The relationship of Motion and Change

As stated previously, we have spent a lot of time on what motion is according to Aristotle. Through reading and discussion, two questions came up: is nature in motion (dynamic) or is nature standing and at rest (static?) The two types of motion of study are incidental/accidental and self-cause, which is arguably the more genuine form of motion. Although we tried to sort it out I believe there is still some confusion regarding the tree parts of self-caused motion, a.) the mover, b.) the moved/what gets moved, c.) that by which causes motion. We all read in the book and heard in class that “the mover is most active and complete and it itself does not move but only causes movement.” But what does this mean? Perhaps understanding the relationship of motion and change can help.

A question was brought up in class if motion and change could be considered equal and the simple answer for time’s sake was yes. However I remember reading in the book that no, in fact motion and change are not equal. The relationship exists as: motion (kinesis) is coextensive with but is not synonymous with change (metabole.) It is stated that there are four irreducible types of motion: thing hood, quality, quantity and place. It is important to note that this list is in ascending order of motions but descending order of changes. For example, place is the primary kind of motion but experiences the least change.

So, using the original example used in class to distinguish the three parts of self-caused motion (hunger, movement of the body, eating,) I think we can sort through this further. If motion and change are not the same than the mover can be a thought, decision, motivation, choice, etc. This does not move nor change. The end result will make one no longer hungry but the reason for creating movement did not and will not ever change for the reason of that sole movement. As for the rest of the example and the one with the zebra and others we can think of, I believe change fits somehow in with the other two parts.

Where and how does change relate to movement without becoming a synonym?