Files
memex/0_inbox/books/TWOW/html/03.01.01.00 Properties.html

685 lines
64 KiB
HTML
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<title>Properties</title>
<meta name="generator" content="LibreOffice 4.2.8.2 (Linux)">
<meta name="author" content="Amr Gharbeia">
<meta name="created" content="20010831;3000000000000">
<meta name="changed" content="20150721;231214607136467">
<style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin-right: 1.2cm; margin-top: 1.2cm; margin-bottom: 1.25cm }
p { text-indent: 1.27cm; margin-bottom: 0.25cm; direction: rtl; color: #99ccff; line-height: 120%; text-align: right; widows: 2; orphans: 2 }
p.western { font-family: "Arial", sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; so-language: en-US }
p.cjk { font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 10pt }
p.ctl { font-family: "Simplified Arabic"; font-size: 10pt; so-language: ar-EG }
a:link { color: #0000ff }
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang="en-GB" text="#99ccff" link="#0000ff" dir="ltr">
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><font color="#ff0000"><font face="Verdana, sans-serif"><b>P<img src="" name="OdhPProp_up" align="right" hspace="5" width="100" height="40" border="0">roperties.</b></font></font>
Among the necessary truths about <i>what is </i>that follow from
spatiomaterialism, the first set has to do with the nature of
properties. Its main significance for issues in traditional
philosophy is how it offers naturalists a solution to the problem of
mind. By &quot;consciousness,&quot; I mean the the fact that
experience has an appearance to the subject, or that it is like
something to be the subject. It cannot be explained without
substances having phenomenal properties as well as physical
properties, and ontological philosophy offers an explanation of
phenomenal properties which entails that they have a necessary
relationship to physical properties. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">This
implication of our ontology does not depend on recognizing the
existence of space, but would follow from any form of materialism
that took ontology to be explanatory and used the concept of
substance introduced in <font color="#0000ff"><u><a href="/F:/Philosophy/Existentialism/The%20Wholeness%20Of%20the%20World/www.twow.net/Lo/L/LoOtdO04.htm" target="Lo"><font face="Arial, sans-serif">Ontology:
Substances</font></a></u></font>. That makes it unique among the
implications of ontological philosophy concerning the issues raised
by traditional philosophical issues, for the rest depend on
substantivalism about space. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">In
the case of phenomenal properties, the implications depend on our
definition of the nature of substance, and the reason contemporary
naturalists have overlooked this explanation is that materialism (or
physicalism) is understood as realism about the theories of
contemporary physics. Materialists posit the existence of whatever is
required for the truth of the theories they believe, but they do not
think much further about the nature of substances and properties.
Thus, they take properties to be as ontologically basic as material
substances, and that makes the relationship between physical and
phenomenal properties seem puzzling. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Let
us consider first what ontological philosophy implies about the
nature of basic properties and their kinds before we take up the
problem that follow from taking properties as just objects of
knowledge.</font></font></font></p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><font color="#800000"><font face="Verdana, sans-serif"><b>P<img src="" name="OdhPAsAs_up" align="right" hspace="5" width="103" height="36" border="0">roperties
as aspects of substances.</b></font></font> We have already seen how
properties are related to the substances postulated by an explanatory
ontology. They are <i>aspects </i>of substances, or part of what is
assumed by postulating them which reason can pick out. We leave open
questions about how rational beings like us are able to distinguish
one aspect from another (until we discuss how reason comes to exist
in a spatiomaterialist world like ours and see how reason depends on
spatial imagination). </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><font face="Verdana, sans-serif"><b>T<img src="" name="OdhPBasic_up" align="right" hspace="5" width="93" height="32" border="0">he
basic properties of substances. </b></font>We have already seen that
substances, as substances, have two basic aspects, existence and
essence. That is, they have the property of existence as well as an
essential aspect to their nature. (See <font color="#0000ff"><u><a href="/F:/Philosophy/Existentialism/The%20Wholeness%20Of%20the%20World/www.twow.net/Lo/L/LoOtdO05.htm" target="Lo"><font face="Arial, sans-serif">Ontology:
Nature of substance</font></a></u></font>.) But at this point, we
must recognize two further aspects that may be involved in the
essential aspect of the nature of substance as substance. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i><b>E<img src="" name="OdhPExist_up" align="right" hspace="5" width="62" height="23" border="0">xistence.</b></i>
We have already seen how the existential aspect of substance as
substance (or its property of existing) includes two properties,
particularity and temporality. In other words, to say that a
substance exists is to say that it has an existence that is distinct
from other substances in the world (particularity) and that it
endures through time temporality). (We take the temporal aspect to be
endurance, because we have seen that endurance is the best
ontological explanation of the nature of time, including both change
and what makes the present different from past and future than
perdurance. See <font color="#0000ff"><u><a href="/F:/Philosophy/Existentialism/The%20Wholeness%20Of%20the%20World/www.twow.net/Lo/L/LoOtfS06.htm" target="Lo"><font face="Arial, sans-serif">Spatiomaterialism:
Best explanation of time</font></a></u></font>.) </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i><b>E<img src="" name="OdhPEssence_up" align="right" hspace="5" width="61" height="22" border="0">ssence.
</b></i>Each substance must have an essential aspect in addition to
its existential aspect, because in order to exist at all, it must
exist in some determinate way. This was our reason for holding that
substances have two basic aspects to their natures as substances, not
only existence, but also an essence. It makes no sense to hold that
something exists and to deny that it has any further aspect to its
nature. But there may be two aspects to the essential aspect of the
nature of substance as substance.</font></font></font></p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>I<img src="" name="OdhPIntrinsi_up" align="right" hspace="5" width="50" height="21" border="0">ntrinsic
nature.</i> This most basic aspect of its essential nature will be
called its &quot;intrinsic&quot; essential property, for it is the
kind of essential property that a substance has in virtue of existing
as something distinct from all the other substances in the world. It
is what the substance is <i>in itself</i>, or its way of existing on
its own. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>E<img src="" name="OdhPExtrinsi_up" align="right" hspace="5" width="50" height="20" border="0">xtrinsic
nature.</i> But its intrinsic essential nature is not all there is to
the essential nature of a substance, if the substance is part of the
same world as other substances (and the existence of other substances
is not entailed by its essential nature, as in the case of parts of
space). Insofar as the world is made up of substances that exist
independently of one another, and insofar as those substances are
related to one another in some way other than simply being parts of
the same world, each substance must also have extrinsic essential
properties relative to those other substances. It may have different
extrinsic essential properties relative to each kind of substance to
which it is related, but its essential nature must have some such
aspects. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Thus, the
essential aspect of the nature of substance as substance includes two
kinds of essential properties: an <i>intrinsic </i>essential property
and <i>extrinsic </i>essential properties. In other words, each
substance must <i>exist some way in itself </i>and it must also <i>exist
some way for other substances</i> that exist independently of it as
part of the same world. </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The
<i>intrinsic </i>and <i>extrinsic </i>aspects of the essential
natures of substance can certainly be distinguished by reason. The
world is made up of substances, and we can think about each distinct
substance <i>as it is in itself</i>, whatever that may turn out to
be, because in order to exist at all, it must exist in some
determinate way. And if there are other substances whose existence
does not depend on what it is in itself, we can also think about <i>what
it is for other substances</i>, assuming that it is related to other
substances in some determinate way in addition to merely being part
of the same world with them (and that relation is not part of its
intrinsic essential nature, as in the case of parts of space relative
to one another). </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">What a
substance is in itself cannot be reduced to what it is for other,
independent substances, because if its extrinsic essential nature
were all there is to its essential nature, there would be nothing to
be related to other substances. Relations need <i>relata,</i> or
something that already exists. The <i>relata </i>are substances, and
since every substance has an essential aspect to its nature as well
as an existential aspect, each <i>relatum </i>has an intrinsic
essential aspect. Since substances already have intrinsic essential
natures, their relationships to other, independent substances must be
a further aspect of the essential aspects of their natures as
substances. Thus, each substance must have properties of both kinds,
though different kinds of substances making up the same world may
have different kinds of intrinsic and extrinsic essential natures.</font></font></p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><font face="Verdana, sans-serif"><b>T<img src="" name="OdhPOfBasic_up" align="right" hspace="5" width="92" height="35" border="0">he
basic properties of the two basic substances.</b></font><i>
</i>Spatiomaterialism postulates the existence of two basic
substances, matter and space, and it assumes that each bit of matter
coincides with some part of space or other. But as we have seen,
matter and space have opposite natures as parts of the world. Though
in both cases, it makes sense to think of the substances as
consisting of many particular substances, their parts are related to
one another in opposite ways. Bits of matter can exist independently
of one another, but no part of space can exist without all the other
parts of space. That is, space has a unique kind of wholeness about
it, which matter lacks. The parts of space are dependent on one
another, whereas the parts of matter are independent of one another.
Being opposite in this way is crucial to their roles in making up the
natural world, for nearly every new necessary truth that is supported
by ontological philosophy comes from how space contains all the bits
of matter. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Matter
and space are, however, different basic substances. The existence of
one does not entail the existence of the other. We do not know what
bits of matter would be like, if they did not coincide with space, or
even if that is possible. But each has an existence that is distinct
from the other. That is the basic assumption of spatiomaterialism.
That is, there would be a difference between parts of space with
which bits of matter coincide and parts with which no bits of matter
coincide, even if that never actually happens, given what physics
implies about the nature of matter. (As we will see, however, space
can be empty.) </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Both
space and matter must, therefore, have all the basic properties that
entities must have to be substances at all, including both kinds of
existential properties and both kinds of essential properties. Space
and matter have existential properties in the same way. But since
each basic substance is made up of parts in opposite ways, each has
intrinsic and extrinsic essential properties in different ways. To
make this clear, let us generate a catalogue of all their basic
properties, starting with matter. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i><b>B<img src="" name="OdhPMatter_up" align="right" hspace="5" width="62" height="23" border="0">asic
properties of matter. </b></i>Matter is a basic kind of substance,
and since it is related to every other substance (of both basic
kinds) in a determinate way, it must have both an intrinsic and
extrinsic aspect to the essential aspect to its nature as substance. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>I<img src="" name="OdhPIntrinsi_up" align="right" hspace="5" width="50" height="21" border="0">ntrinsic
nature of matter</i>. Matter must have an intrinsic nature, even if
matter cannot actually exist without being contained by space,
because it must exist in itself in a determinate way in order to have
an existence that is distinct from space. (That intrinsic nature may,
therefore, be what matter is in itself as it coincides with space,
but it is nevertheless different from the aspect of matter by which
it is related to space.) What is more, however, matter comes in
particular substances that exist independently of one another, and
thus, each material substance must have an intrinsic property
independently of all the other bits of matter. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
intrinsic property of each bit of matter is simply whatever it is in
itself, that is, as something that has an existence distinct from
every other substances. This could be anything a substance might be
in itself (though as we shall see, it is the aspect of the essential
nature of matter that makes it possible to explain phenomenal
properties.) Since there may be different forms of matter, with
different essential natures, the intrinsic properties of matter may
be various. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>E<img src="" name="OdhPExtrinsi_up" align="right" hspace="5" width="50" height="20" border="0">xtrinsic
nature of matter. </i>Each bit of matter must also have an extrinsic
aspect to its essential nature, because it is related to other
substances which exist independently of it as parts of a single
world. But according to spatiomaterialism, the substances that exist
independently of each bit of matter include both space and other bits
of matter, and thus, each bit of matter can have two fundamentally
different kinds of extrinsic essential properties: one by which it is
related to space, and aspect, which presumably depends on the former,
by which it is related to other bits of matter.</font></font></font></p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>E<img src="" name="OdhPToSpace_up" align="right" hspace="5" width="45" height="17" border="0">xtrinsic
nature of matter relative to space. </i>One kind of extrinsic
essential property of matter is how it is related to space. Every bit
of matter must be capable of coinciding with some part of space or
other, since that is what spatiomaterialism assumes the basic
relationship between matter and space to be. Given the essential
nature of space, as we have seen, that gives each bit of matter
certain spatial relations (in three dimensions) to every other part
of space. And since every other bit of matter coincides with some
part(s) of space or other, coinciding with space also gives each bit
of matter certain spatial relations to every other bit of matter in
space. They are all contained by space. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Each bit of
matter coincides with a part <i>or parts </i>of space. No assumption
has been made about how much space bits of matter can coincide with.
There may be different forms of matter contained by space, and
different forms of matter may coincide with larger or smaller areas
of space. Bits of matter may even be spread out in space unevenly. It
depends on further aspects of the extrinsic essential nature of
matter relative to space which will be discussed later (in <font color="#0000ff"><u><a href="/F:/Philosophy/Existentialism/The%20Wholeness%20Of%20the%20World/www.twow.net/Lo/L/LoOtkCaL07.htm" target="Lo"><font face="Arial, sans-serif">Change:
Contingent laws of physics</font></a></u></font>), when we take up
the ontological explanation of physics and how space and matter
endure through time. All we assume here is that each bit of matter
has, at the moment of its existence, a unity about it, so that it
exists as a whole distinct from all other bits of matter. </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Furthermore,
since both matter and space endure through time, there may also be a
temporal aspect to the extrinsic essential nature of matter relative
to space. For example, it is possible that part of the extrinsic
essential nature of bits of matter relative to space is that they
move across space in some determinate way.</font></font></p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>E<img src="" name="OdhPToMatter_up" align="right" hspace="5" width="46" height="16" border="0">xtrinsic
nature of matter relative to matter. </i>Simply being contained by
space gives each bit of matter determinate spatial relations to every
other bit of matter, but that is not a basic part of its extrinsic
essential nature, because it is entailed by its extrinsic nature
relative to space, being contained by space, and the nature of space.
But since other bits of matter in space exist independently of it,
there can be a basic extrinsic aspect to its essential nature that is
relative to other bits of matter is space. For example, if one bit of
matter coincides with a particular part(s) of space, it may not be
possible for other bits of matter to be located there, or not
possible for bits of matter of certain other kinds to be contained by
that part of space. Furthermore, if motion is an aspect of the
extrinsic essential nature of bits of matter relative to space, their
spatial relations may change over time, and there may be regularities
about how their motions affect one another (that is, they may exert
forces by which they change one anothers motion). Indeed, if there
are different forms of matter, there may be ways that bits of matter,
because of their relative locations and motion, affect one anothers
forms. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">This is how
<i>physical properties </i>are explained ontologically. The basic
laws of physics describe regularities in the motion and interaction
of basic particles, and the properties they must mention in order to
predict or control what happens are called &quot;physical
properties.&quot; Hence, the truth of the basic laws of physics can
be explained ontologically by the extrinsic essential natures of bits
of matter relative to space and relative to other bits of matter,
since their extrinsic properties include how the bits of matter move
and interact with one another. Indeed, that is how spatiomaterialism
will explain the basic laws of physics. In other words, physical
properties will turn out to be extrinsic aspects of the essential
nature of matter with respect to space, with respect to matter, or
with respect to both. </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">It should
be noticed, however, that this way of explaining physical laws makes
a distinction between two different aspects of the extrinsic
essential aspect of matter, implying that there is a difference
between two kinds of physical properties. The physical properties
having to do with spatial relations and motion are different from
those having to do with interactions, because the extrinsic essential
natures of matter relative to space is different from their extrinsic
essential natures relative to other bits of matter. Indeed, this is,
as shall see, the beginning of a deeper (that is, ontological)
explanation of the truth of the basic laws of physics.</font></font></p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i><b>B<img src="" name="OdhPSpace_up" align="right" hspace="5" width="63" height="22" border="0">asic
properties of space. </b></i>Space is also a substance enduring
through time, and since, as a substance, it exists independently of
matter, it must also have two aspects to its essential nature: an
intrinsic and an extrinsic essential aspect to its nature as a
substance. That distinction arises for space because of its
relationship to matter, and unlike bits of matter, no such
distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic properties can be made in
the case of parts of space. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Space
has an opposite nature from matter. It has a unique wholeness,
because its parts cannot exist at all unless they are all related to
one another geometrically in three dimensions. They are not
independent substances. Since their relations to one another are part
of the essential nature of each part of space, they do not need any
further aspect of their essential natures by which to account for the
relations to one another. Their essential natures include their
relations to one another, and thus, there is no way to distinguish
between an intrinsic and extrinsic aspect to their essential natures.
</font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The reason
for distinguishing an extrinsic from the intrinsic aspect of the
essential nature of a substance was that when a substance exists
together with other substances as parts of the same world, it needs
some way of being related to them (beyond merely being parts of the
same world). But since that was to assume that the substances exist
independently of one another, we excluded substances whose essential
natures entailed the existence of other substances, for they must
already have relations to those other substances as part of their
essential nature. That holds in the case of the parts of space. </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">To be sure,
each part of space has an existence that is distinct from every other
part of space. But they all have the same kind of essential nature,
for they each have the same kind of relations to all the other parts
of space. What makes the parts of space different from one another is
the <i>particular parts of space </i>to which they have those
relations. And since their relations to one another are part of their
essential nature, they need only their essential natures to be
related to all the other parts of space. That is why the existence of
any part of space entails the existence of all the other parts of
space.</font></font></p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">It is
possible to put this point paradoxically. Since the intrinsic nature
of a substance is what it is in itself and its extrinsic nature is
what it is for other substances, one might say that the intrinsic
nature of each part of space relative to other parts of space entails
its extrinsic nature, because what it for other parts of space is
just what it is in itself as a part of space. But the paradox just
emphasizes that no distinction can be made between the intrinsic and
extrinsic natures of parts of space relative to one another. </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">In
the case of space, therefore, the essential nature of each part of
space as a part of space includes all its relations to other parts of
space. That is the wholeness of space, and though it means that there
is no distinction between the intrinsic and extrinsic aspects of the
essential nature of each part of space <i>relative to other parts of
space</i>, it also has implications for both the intrinsic and
extrinsic essential nature of space <i>relative to matter</i>. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>I<img src="" name="OdhPIntrinsi_up" align="right" hspace="5" width="50" height="21" border="0">ntrinsic
essential nature of space relative to matter. </i>To exist
independently of matter as its container, space must be something in
itself. It must exist in a determinate way apart from space. That is
the intrinsic essential nature of space relative to matter. But it is
a nature that space can have only as a whole. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
essential aspect of the nature of space as a whole includes its being
made up of parts with geometrical relations to one another in three
dimensions, that is, being made up of all the locations in three
dimensional space. This interdependence of the parts of space means
that the essential nature of each part of space includes having
geometrical relations to every other part of space. In both cases,
the essential nature is the aspect the substances have in virtue of
<i>how </i>they exist, and since the parts of space necessarily make
up the whole of space, it is the same aspect of these substances that
characterizes the essential nature of both part and whole. That
aspect of the essential nature of space is the intrinsic nature of
space. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">There is,
however, a part-whole relation involved in the essential nature of
space. That is, the part is not identical to the whole, because it is
only part of the whole. The whole is identical to all the parts.
Thus, the existence of space as a whole entails the existence of each
of its parts. But since all the parts must exist, if any one of them
exists, the existence existence of any part of space also entails the
existence of the whole. (Though there is a necessary relationship
between them, it is, at this point, true because of what we mean by
the terms used, that is, an analytic truth, not an ontologically
necessary truth. It is an ontologically necessary truth about the
world only if spatiomaterialism is the best possible ontological
explanation of the world.) </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Neither
part nor whole is prior to the other. Space cannot be explained
ontologically as a collection of parts of space, because no part of
space can exist without the whole. Likewise the parts of space cannot
be explained ontologically by the whole, because the whole of space
is just all the parts of space. </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">What makes
the parts of space different from one another is not their essential
natures, but the particular parts of space to which each part has the
geometrical relations entailed by its essential nature. This is to
assume that all the parts of space have the same kind of essential
nature, and that is the assumption we are making, since it is the
simplest assumption we can make about the nature of space. But it
does imply that space is infinite, both in its divisibility and its
extent, and thus, the essential nature of space (or its intrinsic
essential nature relative to matter) is an aspect of something that
is infinite. (Of course, if it were to turn out that space is finite,
as contemporary cosmology assumes, a much more complex assumption
would have to be made about space, because if space has edges, the
parts of space would have to have different essential natures. But
space would presumably still have an essential nature that
characterizes both part and whole equally, since they would still
entail one another, and that would be its intrinsic nature relative
to matter..) </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">The
part-whole relation that holds for space is the unique wholeness of
space, and since it is an assumption of spatiomaterialism, there is
no genuine ontological explanation of it. But it is a remarkable
essential nature, and since it is so basic to the spatiomaterialist
explanation of the world (including its explanation of many further
part-whole relations, as we shall see), a few comment might make it
easier to grasp what is involved in taking space to be a substance. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">The parts
of space are puzzling. Mathematicians call them points because the
simplest parts of space have no spatial dimensions. But since they
make up space as a whole, there are infinitely many of them in any
finite distance. That is called the &quot;continuousness&quot; of
space, or its infinite divisibility. But since it has been assumed as
part of the essential nature of space, there is no ontological
explanation of it in spatiomaterialism. It is just another aspect of
the wholeness of space.</font></font></p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">As
explained above, the wholeness of space implies that parts of space
do not have extrinsic essential natures relative to one another. This
is because what forces us to recognize that any substance has an
extrinsic nature is that it can exist independently of other
substances and is nevertheless related to them in some more
determinate way than simply being parts of the same world with them.
An extrinsic essential property characterizes what the substance is
<i>for </i>the other substance, or what it contributes to how they
are related. But since parts of space cannot exist independently of
one another, they lack extrinsic essential natures as parts relative
to other parts of space. Their relations to one another are part of
their essential natures. The existence of one part of space entails
the existence of all the others. </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">To say that
the parts of space lack extrinsic essential natures relative to other
parts of space makes it seem that they do have intrinsic essential
natures relative to other parts of space. After all, since each part
of space does have an existence that is distinct from every other
part of space, it must have something in itself. But since what it is
in itself includes it geometrical relations to every other part of
space, its intrinsic nature seems to be just its essential nature as
a part of space. Thus, it is less misleading to say that no
distinction can be made between extrinsic and intrinsic natures of
parts of space relative to other parts of space. That is just the
unique part-whole relation about space.</font></font></p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">It is the
unique wholeness of space that makes it odd to think of space as a
substance. Space does not seem to be a substance because it is
everywhere. That makes it seem like nothing to us, because we are, as
rational beings, parts of the world (that is, located in space), and
we use the structure of space as a way of thinking about the world.
We think of material objects as what is substantial about the world,
and we take for granted that such substances have have spatial
relations to one another, because that is also a most basic aspect of
our way of thinking about the world. (That is, spatial imagination is
built into every perception). But the appearance that space is
nothing is just the essential nature of space (both part and whole).
That is just its intrinsic nature relative to matter. And it is
because the parts of space exist in such a way that they make up a
three dimensional whole that the bits of matter that coincide with
parts of space are related to one another. Thus, to see as nothing
is, in effect, to grasp its intrinsic nature relative to matter. That
is how it appears from &quot;inside space,&quot; so to speak. </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">On the
other hand, to think of space as a substance is, in effect, to see
space from the outside, rather than from the inside. It gives us the
same angle on space that space itself gives us on material objects,
because it provides a context in which we can see how space is
related to other things, most relevantly, how it is related to bits
of matter. </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">It may
help, therefore, to step back a bit and think about what we are doing
in taking space to be a substance. We are recognizing that space is
an ontological cause of the things that are found in the natural
world that is different from matter, that is, as a separate
principle, along with matter, in explaining everything. Space is
something self-subsistent that helps constitute the world. It may not
be possible to have a deeper understanding of the intrinsic essential
nature of space relative to matter than what we know by its role,
along with matter, in explaining the world ontologically. That is the
step that is required, as I have suggested, to see the world from the
outside. But &quot;from the outside&quot; is itself a spatial
metaphor. You cannot see space from the outside, for taken literally,
the outside of anything is always inside space itself. Thus, as I
have suggested, it may be better to think of substantivalism about
space as what we must assume in order to have a Gods Eye View of
the world. After all, space is something that God would have had to
create, along with matter, in order to create the natural world. But
neither can that description be taken literally, since, as
naturalists we deny that there is any being that transcends the
world. Thus, the best we can do is, perhaps, just to recognize that
the existence of space as a substance enduring though time is just an
independent, basic assumption of the most complete ontological
explanation that we can give of the world. Everything else in the
world is located within the three dimensions of space. That is the
bottom of our understanding of the nature of the world, according to
ontological philosophy.</font></font></p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 1.27cm; margin-right: 2.54cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt"><i>E<img src="" name="OdhPExtrinsi_up" align="right" hspace="5" width="50" height="20" border="0">xtrinsic
essential nature of space. </i>Just as bits of matter have an
extrinsic essential nature that allows them to coincide with space
space, so space must have an extrinsic essential nature that allows
it to coincide with bits of matter. But since space is a whole with
parts that differ from one another as different locations in its
three dimensional structure, it is not clear whether this extrinsic
essential property characterizes the essential aspect of space as a
whole or its parts. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Particular
bits of matter clearly coincide with particular parts of space. But
if any bit of matter coincides with more than one part of space,
coinciding with bits of matter is also clearly something that parts
of space must do jointly. Furthermore, it is only because many
different bits of matter are all contained by the same whole space
that coinciding with space gives them spatial relations to one
another. Thus, what coincides with them seems to be space as a whole
as well as its parts. That is, bits of matter are contained by space </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">On
the other hand, coinciding with bits of matter is something space
does to each bit of matter separately, not how space relates to
matter as a whole, because matter is not a whole, but just all the
bits that exist. To be sure, space coincides with all the bits of
matter in the world. But that is just the spatiomaterialist
assumption about how these two basic substances exist together as a
world, not something that characterizes the essential natures of
space as a whole and matter as a whole. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">What
makes the nature of space problematic is its unique wholeness, or how
space is made up of parts and yet is still one. For our purposes,
therefore, it is enough to recognize that the capacity to contain
bits of matter is the extrinsic essential nature of space, both whole
and part, though each bit of matter coincides with some part (or
contiguous parts) of space or other(s). And if different varieties of
material substances are contained by space in different ways, it must
have all the extrinsic essential properties required to do so. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 2.54cm; margin-right: 1.27cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3" style="font-size: 12pt">Furthermore,
space must also have extrinsic essential properties corresponding to
all the extrinsic essential properties of bits of matter relative to
space. That is, it must give bits of matter motion through space, if
that is how they coincide with space, and it must enable them to
interact in all the ways that are involved in the extrinsic essential
natures of various kinds of bits of matter relative to other bits of
matter. These are also extrinsic essential properties that space both
has as a whole and in each part. </font></font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Nor is that
necessarily all there is to the extrinsic essential nature of space
(though relativistic physics holds, in effect, that it is). Since
space is a substance, which exists independently of matter, it is
possible for space to interact with bits of matter in other ways.
Indeed, that is what we shall need to assume in order to explain
ontologically how Einsteins special and general theories of
relativity are true. The basic assumption of our ontological
explanation of relativity will be is that light always has a
determinate velocity relative to space itself, and in explaining
special relativity, we will hold that space imposes certain (Lorentz)
distortions on material objects moving through space with high
velocity. In the case of general relativity, we will assume, further,
that the accumulation of large quantities of matter in space alters
the velocity at which light moves in nearby regions of space. </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">This is to
hold that the parts of space can contain bits of matter in different
ways in the regions around centers of gravity But that is not to say
that are any changes in the relations among the parts of space
itself. It is only to say that there is a change in how bits of
matter coincide with space in those regions. In short, the assumption
we shall make in explaining Einsteinian relativity is that space has
an absolute, uniform Euclidean three dimensional structure, and that
that structure is not changed even though the extrinsic essential
nature of space includes interactions with matter that change the
state of certain parts of space and, thereby, change how bits of
matter coincide with space in those regions. (See <font color="#0000ff"><u><a href="/F:/Philosophy/Existentialism/The%20Wholeness%20Of%20the%20World/www.twow.net/Lo/LoOtkCaLbStr.htm" target="Lo"><font face="Arial, sans-serif">Change:
Special theory of relativity</font></a></u></font> and <font color="#0000ff"><u><a href="/F:/Philosophy/Existentialism/The%20Wholeness%20Of%20the%20World/www.twow.net/Lo/LoOtkCaLcGtr.htm" target="Lo">Change:
General theory of relativity</a></u></font>.) </font></font>
</p>
<p lang="en-US" align="left" style="margin-left: 3.81cm; margin-right: 2.03cm; text-indent: 0cm; margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0.49cm; line-height: 100%; widows: 0; orphans: 0">
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">In a more
speculative way, I will suggest that space also plays a role in
explaining the truth of quantum mechanics, the basic particles
recognized by physics, and certain issues in cosmology. Those roles
would characterize further the extrinsic essential nature of space,
both part and whole. (See <font color="#0000ff"><u><a href="/F:/Philosophy/Existentialism/The%20Wholeness%20Of%20the%20World/www.twow.net/Lo/LoOtkCaLdQm.htm" target="Lo"><font face="Arial, sans-serif">Change:
Quantum mechanics</font></a></u></font><font face="Arial, sans-serif">
and </font><font color="#0000ff"><u><a href="/F:/Philosophy/Existentialism/The%20Wholeness%20Of%20the%20World/www.twow.net/Lo/LoOtkCaLeCos.htm" target="Lo"><font face="Arial, sans-serif">Change:
Cosmology</font></a></u></font><font face="Arial, sans-serif">.)</font></font></font></p>
</body>
</html>