philosophies Article Hylomorphism Extended: Dynamical Forms and Minds Włodzisław Duch Cognitive Science Department, Faculty of Humanities, and Neurocognitive Laboratory, Nicolaus Copernicus University, 87-100 Toru´n,Poland; [email protected] Received: 17 September 2018; Accepted: 15 November 2018; Published: 19 November 2018 Abstract: Physical objects are compounds of matter and form, as stated by Aristotle in his hylomorphism theory. The concept of “form” in this theory refers to physical structures or organizational structures. However, mental processes are not of this kind, they do not change physical arrangement of neurons, but change their states. To cover all natural processes hylomorphism should acknowledge differences between three kinds of forms: Form as physical structure, form as function resulting from organization and interactions between constituent parts, and dynamical form as state transitions that change functions of structures without changing their physical organization. Dynamical forms, patterns of energy activation that change the flow of information without changing the structure of matter, are the key to understand minds of rational animals. Keywords: hylomorphism; mind; form; matter; neurodynamics 1. Introduction Identity of physical objects has been conceptualized in history of philosophy in various ways. The most obvious distinction that has been made is between matter and form. Abhidharma Buddhist tradition acknowledges the material form or body (rupa)¯ as the basic type of aggregate, and adds four types of aggregates to characterize mental level: sensations, apperception, volitions or dispositional formations, and consciousness [1,2]. In ancient Western philosophy Aristotle in Physics has introduced distinction between form and matter that considered together characterize physical and mental objects. This idea, called hylomorphism, became the foundation of Thomist philosophy in the 13th century [3]. Hylomorphism has been quite influential philosophical theory since antiquity, and is still frequently discussed in contemporary analytical philosophy and theology [4,5], including mechanistic philosophy of biology and neuroscience [6,7]. In preface to the book “Neo-Aristotelian Perspectives on Contemporary Science” John Haldane writes about “shared sense that Aristotelian ideas have much to offer”, and the introduction, written by the editors of this book, starts with a claim “A recent revival in (neo-)Aristotelian philosophy is beginning to transform the landscape of contemporary analytic philosophy” [8]. Form and matter establish properties of physical objects. Frequently form has simple interpretation as structure, arrangement of constituting elements, such as bricks in the building or atoms in molecules. It unifies matter into objects that have specific properties, determining interactions with other objects. Form may also refer to the organizational structure based on interactions between elements that define the identity of the whole. Aristotle has extended hylomorphic concept into the animal and human realm in his Metaphysics and other works. In De Anima he describes body and soul as a special case of matter and form. Living organism is not identified on the basis of anatomy, but also all functions that characterize it. The form of a dead body is different than living body although the arrangement of atoms may be quite similar. In Metaphysics “form” is presented as an essence of things composed of “substance”, making the concept of hylomorphism more abstract. Form is not restricted Philosophies 2018, 3, 36; doi:10.3390/philosophies3040036 www.mdpi.com/journal/philosophies Philosophies 2018, 3, 36 2 of 8 to physical structure, functional organization, nor dynamical states of matter, it is the stable essence that endows substances with particular properties, making different types of things. This idea has been linked to the phenotypic plasticity by Austin and Marmodoro [8] (Chapter 7 and 8), continuous dynamically connected landscape that unfolds in morphological space, maintaining the identity of evolving organisms. Ancient philosophers have been struggling to adapt the concept of form to describe living beings and in particular humans. The substantial form of a material body, called in Thomist philosophy “soul”, was understood as the animating essence of plants, animals and rational humans. De Haan [7] calls this approach “hylomorphic animalism” (HMA): Animals are complex unified psychosomatic substances endowed with integrated biological and psychological attributes. Explanation how this animated principle relates to sensory and intellectual powers was of course well beyond the capability of ancient and medieval philosophers. Full description of mechanisms responsible for the structure and behavior of animals requires development of phenomics at many levels: genetic, molecular, cellular, network and tissues, organs and organisms, interactions with other organisms and ecosystems at different spatial and temporal scales. The Research Domain Criteria of the National Institute of Mental Health, developed to understand mental disorders, are the first step in this direction [9], but achieving this goal will take many decades. Mechanisms explain how component elements forming structures at some level are organized, how they interact, creating various phenomena such as gene expression, binding of neurotransmitters to receptors, or activating brain structures that lead to phobias. These mechanisms may be stochastic, distributed, and may refer to irreducible multi-level organization. This paper has been written in an attempt to understand better the concept of form and to distinguish between different kinds of forms. Form may be understood as physical structure or as functional organization that involves interacting physical entities. The third kind of form, called here “a dynamical form”, has not been clearly distinguished from other two types, but seems to be vital for understanding brain-mind connections. Characterization of different kinds of forms should help to develop hylomorphic ideas further. 2. Different Kinds of Forms Hylomorphism is based on the conviction that substance and form are basic ontological and explanatory principles. Modern science is concerned with matter, energy and information. Matter and energy may be connected to substance and form, but information has no counterpart. Physical entities are composed of elements: atoms, molecules, or more complex structures arranged in some ways. Matter is a form of energy, interactions between elements lead to formation of physical structures, some transient and some stable. The most common sense of “form” is relatively stable physical structure. Physical form of objects may not be sufficient to determine specific ontological category. A unique chair may have many attributes defining its shape and materials that it is made from. However, general ontological concept of a “chair” cannot be defined listing various shapes and material compositions. It cannot also be understood by its function, as one may sit on the bench, stool, tabouret and many other types of pieces of furniture. Moreover, natural concepts are understood in a different way by people, depending on their age and culture [10]. Still, we can say about each particular chair that it has specific shape and it is built from some kind of matter. Form may substantially change, but the category of the object may still be preserved. Here we are touching on the problem of categorization in cognitive psychology and the definition of ontological concepts (cf. Handbook of Categorization in Cognitive Science [11]). The exemplar theory of categorization defines “a chair” as an object that may be used to sit on, and is similar to some examples of objects known as chairs. Hylomorphism simply says that real objects are irreducible unified form-matter wholes, with specific organization of material components, but it does not help to define ontological categories. Some objects do not have permanent or definite form. Clouds behave in chaotic way. Kinetic sculptures moved by the wind may demonstrate various structures that change in unpredictable Philosophies 2018, 3, 36 3 of 8 way. Molecules oscillate between various conformations, have vibrating and rotating fragments, taking several shapes that have different properties. Flexible forms may have finite number of spatial arrangements if local structures are preserved (chemical bonds, snowflakes), or an infinite number of possible shapes (clouds). How stable are forms? Larger objects change much slower, enabling reification, naming of objects that preserve their forms for a longer time. At the microscopic level everything is moving incredibly fast, atoms vibrate and interact changing their arrangements at the timescale of picoseconds. Complex molecules, such as amino acids, are formed even in deep space. The C25H52 molecule has 25 carbons and 52 hydrogens, but these atoms may be arranged in about 36 million of different spatial forms, or isomers. Each spatial structure may be in many different dynamical states (electronic, vibrational and rotational excited states), most of which are stable only for a very short time. Each dynamical state has different properties, such as probability of interactions with other molecules or interactions with light, responsible for the absorption and emission spectra. Small molecules at quantum level may assume many discrete dynamical forms, influencing structural form to various degrees. For larger molecules or for highly excited states