 Cavendish will argue that the processes that are traditionally identified as material are wondrous and impressive and that the processes that she would identify as material, but that others would identify as immaterial, are even more so. As we will see, her view on the sophistication of matter also informs other aspects of her thinking – for example, her metaphysics of imagination, according to which imaginings are not static pictures, but living figures that are creative and able to take on a life of their own; and also her view of the superiority of natural productions to human artifacts (Lascano 2020). According to Cavendish, the latter are composed of bodies that are put together quickly and do not have the same history of communication and synchronization as the entities that compose a production of nature (Cunning 2016, 185–196). When Cavendish says that ideas are material images, or that natural productions are more sophisticated than artifacts, she is not supposing a conception of matter according to which it is static and inert and dead. Her own views employ some of the language of the tradition – for example matter, image, and idea – but she fleshes out such terms in novel directions. She does not attempt to create an entirely new language, given that no one would understant it. For the most part she retains existing terminology and notes the respects in which it has been misused or abused.