17. Main (classical) Elements and their qualities.

In this chapter, I will begin to discuss the next four reference points of our psyche. These are four auxiliary reference points, which we can find between the main reference points. And the main reference points I discussed in previous chapters.

For now, at these four auxiliary points we have so-called qualities of the Elements. Qualities of the Elements are part of Ancient Typology.

In that case, let me remind the scheme of the Ancient Typology.

In the next diagram, for greater clarity, I will leave only the Elements and qualities of these Elements. I will also place types of Mandala of Characters.

The Elements (also called “originative sources”), and qualities are mainly due to Aristotle’s work — “On Generation and Corruption”. This work was popular for many centuries. And the symbolic idea of the Elements and their qualities has survived to our times. This symbolism is deeply rooted in our culture and art, where it is still used. This symbolism is also part of our psyche, because it appears, for example, in our dreams.

Based on the work “On Generation and Corruption” is just build the above diagram. This diagram is actually the analysis and synthesis of the thoughts of many ancient philosophers, which Aristotle has made. The philosophers whose achievements were used by Aristotle were, among others, Thales of Miletus, Anaximander, Empedocles, Heraclitus, Parmenides, Democritus, Plato, and others.

As we can see, the above diagram is divided into four main parts, which are the main Elements. Those are:

• AIR,
• FIRE,
• WATER, and
• EARTH.

In turn, the qualities of the Elements we can find between the above Elements. Those are:

• moist, wet—between AIR and WATER,
• cool, cold—between WATER and EARTH,
• dry—between EARTH and FIRE,
• hot—between FIRE and AIR.

Aristotle divided bodies into:

• Simple bodies (or primary bodies).
  “Simple bodies” are bodies that cannot be divided into smaller or simple bodies.
• Compound bodies.
  “Compound bodies” are a combination of many “simple bodies”. “Compound bodies” can also be divided into simpler bodies.

As for “simple bodies” (or primary bodies), Aristotle distinguished between two types of “simple bodies”.

1. The smallest primary bodies (atoms).
   Atoms are the smallest indivisible particles of bodies. It means such particles that it is impossible to divide them into smaller particles. One of the supporters of the idea of the atom was Democritus.


2. Primary bodies of the same kind (or the same class).
   Bodies of the same kind are, for example, bodies which:
   — consist mainly of the same particles,
   — have the same properties,
   — come from the same source,
   — etc. Therefore, such bodies should be similar, regardless of the other factors. It means they may have different volume or quantity, but they should be similar or homogeneous. In some sense, it can be said that they are collections of some indivisible particles of the same kind, which together form homogeneous bodies. According to Aristotle, such particles of primary bodies are Air, Fire, Water, and Earth.

As for the above four Elements (primary bodies, or simple bodies), Aristotle thought that:

• Elements do not always exist in their pure form.
  It means, adjacent Elements influence each other. For example, Air, under the influence of Water, becomes moist, and Air under the influence of Fire, becomes hot.
• Elements may change.
  It means some Elements can transform into other Elements, specifically:
  — Fire—can transform into—Air or Earth,
  — Air—can transform into—Fire and Water,
  — Water—can transform into—Air and Earth,
  — Earth—can transform into—Fire and Water.

Above I distinguished the transformations that concern adjacent Elements.

Besides, we also have transformations that concern Elements that are opposite to each other, namely:
— Water and Fire, and
— Air and Earth.

Oppositional Elements can transform one into the other directly or indirectly. Indirectly, when in the meantime, these Elements transform into elements that are between them. I will explain more about this later in this chapter.

Qualities of the Elements.

As I just mentioned, Elements are not always in their pure form, because they influence each other. This influence mainly occurs on the borders between the individual elements. That is, between Air, Fire, Water, and Earth.

In a sense, we can say that as a result of influencing Elements on each other, qualities come into existence.

As I mention above, these qualities are:

Besides, we have also such a principle that each Element can have two qualities.

Aristotle also said that there is no Element which has such qualities:
— “hot” and “cool, cold”, and
— “dry” and “moist, wet”.

This is because these qualities are opposite to each other. So, it is impossible to combine these qualities in an area of one Element.

However, the oppositional qualities play a big role in the transformations of one Element into another.

Aristotle claimed that one Element transforms into another when:

• The quality located between two Elements does not change. This is because the quality between two Elements is the same for these two Elements.
• While changes qualities, which:
  — in a sense, are located outside (or on the sides) of the two given Elements,
  — and at the same time, they are opposite to each other. This is because these qualities are different. So, if we change one quality for another, then the Element will also change.

I think it will be easier to understand whey I show it in the diagrams.

Let us start with transforming Fire into Air, and Air into Fire.

So, Fire transforms into Air (or vice versa) when:

• Quality—“hot” does not change. This is because “hot” is on the area of both Fire and Air.
• The opposite qualities are changing, namely:
  — “dry”, and
  — “moist, wet”.
  In this case, if:
  — we want to change Fire into Air, we should “dry” replace with “moist, wet”,
  — while we want to change Air into Fire, we should “moist, wet” replace with “dry”.

Let us move now to the transformation of Air into Water, and Water into Air.

Air transforms into Water (or vice versa) when:

• Quality—“moist, wet” does not change. This is because “moist, wet” is on the area of both Air and Water.
• The opposite qualities are changing, namely:
  — “hot”, and
  — “cool, cold”.
  In this case, if:
  — we want to change Air into Water, we should “hot” replace with “cool, cold”,
  — while we want to change Water into Air, we should “cool, cold” replace with “hot”.

Next in the transformation of Water into Earth, and Earth into Water.

Water transforms into Earth (or vice versa) when:

• Quality—“cool, cold” does not change. This is because “cool, cold” is on the area of both Water and Earth.
• The opposite qualities are changing, namely:
  — “dry”, and
  — “moist, wet”.
  In this case, if:
  — we want to change Water into Earth, we should “moist, wet” replace with “dry”,
  — while we want to change Earth into Water, we should “dry” replace with “moist, wet”.

Let us move now to transformation of Earth into Fire, and Fire into Earth.

Earthy transforms into Fire (or vice versa) when:

• Quality—“dry” does not change. This is because “dry” is on the area of both Earth and Fire.
• The opposite qualities are changing, namely:
  — “hot”, and
  — “cool, cold”.
  In this case, if:
  — we want to change Earth into Fire, we should “cool, cold” replace with “hot”,
  — while we want to change Fire into Earth, we should “hot” replace with “cool, cold”.

Next, we have two cases of transformation when the Elements are located opposite to each other.

Let us start with the opposite pair of Fire and Water.

In this case, the Elements are not located next to each other. So, there are no common qualities that we do not need to change like it was in the previous four cases of transformation. Then, all the qualities concerning Fire and Water are opposite to each other. Thus, if we want to change these Elements, we need to change all qualities.

All in all, Fire transforms into the Water (or vice versa) when we replace:
— “hot” with
— “cool, cold”
and
— “dry” with
— “moist, wet”.

The last case of transformations between Elements is the transformation of Air into Earth, and Earth into Air.

Here, as in the previous case, the Elements are not located next to each other. So, there are no common qualities that we do not need to change like it was in the above first four cases of transformation. Then, all the qualities concerning Air and Earth are opposite to each other. Thus, if we want to change these Elements, we need to change all qualities.

All in all, Air transforms into the Earth (or vice versa) when we replace:
— “hot” with
— “cool, cold”
and
— “dry” with
— “moist, wet”.

For the summary, I will present the above transformations in the table.

Besides to the above transformation one of the Elements into another, we can of course also have few more combinations of these transformations. Aristotle also described possible combinations of transformations
— two elements into one.

However, if we take into consideration the symbolic character of the above Elements, then we can consider other transformations, for example:
— two elements into two others,
— three Elements into one (or vice versa).

Besides, we may consider that we are in some intermediate phase between the various kinds of these changes.

The above transformations of the elements are fascinating to me. In a symbolic sense, the above principles of transformation of some elements into other we can compare with the processes that are taking place in our psyche.

As for the Mandala of Characters, the transformation of Elements can be compared to the movement between psychological states.

Here, for example, we can see the diagrams for twelve types of characters. I placed these diagrams earlier in chapter “11. Position of 12 main types on the Mandala of Characters”. Below I put one of these diagrams. That is, a simplified Mandala of Characters for the type—Moist Air.

I think that in a symbolic sense, we can use the transformations of the Elements, that I presented above, to analyze the above type—Moist Air, and other types of the Mandala of Characters.

Here, for example, it is important to notice that the given Elements are changing into other Elements when we are changing their qualities. In our psyche, these qualities we can compare with adaptive-defensive mechanisms, which I will mention again below. And more widely, I will talk about these mechanisms in one of the next chapters.

So, it turns out that Aristotle’s qualities are analogous to other parts of the Mandala of Characters, which I will talk about in the next chapters. In that case, it is worth saying what these qualities actually are?

Aristotle, in his work "On Generation and Corruption", says that pairs of opposite qualities can be:

• active (or power of action, or act upon, or molding forces),
• susceptible (or suffer action, or act under, or underlines forces as a matter).

And the oppositional quality pair that is active consists of:
— “hot”, and
— “cool, cold”.

In turn, the oppositional quality pair that is susceptible, consists of:
— “moist, wet”, and
— “dry”.

When it comes to active qualities that are “hot” and “cool, cold”, then:

• “Hot” is active (or has the power of action, or acts upon, or has molding forces, or implies power) because:
  — Hot associates things of the same kind.
  — Hot has causal power because it is associating things of the same class. It also has this property that eliminates what is foreign during combustion.
• “Cool, cold” is active (or has the power of action, or act upon, or has molding forces) because:
  — Cold brings together homogeneous and heterogeneous bodies. That is, in other words, similar and unrelated bodies.

Besides, to the above, in my opinion, Aristotle interestingly talks about the excess of fire and cold.

Before I discuss the second pair (that is, “dry” and “moist, wet”), which is susceptible (or suffer action), I will first put this pair in the diagram. It means I will show where are located qualities which are:

• active (or have the power of action, or act upon, or have molding forces, imply power),
• susceptible (or suffer action, or act under, or underlines forces as a matter).

The above division is fascinating to me because we can associate it with the division into adaptive-defensive mechanisms.

These mechanisms are divided into two pairs, and each pair is containing two opposing qualities. So, these two pairs of mechanisms are:

• Extraversion—Introversion, which will be equivalent here of—active qualities (that have the power of action). These qualities are “hot” and “cool, cold”.
• Perceiving—Judging, which will be equivalent here of—susceptible qualities (that suffer action). These qualities are “dry” and “moist, wet”.

I will tell more about the adaptive-defensive mechanism in one of the next chapters.

And now, let us say, why the qualities “dry” and “moist, hot” are susceptible? Or why they suffer action, act under, underlines forces as a matter, and so on?

Here, I will tell first that Greeks used one term for the words “moist” and “wet”. Therefore, in my considerations, I am using two concepts, namely “moist, wet”.

Dry and moist-wet are basically categories of many qualities, which Aristotle classified as similar to dry or moist-wet.

I think that the easiest way to present these similar qualities will be putting them in the table.

Thus, as we can see, the terms “dry” and “moist-wet” have broad meanings.

Besides, Aristotle to qualities “dry” and “moist-wet” attributed various features. Below I have put some quotes from Aristotle that talk about these qualities. The following quotes are specifically from the part of Aristotle’s work “On Generation and Corruption”, which is marked as Book II, 229 b and 330 a.

“Moist, wet” Aristotle defines, among other, in this way:

• “the moist has no determinate shape, but is readily adaptable and follows the outline of that which is in contact with it, it is characteristic of it to be 'such as to fill up'”
• “moist is that which, being readily adaptable in shape”
• “For the fine' consists of subtle particles; but that which consists of small particles is 'such as to fill up', inasmuch as it is in contact whole with whole-and 'the fine' exhibits this character in a superlative degree. Hence it is evident that the fine derives from the moist”.
• “the viscous' derives from the moist: for 'the viscous' (e.g. oil) is a 'moist' modified in a certain way”
• “'the soft' derives from the moist. For 'soft' is that which yields to pressure by retiring into itself, though it does not yield by total displacement as the moist does—which explains why the moist is not 'soft', although 'the soft' derives from the moist”.
• Etc.

In turn, “dry” Aristotle defines, among others, as follows:

• “'dry' is that which is readily determinable by its own limit, but not readily adaptable in shape”
• “coarse derives from the dry”
• “'The brittle', on the other hand, derives from the dry: for 'brittle' is that which is completely dry—so completely, that its solidification has actually been due to failure of moisture”.
• “'The hard', on the other hand, derives from the dry: for 'hard' is that which is solidified, and the solidified is dry”.
• Etc.

Now, I will end my description of:
— Elements (or originative source, or primary bodies of the same kind), and
— qualities.

I hope that I was able to present Aristotle’s theory about Elements and qualities in a way that is accessible enough. This theory has fascinated many philosophers and scientists for many centuries. The fact that this theory has survived to our times says one thing, it is simply brilliant. Personally, I am also fascinated by Aristotle’s theory. I am so fascinated that I made this theory the foundation of my theory. That is, the foundation of the Mandala of Characters. Besides, I used the Elements and qualities, which I described above, to name the types of the Mandala of Characters.

Indeed, nowadays, Aristotle’s theory is not literally used in science. However, the symbolic character of this theory and its construction is extremely logical, consistent, and simple. So, the design of this theory is, so to speak, a fascinating logical masterpiece of art.

The above Aristotle's theory actually gives us a way to the infinitive amount of various associations, metaphors, comparisons, references, analogies, etc. This theory can, therefore, be a huge source of inspiration. So, personally, I am very happy that I was able to rediscover this theory. For me, it is like a discovery of a priceless ancient treasure. A treasure that can still be very useful for everyone who reaches for it.

As I mentioned above, in the next chapters, I will talk about parts of the Mandala of Characters that are analogous to the qualities from Aristotle’s theory. These qualities also set for us four additional reference points in the Mandala. I discussed the main four reference points in previous chapters.

In that case, as a basis for further considerations, I will highlight our four additional reference points, and I place the first parts on them. These parts are Aristotle’s qualities.

References: