Since those propositions have been advanced, some conclusions must now be proved; one of which is, as it were, common and general; namely, that any quantity is not an absolute thing really distinct from substance, or that any quantity is not an absolute thing really distinct from quality. And that I may not appear to depend upon a proper sense and to deviate from the patristic definitions, as a fundament I make use of a passage of the most Holy Father, the illustrious Doctor, John of Damascus, who asserts that the same thing is of the genus ‘substance’ and of the genus ‘quantity’; which can not be true if every quantity were a thing really distinct from substance. Whence, says the aforesaid doctor, the venerable Father, John of Damascus: “Therefore, we say,” he says, “since it is possible for the same thing to be classified as number, according to one intention under one category and according to another intention under another category. Indeed, obvious facts, which were previously mentioned, are classified under ‘quantum,’ as however mutually having condition or mutually classed under those which are in relation to another; for great and small are named in relation to another. For great is called great in relation to small, and double in relation to half, and similarly the rest. But a body, according to that which is natural, is classified under ‘substance,; but according to that which is mathematical, that is, measured, under ‘quantum.’ ”
Notice how plainly that Saint asserts that the same thing is contained under diverse categories because of a distinction of intentions. He also asserts that the same thing, as body, may be of the genus ‘substance’ and of the genus ‘quantity.’ For the same body, because it is a certain natural thing composed of matter and form, is of the genus ‘substance.’ Moreover, the same thing, because it has part separate from part, by virtue of which it can be measured, is of the genus ‘quantity’; which could not be true if every quantity were a thing really distinct from substance. And as the same thing, since it is a certain natural thing composed of matter and form, is of the genus ‘substance’; and, since it has part outside of part, is of the genus ‘quantity’; so the same whiteness, since it is a certain natural thing created to qualify a subject, is of the genus ‘quality’; and, since the same whiteness is a certain thing having part outside of part and part separate from part by situation, it is of the genus ‘quantity.’
And so it is established that in saying that any quantity is not a thing really distinct from substance and that any quantity is not a thing really distinct from quality, I do not deviate from the patristic definitions. Whence, I have never read that any Saint or the Prince of philosophers, Aristotle, has made a distinction between ‘quantum’ and ‘quantity’; on the contrary, he indifferently uses ‘quantum’ and ‘quantity’ as the same. And I say this, that according to Aristotle it would be the same to say, ‘quantum is substance’ or ‘quality and quantity is substance or quality.’ And, indeed, that which is commonly said, that Aristotle says in the first book of the Posteriores, that this negative is immediate, ‘no substance is quantity,’ is false; for he does not even remotely make any mention there of substance or quantity or of other categories.
← Chapter XVI in Which Certain Arguments Are Advanced to Prove That the Quantity · Contents · Chapter XVIII. That All the Qualities in the Sacrament of the Altar Are Not One →