81. Being Simply and Being in Some Way: The Fundamental Distinction

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Distinction: Being Simply vs. Being in Some Way #

• Being simpliciter (ἁπλῶς): Being without qualification; genuine, substantial being
• Being secundum quid (κατά τι): Being in some qualified, limited, or diminished way; partial or accidental being
• This distinction appears in everyday language and thought but is often confused

Two Major Divisions of Being #

1. Substance and Accident

• Substantial being is being simply; accidental being is being in some qualified way
• Example: A body gains quantity (5 foot 10), quality (health), or other accidents—these are acquisitions in some way, not simple coming-to-be
• When an accidental form comes or goes, something becomes or ceases to be in some respect; when a substantial form comes or goes, something is simply generated or corrupted

2. Act and Potency (Ability)

• Being in act is being simply; being in potency/ability is being in some qualified way
• Example: Chairs exist actually in the room; wood has the ability to become a chair (chair in potency, or “chair secundum quid”)
• When something is only potentially known, it is known in some way, not actually known

The Fallacy of Confusing the Two Modes #

• Called the fallacy of confusing simpliciter with secundum quid (mixing simple with qualified being)
• Common in bad reasoning: taking what is true in one qualified sense and affirming it simply
• Appears in the Meno: Meno argues one cannot investigate the unknown because if you don’t know something, you cannot direct your thinking to it
• Resolution: What you don’t know simpliciter, you can know secundum quid (e.g., knowing what a man is, you know my brother Mark in some way)

Examples of the Distinction in Practice #

Personal Knowledge:

• You don’t know the person knocking at the door simpliciter, but you know them secundum quid if they are your mother—you don’t know her as the person knocking
• No contradiction: you simply know your mother but don’t know her in that particular respect

Wisdom and Knowledge:

• Aristotle says the wise man knows all things—but in some way, through knowing universal principles
• Knowing what a thing is, you know every instance of that thing secundum quid
• Example: Knowing “something” vs. “nothing,” in some way you know everything

Inquiry and Questions:

• When you ask a question, you know what you’re asking in some way—you know you don’t know
• Socrates famously knew what he didn’t know; Einstein admired Newton for knowing what he didn’t know
• This is not a contradiction; it involves the distinction between knowing simpliciter and knowing secundum quid

The Principle’s Universal Application #

• A real contradiction occurs only when something both is and is not in the same way and at the same time
• To be simply and not be in some way is not a contradiction
• This distinction is found everywhere in philosophy because everything existing is composed of act and potency, substance and accident—everything is either perfect or imperfect in different respects

Application to Metaphysical Questions #

Ability Before Act?

• Aristotle shows that ability is before act in some way (the thing moving from potency to act must itself be in act)
• But act is before ability simply (what causes the transition must already be in act)
• Those who say matter or ability comes first are confusing what is prior secundum quid with what is prior simpliciter
• This error leads to wrong conclusions about the first cause: some wrongly conclude the first principle is matter rather than God (pure act)

Perfect vs. Imperfect:

• In the Fifth Book of the Metaphysics, Aristotle distinguishes perfection: creatures can be perfect in their kind (lacking nothing a thing of their kind should have)
• But only God is perfect simpliciter—lacking in nothing whatsoever
• To be perfect is to be good; God alone is truly good without qualification
• Man’s intellect is infinite secundum quid; God alone is infinite simpliciter

The Feuerbach Case Study #

• Feuerbach argues man is God through the infinite: man’s mind is infinite; the theologians say the infinite is God; therefore man’s mind is God
• The error: Man’s mind is infinite secundum quid, not simpliciter
• By knowing the most universal principles, man knows all things in some way, not actually or simply
• Confusion of these modes leads to a false metaphysical conclusion

Key Arguments #

The Hegel-Kant Exchange #

• Kant claims we cannot know the world in itself; the world is unknown
• Hegel responds: How can you speak about what you don’t know?
• Resolution: Kant has a problem here, but partially resolved: we can know in some way what we don’t know simply
• We can speak about the unknown (secundum quid) without claiming to know it simpliciter

Socratic Ignorance and Inquiry #

• When one asks an intelligent question, one knows what one doesn’t know secundum quid
• This is not paradoxical; it respects the distinction between knowing and not knowing in different respects
• Socratic wisdom consists in knowing one’s ignorance—knowing in some way what one doesn’t know simply

Important Definitions #

• Simpliciter (ἁπλῶς): Simply, without qualification, absolutely
• Secundum quid (κατά τι): In some way, in some respect, with qualification
• Substantial being: Being that comes to be or ceases to be simply through the coming or departure of substantial form
• Accidental being: Being that comes to be or ceases to be in some qualified way through accidental forms (quantity, quality, etc.)
• Act (actus): Actuality, realization of potential; being in full reality
• Potency/Ability (potentia): Capacity, passive potential; being in possibility

Examples & Illustrations #

Names and Identity:

• Annette became Ann; she announced she no longer wanted to be called Annette, just Ann—a change in name as she matured (diminished form of being)
• Charlie Boy: though grown and married with children, still called Charlie Boy—the nickname stuck; in some way he remains “Charlie Boy”

Simple Language:

• “I know it” without qualification means actual knowledge
• “I know it in some way” means I have ability or potential knowledge
• Scientists often don’t make this distinction; when ability is close to act, the difference seems unimportant

Rectangle Area Example:

• If you know the length and width of a rectangle, do you know its area?
• Practically, yes (the ability is very close to act)
• Strictly, no: knowing dimensions is ability to know area, not actual knowledge of area
• This connects to Plato’s Meno: the slave boy, through Socratic questioning, comes to actually know how to double a square for the first time, after initially giving wrong answers

The Door:

• You don’t know who’s knocking at the door; it turns out to be your mother
• Did you not know your own mother? No—you didn’t know her as the person knocking
• In some respect you didn’t know her; simply, you do know your mother

Being and Not Being:

• I am not a sociologist; I am not Russian; in some way, I am not
• But I simply am
• This is not contradiction because the negation applies to a specific respect, not to being itself

Questions Addressed #

Q: How can you investigate what you don’t know? A: You don’t know it simpliciter, but you know it secundum quid—you know what you’re looking for in general, even if you don’t know the specific answer.

Q: Is there a contradiction in knowing what you don’t know? A: No. A real contradiction requires something to both be and not be in the same way and at the same time. Knowing simpliciter and not knowing secundum quid involves different respects and is no contradiction.

Q: Does Socratic ignorance make sense? A: Yes, when understood through this distinction. Socrates knows what he doesn’t know—he knows secundum quid what he doesn’t know simpliciter.

Q: Why would anyone think matter is the first principle instead of God? A: By confusing what comes before secundum quid with what comes before simpliciter. Ability comes before act in some way, but act comes before ability simply—therefore the first cause must be pure act, not matter (which is pure potency).