the six enneads-第25章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


t　is　a　Reason…Principle　and　could　not　lodge　in　the　indeterminate　object　without　at　once　annulling　the　indeterminateness。　　　　　Matter；　then；　must　be　described　as　Indefinite　of　itself；　by　its　natural　opposition　to　Reason…Principle。　Reason　is　Reason　and　nothing　else；　just　so　Matter；　opposed　by　its　indeterminateness　to　Reason；　is　Indeterminateness　and　nothing　else。　　　　　16。　Then　Matter　is　simply　Alienism　＇the　Principle　of　Difference＇？　　　　　No：　it　is　merely　that　part　of　Alienism　which　stands　in　contradiction　with　the　Authentic　Existents　which　are　Reason…Principles。　So　understood；　this　non…existent　has　a　certain　measure　of　existence；　for　it　is　identical　with　Privation；　which　also　is　a　thing　standing　in　opposition　to　the　things　that　exist　in　Reason。　　　　　But　must　not　Privation　cease　to　have　existence；　when　what　has　been　lacking　is　present　at　last？　　　　　By　no　means：　the　recipient　of　a　state　or　character　is　not　a　state　but　the　Privation　of　the　state；　and　that　into　which　determination　enters　is　neither　a　determined　object　nor　determination　itself；　but　simply　the　wholly　or　partly　undetermined。　　　　　Still；　must　not　the　nature　of　this　Undetermined　be　annulled　by　the　entry　of　Determination；　especially　where　this　is　no　mere　attribute？　　　　　No　doubt　to　introduce　quantitative　determination　into　an　undetermined　object　would　annul　the　original　state；　but　in　the　particular　case；　the　introduction　of　determination　only　confirms　the　original　state；　bringing　it　into　actuality；　into　full　effect；　as　sowing　brings　out　the　natural　quality　of　land　or　as　a　female　organism　impregnated　by　the　male　is　not　defeminized　but　becomes　more　decidedly　of　its　sex；　the　thing　becomes　more　emphatically　itself。　　　　　But　on　this　reasoning　must　not　Matter　owe　its　evil　to　having　in　some　degree　participated　in　good？　　　　　No：　its　evil　is　in　its　first　lack：　it　was　not　a　possessor　（of　some　specific　character）。　　　　　To　lack　one　thing　and　to　possess　another；　in　something　like　equal　proportions；　is　to　hold　a　middle　state　of　good　and　evil：　but　whatsoever　possesses　nothing　and　so　is　in　destitution…　and　especially　what　is　essentially　destitution…　must　be　evil　in　its　own　Kind。　　　　　For　in　Matter　we　have　no　mere　absence　of　means　or　of　strength；　it　is　utter　destitution…　of　sense；　of　virtue；　of　beauty；　of　pattern；　of　Ideal　principle；　of　quality。　This　is　surely　ugliness；　utter　disgracefulness；　unredeemed　evil。　　　　　The　Matter　in　the　Intellectual　Realm　is　an　Existent；　for　there　is　nothing　previous　to　it　except　the　Beyond…Existence；　but　what　precedes　the　Matter　of　this　sphere　is　Existence；　by　its　alienism　in　regard　to　the　beauty　and　good　of　Existence；　Matter　is　therefore　a　non…existent。　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　FIFTH　TRACTATE。

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　ON　POTENTIALITY　AND　ACTUALITY。

　　　　1。　A　distinction　is　made　between　things　existing　actually　and　things　existing　potentially；　a　certain　Actuality；　also；　is　spoken　of　as　a　really　existent　entity。　We　must　consider　what　content　there　is　in　these　terms。　　　　　Can　we　distinguish　between　Actuality　＇an　absolute；　abstract　Principle＇　and　the　state　of　being…in…act？　And　if　there　is　such　an　Actuality；　is　this　itself　in　Act；　or　are　the　two　quite　distinct　so　that　this　actually　existent　thing　need　not　be；　itself；　an　Act？　　　　　It　is　indubitable　that　Potentiality　exists　in　the　Realm　of　Sense：　but　does　the　Intellectual　Realm　similarly　include　the　potential　or　only　the　actual？　and　if　the　potential　exists　there；　does　it　remain　merely　potential　for　ever？　And；　if　so；　is　this　resistance　to　actualization　due　to　its　being　precluded　＇as　a　member　of　the　Divine　or　Intellectual　world＇　from　time…processes？　　　　　First　we　must　make　clear　what　potentiality　is。　　　　　We　cannot　think　of　potentiality　as　standing　by　itself；　there　can　be　no　potentiality　apart　from　something　which　a　given　thing　may　be　or　become。　Thus　bronze　is　the　potentiality　of　a　statue：　but　if　nothing　could　be　made　out　of　the　bronze；　nothing　wrought　upon　it；　if　it　could　never　be　anything　as　a　future　to　what　it　has　been；　if　it　rejected　all　change；　it　would　be　bronze　and　nothing　else：　its　own　character　it　holds　already　as　a　present　thing；　and　that　would　be　the　full　of　its　capacity：　it　would　be　destitute　of　potentiality。　Whatsoever　has　a　potentiality　must　first　have　a　character　of　its　own；　and　its　potentiality　will　consist　in　its　having　a　reach　beyond　that　character　to　some　other。　　　　　Sometimes　after　it　has　turned　its　potentiality　into　actuality　it　will　remain　what　it　was；　sometimes　it　will　sink　itself　to　the　fullest　extent　in　the　new　form　and　itself　disappear：　these　two　different　modes　are　exemplified　in　（1）　bronze　as　potentially　a　statue　and　（2）　water　＇=　primal…liquid＇　as　potentially　bronze　or；　again；　air　as　potentially　fire。　　　　　But　if　this　be　the　significance　of　potentiality；　may　we　describe　it　as　a　Power　towards　the　thing　that　is　to　be？　Is　the　Bronze　a　power　towards　a　statue？　　　　　Not　in　the　sense　of　an　effectively　productive　force：　such　a　power　could　not　be　called　a　potentiality。　Of　course　Potentiality　may　be　a　power；　as；　for　instance；　when　we　are　referring　not　merely　to　a　thing　which　may　be　brought　into　actualization　but　to　Actuality　itself　＇the　Principle　or　Abstract　in　which　potentiality　and　the　power　of　realizing　potentiality　may　be　thought　of　as　identical＇：　but　it　is　better；　as　more　conducive　to　clarity；　to　use　〃Potentiality〃　in　regard　to　the　process　of　Actualization　and　〃Power〃　in　regard　to　the　Principle；　Actuality。　　　　　Potentiality　may　be　thought　of　as　a　Substratum　to　states　and　shapes…　and　forms　which　are　to　be　received；　which　it　welcomes　by　its　nature　and　even　strives　for…　sometimes　in　gain　but　sometimes；　also；　to　loss；　to　the　annulling　of　some　distinctive　manner　of　Being　already　actually　achieved。　　　　　2。　Then　the　question　rises　whether　Matter…　potentially　what　it　becomes　by　receiving　shape…　is　actually　something　else　or　whether　it　has　no　actuality　at　all。　In　general　terms：　When　a　potentiality　has　taken　a　definite　form；　does　it　retain　its　being？　Is　the　potentiality；　itself；　in　actualization？　The　alternative　is　that；　when　we　speak　of　the　〃Actual　Statue〃　and　of　the　〃Potential　Statue；〃　the　Actuality　is　not　predicated　of　the　same　subject　as　the　〃Potentiality。〃　If　we　have　really　two　different　subjects；　then　the　potential　does　not　really　become　the　actual：　all　that　happens　is　that　an　actual　entity　takes　the　place　of　a　potential。　　　　　The　actualized　entity　is　not　the　Matter　＇the　Potentiality；　merely＇　but　a　combination；　including　the　Form…Idea　upon　the　Matter。　　　　　This　is　certainly　the　case　when　a　quite　different　thing　results　from　the　actualization…statue；　for　example；　the　combination；　is　distinctly　different　from　the　bronze；　the　base；　where　the　resultant　is　something　quite　new；　the　Potentiality　has　clearly　not；　itself；　become　what　is　now　actualized。　But　take　the　case　where　a　person　with　a　capacity　for　education　becomes　in　fact　educated：　is　not　potentiality；　here；　identical　with　actualization？　Is　not　the　potentially　wise　Socrates　the　same　man　as　the　Socrates　actually　wise？　　　　　But　is　an　ignorant　man　a　being　of　knowledge　because　he　is　so　potentially？　Is　he；　in　virtue　of　his　non…essential　ignorance；　potentially　an　instructed　being？　　　　　It　is　not　because　of　his　accidental　ignorance　that　he　is　a　being　of　Knowledge：　it　is　because；　ignorant　though　he　be　by　accident；　his　mind；　apt　to　knowledge；　is　the　potentiality　through　which　he　may　become　so。　Thus；　in　the　case　of　the　potentially　instructed　who　have　become　so　in　fact；　the　potentiality　is　taken　up　into　the　actual；　or；　if　we　prefer　to　put　it　so；　there　is　on　the　one　side　the　potentiality　while；　on　the　other；　there　is　the　power　in　actual　possession　of　the　form。　　　　　If；　then；　the　Potentiality　is　the　Substratum　while　the　thing　in　actualization…　the　Statue　for　example　a　combination；　how　are　we　to　describe　the　form　that　has　entered　the　bronze？　　　　　There　will　be　nothing　unsound　in　describing　this　shape；　this　Form　which　has　brought　the　entity　from　potentiality　to　actuality；　as　the　actualization；　but　of　course　as　the　actualization　of　the　definite　particular　entity；　not　as　Actuality　the　abstract：　we　must　not　confuse　it　with　the　other　actualization；　strictly　so　called；　that　which　is　contrasted　with　the　power　producing　actualization。　The　potential　is　led　out　into　realization　by　something　other　than　itself；　power　accomplishes；　of　itself；　what　is　within　its　scope；　but　by　virtue　of　Actuality　＇the　abstract＇：　the　relation　is　that　existing　between　a　temperament　and　its　expression　in　act；　between　courage　and　courageous　conduct。　So　far　so　good：　　　　　3。　We　come　now　to　the　purpose　of　all　this　discussion；　to　make　clear　in　what　sense　or　to　what　degree　Actualization　is　predicable　in　the　Intellectual　Realm　and　whether　all　is　in　Actualization　there；　each　and　every　member　of　that　realm　being　an　Act；　or　whether　Potentiality　also　has　place　there。　　　　　Now：　if　there　is　no　Matter　there　to　harbour　potentiality：　if　nothing　there　has　any　future　apart　from　its　actual　mode：　if　nothing　there　generates；　whether　by　changes　or　in　the　permanence　of　its　identity；　if　nothing　goes　outside　of　itself　to　give　being　to　what　is　other　than　itself；　then；　potentiality　has　no　place　there：　the　Beings　there　possess　actuality　as　belonging　to　eternity；　not　to　time。　　　　　Those；　however；　who　assert　Matter　in　the　Intellectual　Realm　will　be　asked　whether　the　existence　of　that　Matter　does　not　imply　the　potential　there　too；　for　even　if　Matter　there　exists　in　another　mode　than　here；　every　Being　there　will　have　its　Matter；　its　form　and　the　union　of　the　two　＇and　therefore　the　potential；　separable　from　the　actual＇。　What　answer　is　to　be　made？　　　　　Simply；　that　even　the　Matter　there　is　Idea；　just　as　the　Soul；　an　Idea；　is　Matter　to　another　＇a　higher＇　Being。　　　　　But　relatively　to　that　higher；　the　Soul　is　a　potentiality？　　　　　No：　for　the　Idea　＇to　which　it　is　Matter＇　is　integral　to　the　Soul　and　does　not　look　to　a　future；　the　distinction　between　the　Soul　and　its　Idea　is　purely　mental：　the　Idea　and　the　Matter　it　includes　are　conceived　as　a　conjunction　but　are　essentially　one　Kind：　remember　that　Aristotle　makes　his　Fifth　Body　immaterial。　　　　　But　surely　Potentiality　exists　in　the　Soul？　Surely　the　Soul　is　potentially　the　living…being　of　this　world　before　it　has　become　so？　Is　it　not　potentially　musical；　and　everything　else　that　it　has　not　been　and　becomes？　Does　not　this　imply　potentiality　even　in　the　Intellectual　Existences？　　　　　No：　the　Soul　is　not　potentially　these　things；　it　is　a　Power　towards　them。　　　　　But　after　what　mode　does　Actualization　exist　in　the　Intellectual　Realm？　　　　　Is　it　the　Actualization　of　a　statue；　where　the　combination　is　realized　because　the　Form…Idea　has　mastered　each　separate　constituent　of　the　total？　　　　　No：　it　is　that　every　constituent　there　is　a　Form…Idea　and；　thus；　is　perfect　in　its　Being。　　　　　There　is　in　the　Intellectual　Principle　no　progression　from　some　power　capable　of　intellection　to　the　Actuality　of　intellection：　such　a　progression　would　send　us　in　search　of　a　Prior　Principle　not　progressing　from　Power　to　Act；　there　all　stands　ever　realized。　Potentiality　requires　an　intervention　from　outside　itself　to　bring　it　to　the　actualization　which　otherwise　cannot　be；　but　what　possesses；　of　itself；　identity　unchangeable　for　ever　is　an　actualization：　all　the　Firsts　then　are　actualizations；　simply　because　eternally　and　of　themselves　they　possess　all　that　is　necessary　to　th