Explain Aristotles Understanding of the Four Causes Essay

a) Explain Aristotle’s understanding of the four causes. Unlike his teacher, Plato, Aristotle believed that the world could be explained by physical observation. This approach of using the five senses, cataloguing and categorising, is the foundation of scientific study. The approach is known as empiricism. Plato believed that we needed to look beyond the physical for an explanation of the universe in the guise of the World of Forms. Aristotle disagreed with this. Aristotle’s understanding of the four causes begins with the assumption that is present in all Greek philosophy, the notion of pre-existing matter. He observed the world around him and noticed that it was in a state of constant motion, a movement from potentiality to†¦show more content†¦Lastly in terms of his understanding of causation, the final cause of a thing or object was its purpose (telos). The purpose of the statue is aesthetic in that it is admired; the purpose of my laptop is to help me do my work well. Aristotle uses the example of health being the cause of walking, Why does one walk? he asks, that one may be healthy. This is perhaps the most important of all the causes. Yet his understanding does not end here. Once something has achieved a state of actuality it is also in a state of potentiality. In this sense we can see that Aristotle saw that the universe was moving constantly between ‘potentiality’ to ‘actuality’ back to †˜potentiality’ once again. This idea required Aristotle to explain things further still because in order for this theory to work it must explain everything in the universe, including the universe itself. It is the Prime Mover that finishes Aristotle’s understanding of the four causes. The Prime Mover becomes the efficient and final causes of the universe. Its ‘action’ in the universe is passive. It exists in a state of ‘pure actuality’ incapable of change, only contemplating its own existence. This is Aristotle’s god. Things are attracted towards the perfection found within its ‘pure actuality’. This is why the Prime Mover is known as the great attractor. Objects that move from potentialityShow MoreRelatedAristotle s Book 8 Of Metaphysics1160 Words   |  5 PagesMuch of Aristotle’s book 8 of Metaphysics attempts to argue for the First Cause. Aristotle’s argument still holds some merit today but it has greatly changed in form. Today, the argument is known as the cosmological argument. While the form is different the ultimate conclusion is the same: there is a First Cause which explains all subsequent motion and change. This First Cause is held to be an argument for the existence of a Supreme Being or God . While the overall argument is still pondered by philosophersRead MoreAristotle s Understanding Of The Four Causes1448 Words   |  6 Pagesa) Explain Aristotle’s understanding of the four causes Aristotle explains that anything which changes is subject to causes giving it potentiality. Potentiality means that something has a purpose to fulfil when it is enabled to, this potentiality becomes actuality when it achieves that purpose which Aristotle called ‘Telos’. Therefore in order to go from cause to effect an object must change and Aristotle understood this process in four different ways called the four causes. He understood that eachRead MorePlato s Theory Of Form1111 Words   |  5 PagesSocratic questioning to inquire about Plato’s theory of Form and its explanation of causality in comparison to Aristotle’s own theories of causality and being. Aristotle criticizes Plato’s theory of Form because it only accounted for a one-dimensional explanation of what things are made up of and what identifies them. Aristotle offers his own explanations of causality and being through his four causes and his categories of being in an attempt to rectify P lato’s perceived failures. In Metaphysics 1.3 andRead MoreThe Physics, Meaning, Lectures On Nature1712 Words   |  7 Pagescausation, 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, â€Å"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 worldRead MoreEssay about Aristotle vs Plato1665 Words   |  7 Pageshe built on his mentor’s metaphysical teachings of things like The Theory of Forms and his views on the soul. However, he also challenged them, introducing his own metaphysical ideas such as act and potency, hylemorphism, and the four causes. He used these ideas to explain his account of the soul and the immateriality of intellect. Prior to Aristotle, philosophers like Parmenides and Heraclitus argued about the existence of change. Aristotle used the terms act and potency to respond to ParmenidesRead MorePlato Vs. Aristotle On Observational And Deductive Reasoning1139 Words   |  5 Pagesisolate redness without a material medium. As a result, Aristotle greatly advocated observational inquisition. While Plato regards the physical world as deceitful, Aristotle believe that true knowledge exist in understanding the nature of physical â€Å"real† things. Due to Plato and Aristotle’s dissimilar notions of knowledge, they both have different notions as to the acquisition of that knowledge. Plato, believing that the corporal is inherently imperfect, asserts that true knowledge is attainableRead MoreOverview Of Plato And Platos Theory Of The Four Forms1896 Words   |  8 Pagestopic of many philosophical discussions. This debate has caused many philosophers to give potential answers to the problem, yet no one agrees on one idea. Of these potential answers, two well-known ones are Platos Theory of Forms and Aristotles Theory of the Four Causes.   Despite their common focus on knowledge, the two philosophers differ in their beliefs in how knowledge is obtained. Plato places a bigger emphasis on the soul being the source of true knowledge, while Aristotle argues that true knowledgeRead MoreThe Most Significant Of The Scientific Theories Have Made Considerable Progression1372 Words   |  6 Pagesvalleys are what provision the evo lution of theories. The most significant of the preceding times was the era of Aristotle the philosopher around three hundred B.C., who helped lend a foundation for the forthcoming generations. Later on during the years four hundred through one thousand B.C., when much of the world was in stagnation, mostly Europe, the Islamic Empire was able to build a thriving scientific focal point, allowing scientific theories and ideas to emanate from within. If not for these luminousRead MorePlato s View On Form1429 Words   |  6 Pagesuniversal form. Aristotle’s view on form is particular, it is an individual characteristic that helps the conformation of something. Aquinas’s view on form is in its essence itself it is connected with matter. This paper will show how each philosopher’s perspective of form connects with each other and resemble the f-ness on it. Plato’s view on form, is described with what a form contains. Form is divided into six characteristics which are: transcendent, pure, archetypes, ultimate real, causes and systematicallyRead MoreDifference in the Philosophy of Plato and Aristotle and Their Influence.1213 Words   |  5 Pageshis philosophy from that of Plato. Although, both Plato and Aristotle criticized their teacher’s works, they were also influenced by them. Both Plato and Aristotle developed their own modes of knowledge acquisition; Plato’s Platonic Idealism and Aristotle’s Analytic Empiricism. In this paper, my objective is to identify the differences in the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle, which lead to the development of two contradictory modes of knowledge acquisition and their influence on succeeding thinkers