Aristotle on the matter of mind 235
Let us finally turn to the question of thekindof connection or corre-
spondence between the bodily conditions referred to and the intellectual
activities they are said to accompany or influence. Of course, Aristotle has
appropriate language at his disposal: on a structural level (where bodily
influences are related to constitution types such as the melancholic nature,
to deformations such as dwarfs, or to natural conditions such as hardness
of the flesh) he may say (as he often does inParts of AnimalsandGenera-
tion of Animals) that form does not completely ‘master’K Lmatter,
which results in deformedK #) Lor ‘imperfect’K" Lstruc-
tural capacities, or that material natural factors ‘impede’K =
Lthe
full realisation of the formal nature.^97 He may say that physical factors
are responsible as additional causes, as inDe an. 416 a 14 , where he says
that fire is a
of the real
, the soul, or atPart. an. 652 b
10 ff., where he says that of all bodily factors heatK3 !Lis ‘most ser-
viceable to the activities of the soul’K :
H#
9
* ) ) 3 !
L, although these passages relate
especially to the nutritive activities of the soul which constitute, as Aristo-
tle himself recognises, ‘the most physical’K
Lof the psychic
functions (De an. 415 a 26 ).^98 Passages (as discussed above) in which weight
is said to ‘make’K
Lthe soul slow, or disease or sleep are said to ‘over-
shadow’ the intellect, or certain material substances are said to ‘confuse’ and
‘change’ the intellect, indicate anactiverole of bodily factors in the op-
erations of the intellect. Thus apart from saying that bodily changes
‘correspond with’ or ‘accompany’ psychic activities, which does not com-
mit itself to a specific type of causal relationship,^99 we may go further
and say that bodily states and processesacton psychic powers or ac-
tivities just as well as psychic powers may be said to ‘inform’ bodily
structures.
(^97) SeeGen. an. 766 a 15 ff.; 767 b 10 ff.; 772 b 30 ff.; 737 a 25 ; 780 b 10. See the discussion by A. L. Peck
in his Loeb edition ofGeneration of Animals, pp. xlv–xlvii.
(^98) For a similar reason, the remark inPart. an. 667 a 11 ff. that differences in the size and the structure
of the heart ‘also in a certain way extend to’ characterK #C 3 1 N #Lcannot be
used as evidence of bodily influence on theintellectualpart of the soul.
(^99) Cf.De motu an. 701 b 17 ff., in particular b 34 :D " # 5 " n
nC n
(* !# :-D
, on which see the useful comments by Kollesch ( 1985 ) 51 – 2. See also
her comments onDe motu an. 703 a 15 andGen. an. 736 b 31 ff. (P .
!#
/ : "
n " )0 2) 8
-#
-
, sc. of thepneuma): ‘Die
Unterschiede, die das Pneuma aufweist, sind abhangig von der unterschiedlichen Wertigkeit der ̈
einzelnen Seelenvermogen, mit denen das Pneuma jeweils verbunden ist. Das heisst, einer h ̈ oheren ̈
Seelent ̈atigkeit, wie sie z.B. die Wahrnehmung gegenuber der Ern ̈ ̈ahrung und Zeugung darstellt,
entspricht auch eine hohere Qualit ̈ ̈at des Pneumas’ (p. 60 ).