在《物理學》A 7中亞里士多德通過對生成概念的語義學分析,首次闡明了他有關自然的形而上學三本原理論,而其中居于核心地位的就是主體(hypokeimenon)概念。在屬性的變化中主體是持存的,但是,在實體的生成中主體是否持存,卻引起了研究者們長期的爭論。傳統觀點認為在實體的生成中主體質料持存,而以查爾頓為代表的一方則認為主體質料不持存。本文通過對《物理學》A 7的仔細解讀,指出了亞里士多德的主體概念的兩重內涵,即,作為實體的主體和作為質料的主體,并以青銅雕像的生成為例,通過引用其他相關文本區分了在實體生滅過程中作為實體的青銅的消滅和作為質料的青銅的持存,從而為實體生滅過程中質料是否持存的爭論提供了合理的解答。文章最后對查爾頓的相關觀點從文本證據和思想義理方面做了詳細的反駁與批評。

In Physics A7,Aristotle first clarified his metaphysical theory of three principles in nature through a semantic analysis of the concept of generation,the core of which is the subject( hypokeimenon). During the change of attributes,the hypokeimenon persists; whether it persists during the generation of substance has long been debated. The traditional view has been that matter qua hypokeimenon does persist in the generation of substance,whereas Charlton and others believe that it does not. Through a careful interpretation of Physics A7,the dual meanings of Aristotle’s concept of hypokeimon,namely,the hypokeimenon as substance and as matter,become clear. By distinguishing the elimination of a statue’s bronze as substance from the persistence of bronze as matter during the coming-to-be and the passing away of the substance,a reasonable answer to the aforementioned question emerges. This paper thus textually and philosophically refutes and criticizes Charlton’s claim that hypokeimenon persists.