171
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
no edit summary
Aristotle also stands out as a famous writer on causation. His work on causation is also in response to Plato’s views. Plato had a teleological view of causation perpetuated by his idea of forms. Similarly, Aristotle writes on the teleological account of causation in Physics II 3 and Metaphysics V 2.[[CiteRef::Biography.com Editors (2017)]] Aristotle’s account of causation is made pertinent by forming the basis of all of his sciences. Each Aristotelian science consists of an investigation of causes within reality – in which an appropriate science would have knowledge of relevant causes. Aristotle’s teleological account of causation was the preferred account until Rene Descartes’ corpuscular mechanicism.[[CiteRef::Shields (2016)]]
|Major Contributions=== Scientific Method ==
Aristotle’s writings on the scientific method encompass the entire Organon, however, the works forming the basis of most empirical science are Analytica Priora and Analytica Posteriora.
Generally, Aristotle’s method takes heavily from intuition and experience. It implements the requirement to grasp the nature of a thing, a requirement which is abstract in nature. As such, his method acts as an illustration of the capacity of methods to implement different abstract means of assessment. His method can be phrased as “a proposition is acceptable if it grasps the nature of a thing through intuition schooled by experience, or if it is deduced from general intuitive propositions.”
=== Prior Analytics ===
In his work Analytica Priora, Aristotle essentially forms the foundation of syllogisms. Before he begins, he defines a few important terms: major premise, minor premise, and conclusion. The major and minor premises act as the antecedents of an argument and should logically follow to form a consequent, the conclusion. If the conclusion follows from the premises, in that it is a logical valid consequence, the logical structure is known as a syllogism (see the first figure for a common example).
It should be noted, Aristotle’s syllogisms draw on modifiers of certainty, e.g. ‘some’, ‘all’, ‘might’, ‘must’, ‘no’. As such, syllogisms can have different forms.
As a consequence of syllogisms Aristotle recognizes an infinite regress of premises cannot provide a foundation of knowledge for science. Additionally, in this work, Aristotle identifies himself against apriori foundationalists, stating apriori knowledge can never form the foundation of knowledge. Instead, Aristotle opts the scientist to look towards observation and memory to form the foundation of their knowledge.
=== Posterior Analytics ===
In contrast to Prior Analytics which defined syllogisms with respect to their forms, Aristotle deals with syllogisms’ content in Posterior Analytics. The reason to take a look at the distinction is much akin to why checking the validity of an argument is not enough to ascertain it as a good argument. The form of a syllogism lies in the connection between the premises and conclusion. However, even when there is no problem with the form, the matter of the premises or the conclusion may be problematic. To clarify what type of content is problematic, Aristotle explains what good content looks like.
=== What Constitutes Knowledge ===
Primarily, all knowledge must be formed on existing matter. Anything formed outside the scope of what is already known is not useful information . Knowledge is not opinion and one cannot hold knowledge about something while holding an opinion on it simultaneously . Furthermore, the existing matter or principles on which information is founded must be demonstrable, and if not demonstrable then they must be self-evident.
==== Rules of Demonstration ====
To explain proper demonstration, Aristotle provides some principles and guidance as to how demonstration should be conducted.
*Demonstration should follow the figures of syllogism. When the figures are followed, they assert conclusions as universally affirmative.
*Demonstrated affirmative propositions hold more value than demonstrated negations.
*Content which demonstrates other content cannot be further asserted through that which it demonstrates; if α is used to demonstrate µ, then µ cannot be used to demonstrate α.
*There cannot be an infinite number of premises between the principle which forms the foundation of our knowledge and the conclusion.
*The foundation of knowledge, the premises which follow from that foundation, and the conclusion must all be necessarily true. Anything purely contingent or coincidental cannot be used within a syllogism because it can never be consistently demonstrated.
*The foundation on which knowledge is demonstrated should always be more certain than the conclusion.
==== Explanatory vs Descriptive ====
Aristotle also makes the value distinction of explanatory theories and descriptive theories. Explanatory theories explain why something happens the way it does, while descriptive theories explain that it happens. Per Aristotle, explanatory theories should be valued more than descriptive theories.
==== Induction ====
Aristotle concludes Posterior Analytics with a comment on foundationalism. While dissatisfied with apriori foundationalism, at his core, Aristotle is an aposteriori foundationalist. Knowledge claims cannot infinitely regress, and they must not be formed from apriori principles.
==== Causation ====
For Aristotle, scientific knowledge comes from an understanding of a thing in terms of what causes it . Generally, Aristotle divides causes into four categories :
# The material cause: that which an object is made of.
# The formal cause: the form of an object.
# The efficient cause: the primary source of change.
# The final cause: the final reason for why something is being done.
An object may encompass all causes in its production. A statue for example, has all four causes through its production. As someone begins to create a statue, they melt down some metal. Metal is the material cause of the statue as it is what makes up the statue. As the metal is molded into the shape of a statue the shape it takes becomes the formal cause. Simultaneously, since the metal is being molded, the efficient cause is the molding of the metal into a statue. Aristotle makes the distinction here that the efficient cause is not relevant or connected to intention or desire; the artisan making the statue is solely responsible for manifesting specific knowledge. Finally, all the processes which the metal is undergoing are for the sake of producing a statue, the final cause.
In discussing the causes, it seems that Aristotle has provided a teleological account of causation in that the explanation for an object makes reference to the goal or end of the process. It is also of note that this process ignores intentionality and desire.
|Page Status=Stub
}}
