Aristotle's Arguments Against The Existence Of Space

Aristotle’s view of space shapes his understanding and ultimately formulates his unconvincing arguments against the existence of the void. This can be most seen in his partial rejection of his container theory for space. To begin, it will be important to understand the framework for Aristotle’s investigation into both space and non-space. In the fourth chapter of fourth book, Aristotle begins by determining the conditions and characteristics that define space. According to Aristotle, there are 5 main conditions (CITATION). Firstly, a place must contain and belong to an object(CITATION). The place must also be distinct from its object, but places are also same size as their objects despite being able to have multiple objects (CITATION). Lastly,
Similarly, Aristotle also put forward the alternative explanation that space was the matter of the object which inhabited(CITATION). However, this explanation also contradicts Aristotle’s first assumption. Unless one assumed that objects could not exist, matter and place cannot be the same. As such, Aristotle similarly rejected this explanation for the existence of space. Moving on, Aristotle goes on to present a third explanation which implies that space is and exists within the gaps between the extremities of objects(CITATION). However, Aristotle rejects this explanation as it would create the possibility for a given area or container to have an infinite number of places(CITATION). For example, consider two liquids of the same density put into a blender. If one assumes Aristotle’s third explanation, there would be an infinite amount of spaces within the area where the mixing is occurring. Furthermore, Aristotle presents a fourth explanation which stipulates that “Space are the extremities” of objects (CITATION). Aristotle’s finds this explanation as an adequate definition as it clearly addresses the first four of his
Despite, Aristotle’s belief in the importance of the distinction between space and object, he makes it evident that his understanding of space cannot be defined without object(CITATION). That being established, Aristotle uses his understanding of place to justification in his argument against the existence of void. Firstly, Aristotle starts by defining the void as a “a place without an object” (CITATION). Considering Aristotle’s understanding of space, which states the despite being distinct a place and object cannot exist without one another (CITATION). As such a place cannot exist without an object within it under Aristotle’s explanation of space. This premise forms the foundation of most of his arguments against the existence of the void. For example, if voids did exist that would mean there would be places with no object in them, one could imagine a vacuum in space. Thus, if voids are a place their place would be the “intervals” (CITATION) between the bodies of objects. Therefore, under Aristotle’s framework voids do not exist because places cannot be the “intervals” (CITATION) between objects. Hence, we can see how Aristotle of