Skip to main content

Give an example of final causality in human action and in the action of non-rational animals. Is it reasonable today to assert that final causality...

Final causality refers to Aristotle’s theory of the four causes. These are four types of explanations of change or movement. The fourth cause is the end or purpose (telos), that for the sake of which a thing exists or is done. According to Aristotle, a seed has as its end to become an adult plant. In human action, the final causality of a man walking could be to stay fit. In the animal world, the final causality of a dog barking could be to scare away a potential threat.  


Some mistakenly believe Aristotle’s theory of final causality reads human purposes and intentions into the natural world. Rather, this teleological view of the natural world means that whatever lies at the end of the typical developmental changes of a species is its final causality.


In scientific fields, teleological explanations have gone out of favor and are often deliberately avoided because conclusions about final and formal causation are often faulty or subjective. Instead, scientific explanations tend to focus more on material and efficient explanations. In evolutionary biology, however, teleological language is still used to describe natural tendencies toward particular end conditions.


Regarding final causality in the activity of inanimate things, this view can still be regarded as reasonable because it does not posit that inanimate things have a consciousness of purpose. Rather, an inanimate process can have a final purpose. For example, rain falling to the earth is not consciously aware of its purpose but still serves the final purpose of hydrating plants.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.