Aristotelian theory of causality – Wikipedia

The four causes of Aristotle for a table: material (wood), formal (design), efficient (frame) and final (meal).

The Aristotelian theory of causality is a classification by Aristotle of four different types of causalities. Forged at IV ^{It is} century of. J.-C. , this vision of causality deviates greatly from what is called “cause” in contemporary times. For Aristotle, the cause ( cause / ideas ) is not just the preceding the effect, but includes other factors such as the will to act: it is a composite metaphysical notion.

Identification of causes [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Aristotle develops complex physical and metaphysical thought. He seeks to understand the causes and their effects. He distinguishes four causes, which each president in reality. The cause is not understood by the philosopher in his modern mechanicist sense; Aristotle also takes into account the will to act, that is to say the purpose of the action.

The four causes he identifies are as follows:

• cause material (matter that constitutes one thing),
• cause formal (the essence of this thing),
• cause DRIVING (the principle of change),
• and cause finale (this “in view of what” is done).

By way of illustration, we can say that the material cause of a bowl is wood or metal, its essence containing food, its driving cause the process by which it was made and its final cause its use in food.

Place in Aristotle’s work [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

The typology of causes is particularly important in Aristotle’s work because it is one of the foundations of its philosophical investigation. It precisely defines philosophy as the search for causes; Identifying the four causes amounts to creating a bridge between physics and metaphysics. This typology is thus exposed in several works, in particular in Physique (II, 3-9) and in Book Z of the Metaphysical ^{[ first ]} .

The identification of these causes is an important moment in the history of philosophy, because many thinkers ^{[Who ?]} This theory will be fully appropriated completely or partly over the centuries. It is less used from modern times, due to scientific theories associating material and motor causes in their concrete existence and, in the case of the final cause, of the separation of sciences into two fields (Leibniez, Special Sciences ), one studying the causes (in the physical sense), the other reasons (human activity). In contemporary times it remains alive among thomist philosophers, but terminology has refined: we speak for example of specifications , of process , of purpose and of Functional description .

The material cause [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

The material cause is the most obvious to the subject, but it is one of the most inaccessible. By intellect, man can identify the form of matter. However, it is not possible to consider material alone, pure. Aristotle considers matter and form as melted together, which makes it possible to produce the compound substance ( total , Sunol ). Matter is the weighty, the sensitive, the body of an animal or a work.

Matter is associated with power, because matter is to the object what power is act. Matter is in power because it can be trans-formed, that is to say that it can be associated with a form to make it an object ^{[ 2 ]} .

At the question “Why does the shield protect from blows?” »» , the material cause is: because the material of the shield is resistant ^{[ 3 ]} .

The formal cause [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

The formal cause is based on Aristotle’s conception of what the form is. The shape of an object is not its geometric shape, but its definition, which makes it definable. For example, what differentiates a man from a statue that would represent him is the possession of a soul; The soul is the form (definition) of man ^{[ 4 ]} .

More than its physical characteristics, it is the possession of this faculty which will make it possible to define man. The form of a work of art is the idea that the artist has. It is of capital importance in Aristotle’s theory of knowledge.

At the question “Why is this balloon round?” »» , the formal cause is: because the shape of a ball is its roundness. The ball is, by definition, round ^{[ 5 ]} .

The motor cause (or efficient) [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Aristotle defines the motor cause as: “The primary principle from where the change or rest is based” ^{[ 6 ]} . This cause is based on the Aristotelian postulate of what the movement, if exists, is not chaotic: it obeys the laws of the universe, accessible to the senses and therefore knowable. Thus, Aristotle frontally opposes the thesis of the disciples of Heraclitus (and in particular, of Cratyle), according to which it would be impossible to know anything that everything is in permanent motion ^{[ 7 ]} . It was also to be able to found an acquaintance that Plato had proposed his theory of immutable forms ^{[ 8 ]} .

The movement covers, in Aristotle, a much broader meaning than that commonly accepted today: it is not only a change of place, but also a change in the physical state: phenomena like generation and Corruption are also forms of movement, as well as alteration or growth. The movement is therefore for Aristotle any change, or, in its vocabulary, a future.

The becoming can be relative, when something becomes (ex: man becomes a musician), absolute when something appears or disappears (generation or corruption). A change is considered absolute where something becomes something that is not of the same substance as what it was (for example, the marble block becomes a statue).

Subsequently, in medieval philosophy, the motor cause becomes cause of the efficient . Depending on the use, the efficient cause is defined as what Aristotle describes in these terms: “This from which the movement proceeds” ( The first of the movement ), even “In general the agent” ( Out of which one ) ^{[ 9 ]} . The efficient cause is divisible into two parts: the main efficient cause, and the instrumental efficient cause. When the painter paints a painting, the main efficient cause is the painter; But he used a brush and his knowledge of painting, which will be called an instrumental efficient cause. The instrumental efficient causes are attached to the main efficient cause because they are only caused if they are attached to a main efficient cause. For example, the brush is considered an efficient cause of the table only if a painter painted using it, because a brush alone does not make a table.

It is no longer just an explanation of the change in the directions, but also an explanation of their very existence: things are what they are because existence is brought to them from the outside. What gives existence (i.e. God) is then also named efficient cause. However, the definition does not change.

The final cause [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

It is often difficult to distinguish from the formal cause, and Aristotle even indicates that “often” (often ” oftentimes ) three species of causes, the end, the form and the agent, coincide in the same reality ^{[ ten ]} . We define it as the raison d’être of the thing, this “in view of what” ( I ) she exists. As “nature does nothing in vain” ( Parts of animals ), the role that a being has to accomplish will be made to him possible by the means at his disposal – means whose formal cause accounts for.

The purpose is a capital concept of Aristotle’s philosophy: “All art and all investigation, and similarly all action and any choice, tend towards some end. “( Ethics in Nicomaque )

This last cause, by generating the question ” What is ? ” (“What is it?”), Bases philosophical reflection.

Intrinsic and extrinsic causes [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Material causes and formal causes are considered to be intrinsic causes, because they remain as long as the thing continues to exist. Hence the preposition inter which means “from the inside”. In addition, of course, the thing ceases to exist as soon as one of these two causes ceases to exist.

Efficient causes and final causes are extrinsic causes because they are not contained in the thing. Hence the preposition extra which means “outside”. The thing therefore continues to exist even if the person who did it dies or if the object loses their raison d’être (in the case, for example of a technologically exceeded object) which continues to exist, but risks finishing in a museum or in the trash.

Singular causes, generic and universal universal [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Each cause can have a different level of specificity. We will then distinguish the generic universal cause, the specific universal cause and the singular cause. Rather than giving complicated definitions for these terms, the example of the house will be easier to approach.

• Generic universal efficient cause: a craftsman
• Specific universal efficient cause: an electrician
• Singular efficient cause: the individual craftsman X.
• Generic universal material cause: wood
• Specific universal material cause: maple wood
• Singular material cause: the wood of this board

Thomas Aquinas takes up the four causes of Aristotle in The principles of natural reality ( The principle of nature , 1255) ^{[ 11 ]} .

• (in) Richard Sorabji, Necessity, Cause and Blame : Perspectives on Aristotle’s Theory , Londres, Duckworth, 1980 , p. 40-44, 51-56 and passim .
• Léon Robin, Hellenic thought of origins to Epicurus: questions of method, criticism and history , Paris, P.U.F., 1942 , 560 p. ( read online ) , p. 423 to 485: “On the Aristotelian design of causality” .
• Annick Jaulin, Aristotle. Metaphysics , Paris, Puf, 1999 ( read online ) , p. 64 to 91 (principles and causes) .