Comments on John Brungardt’s Post (2019) "Those Two Roads‪"‬

John G. Brungardt, Ph.D., posts a 15 page essay on the Thomistica website. The title is “Those Two Roads: How a Natural Philosophical Solution about Motion serves Thomistic Philosophy”. The titular road connects Athens and Thebes.
Aristotle’s approach to motion is phantasmagorical. It moves. It is moved. The mover stands in contiguity with the moved. Action is contiguous with passion. Teaching is contiguous with learning.
Similarly, one travels the road from Athens to Thebes. Another travels the road from Thebes to Athens. Yet, the two roads are the same.
Brungardt follows Aquinas into the thicket. These are all relations. But, what is a relation?
From a Peircean point of view, there are two types of “relations”: triadic and dyadic. One belongs to the category of thirdness. Triadic relations may be conveniently diagrammed as category-based nested forms. The other goes with the category of secondness. Dyadic things and events, including motions, consist of two contiguous real elements. These are very different types of “relations”.
‘Aristotle’s phantasms of “relations” between mover and moved’ associate to secondness.
Consequently, these comments begin by replacing the word “relation” with “dyad” and “relata” for “dyadata”. Each dyad consists of two contiguous real elements (two dyadata). The contiguity goes into brackets, in the following notation: one real element [contiguity] other real element.
Once this substitution is performed, Brungardt’s premodern argument opens to a postmodern configuration.