According to the traditional substance-property distinction, what role does a substance play?
AIt is the physical material an object is made of
BIt is an independently existing thing that bears properties
CIt is a bundle of co-occurring properties with no separate bearer
DIt is a predicate in a subject-predicate sentence
In the traditional (Aristotelian) account, a substance is whatever exists in its own right and serves as the subject that properties belong to. The apple is a substance; redness exists only as the redness of something. This is an ontological role — what it means to be a thing rather than a way something is — not a claim about physical composition.
Question 2 True / False
On bundle theory, an object is an independently existing substance that possesses its properties as a separate bearer.
TTrue
FFalse
Answer: False
Bundle theory is precisely the view that rejects an independent bearer. On this account, an object just is the bundle (collection) of its properties — there is no substratum beneath the properties that 'has' them. Bundle theory is introduced as the main alternative to the traditional substance view, because it avoids the mysterious bare particular while raising its own puzzle about individuation.
Question 3 Short Answer
What is the 'bare particular' problem, and why does it arise from the traditional substance view?
Think about your answer, then reveal below.
Model answer: A bare particular is what remains of a substance after all its properties are mentally removed — a propertyless bearer. The problem is that such an entity would be entirely unknowable (we access things only through their properties) and seemingly plays no role beyond being a 'peg' to hang properties on. Locke captured this worry with his notion of substance as an unknown substratum.
The problem arises because the traditional view insists that the substance is something distinct from and underlying its properties. But if we try to identify what that something is — setting aside all its properties — nothing identifiable remains. The substance becomes a theoretical posit that does explanatory work (it's what bears properties) while being forever hidden behind the very properties it supposedly grounds.