| Annotation Metadata
|
^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"Erd0lmpo8x","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ10Ӻ","startOffset":0,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/preӶ7Ӻ","endOffset":280°Ӻ,"quote":"Cause 1 and 2. The first two of Aristotle’s four explanatory principles are now known as material and formal causes. Although they are generally considered “archaic” and inappropriate for our attempts at explanation, I am including them in this exposition of Aristotle’s classification, because there is an important area of modern science where the first of these causes plays a dominant role. Aristotle lists the four categories into which he divides the concept of causation in the following order: Material, formal, efficient causes, and the final cause, which is the most important for his teleological world view. This is the very order I would have chosen for this exposition. Thus I shall follow Aristotle, presenting for each category the essentials of his characterization. To avoid space-consuming cross references, however, I shall discuss the first two together. \n1.\tMaterial Cause: \n\nThat out of which a thing comes to be and which persists, … e.g. the bronze of the statue, the silver of the bowl, and the genera of which the bronze and the silver are species. \n\n2.\tFormal Cause: \n\nThe form or the archetype, i.e. the statement of the essence, and its genera, … (e.g. the relation 2:1 of the octave, and generally number), and the parts in the definition. (Aristotle, Physics, Book II, ch.3, 194b) \n\nOn the face of it, it seems trivial to say that bronze is the cause of a bronze statue. \nAristotle, however, had in mind the relation between matter and form. Materials such as bronze and metals (the genus of which bronze is a species) have, in themselves, no form in which they could be said to persist. Conversely, the form of a statue has no way of being or coming into being except as the shape implemented in some kind of matter. This, as Bertrand Russell explained, can be further substantiated by invoking the concept of unity. Materials, such as bronze, water, or marble, have no unity (i.e. they are not unitary things), unless we take them in discrete amounts. \n\nThe part of a block of marble which afterwards becomes a statue is, as yet, not separated from the rest of the marble; it is not yet a ‘thing’, and has not yet any unity. After the sculptor has made the statue, it has unity, which it derives from its shape. (Russell, 1940; p.193)","highlights":Ӷ^"jQuery321096051066034122692":^°°,^"jQuery321096051066034122692":^°°,^"jQuery321096051066034122692":^°°,^"jQuery321096051066034122692":^°°,^"jQuery321096051066034122692":^°°,^"jQuery321096051066034122692":^°°,^"jQuery321096051066034122692":^°°,^"jQuery321096051066034122692":^°°Ӻ,"text":"","order":"mw-content-text","category":"WissenschaftlicheReferenz2","data_creacio":1576067621774°
|
