0
Aristotle said that the world must have an "Initial Cause", that something must have set in motion the cosmos. That has been used and is still used as an argument by many theists in favour of the existence of God. Aristotle did not describe exactly what/who that cause is, but the very nature of such a thing implies that it is a god-like entity.
Wiki User
∙ 15y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
According to Aristotle what is the final cause of rainfall?
It rains so plants and creatures can survive.
What is Aristotle's Chain of Cause and Effect?
Aristotle's Chain of Cause and Effect for a tragic hero is: Inciting Incident Hamartia Peripeteia Anagnorisis Catharsis
Aristotle was primarily interested in what?
cause and effect
What are Aristotle's four causes?
Aristotle, born in 384 BCE was a philosopher taught by Plato at his academy in Athens. Aristotle, despite being a disciple of Plato, often questioned and challenged Plato's ideas, for example Aristotle did not understand how humans could gain knowledge, if according to Plato, Forms place knowledge outside particular things. Aristotle criticised Plato's idea of the ideal world being the most real world, as he believed the World of opinion was the most real world. Aristotle wrote a book called, ' Metaphysics,' in, which he investigates the question, 'What is being?' Aristotle opened the book with 'All men desire to know,' this clearly shows Aristotle's passion for knowledge and observation of the world. Aristotle was concerned with the Empirical World, and he believed we gain knowledge through experience. He argued that there are four causes, material, efficient, formal and final. The four causes in Aristotle's eyes is not the normal definition of cause, for example cause and effect. Cause in this context comes from the Greek word 'aition', which is why an object exists in the shape, or form that it does. Material cause is what an object consists of. For example a wooden chair is made of wood. The wood, the material cause, is only what the chair is made of, it is not what makes chair what it is, or what gives the chair characteristics. The wood is what the chair is composed of. The matter that the chair is made from is wood. The characteristics of an object is the Formal cause, the shape or form it takes. For example, the wood chair, its formal cause is what gives the chair its characteristics and expression. For instance what the builder or sculptor plans in his mind whilst building the chair. The wood arranged in a certain way is the Formal cause. The efficient cause, this is how an object happened, how and why it was built or made. For example, the builder or sculptor by which the chair was fashioned. The efficient cause is the force that affects an object. The builder of the chair built the chair instead of just leaving a pile of wood. The final cause is the purpose of an object, its reason of being. Why has the chair been made? To be sat on, either whilst people eat, learn or relax. It final cause is concerned with why the chair is as it is, in order to carry out its function the Final cause is teleological and therefore Aristotle believed every object has a final cause, this is known as its telos. Such as a houses ultimate telos is to protect and shelter a family and a carpets telos is to insulate the house or to decorate it. Telos is the Greek word for purpose, meaning or goal and that is what the final cause is, the end of something. An objects telos can either be deliberate or natural, for example a human consciously tries to be a nice, caring and reasoning in order to teach its full potential, telos. On the other hand a chair unconsciously achieves its telos of becoming a chair. Aristotle argued that the material cause, the matter could not live without the form. For example without the wood of the chair, there could simply not be a chair. The material and formal causes are matter. They could not be alone without the other two causes, efficient and final cause because matter alone in the chair would simply be a pile of wood that took no shape. Whereas the form is what gives the chair its shape and structure. However not is not the same 'form' that Plato talked about; it is not the perfect form, it is simply how it's built and put together. Aristotle believed in potentially that then led to actuality, and this theory was a major theme in his book, 'Metaphysics.' Aristotle believed that an object is influenced by the four causes; material, formal, efficient and final, and the object has actuality, which is achieved by potentiality. Aristotle argued that everything in the World of Sense is always changing. For example a pig in it sty exists in an actual state however its potential is to become sausages or pork. Potentially allows the pig to achieve its telos, its ultimate end. Aristotle believed the actuality of an object is always present in the potentiality. Jonathon Leceo used the famous, Kermit the frog as an example to explain actuality and potentiality. Leceo said, Kermit started as an embryo, this was the 'cause' of sex. Kermit then developed into a tadpole, who had potentiality to become a frog, and then at last Kermit become a frog. Becoming a frog was Kermit's actuality, his eudemonia. Aristotle as everything is always changing there must be something that causes everything to change. Aristotle called this the Prime mover, he described the Prime mover as unchanging as it had reached its actuality and therefore it is good, as it does no longer need to change to improve itself. The prime mover is also the final cause fir Aristotle; it is the final goal of movement. Aristotle linked the prime mover into being God, as he has no form, only matter therefore the Prime mover is divine simplicity. The Universe depends on the Prime mover or else nothing would ever change. All objects try to attain their final cause and finally the Prime mover. Aristotle used nous and described the prime mover as the cosmic nous of the universe. Nous is a Greek word, which is translated as mind or intellect, and it is used but was also used by philosophers such as Plato and Plotinus. Nous is how Aristotle referred to reason and it has the uppermost form of rationality. In conclusion the four causes are everything that influences an object; all four causes operate upon everything in the universe. Aristotle believed that everything in the universe had a purpose and therefore the causes explain each objects means for existence. Each object has matter and form to give it specific characteristics. The prime mover causes all this change, as he is eternal and inspiring as he had already reached his teleos, which is this aim of everybody and everything.
What are the strengths and weaknesses of Aristotle's four causes?
Aristotle used the Four Causes to explain an object's transferral from potentiality to actuality. The material cause, formal cause, efficient cause and final cause take something from an idea to reality. They are accurate to a degree but have several flaws and faults. A problem with the four causes is that they rely on experience. Plato argued that experience was unreliable as it changes from person to person - we cannot be sure that chairs look the same to every person. Also, Aristotle has no concrete evidence that the material world is the source of knowledge - many would turn to religion and faith as the source of truth. However, the Four Causes are derived from Aristotle's reflections on his studies of the natural world so many would agree that they are reliable, including many scientists. Another benefit to the four causes is that they can be applied to things which already exist. The material cause can be tested and confirmed; 'The chair is made of wood'. The formal cause is also easy to prove - the structure of something can be seen. We can test it. The efficient cause is more confusing as there can be several efficient causes for an object. The carpenter made the chair but a wood cutter cut the tree and a machine sanded the wood. The final cause is obvious in some cases (a chair exists to be sat on) but less so in others - what is the final cause of a person? There are anomalies which don't conform to the four cause structure. The material cause of a movement or the efficient cause of a coincidence highlight flaws in Aristotle's theory. If things happen by chance or luck then they do not fit into the categories. Emotions also go against the theory as they have no material or formal cause and even their efficient and final causes can be questioned. Is there a final cause for despair? The fact that there are anomalies does not disprove the theory and this is a major strength to the argument. There is no evidence that it is not true and it doesn't overrule other theories like God or the Big Bang so does not have much opposition. If it could be disproved it would suggest that it was inaccurate but it has not been.
According to Aristotle what is the final cause of rainfall?
It rains so plants and creatures can survive.
Is there a Christian ultimate reality?
Ultimate reality exists outside religions. There is not a different reality for each religion, only an inner peace and understanding. It is both a religious experience (no matter one's faith) and a personal experience. The only requirement in achieving ultimate reality is belief in and a surrender to a greater power. Meditation is a great way to encounter the Ultimate Reality because it is like the opposite of prayer; instead of talking to God(s), you are listening. As a Christian, I can tell you there is not a "Christian Ultimate Reality" but all Christians can encounter Ultimate Reality.What is stated above is both self refuting and ridiculous. If there is no ultimate reality, then this turns out to actually be the ultimate reality, so the idea shoots itself in the foot. It is contradictory and therefore necessarily false to say that it is true that there is no ultimate truth. A self refuting statement is one that cannot live up to its own criteria of meaning. Anything you say to me about truth, even if you say there is none, is a claim to truth. You want me to think it is true that there is no truth. I simply can't buy it. Of course there is a Christian ultimate reality. It begins with God himself, who is the source of all things, the foundation upon which everything else rests. The next truth about Christian ultimate reality is that nothing comes from nothing, or out of nothing, nothing comes. Therefore there must be a cause or source for everything. The universe could not have created itself, and so it needs a cause greater than it. All this inner peace and listening in meditation is nonsense if there is no ultimate source of meaning. Since God is that source, he is the ultimate reality, in the biblical, Christian view. Further, we are not perfect and must die, but there either is or is not a "cure" for death, a solution to the problem of "eventual personal extinction." If there is not, then there is no ultimate hope for anyone, let alone humanity. If there is a path to immortality, then there is indeed hope for everyone. Christ is both that path and that hope.
What was the cause of Aristotle's death?
Aristotle died from an unidentified stomach illness.
In Quinney's Social Reality of Crime theory were there any historical events that would have significant impact on the study of Criminal Justice?
the ultimate cause of crime is the law
What is Aristotle's Chain of Cause and Effect?
Aristotle's Chain of Cause and Effect for a tragic hero is: Inciting Incident Hamartia Peripeteia Anagnorisis Catharsis
What is the definition of the word plot when relating to a story?
Aristotle defines plot as "the arrangement of the incidents [action, episodes, scenes] according to cause and effect."
Aristotle was primarily interested in what?
cause and effect
What is the definition of ultimate cause?
The definition of ultimate causes is the ultimte cause of ur causes
What do Galileo and Aristotle have is common?
Both Aristotle and Galileo triggered a Paradigm Shift. Galileo mainly influenced the world of 'scientists'. To be honest a universe with or without earth as centre doesn't matter that much Probably Newton made more difference, only would there have been a 'Newton' without Galilei But also Newton mainly influenced the world of 'scientists'. Aristotle cause a Major Paradigm shift in The Western World. A reality Redesign. One that changed the view about reality from a holistic view (The One, The Fire, The All, ..) in a creationist view. Physical common sense reality + supreme God. Excuse for hunting 'barbarians', 'devils', 'witches', 'terrorists'
How do you identify the plot?
The plot is just what happens in the story. Tell someone what happened in the story and you have the plot. Aristotle says that plot is "the arrangement of the incidents" according to cause and effect.
Did Aristotle believe in the Greek Gods?
No he did not. Aristotle created the discipline of logic. He used this logic to answer life's greatest question. ..What is holding up reality? His answer was the universe must be held up and sustained by something that was uncreated and not part of the material world. . Otherwise it too would require a cause. We see design so it must be a mind . He called this God... The unmoved mover and first cause. He determined God was One...There were not "gods"
Contrast immediate and ultimate causes of behavior?
Immediate Cause is the oraganism's interaction w/ the environment and Ultimate Cause is the oraganism's evolutionary.
