Substance…
The Physical Primary Mode of Being and the Medium for Meaning
“All nature abounds in proofs of other influences than merely mechanical action, even in the physical world”…
— Charles Sanders Peirce
“There is indeed an essential opposition between the spirit of Greek science, orientated towards contemplation, and the secular spirit of modern science, directed at dominating the world through technology, and this informed by the spirit of domination and power”…
— Augusto del Noce
“The great discovery of Greek philosophy and the foundation of its lasting truth is that of evidence, understood not as a force that constrains but as light that illuminates”…
— Augusto del Noce
To demonstrate that Substance is the medium for Meaning (Metaxic Semiotic) for Natural Revelation in finite Natural Beings we must stand on the shoulders of some of the giants of Western Civilisation Christian Theology and Ancient Greek Philosophy.
From Aristotle’s ideas around Essence-Form-Matter-Substance and Aristotle-Christian Theology-Scholastics-Voeglin’s perspectives on Metaxy and Order of Being (Part A, Part B, Part C and Part D), Aristotle-Kant-Peirce Categories of Human Thought (Part B, Part C and Part D ), and Peirce’s ideas on Semiotics and the role of Signs (Part B, Part C and Part D).
- Part A: Essence to Existence (actualisation of essence (caused by God — Aquinas) ) to Being (the act of existing) to Substance (through the act of existence) — the Primary Mode of Being — the most fundamental category of existence. Part A also highlights how the concept of Metaxy is fundamental to understanding the building blocks of Western Civilisation thought which combines both the Transcendent (Essence & Form) and Immanent concepts (Substance & Matter) — the Metaphysical and Physical;
- Part B — a Universe of Meaning and Man’s Metaxic Semiotic Participation in Reality — Part B demonstrates how the emergence of Charles Sanders Peirce’s Categories of the Whole — Modes of Being leads to Triadic Categories of Human Thought and provides the dynamic modes of Being to mediate Aristotle’s Ontological Categories (Rosmini — Real Being) and Kant’s Epistemological Categories (Rosmini — Ideal Being). It demonstrates how it is through Peirce’s Semiotic Triadic & Pragmatic Maxim, together with Peirce’s Triadic Nature of Human Consciousness & Peirce’s Categories of the Whole — modes of Being, that Man brings an intelligibility to his understanding of the Universe. Man’s Metaxic Semiotic Participation in Reality.
- Part C — the Metaxic Semiotic Nature of Substance and its Role in Natural Revelation — In Part A substance is demonstrated to be the most fundamental category of Existence in finite Natural Beings. It represents the Primary Mode of Being. Part C outlines the Metaxic Semiotic nature of Substances and how Substances provide both Transcendent Kantian Epistemological Categories (Ideal Being) (Mind — Abstraction & Transcendent )- how we perceive and structure Reality — What it is (essence) and how can we know? — Internal perception of Reality — and Immanent Aristotelian Ontological Categories (Real Being) (Being — Material & Immanent ) — the different ways things can exist in the World — What exists and in what way? — Being, Existence and Reality itself.
- Part D — Substance as the medium for Meaning (Metaxic Semiotic) for Natural Revelation in finite Natural Beings — The synthesis of applying the Triadic Categories of Thought and in particular, Peirces Categories of the Whole as the mechanism to mediate meaning outlined in Part B to the Metaxic Semiotic nature of Substances outlined in Part C whilst recognising that Substances are the most fundamental Category of Existence — the Primary Mode of Being — contained in Part A leads to the conclusion that Substances are the medium for Meaning (Metaxic Semiotic) for Natural Revelation in finite Natural Beings. In other words, it reveals the role of the Triadic of Reason and Triadic Categories in Natural Revelation — a key part of Man’s Metaxic Semiotic participation in Reality (alongside Divine Revelation) — and — a key principle to Rosmini’s Triadic of Being.
Part A — Substance as the primary mode of Being for finite Natural Beings
Essence to Existence (actualisation of essence (caused by God — Aquinas) ) to Being (the act of existing) to Substance (through the act of existence) — the Primary Mode of Being — the most fundamental category of existence.
Part A also highlights how the concept of Metaxy is fundamental to understanding the building blocks of Western Civilisation thought which combines both the Transcendent (Ideal Being — Essence & Form) and Immanent concepts (Real Being — Substance & Matter) — the Metaphysical and Physical.
Note — For Finite Natural Beings Form is treated as the Essence of a Substance. The combination of the potentiality of Matter and the actuality of Form results in Substance.
Substance is the most fundamental category of existence. It exists in itself, subject to Predication (substance underlies all other categories of Being including qualities, quantities & other categories). It is the foundation of the continuity of Being (persists through accidental change) and has ontological priority (other categories such as qualities, relations etc) depending on Substance for Existence — accidents depend on Substance for Being.
Aristotle’s Ontological Categories acknowledge other modes of Being such as quantity, quality, relation, place, time etc.
Essence
What is Essence?
The fundamental nature or intrinsic quality that makes something what it is (unchangeable — actual)
Existence
What is Existence?
The actualisation of essence.
Note: Existence is not a predicate — Kant argued that existence is not a real predicate (or determination) that adds something to the concept of a thing. When we say that something exists, we are not attributing a property to it but rather affirming that the concept corresponds to something in reality.
Actualisation of Essence (caused by God)
What actualises essence?
For finite natural beings, Aristotle treats form as the essence of a substance.
In Aristotelian metaphysics, in finite natural beings, it is not merely matter (potentiality) but also form (actuality) that actualises essence.
Matter is pure potentiality and requires form ( organising principles and structure) to become a determinate substance.
In Aristotle’s hylomorphic (matter-form) theory, form is what gives shape and definition to matter.
The combination of matter and form results in substance.
Being
What is Being?
According to Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas anything that is in the act of existing (that is) rather than the potential of existing.
The act of existing can be both materially and immaterially. It is ontologically fundamental.
Human Being and Contingent Beings (Created) are Metaxic in nature.
Noting Being according to Thomas Aquinas is ultimately received from an external cause (God).
Substance
What is Substance?
Primary Being — For Aristotle, a substance is a unified, self-sufficient entity that exists in itself rather than as a predicate of something else.
According to Aristotle, substances consist of Form and Matter (Hylomorphic Theory) and can be broken down into Primary (individual things) and Secondary categories (universal categories).
Substance is therefore Metaxic ( form & matter — actuality & potentiality — universality & particularity — stability & change — metaphysical & physical) in nature.
Reality
What is Reality?
If we take Reality to mean everything that exists — both materially and immaterially — and Being in the philosophical sense of that which has existence or is ontologically fundamental, then one could argue that Reality is necessarily anchored in Being.
That is, without Being, there would be no Reality because Reality consists of things that are. This aligns with classical metaphysical perspectives where Being is the ground of all things.
Although a modern philosopher — Heidegger — would argue that Being is the fundamental condition that allows things to be and Reality might be understood as the totality of entities that exist.
Reality is therefore Metaxic ( immaterial & material — Contingent Being (created) & Necessary Being (creator) ) in nature. The Necessary Being of God is the ultimate source of existence.
“Before we undertake to apply this rule, let us reflect a little upon what it implies. It has been said to be a sceptical and materialistic principle. But it is only an application of the sole principle of logic which was recommended by Jesus; “Ye may know them by their fruits,” and it is very intimately allied with the ideas of the gospel. We must certainly guard ourselves against understanding this rule in too individualistic a sense. To say that man accomplishes nothing but that to which his endeavors are directed would be a cruel condemnation of the great bulk of mankind, who never have leisure to labor for anything but the necessities of life for themselves and their families. But, without directly striving for it, far less comprehending it, they perform all that civilization requires, and bring forth another generation to advance history another step. Their fruit is, therefore, collective; it is the achievement of the whole people. What is it, then, that the whole people is about, what is this civilization that is the outcome of history, but is never completed? We cannot expect to attain a complete conception of it; but we can see that it is a gradual process, that it involves a realisation of ideas in man’s consciousness and in his works, and that it takes place by virtue of man’s capacity for learning, and by experience continually pouring upon him ideas he has not yet acquired”…
- 1893 | Grand Logic 1893: Methodology. The Doctrine of Definition and Division. Chapter XVI. Clearness of Apprehension | CP 5.402n2
[ LINK ]
As outlined in Metaxic Semiotic — Intelligibility and Being, Knowing and Meaning Man’s participation in Reality can be considered a triadic relationship between the Observer (Subject — Interpretant ) and Observed (Object) mediated via Semiotic Signs (Representamen).
Reality is Metaxic ( immaterial & material) in nature.
Semiotics**** is the foundational discipline that brings a Sense of Coherence to Man’s participation in Reality.
- Being (Ontology ) — What is existence itself? What is real?
- Knowing (Epistemology) — Our understanding and limits of understanding (Negative Capability) Reality.
- Meaning (Semiotics) — Our Metaxic mediation through signs of Being and Knowing that brings coherence and intelligibility. It is metaxic in that it combines the physical (e.g. agency, actions, behaviours, habits) with the metaphysical (e.g. abstraction, concepts, categories, relationships, understanding).
- *** Note — Traditionally, semiotics is considered part of philosophy because philosophy deals with the broadest questions, and meaning is one of those questions. However, if we accept that all human knowledge and experience are mediated through signs, semiotics could be seen as the foundational discipline, with philosophy as a subset. It ultimately depends on whether you view meaning as one domain among many, or as the primary structure through which all knowledge, being and meaning (metaxic semiotic) is framed.
Charles Sanders Peirce approached the mind-body relationship from a perspective grounded in his broader philosophical framework, which combined pragmatism, semiotics, and a form of objective idealism.
His view was not strictly dualistic (in the Cartesian sense) or materialistic (in the Marxist dialectical materialism sense).
Instead, Peirce saw the mind and body as part of a continuum (Synechism and Whole), with mental and physical processes intertwined through a semiotic and evolutionary framework.
Man’s participation in a dynamic Metaxic Semiotic process that reflects an interconnected emergent web of relationships of Being, Knowing and Meaning (a Peircian relational perspective) of Substances.
Some key aspects of his thinking include:
- Continuity (Synechism) — Peirce rejects strict dualisms and views reality as continuous rather than distinctly divided between mind and matter. The existence of mental and physical phenomena exists on a spectrum, with no absolute separation between them.
- Objective Idealism — Peirce held a version of objective idealism (Metaphysical Idealism & Epistemological Realism), which posited that matter itself is a form of “effete mind” — inveterate habits becoming physical laws over time. From this perspective, the physical world is not entirely separate from mental processes but rather represents the mind in a more crystallised or habitual form.
- Semiotic Mediation — Peirce’s theory of signs (semiotics) plays a central role in his understanding of the mind-body relationship. He believed that thought is a process of mediating and participating in Reality through signs — a semiosis, where the mind and body (PrimeSense, Altersense and Medisense) participate in the interpretation of signs. Consciousness is part of a semiotic process rather than being an isolated entity (an idea that is not dissimilar to Nietzsche’s external orientation of consciousness — refer to — Beyond Perspectivism and the Primacy of Man — Modes of Being, Semiotics, the Intelligent Universe and a Divine Order).
- Embodied Mind — Although Peirce did not use terminology like embodied cognition, his views align with the idea that mental activity is deeply connected to bodily and environmental interactions (Jean Piaget — Intelligence being part Biological and part Logical). He saw thought as rooted in habits of action, which means that cognition is not just a passive reflection but an active, embodied process (refer to Peirce — Theory of Inquiry).
- Evolutionary Perspective — Peirce’s evolutionary philosophy suggested that both mental and physical processes develop through the formation of habits over time. He proposed that mind and matter are not fundamentally different substances but different manifestations of an underlying evolutionary tendency toward increasing complexity and entanglement.
Peirce thought of the mind and body as interrelated through continuity, habit, and semiotic processes. He avoided strict dualism (e.g. Descartes) and materialism (e.g. Marx), instead proposing that mind and matter exist on a continuum(Synechism and Whole (Monism)), with physical processes being habituated forms of mental tendencies.
Peirce — Meaning (Peircian Semiotics) as an ongoing process of reconciling Being (Ontology) with Knowing (Epistemology)
Peirce’s Categories – modes of being – provides a framework for understanding how the mind mediates between being (ontology) and knowing (epistemology) through signs. His semiotic process allows for the interpretation of mind-independent reality via mind-dependent representations, leading to learning, knowledge formation, and the actualisation of potential.
Signs in themselves represent the structure and relationship of meaning, so, if Aristotle form’s represents what something is ( i.e. essence and ways in which it is predicated and expressed — its actual structure of knowing ) and matter represents what can exist — Being and the act of existing.
A reconciliation occurs through the interplay between the triadic nature of human consciousness ( Peirce — Primisense, Altersense and Medisense) and comparing the meaning of the concept to the practical effect ( Peirce Pragmatic Maxim).
Peirce’s triadic structure of the sign — composed of the representamen (sign), object (what it refers to), and interpretant (how it is understood) — already implies a process of Metaxic mediation between being and knowing.
Aristotle’s forms (as structures of meaning) correspond to the object in Peirce’s semiotic system, while Kant’s categories of understanding align with the interpretant, which organises cognition. The sign, then, serves as the Metaxicmediating structure that brings these two into relation.
Peirce’s Categories — modes of Being (Firstness, Secondness, Thirdness) — offer a dynamic framework that can accommodate both Aristotle’s and Kant’s categories.
- Firstness (possibility, quality, feeling, immediate & indeterminate) maps onto Aristotle’s form and Kant’s pure intuitions (space and time — universality and necessity — forms of sensibility — a priori conditions of human perception ).
- Secondness (actuality, existence, resistance & opposition) maps onto Aristotle’s substance & matter and Kant’s empirical intuition (what is given in direct sensory experience of particular objects).
- Thirdness (law, mediation, meaning-making, habit formation) bridges and mediates these two through representation, interpretation, and habit — this is where Peirce’s pragmatic maxim comes into play.
In this way, meaning is produced through the triadic nature of human consciousness — Peirce’s Primisense, Altersense, and Medisense — and modes of Being (Peirce’s Categories).
Meaning is only mediated when a concept (represented via signs) is not only thought (Firstness) and encountered in reality (Secondness) but also understood in terms of its practical effects (Thirdness).
This is what Peirce’s Pragmatic Maxim states:
“It appears, then, that the rule for attaining the third grade of clearness of apprehension is as follows: Consider what effects, that might conceivably have practical bearings, we conceive the object of our conception to have. Then, our conception of these effects is the whole of our conception of the object”…
- 1878 | How to Make Our Ideas Clear | CP 5.402
[ LINK ]
Meaning emerges as the ongoing habit of interpretation, which both stabilises and evolves through experience, inquiry and relationships.
Refer — Peirce’s Pragmatic Theory of Inquiry: Fallibilism and Indeterminacy [LINK]
Part C — the Metaxic Semiotic nature of Substance and its role in Natural Revelation
“The entire universe is perfused with signs, if it is not composed exclusively of signs”…
— Charles Sanders Peirce
Meaning itself is a kind of living process, where truth is never fully given but is instead something that emerges through the process of semiosis, open inquiry and practical engagement.
“What we observe is not nature itself but nature exposed to our method of questioning. Our scientific work in physics consists in asking questions about nature in the language that we possess and trying to get an answer from experiment by the means that are at our disposal”…
- Werner Heisenberg
Aristotle’s forms can be understood as epistemological truths, while his substances — which combine form and matter — align with ontological existence.
- Forms as Epistemological Truths — True Being (Ouisa).
- Aristotle’s forms represent the intelligible structure of things — their essence or what it means to be that thing (ousia). True Being (Ouisa). This is what allows us to categorise and understand objects. Without form, we couldn’t recognise a thing as what it is. Since epistemology is concerned with how we come to know things, forms can be seen as the conceptual foundation of truth. They define the necessary structure by which something can be known.
2. Substances as Ontological Existence — Real Being (Ousiai)
- Aristotle’s substance (ousiai) consists of both form and matter. Form alone is not enough for something to exist; it must be instantiated in matter.
- Substance is what actually exists, not just in the mind, but in the world.
- Since ontology is concerned with what exists and what it means to exist, substances (as the union of form and matter) align with ontological reality.
In summary:
- Forms → True Being (Ouisa) → Truths (how we know what something is)
- Substances → Real Being (Ousiai) → existence (what something actually is, in reality).
Note — this aligns with the notion that Peirce’s semiotics as the mediator between ontology and epistemology. Forms give us the conceptual categories necessary for knowledge, while substance ensures those forms are grounded in the real world.
Part D — Substance as the Medium for Meaning for Natural Revelation in Finite Natural Beings
If forms are epistemological truths (True Being), substances ontological existence (Real Being) and signs are Metaxic mediation of meaning, then substances that consist of matter and form can be viewed as containing both ontology (substance and matter) and epistemology ( forms ) or potential ideal and actual real being.
In other words, substances enable Metaxic meaning to be mediated through the relationship between their epistemology, ontology and the normative pragmatic maxim (Peirce) principle where the meaning of a concept aligns with its practical effect.
A Metaxic Semiotic framework that articulates Truth is Being understood by the Mind.
The possibility of the gradual alignment of human beliefs and human actions with an independent objective reality.
Substances, as the metaxic union of form and matter, contain both ontological(their material instantiation) and epistemological (their intelligible structure) dimensions.
Meaning, then, is mediated through the medium of substances because they serve as the bridge between being and knowing.
By incorporating Peirce’s semiotic theory and pragmatic maxim, it can be further refined:
- Ontology in Substances (Matter & Existence) → Secondness → Real Being
- The material component of a substance ensures that it exists independently of our perception.
- This aligns with Peirce’s Secondness (Altersense) — the realm of brute facts, resistance, and actuality.
2. Epistemology in Substances (Form & Intelligibility) → Firstness → Ideal Being
- The form of a substance provides the conceptual structure that allows it to be categorised and understood.
- This aligns with Peirce’s Firstness (Primisense), the realm of potentiality (i.e. the beginning of the process of learning & understanding), qualities, and essences.
3. Meaning as the Mediation Between Ontology & Epistemology → Thirdness → Metaxic Being (Divine and Natural Revelation) (akin to Rosmini’s Moral Being transcending both real being and ideal being — the participation in the Divine)
- Meaning is established when the epistemological (form) and ontological (matter) dimensions of a substance are reconciled through semiosis (the interpretative process).
- Peirce’s Thirdness (mediation (Medisense), heuristic, mediation, habit) governs this process.
- The Pragmatic Maxim ensures that meaning is validated not just conceptually(as a form) or physically (as brute existence), but in terms of its practical effect — the way it functions and interacts within a system of thought and action.
Since substances contain both form (epistemology) and matter (ontology), they are the necessary conditions for meaning to emerge. But the meaning is not static — it is mediated through signs and verified through its practical consequences.
This suggests that truth is not merely correspondence (matching reality) or coherence (fitting within a conceptual system), but is ultimately pragmatic — tied to its actual effects.
A Metaxic Semiotic framework that articulates Truth is Being understood by the Mind.
The possibility of the gradual alignment of human beliefs and human actions (Man’s participation in Reality) with an independent objective reality.
“The world that is being created by the accumulation of technical means is an artificial world and hence radically different from the natural world.
It destroys, eliminates, or subordinates the natural world, and does not allow this world to restore itself or even to enter into a symbiotic relation with it. The two worlds obey different imperatives, different directives, and different laws which have nothing in common. Just as hydroelectric installations take waterfalls and lead them into conduits, so the technical milieu absorbs the natural. We are rapidly approaching the time when there will be no longer any natural environment at all. When we succeed in producing artificial aurorae boreales, night will disappear and perpetual day will reign over the planet”…― Jacques Ellul, The Technology Society
.
