Explain Aristotle's Understanding of the Four Causes Essay

23.   Aristotle's concept of the "unmoved mover" or the ultimate "efficient cause" is similar to but not identical with, the later theistic concept of God seen in certain major religions.

Aristotle was an ancient Greek scientist and philosopher who sought the answer to our existence and the truth of reality. Aristotle was a pupil of Plato, a Greek philosopher who was famous for his theory of forms, but following his (Plato’s) death, he changed his views from Platonism to empiricism. Where Plato thought that true reality was based in what was abstract and intangible, Aristotle instead thought of

Aristotle created the foundations for modern reason. He studied data taken from observation and saw the world as an evolving place that strove to realize its innate potential. He saw the world as always moving and was fascinated by nature and human behavior. He wrote from zoology to poetics to metaphysics and more, which resulted in vast amounts of data organized and fit into a logical framework of explanation. Aristotle’s works came to influence philosophy, ethics, biology, physics, astronomy, politics, religion, and medicine.

He was the first to study formal logic, founded called the Lyceum and tutored kings. He influenced Jewish, Christian and Islamic traditions and beliefs. The Catholic Church took his view of a universal hierarchy and added the divine, the heavenly and the demonic to make their “Great Chain of Being.” Aristotle even had a basic idea of evolution based on God’s plan for the world (IEP). It is possible that he was the last person to know everything there was to know in his own time (Neill 488). His contributions to our understanding of the world are innumerable, despite that only about a third of his work survived. He contributed to philosophy as much as Plato, if not more. He took Plato’s theory of forms and changed it, making it his own, and in the process resolved the problems that he had noted, as well as those pointed out by Plato and others. He called his new theory he called Hylomorphism. Hylomorphism’s way of thinking stands directly opposite that which Plato’s forms encourage. Aristotle did not see the world as a reflection of another filled with forms but as the physical embodiment of the forms. The substances are created by the innate forms in the matter and are the only way we can perceive forms. This means that to Aristotle a substance did not have form only in an abstract world of forms but was contained by the object in and of

In this paper, I will refute Aristotle’s argument in the Physics in showing the need for formal and final causes in explaining natural things, by showing that his theories do not allow for any ‘chance’. Aristotle claims we observe order in the presence of ‘nature’ and ‘forms’. Accordingly, final and formal causes give structure and regularity to the natural world. I will argue, especially from the stance of materialism and Empedocles’ theories that chance can lead to order.

3. He debates that the entire body, rather than the parts, should be taken into

Aristotle introduces the argument of substantial change. There are three components for a change to occur; subject, potency, and act. The act refers to the change of the form. For a change to occur the potential of the new form must have existed before. Also, a change can be affected by an agent which adds potential for the act to occur. Without potential, the previous matter must have been destroyed

Aristotle’s view about nature is said to be teleological, but before delving into the specifics it is important to know what teleology is and how it can be applied to nature. Teleology is the explanation of phenomena by the purpose they serve rather than by postulated causes. In addition, telos- means an end, which Aristotle incorporates in his view of nature. This teleological view of nature is broken down into three categories in Physics II of the book we have been reading in class: nature as matter and as form, cause and chance, and final causes and necessity in nature. Aristotle’s concluding statements in these works show that nature itself is a cause and means for an end. Additionally, this teleological view of nature is still hinted

In Metaphysics XII, Aristotle elaborates on a need for a “first mover that initiates motion without being moved” (Met. 12.7, 1072a26). This primary, or unmoved mover, he believes is the source of all motion in the universe. In this essay, I will explain his conception of such a mover. I will then elaborate on how this unmoved mover initiates motion. Finally, I will explain his rationale for believing there is such a mover.

Although Aristotle's experts are short, they are filled with a lot of meaning. With his explanations of the ‘four causes’, it is critical to analyze that they can be used in our daily lives. They can be utilized to explain things such as how the government works and why they do, what they do as the people and nation evolve.

After introducing the principle causes (efficient, formal, material, final), Aristotle talks about chance and spontaneity in Book II, (Physics) for the purpose of investigating their place among the said causes. Aristotle bases his enquiry on the observation that in history, these terms are conflictive in their interpretation. Some people say that everything that we consider luck or spontaneity really has some underlying definite cause. Yet there are other people, such as Empedocles, who invoke chance when describing the physics of air; or some, who “ascribe this heavenly sphere and all the worlds to spontaneity” (196a 25). In setting out to elucidate the nature of these terms

The theory of the Four Causes refers to an influential Aristotelian principle whereby the causes of movement and/or change are categorized allowing us to have knowledge of our existence and everything around us. Aristotle wrote that "we do not have knowledge of a thing until we have grasped its ‘why’, that is to say, its cause." He provided an account of the operation of various individual substances in the universe. Distinctions were made between things of two sorts: those that are contingent on something else’s movement and those that necessary in their own movement. Aristotle not only suggested a proper description of these but also attempted to answer particular questions such as ‘Why does this event happen?’ and ‘Why is this object as

The relationship between Aristotle's conception of metaphysics, epistemology, and man's desire to know is extremely intricate. These notions have an inherent interrelation with one another, which is tied to his concept of being as being. Aristotle's idea of the first science (Aristotle 79), which was eventually called metaphysics, revolves about the concept that prior to other forms of science that pertain to empirical evidence and certain facets that can be examined in terms of their physical qualities, such as astronomy or certain forms of mathematics, there is a fundamental form of science that can explain the root cause of these other events and proclivities.

As Aristotle saw his general surroundings, he watched that things are moving and changing in certain ways. Aristotle found that specific things cause different things, which thusly bring about something else. Aristotle trusted that a boundless chain of causation was unrealistic, subsequently, a prime mover or some likeness thereof should exist as the main source of everything that progressions or moves.

The physics, meaning “lectures on nature” written by Aristotle was a base towards Western science and philosophy genre books. His passion towards the topic of nature had led him to become more curious on general issues such as motion, causation, place and time. In Physics II.3 Aristotle’s provides a general understanding of the four causes, these four causes seem to apply to everything that would require an explanation. He first introduces his theory of the four causes in Book II, Chapter 3 where he states, “knowledge is the object of our inquiry, and men do not think they know a thing till they have gasped the ‘why’ of it (which is to grasp its primary cause).” (Physics, 194b 18-21). Aristotle’s passion towards knowing about the world, the things involved in it, and them to break each of them down individually to understand them completely, comes from the reasoning that he likes to know the reasons as to why they, as they are. Aristotle continues on to say “clearly, then, we must also find the reason why in the case of coming to be, perishing, and every sort of natural change.” (Phys, 196b 21-23). His four causes help him build a complete understanding on the ontology of physical things, which requires to know every aspect of properties these physical objects have. Throughout this essay I will be arguing that Aristotle’s four causes offer a complete system for motion in which all motion fits.