亞里士多德《物理學》第八章第四節的兩個問題？

01-14

在《物理學》第八章第四節最開始，亞里士多德先對本性的運動（intrinsic motions）和偶性的運動（incidental motion）進行了區分（254b7-12），接著他在本性的運動中細分了自然的運動（moved by nature）與被迫的運動（moved by force）被自身推動的運動和被他物推動的運動（252b12-24）
1.他在254b7-12提出的偶性與本性運動的二分的依據究竟指的是什麼？（它是怎麼來的？是否可以根據他的依據舉一個例子？與他在前文中關於偶性和本性的論述又有什麼聯繫？）

2.為什麼他要在本性的運動中進一步二分自然的運動與被迫的運動？更進一步說，為什麼被迫的運動可以是本性的運動？（個人一直將本性的運動與自然的運動看作大致同延的，當然這闊能是誤解......）

阿奎那已經解釋得很清楚了，沒有什麼進一步要說的，抄（阿奎那：《物理學注》）：

1）

He gives therefore first three divisions of movers and mobiles. The first of these is that among movers and mobiles some move or are moved per accidens, and some per se. And he takes 「per accidens」 in a wide sense include what moves or is moved with respect to a part. Hence in explaining what he means by 「per accidens, he adds that things cause motion or are moved per accidens in two ways. (1) Whatever things are said to cause motion by virtue of being present in things which move are said to cause it per accidens, as when it is said that a musician causes health, because a knowledge of music is present in the one who heals; and likewise things are said to be moved per accidens either on account of existing in what is being moved in the way that an object in place exists in a place, e.g., when we say that a man is being moved, because the ship on which he is is being moved, or on account of being an accident in a subjects as when we say that the white is being moved, because a body is being moved. (2) In another way, things are said to move or to be moved per accidens, because they move or are moved with respect to a part, as a man is said to strike or be struck, because his hand strikes or is struck.

But when these two per accidens ways of causing motion or being moved are eliminated, things are said to move or to be moved per se, i.e., when they are not said to cause motion or be moved by virtue of being in the cause of motion or in what is being moved, or because some part of them causes motion or is moved.

2）

with respect to things that are moved by themselves—such as are animals, which move themselves—he says that they are moved according to nature. And he proves this on the ground that they are moved by an intrinsic principle, and since things whose principle of motion is within are said to be moved by nature, it follows that an animal』s motion, by which it moves itself, if it is compared to the whole animal, is natural, because that motion proceeds from the soul which is the nature and form of the animal. But if it be compared to the body, an animal』s motion may be both natural and not according to nature. The difference depends on the type of motion and on the element of which the animal is composed. For if an animal consists of a predominant heavy element, as does the human body, and it is moved upwards, such a movement would be compulsory with respect to the body; but if it is moved downward, it will be a movement that is natural to the body. However, if there were animals whose bodies were composed of air, as Platonists held, then the contrary would be true.

更多精彩

點擊立刻購買正版

謝邀。

一、其實這裡主要是根據對直接推動者的定義來判斷，按照亞里斯多德的定義：「直接推動者——不是作為運動的目的而是作為運動的根源——是和被它推動者『在一起』」（243a3）。這就把自然的運動和有目的的推動排除在直接推動者的運動之外，因為按照亞氏所說：「自然是一種原因，並且就是目的因」，（199b30）

二、按照亞里斯多德的觀點：「自然是運動和變化的根源」。（200b12）「還有一種事物，它的運動既不是因偶性的……而是自身直接在運動的。也就是說，這是一種本性能運動的事物。」（224b30）另外就是有目的的推動其它事物運動。所以亞里斯多德在此將本性運動分為兩種，一種是被自身推動著運動，另外一種是被別的事物推動著運動，但是是被有目的的推動著運動。從另外一個角度看，在自然運動的原因中有一種必然要產生的運動，亞里斯多德舉的例子是，「重的東西自然地向下」。（200a）這是一種必然性要發生的運動。但由於自然還有一種目的因的原因存在，這種目的因是完全可能反必然性的。這就是亞里斯多德所舉的例子：例如動物的跳躍，作為必然性，動物是重物，必然應該自然向下，但動物的跳躍的目的使其反自然而向上。這就是亞里斯多德所說的「運動事物有的是自然的運動的，有的是被迫地即反自然地運動。」

供參考。

說起運動同想到阿奎納藉助亞里士多德提出的上帝存在的五條路徑亞里士多德的運動是有一個低級向高級運動的等級序列的也就是質料向純形式（上帝）潛能變成現實的過程倫理學的我只看過他的尼各馬可倫理學別的都沒看過……所以不敢瞎說等了解的人吧

1、甲-日常語言說：本性的運動（intrinsic motions），乙-邏輯的分析：i--心物--c，靜止不動；

2、甲-偶性的運動（incidental motion）,乙-人心--m-靈動靜止不住-人靜止-e-東西北南瞎轉悠；

3、甲-自然的運動（moved by nature），乙-事物-n-自然動靜止不住--物靜止-e東西瞎轉悠；

4、甲-被迫的運動（moved by force），乙-事-f-物-e-東西被迫轉悠悠！

你看這不如找本現在的物理教材，這裡面很多東西是錯的。