The universe’s fundamental principle In Aristotle’s view, “Metaphysic” is the most important science, while metaphysics takes matter as the fundamental substance and sheds light on it in a fundamental way. As a result, this science focuses on fundamental matter, which provides enough light to describe all types of matter. Aristotle also uses the word “being” in place of matter. Aristotle asserts that the principles of the first philosophy apply to all material things, while the laws of zoology solely pertain to the existence of goods and their lives.
The Term Metaphysics
The term Metaphysic only appeared around 50 BC when “Andronicus” published all of Aristotle’s writings in a particular order. In this edition of the writings, “Andronicus” placed the subject or title of First Philosophy after “Physics.” From this point, the renowned author opposes Aristotle’s controversial physical theory, asserting that Plato’s theory of ideas signifies something beyond the material world.
Difference between Aristotle and Plato’s Views
The main difference between Aristotle and Plato’s views is that Plato gives importance to a universal concept of things rather than to them, whereas according to this concept, many material objects in the world are an approximation or an illusion. According to Aristotle’s perspective, the second flaw in Plato’s philosophy lies in his lack of explanation. For instance, he fails to explain whether the universal concept of man existed prior to the existence of human beings, and whether this universal concept represents the true reality in comparison to material human beings. Then how did these material human beings come into existence? How did the concept of beauty give rise to beautiful objects, and how do material objects relate to their own universal concepts?
Material Objects Are Not Copies of Universal Concepts
Plato simply says that material objects are copies of or reflections of his universal concepts. Plato asserts that the senses alone cannot comprehend the universal concept of an object. While Aristotle wanted to prove through his metaphysical theory that universal concepts are nothing but natural objects, contrary to Plato’s views, In other words, material objects are not copies of universal concepts; rather, universal concepts, which serve as a universal description of these objects, are copies of these material objects or their reflections.
Concepts Are Within These Material Things
And that these concepts are within these material things themselves. Plato’s theory was that universal concepts are something separate from material objects. Plato posited that universal concepts exist in a realm distinct from that of material objects. A universal concept is a thing consisting of common attributes found in a kind of object; therefore, this universal concept, despite being universal, is related to each individual choice like itself. In other words, the existence of universality is due to individuality. According to Aristotle, it is not the case that the universal concept of a material object is an existence separate from this object; on the contrary, the real fact is that the universal concept of everything is in relation to the essence of that thing. Aristotle’s philosophy emerges at this point, emphasizing that while universality is the ultimate truth, individuality embodies this universality.
Common Attributes Are Inherent Within Each Individual
In other words, the universal concept of man undoubtedly encompasses the common attributes shared by all human beings, yet these common attributes are inherent within each individual. From a metaphysical perspective, the first question to consider is: What constitutes real reality? Or, what is the actual substance or content? According to Aristotle, the real reality, or substance, is the one that is complete in itself and does not need any other support for its existence. For instance, if we say that a substance has weight, it can explain its own existence. However, weight cannot explain its own existence, but it can explain the existence of weight, indicating that the actual reality is the existence of substance itself.
Material Objects and Their Universal Concept
From the above example, Aristotle gives an explanation of material objects and their universal concept. According to him, the universal concept of something is impossible without the material existence of that thing. For example, just as weight is due to matter, the universal perception of a thing is also due to that thing. Another example is that the concept of humanity is due to the existence of material beings in the world. Aristotle also draws this second point or another conclusion from his philosophy that neither universality nor individuality is the real reality.
Weight without Matter Is Nonsense
Because if the concept of weight without matter is nonsense, then the concept of matter without weight is also false. In other words, if the concept of humanity without humans is futile, then the concept of humans without a universal concept of humanity is also meaningless. For there is a universal concept of man. Every human being has one head, one face, two eyes, one nose, and one mouth. Then the upper side with two arms and two hands with arms and each hand with a thumb and four fingers. Then the lower torso ie two legs and two toes and then the big toe and toes of each foot and the tines on the toes. Hair on the head and tongue and teeth in the mouth. And so is the universal concept of man.
Concept of Humanity Will Also Automatically Vanish
Although humans have two arms, two legs, and no tail, although the monkey is a similar animal to man, it is quite different from man due to its size and other characteristics. People discussed the idea that a universal concept of humanity exists because all humans share certain attributes. However, if these common attributes of human beings suddenly disappear, the concept of humanity will also automatically vanish. Just as the properties of matter, such as its weight, volume, and ability to occupy space, are due to the nature of matter itself, the properties of matter also determine its nature.
Material Objects and Their Universal Concept
And that it is not a substance other than its specific attributes, but something else. According to Aristotle, separating the attributes of matter from matter means separating matter from matter. So are material objects and their universal concept. And these two cannot be separated from each other. Rather, the concept of every material thing exists within that material thing itself. The second important thing is that the universal concept of material objects is due to these similar objects, not that the same characteristic material objects are due to their universal concept.
Psychology and Nature
Before further elucidating Aristotle’s ideas, it would not be out of place if we had some discussion of our own. Readers, during the study of Plato’s ideas, we have expressed that the psychology and nature of the powerful have feelings of pride and aggression, and the psychology or nature of the weak has a tendency to compromise and reconciliation. If the preference is more, according to Aristotle’s ideas, our opinion will be correct that the psychology and nature of the powerful are of a certain type due to their strength, while the psychology of the weak is that of the powerful due to their own or physical weakness.
Submissiveness and Conciliation Make Up the Psychology
Elements of pride and aggression make up the psychology or nature of strength, while elements of submissiveness and conciliation make up the psychology or nature of weakness. This is a broad characterization of a universal concept. As previously stated, the distinction between material science and social science lies in the absolute accuracy and finality of material or natural science’s results, whereas social science’s results occasionally exhibit discrepancies, thereby justifying this assertion. It is known that the results of material science are often conclusive because material science is concerned with matter, which remains the same in all cases.
Social Science Is Closely Associated With Human Psychology
Although social science is closely associated with human psychology or nature, its outcomes may occasionally deviate, Similarly, if the psychology of a person with exceptional natural mental and physical abilities displays pride and aggression rather than arrogance and aggression, we will label it as an exceptional case; otherwise, it represents the true nature or psychology of those in positions of power. I always exhibit pride and aggression, revealing them through my words and actions.
Natural Mental and Physical Abilities
On the other hand, if the psychology or nature of a person with more or less natural mental and physical abilities shows or finds feelings of pride and aggression or support for exploitation instead of rebelliousness and conciliation, then this is also an exceptional case. The true essence of weakness lies in reluctance and complacency. Real philosophers no longer debate “matter first or idea first.”
Definition of Social Good and Social Evil
Rather, this is where philosophy falls short. The task of real philosophy is to provide the ultimate definition of social good and social evil, as well as present their universal concepts. Similarly, real philosophy should provide a definitive definition of social justice and social injustice, as well as present their universal concepts. He should then create guidelines and regulations that uphold the values of social goodness and justice in society, while obscuring the image of social evil and injustice, enabling individuals to perceive and acknowledge evil and inhumanity from a distance. People can avoid it, too.
Social Justice to Readers Is Not an Easy Task
Explaining social justice to readers is not an easy task. When society bases the ultimate definition of social good and social justice on the personal, selfish, cruel, and inhumane interests of its members, it reveals the origin of these concepts, necessitating the sacrifice of life. They allow the explanation, while the forgotten innocents grinding in the mill of oppression are unaware of the truth. If Socrates dared to speak the absolute truth in his time, he also had to suffer the punishment for this insolence. He had to sacrifice his life or his head.
This is the first part of a continuous series about metaphysics. If you are interested in learning about epistemology, you must read (https://scienceresearchs.com/epistemology-in-social-science-historical-perspective/)
Regards
Dr. Abid Hussain Nawaz
Outstanding
You are doing a great job, keep up the good work