The efficient cause is why it is here (so for a chair, someone must have made it.) The final cause is its reason for being, the purpose it has. Aristotle identified this as the “soul,” however Aristotle did not believe that the soul was separate from the body. Aristotle believed there was a “prime mover” something that causes the changes in the universe. It was the reason everything was here (the reason for being.)
Aristotle wanted to explain the purpose of things existing as they do, and rejected the idea of Plato's 'perfect form' of objects. He came up with the idea that a certain object had four different explanations as to why it existed, hence calling it the 'Four Causes'. The Four Causes he came up with were; The Material Cause, The Formal Cause, The Efficient Cause and The Final Cause. The Material Cause refers to what the object in question is made out of, for example, a book is made of paper, therefore the material cause of the book is paper. The Formal Cause refers to what gives the book its form or structure, many pieces of paper put together in a particular way give the book it's formal cause.
Plato: The Republic and Euthyphro Dilemma These three past weeks I have learned about Plato and his dialogues, one of them is the Euthyphro dilemma. In his dilemma he tries to discover the nature piety. The answer that Euthyphro gives is that what is good is what is loved by the gods. Here we can see a contradiction that Socrates points out which is that some gods love and hate the same things at the same time. This would turn morality into something subjective.
the oral argument. He explains that both methods have different ways of communicating ideas to an audience, speech as the notable form in ancient Greece, where only philosophers were basically allowed an opinion on a subject. And writing as a new media where it can be directed to a certain audience instead of everybody and it can help lessen miscommunication. It does come across that Socrates prefers one, speech, over the other but regardless in today’s time written arguments is the more popular media. As stated above many of the rhetoric tools that we use today was also used back in Socrates time.
He believed in the Socratic Method he stated people should question the world around him. In many countries all over the world. Schools still use Socrates method of learning. Another famous Greek philosopher was Aristotle. According to him human reason was the most important human quality.
Plato, Aristotle, Epictetus Response While there are multiple common ideas that are concurrent amongst the texts of Plato, Aristotle and Epictetus, there are four common themes that appear to recur in The Republic, The Nicomachean Ethics and the Handbook of Epictetus. The most prominent idea, as is expected within such a class, is happiness and how one should go about attaining it. Epictetus focuses on the avoidance of pain as a measure to find happiness. In his argument, he advises us to care not of things that are external to us – that is, things that we cannot directly control. In #10 he asks us to ask ourselves what capacity we have within ourselves to deal with a particular situation, “If hardship comes to you, find endurance,” (p14) so that we might not let outside influences affect our own happiness, and that our happiness can be created only by our own judgments, perceptions, decisions and actions.
For example a screwdriver, its primary function is to be used to turn a screw in to or out of an object. In the bigger picture it can be used to scrape paint, open a paint can, or even as a hammer. In today’s society people understand the complex function of a piece of technology and not the basic primary function. In "I'd Hammer Out Freedom: Technology as Politics and Culture", Richard Scolve talks about polypotency and how it is becoming more accepted in today’s society. Polypotency can be defined as the unintended or secondary consequences which are presumed that one understands all the functions.
In Plato’s The Republic, there exists a struggle between the characters of Socrates and Thrasymachus to find the correct definition of what justice is. Thrasymachus, being a Sophist, expressed his views on justice in a manner of rash sequences whereby Socrates closely followed behind with his own counter-arguments. These counter-arguments effectively exposed weaknesses in Thrasymachus’s argument for justice, and further crippled it entirely. By outlining and explaining Thrasymachus’s views on justice, I will argue two things; first that the weakness in his argument comes from only himself in abandoning his method. Secondly, that justice may be our deep-rooted understanding and ability to identify good from evil.
Jasmine Stonehewer a) Explain Aristotle's theory of the Four Causes. [25] Aristotle's theory of the Four Causes was based around his idea of looking at the world and wanting to explain why and how things are the way they are. His empiricist theory of the Four Causes is made up of the material cause (what things are made of), the formal cause (what makes a thing recognisable – it's structure or form), the efficient cause (who made it or what caused it) and the final cause (why it exists). Aristotle believed that everything that exists has a material, formal, efficient and final cause. He also believed that the final cause was the most important because without it there is no point in it being.
We can categorise things that we see this way. For Aristotle this is where the ‘form’ that Plato wishes to speak of resides. A table has 4 legs a flat surface, we recognise this and put it in a group we call furniture. His third cause was the efficient cause. My laptop’s efficient cause may vary from machines and people to plastic moulds and screwdrivers.