Aristotle and causation

• Aristotle was Plato's student but looked for the ‘truth’ in our world, where Plato believed in the world of the Forms. Plato was a rationalist - he thought knowledge was based on reason, whereas Aristotle was an empiricist - he thought that knowledge is based on experience. Plato uses a priori approach, whereas Aristotle uses a posterior approach. This means that unlike Plato, Aristotle's ideas can be proved right or wrong. 
• This world is in a constant state of flux. Aristotle says there are four causes needed to explain change in the world. There are four causes so four explanations. 
• Material cause: 

  • Explains what something is made from. 
  • This does not define the object because components can make other things. 
  • Does not explain everything. 
  • E.g. A rat is made from fur, flesh and organs. 
• Efficient cause: 

  • The thing that makes something happen.  
  • E.g. A Carpenter makes a piece of wood into a chair. 
• Formal cause: 

  • This is how Aristotle termed the characteristics an object has. 
  • It gives something its shape and allows it to be identified. 
  • E.g. A book is not just a piece of paper, but pieces of paper arranged in a particular way. 
• Final cause: 

  • The reason why the object exists. 
  • This purpose or 'telos’ gives significance to the object, so it is the most important cause. 
  • This helps us understand what is good; Something is good if it fulfills its purpose. 
  • E.g. Human’s purpose is eudaimonia 
• Aristotle embraced change. He also said there are that there are two states of being: 

  • Potentiality: The possibility of doing something or becoming something. 
  • Actuality: When potential is achieved. 

  He also observed that: 

  • If things come into existence, they must be caused by something. 
  • Something has the potential to change. 
• The cause of this change and motion is the prime mover. Everything is attracted to the prime mover, and this causes change. This is the purpose or ‘telos’ of change. 
• Properties of the Prime Mover: 

  • Is the ultimate explanation of why things exist and move – it is the final cause 
  • Is not capable of change – it is said to be ‘unmoved’ (pure actuality) 
  • Never changes or has the potential to change and so is eternal 
  • Does not interact with the world in any way. It is said to be transcendent and only thinks of itself 
  • Has necessary existence. This means that it does not depend on anything else for existence 
  • Did not create the universe – it is eternal  
• Gerry Hughes likens this to a cat and a saucer of milk - the cat is attracted to the saucer of milk and moves towards it, but saucer of milk does not make the cat change. 

  • Critiques say that two physical things are not comparable to a spiritual thing. 

  " If there was no first cause, there was no cause at all.” 
• Strengths of Aristotle's Theory:

  • His theory is based on what we can observe through our senses (a posteriori knowledge). It is more acceptable as it is based around concepts that everyone can discover. 
  • The first three causes each rely on sense experience to be proved. The emphasis on testing and observation in the material world is similar to how scientists conduct experiments – making his ideas all the more influential.  
• Weaknesses of Aristotle's theory: (1)

  • Senses are different from person to person. This means the information they give us is subjective (personal). 
  • Rationalists like Descartes and Plato take a skeptical approach to the reliability of our senses. For example, can we be sure chairs look the same to every person? They argue for an ‘a priori approach’ 
• Weaknesses of Aristotle's Theory: (2)

  • Some thinkers argue that there is no need for a final cause for everything that exists in the universe (reason why things exist). For example, Nietzche adopts a philosophical position known as Nihilism. This is where someone believes there is no object purpose why things exist (such as the meaning given by external agents such as a Prime Mover) 
  • Emotions also go against the theory as they have no material or formal cause and even their efficient and final cause can be questioned. Is there a final cause for despair? 
• Weaknesses of Aristotle's theory: (3)

  • Other thinkers also agree with Nietzsche. For example, Jean Paul-Sartre agreed that there is no objective purpose to the universe. In fact, we argued that we need to find out our own purpose for ourselves.  
  • The efficient cause is more confusing to confirm as there can be several efficient causes for an object. The carpenter made the chair, but a woodcutter 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 for a person? 
• Weaknesses of Aristotle's Theory: (4)

  • Modern physics and science suggest that the universe and matter are not eternal as Aristotle assumed.  
  • David Hume argues that we are viewing events from inside the ‘cause-and-effect chain’ and so perceive causation. Cause and effect may be nothing more than the habitual link between correlated events.