PHL 200 Monday, January 16, 12

PHL 200 Monday, January 16, 12 - PHL 200 Monday Book...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
PHL 200 Monday, January 16, 12 Book 2: -Formal causality aka essential causality: answer to the question “what is it” -trying to understand the phenomenon in nature forces to ask what it exactly is -asking either what it’s made out of (material organic or inorganic) or focusing on the change itself (ie.lightening or earthquake) we ask what underlies that change (underlying subject) -The matter can be both referring to that question; can be the thing that undergoes the change (subject) and the capacity to change -efficient cause so called moving causes …the answer to the question “who did it”: source of the cause -we usually ask what causes a phenomenon, asking about an efficient cause. The kinds of explanation by Aristotle ‘the final cause’: -the final cause thus the end result of a change -what sort of question are you asking? You often ask “what is this thing for and what is its goal?” -the first response to this normally, is kind of difficult to answer in response to nature. . -perfectly legitimate question… but the principles of change in nature and their explanations of those undergoing changes… HOW DOES FINAL CAUSALITY give the explanation for nature? -Not only is final causality evident to us, but it’s also unproblematic in terms of human desires and human intentions and practical reasoning which are always oriented towards a goal; “why are you going this way?” because “I want to get to the store”. In English the word ‘ in order to’ explains our final cause -Final causality in humans is purposiveness -What is final causality doing in the realm of nature? -one possibility (though not Aristotle’s possibility) is to say “God created the world and every existing thing, and everything is created for a purpose”. Depending on theologian and religion this is the idea. So, animals, plants, everything existing in nature may have a divine purpose which are or are not evident to us -but Aristotle says that the study of nature is not the study of God; the study of God belongs to Metaphysics. Nature studies qua-changeable (in so far as they change) only
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 03/06/2012 for the course PHL 200 taught by Professor Gerson during the Spring '11 term at University of Toronto.

Page1 / 4

PHL 200 Monday, January 16, 12 - PHL 200 Monday Book...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online