylomorphism--> in scholastic --> contexts, see now Brower 2014 and Ward 2014.

  7. 7.

    For a recent discussion on whether the Stoic model of appetite and the bipartite soul may have been influenced by the superficially similar --> Platonic account, see Bonazzi 2007, 115–116. In this chapter, I leave aside Plato’s position on appetite; for all the various twists and turns in his works, it is fair to say that he remains more hostile to the notion of rational appetite than Aristotle-->.

  8. 8.

    Melanchthon’s charge is that the Stoics ‘miscuerunt -->appetitiones naturales, affectus tactum comitantes et motus cordis’. See Melanchthon 1542 [1540], 116v–117r.

  9. 9.

    See, for instance Collegium Sancti Thomae --> Complutensis 1692, 173–174; De San Augustín 1697, sig. D4r.

  10. 10.

    For an instance of competing --> translations generating -->confusion in the reader rather than understanding, see Martin 2008, 170. On Argyropoulos, see now Matula 2006.

  11. 11.

    I have left out the vetus translation on grounds of impact. It may instead be useful to quote here the nearly identical translation used by Jacopo Zabarella --> in his commentary: ‘Existente enim quodam divino et bono et appetibili, aliud quidem contrarium ipsi dicimus esse, aliud autem quod natura aptum est appetere, et desiderare ipsum secundum suam ipsius naturam, quibusdam autem accidit contrarium, appetere suam ipsius corruptionem, attamen neque ipsum, suam ipsius possibile est appetere formam, propterea quod non est indigens, neque contrarium, corruptiva enim sunt sui invicem contraria, sed hoc est materia, sicut si foemina masculum, et turpe pulchrum, verum non per se turpe, sed secundum accidens, neque foemina, --> sed secundum accidens’ (Zabarella 1601, sig. Mm1r).

  12. 12.

    I decided not to consider here Isaac Casaubon’s 1590 edition and translation of Aristotle’s works (Aristotle 1590) because too little -->original intellectual effort went into the -->translation, and the text was ripped off from his father-in-law, Friedrich Sylburg --> (1536–1596), editor of many -->classical texts for the Wechel --> printing firm in Frankfurt. See Hotson 2007, 58–59, relying on Glucker 1964.

  13. 13.

    -->Vimercati 1567, fols 34rv: ‘omnia etenim, etiam inanima, natura in id feruntur, ut esse velint, et perpetuari, quorum appetitum ἔφεσιν in rebus inanimatis, ὄρεξιν in animatis, inquit Simplicius nominari’.

  14. 14.

    For Périon --> as a translator, see Cranz 2006 [1975]. For comments on Iacobus Ludovicus -->Strebaeus (Jacques-Louis d’Estrebay, 1481–1550?), see Andersson 2013.

  15. 15.

    See Thijssen 1988, I, 58–81, for a discussion -->of the textual problems.

  16. 16.

    Buridan 1509, fol. 75v: ‘et iterum -->oportet imaginari ibi aliam causam resistentie et retardationis, quia in quocunque loco vel ubi celum fuerit est sibi naturale et conveniens, ideo appetit ibi esse sicut -->materia appetit formam quam habet per modum delectationis, ut dicitur in primo libro. Quamvis etiam per modum desiderii appeteret ad ubi, sicut materia aliam formam, et ita appetitus ad ubi quod habet est quaedam resistentia motui ad alterum ubi’.

  17. 17.

    Achillini 1568, sig. P4v: ‘Ad tertium. Naturalis -->potentia materiae est aequalis ad duo contraria, dixit enim Averroes 2 phys. com. 48 praeparationem in potentiis passivis esse aequalem ad duo contraria, sed illorum contrariorum illud quod est bonum, perfectio et finis est naturaliter appetitum, illud vero quod non est bonum, cuiusmodi est privatio, non est naturaliter appetitum. Ex hoc patet differentia inter potentiam naturalem et appetitum, quia potentia respicit formam et non privationem; ideo diximus appetitum materiae praesupponere potentiam, potentiam praesupponere privationem, privationem praesupponere materiam. Isti tamen ordines secundum intellectum sunt’.

  18. 18.

    Guillaume Rouillé --> (1518–1589), a humanist bookseller of Lyon, who specialized in student editions in compact format, was not the first publisher of his work, which had originally appeared over twenty years earlier. For a full discussion of the distinctive flavour that characterized the intellectual and religious environment surrounding Titelmans’s works, see Andersson 2009b.

  19. 19.

    Javelli 1568, sig. Xx5r: ‘Et intendit [sc. Avicenna-->] negare desiderium a materia simpliciter accepta, id est, seclusa forma. --> Et si debet hoc desiderium concedi, non erit nisi ratione formae iam existentis in materia, quae virtutibus suis movet ad consequendam perfectiones suas secundarias, ut forma ignis levitate movet ignem sursum, sed hoc desiderium proprie non est materiae, sed formae, vel rei compositae’.

  20. 20.

    Javelli 1568, sig. Xx5v: ‘Sed si -->advertis invenies Avicennam non intellexisse verbum Philosophi, quia nescivit rationem et naturam desiderii naturalis. Arbitratus est enim ut patet in dicto suo quod sicut appetitus est virtus et qualitas addita essentiae animalis, qua movetur animal in bonum sibi conveniens, sic appetitus naturalis sit forma aut qualitas, aut virtus addita rei, qua naturaliter, id est, sine praecognitione, tendat in bonum suum ut ignis levitate ascendit, lapis gravitate descendit, et sic secundum Avicennam, levitas est appetitus naturalis in igne, gravitas in lapide. Et quoniam in yle praecise sumpta non est cognitio, nec est aliqua virtus additas yle, qua moveatur ad formam, ut ad perfectionem suam, dixit se non intelligere verbum Philosophi’.

  21. 21.

    Zabarella 1601, sig. V6v: ‘Primo enim oportet --> adesse aliquod appetibile, et habens rationem boni. Deinde aliquid, a quo appetatur. Tertio debet istud appetens esse privatum et carens illo bono, ideo enim appetit, quia caret, et haec omnia ex Platone in Convivio colliguntur’.

  22. 22.

    On -->Scaliger as a natural philosopher, see Lüthy 2001.

  23. 23.

    Scaliger 1557, 92v: ‘Qui -->materiam condidit, --> formasque illas condidit: voluit suae quanque cuique acquiescere. Neque posuit appetitum in materia mutationis, sed perfectionis tantum. Perficitur autem sub qualibet forma quaelibet pars, et tota sub omnibus. Non est igitur ei opus mutatione: nihil enim potest vel amittere vel recipere’.

  24. 24.

    Vanini 1615, 27–28 : ‘Sed Scholasticorum --> caterva, perplebeia quidem apud me, licet senatoria apud alios, sic insurgit: Materia appetit formam, ergo et corruptionem. Consecutio probatur, quia non potest desiderari finis, nisi ad hunc media necessaria exoptentur. Medium vero pernecessarium ad novae formae consecutionem primevae corruptio est. O acutos homines! Scholares meos doceo, et subtilissime, materiam non appetere formas: nam appetitus dicit privationem. Materia autem omnes formas habet, hae namque materiae individuatae partes sunt materiae primae, quae una est’. On the issue of -->Vanini and his sources, see the evidence presented in Corvaglia 1933.

  25. 25.

    For an instance of this crabby natural historical observation imported into a more philosophical context, see Liceti 1618, sig. Ll1r (where Scaliger -->is explicitly mentioned).

  26. 26.

    Lambeth Palace Library, London, MS 826, fols 20r–22r.

  27. 27.

    Ibid., fols 21v–22r: ‘Ob: Si materia appeteret formam, hoc esset, ratione suae imperfectionis, at forma non potest perficere materiam, cum materia sit aeterna; forma est caduca. aeterna non perficitur a caduco, et diuturniora sunt perfectiora.

    Sol::

    Diuturniora in eodem genere sunt perfectiora, atque caeteris paribus: sed materia et forma non sunt paria.

    Ob::

    Natura caeli non appetit formam, materia contenta est illa quam habet forma: et appetitus e[st] carentia, neque potest habere praestantiorem formam.

    Sol::

    Est appetitus, atque hoc appetitu appetit formam: Desiderii, atque hoc appetitu non appetit formam.

    Ob::

    si appetit formam, ergo vel appetitu naturali, vel animali: dices naturali. Appetit materia formam sicut femina virum: at illa appetit appetitu animali: ergo materia prima appetit animali appetitu.

    Sol::

    similtudo non currit 4 pedibus: sed in hoc consistit; sicut femina appetit virum, ut imperfectum perfectum; ita materia appetit formam, ut perfectum perfectius’.

  28. 28.

    British Library, -->London, Add. MS 4395. See Prins 1992.

  29. 29.

    Arriaga 1632, 252a: ‘Materia prima -->non potest habere appetitum, naturaliter loquendo, respectu formae substantialis per modum desiderii. Patet, quia naturaliter non potest carere forma, ergo illam non potest respicere ut absentem, -->ergo nec desiderare’. For Arriaga, see Knebel 2009 and Sousedík 2009.

  30. 30.

    Arriaga 1632, 252b: ‘Quod autem aliae sint aliis perfectiores, non efficit eas diversimode appeti a materia: nam maior perfectio habet se omnino per accidens in ordine ad complementum substantiale materiae’.

  31. 31.

    Ibid.: ‘appeteret etiam destructionem propriae formae (si non esset rationalis) quod est absurdum: quis enim dicet, materiam primam esse violentam sub forma equi, appetereque equi destructionem, quae sequitur ad receptionem formae rationalis, quam appetit per te in particulari ut forma equi perfectiorem? Ergo materia prima non appetit per modum desiderii aliquam formam in particulari ut determinate, sed aliquam disiunctive’.

  32. 32.

    For a selection of Jesuit treatises, --> see: Saenz de Aguirre --> 1672, sig. E3r; Ruedhoffer 1732, sig. L1v. On Jesuit philosophy, I have been guided chiefly by Blum 1999 and by subsequent -->conversations with the author.

References

  • Achillini, Alessandro. 1568. Opera omnia in unum collecta. Venice: Girolamo Scoto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aertsen, Jan. 1996. Medieval philosophy and the transcendentals: The case of Thomas Aquinas. Leiden: Brill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, Daniel C. 2009a. Lord Henry Howard (1540–1614): An Elizabethan life. Woodbridge: Boydell & Brewer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, Daniel C. 2009b. Anagogicis … excessibus: A philological addendum to the religious phenomenology of Frans Titelmans. Verbum: Analecta Neolatina 11: 29–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, Daniel C. 2013. Philosophy and the Renaissance encyclopedia: Some observations. In Encyclopaedism from antiquity to the Renaissance, ed. Jason König and Greg Woolf, 398–412. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle. 1590. Opera, ed. Isaac Casaubon. Lyon: Guillaume de Laymarie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle. 1629. Naturalis auscultationis libri VIII, ed. Giulio Pace. Hanau: André Wechel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle. 1984. Complete works, the revised Oxford translation, 2 vols., ed. Jonathan Barnes. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arriaga, Rodrigo de. 1632. Cursus philosophicus. Antwerp: Balthasar Moretus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bacon, Francis. 1996. Philosophical studies c.1611-c.1619, ed. Graham Rees and Michael Edwards. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, Doris. 1935. The concept of appetitus naturalis in Thomas Aquinas. Loyola College: MA Dissertation. Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blum, Paul Richard. 1999. Philosophenphilosophie und Schulphilosophie: Typen des Philosophierens in der Neuzeit. Stuttgart: Steiner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonazzi, Mauro. 2007. Eudorus’ psychology and Stoic ethics. In Platonic Stoicism-Stoic Platonism: The dialogue between Platonism and Stoicism, ed. M. Bonazzi and Christoph Helmig, 109–132. Leuven: Leuven University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brower, Jeffrey E. 2014. Aquinas’s ontology of the material world: Change, hylomorphysm, and material objects. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Buridan, Jean. 1509. Quaestiones subtilissimae super octo libros Physicorum Aristotelis. Paris: Denys Roce.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burley, Walter. 1609. Super Aristotelis libros De physica auscultatione lucidissima commentaria, cum nova veterique interpretatione. Venice: Pietro de Farris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlin, Laurence. 2012. Boyle’s mechanistic Aristotelianism, and the myth of immanent teleology. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 43: 54–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coimbra Commentators. 1602. In octo libros physicorum Aristotelis Stagiritae prima pars. Cologne: Lazar Zetzner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collegium Sancti Thomae Complutensis. 1692. In octo libros Physicorum Aristotelis Quaestiones. Alcalá: Julián García Briones.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corvaglia, Luigi. 1933. Le opere di Giulio Cesare Vanini e le loro fonti, 2 vols. Milan: Dante Alighieri.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cranz, F. Edward. 2006 [1976]. Renaissance readings of the De anima. In Platon et Aristote à la Renaissance, ed. Jean-Claude Margolin, 359–376. Paris: Vrin (repr. In Reorientations of western thought from antiquity to the Renaissance, ed. Nancy Struever. Aldershot: Ashgate).

    Google Scholar 

  • De San Augustín, Buenaventura. 1697. Artium cursus. Tomus II octo libros physicorum Aristotelis comprehendens. Salamanca: Maria Estévez.

    Google Scholar 

  • Des Chene, Dennis. 1996. Physiologia: Natural philosophy in late Aristotelian and Cartesian thought. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dvořák, Petr, and Lukáš Novák. 2007. Úvod do logiky aristotelské tradice. České Budějovice: Faculty of Theology, University of South Bohemia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glucker, John. 1964. Casaubon’s Aristotle. Classica et Medievalia 25: 274–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goclenius, Rudolph. 1980 [1613]. Lexicon philosophicum. Frankfurt: Widow of Matthias Becker [repr. Hildesheim and New York: Olms, 1980].

    Google Scholar 

  • Grier, Michelle. 2007. Kant’s doctrine of transcendental illusion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasse, Dag Nikolaus. 2010. The soul’s faculties. In The Cambridge history of medieval philosophy, ed. Robert Pasnau and Christina van Dyke, 305–319. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hocker, Jonas. 1606. Clavis philosophiae Aristotelis. Tübingen: Philipp Gruppenbach.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hotson, Howard. 2007. Commonplace learning: Ramism and its German ramifications 1543–1630. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Javelli, Crisostomo. 1568. Totius rationalis, naturalis et moralis philosphiae compendium. Lyon: Heirs of Jacob Giunta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knebel, Sven K. 2009. Die Kunst der ‘Barock’ Scholastik: Zur Ontologie der forma artificialis bei Rodrigo de Arriga SJ. (1592–1667). In Spätrenaissance-Philosophie in Deutschland, 1570–1650: Entwürfe zwischen Humanismus und Konfessionalisierung, okkulten Traditionen und Schulmetaphysik, ed. Martin Mulsow, 281–291. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knuuttila, Simo. 2004. Emotions in ancient and medieval philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kraye, Jill. 2002. Eclectic Aristotelianism in the moral philosophy of Francesco Piccolomini. In La presenza dell’aristotelismo padovano nella filosofia della prima modernità, ed. Gregorio Piaia, 57–82. Rome/Padua: Antenore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 1926 [1663–1685]. Philosophischer Briefwechsel: Erster Band. Darmstadt: Otto Reichl.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leijenhorst, Cees. 2002. The mechanisation of the Aristotelianism: The late Aristotelian setting of Thomas Hobbes’ natural philosophy. Leiden: Brill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liceti, Fortunio. 1618. De spontaneo viventium ortu libri IV. Vicenza: Domenico Amadeo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lohr, Charles. 1988. Metaphysics. In The Cambridge history of Renaissance philosophy, ed. Charles B. Schmitt, Quentin Skinner, Eckhard Kessler, and Jill Kraye, 537–638. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lüthy, Christoph. 2001. David Gorlaeus’ atomism, or: The marriage of protestant metaphysics with Italian natural philosophy. In Late medieval and early modern corpuscular matter theories, ed. C. Lüthy, John Murdoch, and William R. Newman, 245–290. Leiden: Brill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, Craig. 2008. Scientific terminology and the effects of humanism: Renaissance translations of Meteorologica IV and the commentary tradition. In Science translated: Latin and vernacular translations of scientific treatises in medieval Europe, ed. Michèle Goyens, Peter de Leemans, and An Smets, 155–180. Leuven: Leuven University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matula, Josef. 2002. Thomas Aquinas and the influence of imaginatio | phantasia on human being. Acta Universitatis Palackianae Olomoucensis 5: 169–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matula, Josef. 2006. John Argyropoulos and his importance for the Latin West. Acta Universitatis Palackianae Olomoucensis 7: 45–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melanchthon, Philipp. 1542 [1540]. Commentarius de anima. Wittenberg: Peter Seitz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osler, Margaret J. 2001. Whose ends? Teleology in early modern natural philosophy. Osiris 16: 151–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piccolomini, Francesco. 1628. Naturae totius universi scientia perfecta atque philosophica quinque partibus ordine exactissimo absoluta. Frankfurt: David Aubry and Clemens Schleich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prins, J.L.M. 1992. Walter Warner (ca. 1557–1643) and his notes on animal organisms. Utrecht: Universiteit Utrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruedhoffer, Eberhard. 1732. Salisburgensis Thomista philosophus, seu universa philosophia peripatetico-Thomistica … editio altera. Salzburg: Johann Joseph Mayr.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saénz de Aguirre, José. 1672. Philosophia nov-antiqua, seu disputationes in universam physiologiam. Salamanca: Luca Perez.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scaliger, Julius Caesar. 1557. Exotericarum exercitationum liber quintus decimus de subtilitate ad Hieronymum Cardanum. Paris: Michel de Vascosan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schramm, Johann Moritz. 1709. De vita et scriptis famosi athei Julii Caesaris Vanini tractatus singularis, in quo genus, mores et studia cum ipsa morte horrenda e scriptis suis rarioribus et aliis fide dignis auctoribus selecta sunt et, ne cui offendiculo forent errores illius, simul sunt refutati. Küstrin: Gottfried Heinich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapin, Steven. 1996. The scientific revolution. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Simplicius. 1882. Simplicii in Aristotelis Physicorum libros quattuor priores commentaria, ed. Hermann Diels. Berlin: Reimer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Rob. 1995. Derrida and autobiography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sousedík, Stanislav. 2009. Philosophie der frühen Neuzeit in den böhmischen Ländern. Stuttgart: Frommann-Holzboog.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, Daniel. 1663. Regulae philosophicae sub titulis XXII comprehensae. Oxford: John Webb.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thijssen, J.M.M.H. 1988. Johannes Buridanus over het oneindige: Studie. Nijmegen: Ingenium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas Aquinas. 2006 [1964–1976]. Summa theologiae, Blackfriars edition, 61 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Titelmans, Frans. 1558. Compendium philosophiae naturalis, seu de consideratione rerum naturalium earumque ad suum creatorem reductione libri xii. Lyon: Guillaume Rouillé.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanini, Giulio Cesare. 1615. Amphitheatrum divinae providentiae. Lyon: Widow of Antoine de Harsy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vimercati, Francesco. 1567. In octo libros Aristotelis de naturali auscultatione commentarii. Venice: Domenico and Giovanni Battista Guerra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, Karl. 1967. Francis Bacon on the nature of man: The faculties of man’s soul. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, Thomas M. 2014. John Duns Scotus on parts, wholes, and hylomorphism. Leiden: Brill.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zabarella, Jacopo. 1601. In libros Aristotelis physicorum commentarii nunc primum in lucem editi. Venice: Giovanni Antonio and Jacopo de Franceschi, and Francesco Bolzeta.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Wolfson College, Oxford, OX2 6UD, UK

    Daniel C. Andersson

Authors
  1. Daniel C. Andersson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel C. Andersson .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Warburg Institute, London, United Kingdom

    Guido Giglioni

  2. Royal Holloway, University of London, London, United Kingdom

    James A.T. Lancaster

  3. University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania

    Sorana Corneanu

  4. Institute for Research in the Humanities, University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania

    Dana Jalobeanu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Andersson, D.C. (2016). Appetites, Matter and Metaphors: Aristotle, Physics I, 9 (192a22–23), and Its Renaissance Commentators. In: Giglioni, G., Lancaster, J., Corneanu, S., Jalobeanu, D. (eds) Francis Bacon on Motion and Power. International Archives of the History of Ideas Archives internationales d'histoire des idées, vol 218. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27641-0_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation