Topic Arguments - Test

Four Causes

- Aristotle believed that everyone has an aetion, cause.

- Every object is in either potentiality or actuality, and to get to actuality it must undergo Aristotle’s Four Causes.

1. Material Cause - What the object is made of.

2. Formal Cause - Shape the object takes.

3. Efficient Cause - Activity that creates the object.

4. Final Cause - Object’s purpose for existing.

Argument 1: Strength: Based on Aristotle’s observations - empiricism - can be applied to virtually any object. Counter: Experience changes from person-to-person, so people may not have a shared final cause, based on experience, people use objects for different reasons.

Argument 2: Strength: Gives multiple explanations for something as opposed to just explaining it with ‘G-d’, thus refuting a G-d of the gaps argument. Counter: We do not know the efficient or final cause of the big bang, so that could be G-d, Kalam Cosmological Argument.

Argument 3: Weakness: Existentialism - Bertrand Russel “the universe is a brute fact”, there is no final cause of the universe. Counter: Essentialism - everyone is born with a final cause, Aquinas’s Natural Law Theory, telos is to serve G-d.

Prime Mover

- Solution to the problem of infinite regression, the universe was caused by an uncaused causer, existing outside of time and space.

Argument 1: Strength: It is a deistic being (does not interact with the world), thus solving the problem of evil - theodicy. Counter: Aristotle does not provide us with many facts about the Prime Mover’s properties, so it may be involved in the world, or it may not - ambiguous.

Argument 2: Weakness: It does not lead to the establishment of moral/ethical values - Maimonides ‘The guide to the Perplexed’ Part 2, Chapter 25 “does not lead to the establishment of the law and principles of religion”. Counter: Confirmation bias, not arguing against the Prime Mover per se, but disagreeing the with logic as its consequences does not fit his worldview.

Argument 3: Weakness: Not all things adhere to the idea of cause and effect - e.g. subatomic particles - Schrodinger’s cat dies due to the atomic decay of an atom (which is random), not a chain of cause and effect. Counter: On a macrolevel, all things adhere to cause and effect, so disregarding subatomic particles, Aristotle is correct.

Prime Mover vs Form of Good

- Both are an idea of G-d.

- PM is an uncaused causer.

- FoG exists in the WoF and participates in the WoA.

Argument 1: PM is Better: It explains the change in the world - the domino effect. Counter: FoG also explains change, change is caused by distortion of forms from the WoF to the WoA.

Argument 2: FoG is Better: Explains why we recognise things, the soul experiences them, and remembers them from the WoF - anamnesis, reference to Plato’s dialogue Meno with Socrates slave-boy story. Counter: There is no evidence for the WoF, Plato simply asserts its existence, WoF of the gaps argument.

Argument 3: Both are Correct: They are both eternal, and so is G-d. Counter: No evidence that the PM is eternal as Aristotle does not provide many details about the PM, it may have done the first motion, then ceased to exist.

Empiricism vs Rationalism

- Empiricism is knowledge based on observation, with Aristotle’s empiricism being the Prime Mover.

- Rationalism is knowledge based on reason, with Plato’s rationalism being the World of Forms.

Argument 1: Empiricism: Connects beliefs to the real world - learning about the properties of water, we don’t derive that from reasoning, we see it empirically. Rationalism: We need rationalism for A priori truths, e.g. mathematics.

Argument 2: Rationalism: Provides basis for ethical systems, such as utilitarianism, we observe morals through reason. Empiricism: We only truly know morals based on experience, e.g. we only know that pain is bad because we have experienced and seen pain.

Argument 3: Rationalism: Empirical evidence is contingent on sensory experience, which is subjective, we need reason to check empiricisms reliability. Empiricism: Without empiricism, reason is meaningless, we may be able to observe the data behind gravity, but without observing it, without practical application, the facts are meaningless.

WoF vs WoA

- Plato believed we live in a state of flux - cannot know anything as it is always changing.

- Heraclitus “You will never step in the same river twice” - supports Plato’s state of flux idea.

Argument 1: Strength: Explains why we recognise things, the soul experiences them, and remembers them from the WoF - anamnesis, reference to Plato’s dialogue Meno with Socrates slave-boy story. Weakness: Dawkins meme theory - concepts such as beauty and justice are passed from generation to generation, not remembered, memes.

Argument 2: Weakness: Does not give compelling evidence, simply asserts its existence, WoF of the gaps argument. Counter: It solves certain problems - theodicy - evil exists as the world (WoA) is imperfect.

Argument 3: Weakness: Ideal forms of negative qualities is a paradox, how can negative qualities be ideal. Counter: All negative qualities are just an absence of positive ones, death is absence of life, so there are no forms of negative qualities.