Entelechy. The potential has two opposites according to the matter in hand, action or operation, and existence. Aristotle seems to have intended to denote the former by ἐνέργεια, and the latter by ἐντελέχεια. Energies, he tells us, tend to entelechies.(1) Entelechy may therefore, especially when we consider the formation of the word, be rendered complete existence.(2) The soul is defined by Aristotle «the first entelechy of a body having potential life.»
But Aristotle does not adhere to whatever distinction he may have proposed to make between energy and entelechy. The former he says is not confined to movement, but includes repose. God everlastingly enjoys one pure and simple pleasure. For there is an energy not only of movement, but also of repose.(3) Again, God is οὐσία ᾀΐδιος καὶ ἐνέργεια ᾄνευ δυνάμεως. God is eternal substance and energy (act) apart from potentiality.
The meaning assigned to entelechy by Sir A. Grant seems the right one. The word, however, has been variously interpreted. Cicero, who may be thought to have confounded it with ἐνδελέχεια, explains it as meaning quandam quasi continuatam motionem et perennem.(4) Melancthon writes it endelechy, says it means continuitas, and vindicates Cicero’s interpretation. It will, however, I suppose be admitted that ἐνδελέχεια and ἐντελέχεια are quite different words.
Bishop Hermolius Barbarus is said to have consulted the devil in order to find the meaning of the latter. He translated it literally perfectihabia.
Leibnitz calls his monads entelechies, as being each a perfected existence. The word is little used.
__________
(1) Metaph. VIII. 8, 11.
(2) Sir A. GRANT, Arist. Eth. vol. I. p. 234, 3rd ed.
(3) Nic. Eth. IV. 9, 5.
(4) Tusc. Quœst. I. quæst. 1.