Why is the Latin phrase: horror vacui commonly interpreted as: nature abhors a vacuum?
It may well be Aristotle's intended message, given the context, but it seems like a bit of a jump. Doesn't it? I'm sure I must be wrong; Aristotle was famously well spoken and well educated, and modern academics and well educated people seem to accept this translation/interpretation. I just can't see how or why, so I invite you to correct me.
In case the reasons for my confusion aren't obvious; trying to reconcile it, my inner monologue went something like this:
- It's just two words: horror (fear?) & void (vacuum?).
- There's no mention of nature, natura, naturae, etc.
- Why horror? Wouldn't timor or metu be more appropriate when talking about fears or phobias?
- Why vacui? Isn't vacuum a Latin noun already?
- Wouldn't it be more along the lines of something like:
- naturae abhorreos vacui, or
- natura abhorret vacuum?