Top-Rated Free Essay
Preview

Aristotle S Four Causes

Good Essays
620 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Aristotle S Four Causes
Aristotle, differing from Plato, believed that by observation we could explain the world and all matter. Aristotle refuted Plato’s idea of having an absolute explanation. Aristotle’s approach, empiricism, is the foundation of science. Empiricism is the use of the five senses to observe objects and gain knowledge.
Aristotle observed that the world was constantly changing, a movement from potentiality to actuality. One of Aristotle’s examples, whiteness, shows that something that is ‘not white’ has the potential to become ‘actually white’. Aristotle came to the conclusion that there are stages, due to the movement from potentiality to actuality. He called these the ‘four causes’: Material, Formal, Efficient and Final causes.
Aristotle understood that an object could not reach actuality without completing each of the four causes successfully. His first cause, the material, describes what the object is made from. For example, a computer is made up of wires, plastic and other materials, these things become the ­­material cause of the computer. Aristotle used the example that a bronze sculpture and silver saucer would have the material causes of bronze and silver. Objects can have as many material causes as deemed necessary.
The second cause, formal, it is what we recognise as the item we are looking at. For instance, you recognise a phone to be a phone because you have an already formed image of its actuality. This links with Plato’s theory of the forms, in the sense that Plato believes there to be absolute views of objects which exist.
His third cause was the efficient cause, this is the way in which something is made/built/manufactured to achieve its actuality. For example, a sculpture’s efficient cause could be a hammer, chisel, water and cloth. My computer’s efficient cause may vary from machines to people to screwdrivers. Once this third cause is complete, the object reaches its actuality.
Lastly, the final cause of a thing is its purpose (telos).Aristotle used the example of health being the cause of walking, he asks ‘why does one walk? That one may be healthy’. Once something has reached its actuality it is also in a state of potentiality. An object, once reached its actuality, has the potentiality to grow old and be damaged, therefore outliving it’s purpose. From this, we can see that Aristotle saw that the universe was in a constant change between potentiality and actuality. This is relatively the most important of all of the causes, if an object does not fulfil its actuality then it is does not reach its purpose and therefore it’s useless.
In one of his works, Aristotle identifies three substance categories. Substance category one contains thing which are subject to decay, die or change. These things are moved by the four causes from a state of actuality to potentiality. Substance category two involves things which are subject to the four causes but never die, decay or cease to exist. Aristotle believed that, within this category, the universe and time was placed because of pre-existing matter. The final category was ‘substance’ category three. Aristotle placed eternal things that are not subject to the four cases, mainly mathematics and what he called the Prime Mover.
The Prime Move is the efficient and final cause of the universe. It exists in a state of pure actuality incapable of change, only contemplating its existence. Aristotle believed this to be his ‘God’. Objects that move from potentiality to actuality fulfil their purpose because their change is bought about by the prime mover.
In conclusion, Aristotle believed the four causes acted upon everything and understood that they are a movement from potentiality to actuality. This movement though material, formal, efficient and final causes was ultimately bought about by the prime mover.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    There is an ongoing debate as to whether Plato’s Theory of Forms truly teaches us anything about the physical or empirical world, with many scientists and philosophers throughout history having very contrasting views. Throughout this essay I will lay down both arguments for and against the above statement and evaluate the outcome.…

    • 745 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Aristotle was a materialist. The material world is important for Aristotle as it is this world where our knowledge starts (i.e. we are not born with knowledge like Plato suggested – he’s not a rationalist).…

    • 1179 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Matrix 2

    • 679 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In the next column, based on Aristotle’s science of the first philosophy, analyze how Aristotle’s metaphysics may guide contemporary people to knowledge about the world.…

    • 679 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    This then leads Descartes to put the causal principle and ideas together, establishing causal principle ideas. Descartes asks if the cause of the idea of something can be a mode. As stated above, the cause of an effect must have more reality that the effect itself. An idea…

    • 723 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Please respond to the questions in bold. All your responses to this assignment should be based on the information given on “Was Aristotle Right or Wrong?”…

    • 1103 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Summing up from these four points Aristotle came to a conclusion that something must exist which causes the motion and change to occur without being moved itself and the 'uncaused change' must be eternal. Aristotle reached this conclusion by observing that if something can change, it exists in one 'actual' state and has the 'potential' to become another state, for example, an actual child is potentially an adult and a cow in a field is potentially a piece of roast beef. He realised that if things come to existence they must be caused to exist by something else and if something is capable of change that means it is potentially…

    • 1238 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Aristotle vs Plato

    • 905 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Aristotle’s and Plato’s views on forms were very different. Plato saw “forms” as descriptions and something like adjectives and it could be applied to more than one thing. If something was “delicious,” there was something else that was also “delicious” but they were not the same thing. These descriptions are real but are not physical matter. Aristotle, however, saw reality as having four causes: matter (what it is made up of), essence (what it is), producer…

    • 905 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Plato’s thoughts tended to believe in two levels of reality. Plato held that metaphysics is dualistic: he proposed that there are two different kinds of things - physical and mental. There is what appears real and what is real. Plato believed that everything real takes on a form but doesn't embody that form. on the other hand, Aristotle’s beliefs lead to him seeing only one level of reality. He felt there was only one imminent world and that forms existed within particular things. Aristotle held that form had no separate existence and existed in matter. in nature, we never find matter without form or form without matter. substance is always a composition of form and matter.…

    • 962 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Chrysippus argued that the cause is action or event that results in another action or event. He also stated that the cause, as well as, the body is all existent. The event that results from the cause is non-existent instead, therefore, a predicate. The cause of an event is inferred as ‘because’ while that which it causes is inferred as ‘why’. The cause and effect, according to Chrysippus, are not only relative but also inseparable. Chrysippus provided a distinction between “auxiliary and proximate” causes and “perfect and principal” causes. He argues that antecedent causes, when they are auxiliary and proximate, render their effects necessary. Perfect and principal causes, when they are antecedent, render their effects necessary. On the other…

    • 288 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Aristotle

    • 901 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The statement argues that Aristotle’s theory of the four causes is impossible to apply to everyday life and cannot be applied to the real world. Aristotle believed there are four causes that determine what things are and their purpose and claims this is how we differentiate one thing from another. These four causes are known as the material cause, the efficient cause, the formal cause and most importantly for Aristotle, the final cause, and these together describe how ‘things’ transform from the state of actuality to potentiality. To some extent the theory of the four causes could be accurate and plausible, however, some of the ideas behind it is flawed and unrealistic. In this essay I will cover the three main faults of Aristotle’s theory. Namely, its lack of clarity, that the theory is based on assumptions and that there is no evidence to support the existence of the prime mover.…

    • 901 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Each of the four causes answer a "why?" question. Aristotle believed that to gain a complete answer we needed to know the answer to each of the four causes. But not all objects will have four causes. For example a universal triangle has a final cause that states its definition but it does not have an efficient cause as it does not come into being but it purely exists. Nor does it have a final cause and it does not have a goal or end.…

    • 1400 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    When Plato and other prominent philosophers such as Plutarch and Heraclitus were observing the world, they came to the conclusion that it was in a state of flux; they came to the conclusion that it was constantly changing. Plato wrote a number of texts including Phaedo and Republic; this worked with his dualistic approach concluding that our realm of appearances – or our world; and all within is changeable and will eventually cease to exist. He says that this world is nothing but a mere copy of forms, and the forms are described as the eternal and perfect idea of what a thing is. The world of the forms, to Plato is the only realm where true knowledge lies, Plato defined this as the realm of reality; this could in fact be trusted unlike our own world. There are a few reasons to Plato as to why The Forms exist, and these reasons are present through his work for example through The Theory of Recollection, and The Imperfection Argument. But several philosophers have critiqued Plato’s notion and they argued Plato’s arguments are actually just reasons for why forms should exist; rather than actual proof of the existence. Furthermore, The Third Man Argument in Plato’s ‘Parmenides’ brings a prominent problem for the theory of The Forms. For example, Russell called it ‘One…

    • 2371 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Aristotle's Final Cause

    • 1569 Words
    • 7 Pages

    In this essay I will begin by extracting the arguments from the extract, outlining Aristotle’s explanation of the four ‘causes’ and arguing why Aristotle has reasons for believing this. In order to achieve a considered and…

    • 1569 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Aristotle, by contrast, theorized that objects were defined by their purpose. A pizza was round because it’s designer had given it that roundness, or function. The form of the object exists within itself so all is within this world. That which the pizza was made of could have been given a different form if it had been made differently. It could have…

    • 534 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Aristotle's Argument

    • 157 Words
    • 1 Page

    What is a good argument? Aristotle’s was the first person to have a formal theory for argument. He states that an argument is “When, certain things being so, something else results from these by their being so (either generally or for the most part) – there (in the Topics) this is called deduction, here it is called enthymeme” (Rhetoric I.2, 1356b16–18). It’s very interesting how Aristotle’s saw an argument from very different ways. In my opinion an argument is just the view of things from different perspective. I can’t understand how he can relate many words and concepts to this simple word. As Dr. King ask in lecture, what is a good argument? Is the big question. He combined fallacies, validity and induction to create a good…

    • 157 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays