Eudemus’ Objection to the Ash-Argument for the Existence of the Void

Abstract

Aristotle devotes Physics 4.6–9 to the void (τὸ κενόν), the existence of which he rejects. His discussion includes a brief presentation of the five arguments offered in favor of the existence of a void, and of his objections to four of those arguments. This essay focuses on one of those arguments for the void, namely the ash-argument: The defenders of the void, Aristotle says, ‘produce as evidence the business about the ash, which accepts an equal amount of water as the empty vessel.’ Eudemus of Rhodes (ca. 370–300 BC), a student and then colleague of Aristotle, discussed this topic in his own (now lost) Physics. The sole fragment from his Physics dealing with the void, preserved by Simplicius in his commentary on Aristotle’s Physics, is an objection to the ash- argument not found in Aristotle. This text has received little scholarly attention. I argue that Eudemus’ objection represents a (minor) disagreement with Aristotle, though he is committed to the Aristotelian view that a void does not exist. The essay ends by underscoring the distinctiveness of Eudemus’ views on this issue by contrasting them with those of two other Peripatetic thinkers: the unknown author of Problemata physica 25.8 and Strato of Lampsacus.