And just as the passive potentiality of the statue is something real in the block of marble, though distinct from the actuality of the statue and from the process by which this is actualized, so is the active power of making the statue something real in the sculptor, though distinct from the operation by which he makes the statue. If an agent’s _power_ to act, to produce change, were not a reality in the agent, a reality distinct from the _action_ of the latter; or if a being’s capacity to undergo change, and thereby to become something other, were not a reality distinct from the process of change, and from the actual result of this process—it would follow not only that the actual alone is real, and the merely possible or potential unreal, but also that no change can be real, that nothing can really become, and nothing really disappear.(73) 9. (_c_) ACTUALITY: ITS RELATION TO POTENTIALITY.—It is from our experience of change in the world that we derive our notions of the potential and the actual, of active power and passive potentiality. The term “act” has primarily the same meaning as “action,” “operation,” that process by which a change is wrought. But the Latin word _actus_ (Gr. ἐνέργεια, ἐντελέχεια) means rather that which is achieved by the _actio_, that which is the correlative and complement of the passive potentiality, the actuality of this latter: that by which potential being is rendered formally actual, and, by way of consequence, this actual being itself. “_Potentia activa_” and its correlative “_actus_” might, perhaps, be appropriately rendered by “_power_” (_potestas agendi_) and “_action_” or “_operation_”; “_potentia passiva_” and its correlative “_actus_,” by “_potentiality_” and “_actuality_” respectively.