Analyse Aristotle’s Four Causes
In attempting to explain why things exist, Aristotle
asserts as part of his four causes that all things which
exist have a final cause, or a reason/purpose for
existing (denoted by the Greek word 'telos'). He goes
further to claim that things which are 'good' are things
which fulfil their telos, eg a 'good' chair is one which
allows someone to sit down. Although this theory
might work with inanimate objects which exist within
the universe, it fails on a larger scale. One object may
fulfil many purposes, and there is no boundary to
which something can be considered to fulfil its telos.
For example, a river may be considered 'good' if it
provides water to people or animals, but it could also
be considered 'good' if it continues to flow and not
evaporate. Aristotle does not clearly define how to
establish the final cause of something. Furthermore,
the universe at large could be said to have no purpose
to it at all. This is the view of Bertram Russell, who
claimed that the existence of the universe is a 'brute
fact', and again, Aristotle claims that the universe has a
telos, but does not state what that purpose is, nor how
it can be fulfilled. Hence, Aristotle's Four Causes
appear to be weak in attempting to explain the
purpose for things existing as some things could have
many reasons for existing, or none at all, and Aristotle
does not tell us how to distinguish between such final
causes.
In attempting to explain why things exist, Aristotle
asserts as part of his four causes that all things which
exist have a final cause, or a reason/purpose for
existing (denoted by the Greek word 'telos'). He goes
further to claim that things which are 'good' are things
which fulfil their telos, eg a 'good' chair is one which
allows someone to sit down. Although this theory
might work with inanimate objects which exist within
the universe, it fails on a larger scale. One object may
fulfil many purposes, and there is no boundary to
which something can be considered to fulfil its telos.
For example, a river may be considered 'good' if it
provides water to people or animals, but it could also
be considered 'good' if it continues to flow and not
evaporate. Aristotle does not clearly define how to
establish the final cause of something. Furthermore,
the universe at large could be said to have no purpose
to it at all. This is the view of Bertram Russell, who
claimed that the existence of the universe is a 'brute
fact', and again, Aristotle claims that the universe has a
telos, but does not state what that purpose is, nor how
it can be fulfilled. Hence, Aristotle's Four Causes
appear to be weak in attempting to explain the
purpose for things existing as some things could have
many reasons for existing, or none at all, and Aristotle
does not tell us how to distinguish between such final
causes.
