Analysis of Aristotle's Views on Causality
A: Aristotle's teaching on causality was in contrast to that of his
teacher, Plato, Plato believed we can recognise an object because our
soul remembers the perfect Form from the Realm of Forms, but Aristotle
argues that we recognise an object because of the four causes that
occasion it; the Material cause, the Efficient cause, the Formal cause
and the Final cause.
The Final cause is a very different cause to the other three. Whereas
the Material, Efficient and Formal causes all relate to how something
exists, the Final cause is about why it exists.
If we take a snowman as an example, then the Material cause is snow,
the Efficient cause is the children who made it, and the Formal cause
is the shape of the snowman. These three causes could be seen to be
sufficient for how to work out what the snowman is, however
Aristotle's Final cause states that for the snowman to be anything,
then it must fulfil its purpose. In this case, the children's
enjoyment.
The Final cause is the most important cause, as it gives everything a
purpose in existing. If there were no Final cause then there would be
no need for anything to exist.
B: Despite the fact that Aristotle came up with his theory on
causality over 2000 years ago, a lot of it still makes sense today,
and unlike quite a few ancient theories, it hasn't come up against a
lot of opposition, and hasn't been disproved. As with any theory, it
has weaknesses, but it has strength as well.
One of its biggest strengths, is that it doesn't overrule other
theories, such as the Big Bang, or God. It requires 4 causes, and so
it can be said that the Big Bang is the Efficient cause, while God is
the Final cause. God fits in quite well with Aristotle's theory of
causality, as Aristotle said that there must be an Eternal Mover,
which cannot be moved itself, for which God seems a reasonable
Do we know other minds exist? If so, how? Based on similarities in characteristics and behavior alone are not sufficient proof to conclude other minds exist, however, if we breakdown the mind to its core and analyze the relation to our existence then I believe we can know other minds exist. I will use Aristotle’s Doctrine of the Four Causes to argue that knowledge of other minds is plausible. His doctrine suggests that the reason for something to come to be, can be attributed to four different types of causal factors; these can be applied to comprehend anything. Its objective is to break the thing down to its base or its core to be able to gain a better understanding of the subject. We need to know what as much as we need to know why something
Aristotle lived before the writings of the New Testament and the birth of Jesus of Nazareth born in Bethlehem of Judaea. Aristotle was a theoretical philosopher confident that his endeavors to understand the world would succeed. Aristotle agreed with is teacher (Plato) about many things; the existence of God, the presence of oppose in the world, and the creation of the universe, (the connection between virtue and happiness). According to Mason on God and Nature (161) Aristotle (and Plato), played a major part in making belief in a single supreme God more wide spread, the idea of a creator God was not widespread among all the Greek philosophers and thinkers. Aristotle (c. 384–322 BC), often posited first cause arguments, that had certain notable cause, and saw ex nihilo nihil as proof for God and the Creation of the Universe (Mason 3, 28, 161 and Waterman Lecture Notes).
To some the causes and effects of things are mutually exclusive, and coexistence with one another. When observing specific equipment or even life, the question stands that there must be an account that took place before such items ceased to exist. Particularly, Aristotle argues that each thing, whatever it may be, will have causes, or types of explanatory factors by which that thing can be explained. The significant knowledge of causes allows for specific accounts to be known. It’s like questioning what occurred first the chicken or the egg. Anything in life offers a question of cause; something must have been in order to bring about the nature of today. These causes are apparent in answering everyday questions, which in turn explains that the causes of life clarify the being of which stood before it and such causes amount to same entity.
The first reason that makes me believe that the views of Aristotle on metaphysics are accurate is the factual nature of the philosopher’s evidence. In essence, the thinker optimism regarding the nature of real forms existing on earth is practical. To illustrate this, no one should endeavor to prove the nature of human existence through abstract thinking such as “being preconceived” in an ideal world before humans appear on earth. Indeed, such thinking is at best, a fantasy, and proving such claims could be a daunting task, if not an impossible one. Conversely, I believe Aristotle is right in regard to the existence of forms, such as the human nature. To illustrate this, curious minds regarding the validity of a form of existence as whether
For millennia, human beings have pondered the existence of supreme beings. The origin of this all-too-human yearning for such divine entities stems in part from our desire to grasp the truth of the cosmos we inhabit. One part of this universe physically surrounds us and, at the end of our lives, consumes us entirely, and so we return from whence we came. Yet there is another, arguably more eternal, part of the cosmos that, in some ways, is separable from the transient, material world we so easily perceive but that, in other ways, is inextricably linked to it by unexplored, divinable forces. The argument of Aristotle’s Metaphysics is not that this worldview is provable or disprovable; the mere fact we are able to reason about abstract objects without having to perceive them is evidence enough of this order. Rather, Aristotle attempts to tackle some of the most fundamental questions of human experience, and at the crux of this inquiry is his argument for the existence of an unmoved mover. For Aristotle, all things are caused to move by other things, but the unreasonableness of this going on ad infinitum means that there must eventually be an ultimate mover who is himself unmoved. Not only does he put forth this argument successfully, but he also implies why it must hold true for anyone who believes in the ability to find truth by philosophy.
The great Greek thinker Aristotle was born in 384 B.C. in Stagirus, a city in ancient Macedonia in northern Greece. At the age of eighteen Aristotle went to Athens to begin his studies at Plato's Academy. He stayed and studied at the Academy for nineteen years and in that time became both a teacher and an independent researcher. After Plato's death in 347 B.C. Aristotle spent twelve years traveling and living in various places around the Aegean Sea. It was during this time that Aristotle was asked by Philip of Macedon to be a private tutor to his son, Alexander. Aristotle privately taught Alexander for three years before he returned to Athens after Philip gained control of the Greek capital. During this period back in Athens Aristotle founded his own school, the Lyceum, where he taught for twelve years. In 323 B.C. Alexander the Great died and the Macedonians lost control of Athens. Aristotle was forced to leave and he died one year later in Chalcis, north of Athens, at the age of 62.
In Aristotle’s Metaphysics, he discusses what he believes to be the theory of origin. One must differentiate Aristotle’s theory with that of creation. The word “creation” implies a biblical idea. Aristotle was not familiar with the biblical text and therefore did not understand the concept of “creation” in the biblical sense. Rather he was more interested in the “origin” of the world.
Aristotle is the most influential philosopher in the history of Western thought. A Greek drama by Sophocles, Oedipus Rex, was praised in the Poetics of Aristotle as the model for classical tragedy and is still considered a principal example of the genre. In this essay I will analyze Oedipus Rex using Aristotle's concepts praxis, poiesis, theoria.
Aristotle, the last of the great Greek philosophers. He roamed Ancient Greece from 384 BC until his death in 323 BC. In this time, he wrote an enormous amount of works, a variety of books from metaphysics to politics and to poetry. His variety is exceptionally impressive. His greatest known works are the Athenian Constitution and Nicomachean Ethics. Aristotle’s works of Ethics explore a vast area of topics. He states, “The goal of the Ethics is to determine how best to achieve happiness.” In order to achieve happiness, one must live a virtuous life, in the mind of Aristotle.
To know a thing, says Aristotle, one must know the thing’s causes. For Aristotle the knowledge of causes provides an explanation. It is a way to understand something. Because of the importance of causality to knowledge and understanding, Aristotle developed something like the complete doctrine of causality, distinguishing efficient, material, formal, and final causes, and later concepts of causality have been derived from his analysis by omission. Aristotle’s four causes gives answers to the questions related to the thing to help ascertain knowledge of it, such as what the thing is made of, where the thing comes from, what the thing actually is, and what the thing’s purpose is. The thing’s purpose is used to determine the former three, in addition to the purpose being basically the same thing as what the thing actually is, as the purpose of the thing is used to determine whether or not a thing is what it is.
Aristotle is a well-known philosopher, who lived from 384 BC through 322 BC, having been born and spending most of his life in Greece. According to William Turner, in the Catholic Encyclopedia, his father was physician to the King of Macedonia, and other ancestors of Aristotle’s likely also held this position. Aristotle’s parents probably planned for him to receive a medical education so he also could become a physician, but both of his parents died while he was still a child. As he approached the age of 18, he was sent to school at the university of another great and well-known philosopher, Plato.
To the modern reader, Aristotle's views on astronomy, as presented in Metaphysics, Physics, De Caelo (On the Heavens) and Simplicius' Commentary, will most likely seem very bizarre, as they are based more on a priori philosophical speculation than empirical observation. Although Aristotle acknowledged the importance of "scientific" astronomy - the study of the positions, distances and motions of the stars - he nevertheless treated astronomy in the abstract, linking it to his overall philosophical world picture. As a result, the modern distinction between physics and metaphysics is not present in Aristotle, and in order to fully appreciate him we must try to abandon this pre-conception. Aristotle argued that the universe is spherical and finite. Spherical, because that is the most perfect shape; finite, because it has a center, viz. the center of the earth, and a body with a center cannot be infinite. He believed that the earth, too, is a sphere. It is relatively small compared to the stars, and in contrast to the celestial bodies, always at rest. For one of his proofs of this latter point, he referred to an empirically testable fact: if the earth were in motion, an observer on it would see the fixed stars as moving, just as he now observes the planets as moving, that is from a stationary earth. However, since this is not the case, the earth must be at rest. To prove that the earth is a sphere, he produced the argument that all earthly substances move towards the center, and thus would eventually have to form a sphere.
Aristotle made contributions to logic, physics, biology, medicine, and agriculture. He redesigned most, if not all, areas of knowledge he studied. Later in life he became the “Father of logic” and was the first to develop a formalized way of reasoning. Aristotle was a greek philosopher who founded formal logic, pioneered zoology, founded his own school, and classified the various branches of philosophy.
The scientist Aristotle (384-322 BCE) developed many important theories which modern day physics is based upon. One of these theories is Aristotle’s theory of motion. Through his research Aristotle attempted to provide explanations as to how objects in our universe moved. While many of his theories have been since proven to be inaccurate, they provided a basis for future theories which eventually lead to our present day understanding of motion.
Aristotle was and is a very influential figure when it comes to educational practices and process as well as philosophy, ethics, and many other subjects. Many of his teachings and lectures shape the way we are taught and learn today. He comes from a long line of recognizable names when considering influential figures in Educational Philosophy. Although this analysis is focused on his contributions to education, it is important to note that he showed influence in a variety of concepts.