Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Plato vs aristotle philosophy
4 critique of Plato in the republic
Plato vs aristotle philosophy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Kert Woods
Prof. LaBarge
Philosophy 51
7 November 2014
Explain the place of God in Aristotle’s view of the world. How does Aristotle think that we can know that God exists? What role does God play in explaining why things in the world exist and behave the way they do? How persuasive do you find Aristotle’s account of these matters?
Aristotle the Contemplator
To open Chapter 6 of Lambda in Metaphysics, Aristotle states, “Since there were three kinds of substance, two of them natural and one unmovable, regarding the latter we must assert that it is necessary that there should be an eternal unmovable substance. For substances are the first of existing things, and if they are all destructible, all things are destructible. But it is impossible
…show more content…
There cannot have been a first change, because something would have to have happened just before that change which set it off, and this itself would have been a change, and so on and so forth. Aristotle believed that if the universe ever completely ceased movement there would never be a force that possessed the ability to begin the moving again without the presence of the Prime Mover. In chapter 6 of Metaphysics Lambda, Aristotle concluded that the world and time are not perishable. He vouched for the idea that there must be at least one eternal and imperishable substance; otherwise all substances, therefore everything in the world, would be perishable. Aristotle calls this source of all movement the Prime Mover. The Prime Mover to Aristotle is the first of all substances, the necessary first source of movement, which is itself unmoved. It is a being with everlasting life, and in Metaphysics Aristotle also calls this being …show more content…
Here Aristotle is attempting to explain the way in which the world is created by god. He does not want his god to act in time because he does not want god actively changing things in the world because that active change would lead to potentiality. Aristotle’s god is not an activist, the God of the Bible is much more of an activist who gets involved with human lives in a direct fashion. He believes that the final end of the universe is to attempt to be like god. I find Aristotle’s arguments to lack the evidence necessary to actually persuade me into seeing the world through his lens. Aristotle, criticizes Plato for having no concrete evidence to back up his theories yet he has no concrete evidence that the material world is the source of knowledge. Isn’t it possible that things don’t exist for a reason, some things happen by chance? If the Prime Mover cannot interact with the world, then it is very different from the Judeao-Christian understanding of God that I have grown up being taught to understand. Therefore I am quite biased in the sense that my morals lean toward the Christian view more so than that of Aristotle, his ideas are second nature right now and therefore not as appealing to my mind. I would want Aristotle to believe that God has the ability to know that evil is
In this paper, I offer a reconstruction of Aristotle’s argument from Physics Book 2, chapter 8, 199a9. Aristotle in this chapter tries to make an analogy between nature and action to establish that both, nature and action, have an end.
Baird, Forrest E., and Walter Kaufman. "Aristotle." Ancient Philosophy. 3rd ed. Philosophic Classics, vols. 1. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2000. 304 - 444.
To some the causes and effects of things are mutually exclusive, and coexistence with one another. When observing specific equipment or even life, the question stands that there must be an account that took place before such items ceased to exist. Particularly, Aristotle argues that each thing, whatever it may be, will have causes, or types of explanatory factors by which that thing can be explained. The significant knowledge of causes allows for specific accounts to be known. It’s like questioning what occurred first the chicken or the egg. Anything in life offers a question of cause; something must have been in order to bring about the nature of today. These causes are apparent in answering everyday questions, which in turn explains that the causes of life clarify the being of which stood before it and such causes amount to same entity.
Aristotle tries to draw a general understanding of the human good, exploring the causes of human actions, trying to identify the most common ultimate purpose of human actions. Indeed, Aristotelian’s ethics, also investigates through the psychological and the spiritual realms of human beings.
Unlike Parmenides and Heraclitus, who took a clear stance on whether being is changing or unchanging, Empedocles argued that things do change, but these objects are composed of materials that do not change. The change that we see is merely a cause of the interaction and changes in position of the four basic elements (earth, air, fire, and water). Much like Heraclitus and his views that orderly change is brought about by the “logos”, Empedocles also recognized that there was a force responsible for the change brought about. In his case, changes in the forms and positions of the basic elements was an effect of two forces – love and strife (or more commonly known as the forces of attraction and repulsion/decomposition). The philosophy of Empedocles can be likened to our understanding of physics today. What with his belief of the universe being composed of basic material particles (the four basic elements, in his point) constantly moving under the act of impersonal forces (love and strife). With that being said, it’s difficult to argue against his philosophy when much of what he said we know is true today. Except, of course, for his belief that the four basic elements are the rudimentary material particles of matter that are the “building blocks” of the universe. The elements themselves are made up of smaller particles, which can be broken down even further.
First, Descartes contends that God’s perfection implies his immutability because a modification of his action would deny the perfection of the creation. Accordingly, Descartes says: ‘Thus, God imparted various motions to the parts of matter when he first created them, and he now preserves all this matter in the same way, and by the same process by which he originally created it’ (AT IXB, 62). The conservation of the initial conditions of the universe is possible because of God’s continual action on the universe. Finally, Descartes concludes this argument explaining that it is reasonable to think that God preserves the same quantity of motion in matter. Under these considerations, we can say that Descartes founds his physics on his metaphysical conception of God’s immutability, and it makes possible to universalize the laws of
...e ultimate cause of everything? While its minor problems are resolved quite easily, Aristotle’s argument for the unmoved mover is predicated on a premise of unknown stability: philosophy. At the heart of the issue is the very nature of philosophy itself and its ability to tackle questions of any magnitude. If everything is knowable, and philosophy is the path to knowledge, then everything must be knowable through philosophy, yet the ad infinitum paradox Aristotle faces is one that shows that the weakest part of his argument is the fact it relies on the abovementioned characteristics of philosophy. If any one of those is wrong, his proof crumbles and the timeless God in which he believes goes along with it, but if they are all right, then there is one God, immovable and actuality, for as Aristotle says, “The rule of many is not good; let there be one ruler” (1076a).
Aristotle is regarded by many as one of the most important thinkers of the ancient era. Although many of his theories regarding the physics of the natural world were later disproved by Galileo, Aristotle nevertheless offered the world at that time a relevant and consistent explanation of physics of impressive breadth and explanatory ability. Many of his theories endured for up to 1200 years, and helped to form the basis of the midieval christian perspective of the natural world. Much of his physics, when combined with Ptolemy's mathematical model of planetary motions, was used by midieval thinkers to describe the behavior of the cosmos.
Gakuran, Michael. "Aristotle’s Moral Philosophy | Gakuranman • Adventure First." Gakuranman Adventure First RSS. N.p., 21 May 2008. Web.
According to Aristotle, this theory can be applied to the origin of the world. Once the world was set in motion, it was given potential for that which moves is constantly changing and therefore has potential. Aristotle says that change is eternal. Since the world is constantly changing, it is eternal, meaning it had a beginning but has no end.
Aristotle's Theory of the Soul in the De Anima centres on the kinds of souls possessed by different kinds of living things, distinguished by their different operations. He holds that the soul is the form, or essence of any living thing; that it is not a distinct substance from the body that it is in; that it is the possession of soul (of a specific kind) that makes an organism an organism at all, and thus that the notion of a body without a soul, or of a soul in the wrong kind of body, is simply unintelligible. Aristotle uses his familiar matter/form distinction to answer the question “What is soul?” he says that there are three sorts of substance which are matter, form and the compound of the matter and form. Aristotle is interested in compounds that are alive. These - plants and animals - are the things that have souls. Their souls are what make them living things. Aristotle also argues that the mind is immaterial, able to exist without the body, and immortal by “Saying that something has a soul just means that it is alive”
Aristotle’s notion of cause represents his idea of how everything comes into being. All change involves something coming from out of its opposite. These causes are split into four: material cause, efficient cause, formal cause and final cause. Change takes place in any of these causes. A material cause is one that explains what something is made out of. An efficient cause is what the original source of change is. A formal cause is the form or pattern of which a thing corresponds to. And a final cause is the intended purpose of the change. All of these causes Aristotle believes explains why change comes to pass. A good example of this is a baseball. The material cause of a baseball is are the materials of which it is made of, so corkwood, stitching, with a rubber core and wrapped in leather. The efficient cause of the baseball would the factory where the ball was made or where the materials were manipulated until they corresponded into a baseball. The formal cause of the ba...
Aristotle’s God and Plato’s Demiurge share many similarities and differences. Aristotle’s God (also referred to as The Good) is understanding, everlasting, and the actuality that causes the universe. Plato’s Demiurge, or the Craftsman, is described as good, everlasting and also the cause of the universe. Plato’s description of the Demiurge is not as specific as Aristotle’s description of God, so to compare and contrast the two is left partly to interpretation. There a few insights in Aristotle’s Metaphysics and Plato’s Timaeus that allows us to come to a basic understanding of what they thought.
Aristotle’s discussions on free will came from his theory of the prime mover. In his book Physics, Aristotle theorized that everything is always in a constant state of change, or movement. When a pen falls of a table, it is changed because it is in a different location than it was previously and also possibly scuffed up from falling to the floor. If something is moved, or changed in its composition, there has to be an ultimate higher power, or mover, responsible. This is what Aristotle called the Prime Mover, referring to God. Aristotle believed the Prime Mover to be unchanging and infinite. He exists because in order for something to be changed, there must also be a master, unchangeable thing. There needs to be a start to the chain of events that is caused by the primary, unmoved mover, or God. Therefore, God is necessary for ...
Although Aristotle grew up under the ideas of Plato, through time he began to develop his own theories and views about philosophical thoughts (Aristotle Biography, 2015). Aristotle believed that in order to understand the natural world to the fullest, one must use each of the five senses, all of which we use to this day. Aristotle also had his own views of the world, especially the astronomy of it. He believed the earth was at the center of the universe and the remaining planets, only 5 known at the time, were circling around it (Worldview of Ancient Greece - Socrates, Plato & Aristotle, n.d.). We know now that his views on this matter are not taught and the planets revolve around the