ristotle: A Comprehensive View on Nature and Society
In order to fully understand Aristotle’s views on a natural system, it is necessary to first explain some general principles of his
philosophy. It is in his work the Categories that Aristotle presents the concept of substance, a concept which will serve as the foundation
for much of his philosophical system. Substance, for Aristotle, is not a universal, but rather, it is the particular; substance is not a
“such,” but a “this.” Thus, substance is neither in nor is it said of a subject (as are qualities).
Rather it is that which makes the subject
numerically one; it is that which makes the subject the individual. Substance is “an individual man and [or] an individual horse.”
Aristotle still classifies universals as substances, for they define what constitutes the substance, and without these universals, a substance
would not be what is. There are four characteristics of substances: a substance is a “this”, not a qualification or a ‘such’ (which stresses
individuality); a substance has no contraries to it (there are no opposites of a substance); a substance does not admit more or less (there
are not degrees of a substance); and a substance can admit contraries while remaining numerically one.
In the Physics, Aristotle addresses that which constitutes Natural Objects as substances. He states that all Natural Substances consist of
The Term Paper on Potential Effects Of Five Different Life Factors On The Development Of An Individual
Genetics affect who you will grow to be in many ways. Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is the language of life that is within every living thing, genetic instructions that form what we will become. There is still much of the language that scientists don’t understand, but after extensive research scientists have found that certain gene codes actually relate to increased chances of developing a cancer or ...
both form and matter. Matter is that out of which the substance arises and form is that into which the matter develops. In building a
table, the wood, nails, etc., are the matter, and the idea of a table, what the end result will be, is the form, according to Aristotle. Matter
and form are inseparable from each other; there is no ‘form’ apart from concrete things. Aristotle explains that all substances contain
within themselves the origin of their change and movement. He continues by stating that the change which can occur is due to four
possible natural causes: formal cause, material cause, efficient cause, and final cause. Formal and material cause are self explanatory, in
that it is the form or the matter of the substance which is responsible for the change within the substance. Efficient and final cause,
however, will become more clear once we investigate Aristotle’s ideas of actuality and potentiality.
We should begin the explanation of actuality and potentially by saying that form can be seen as the actuality of the substance while
matter is the potential for that form to exist. The best way to illustrate this is through the analogy of the building of a house. The
materials, bricks and wood, should be seen as the matter, the potentially to become a house. The end-result, the house, is the form, it is
the potential made actual. The building of the house itself, the movement, is analogous to the four types of causes Aristotle says exist in
substances. In the case of this analogy the builder would be the efficient cause in that it is he/she who initiates the change. One could
also say that there is a final or teleological cause taking place as well, that the motive is to build a house which serves the purpose of
“house-ness”, namely that the house is one in which people can live. Through this analogy one can begin to see the nature of each of
the causes which can exist within a given substance. Once we see how Aristotle’s ideas of actuality and potentially relate to his ideas of
The Term Paper on Haunted House
NOTE: phrases highlighted are being modified to the phrases shown in brackets. (I’ve always found something fascinating about seeing an old dilapidated house along a winding road, they spark my curiosity.) Something about the fascination of dilapidated houses along winding roads sparks my curiosity but most of all give me shivers. (I stare; captivated by the sight) looking at the sight of the ...
form and matter (matter is potentiality, form is it’s actuality), which necessarily relate to substance, we can almost begin the analysis of
his philosophy on an ethical system. First, however, an introduction to the idea of the “Unmoved Mover” is necessary.
In accordance with Aristotle’s teleological view of the natural world, the “Unmoved Mover” is a purely actual thing which motivates
all things toward the “good.” All things try to achieve completeness, full actuality, or perfection; this implies that there must exist an
object or state towards which this striving or desire is directed. This object or state is the “Unmoved Mover.” This state of perfection
must be one of pure actuality since it can have no potential, being perfect; it must be non-natural since all natural things have potential.
Thus, it is not moving, yet moves other things to attempt to achieve perfection; this thing is the final cause of the universe. Knowing,
now, that which moves all natural things towards the goods, we can begin the analysis on Aristotle’s ethical system.
In investigating Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics, it is important to remember that just like the Physics, it is a teleological view, not
on the natural world, but on human nature, the end (telos) of which is the “good.” Everything that humans do is aimed at some end;
this end is can either have intrinsic or extrinsic worth. This is to say that the acts of humans can either be done for themselves (intrinsic)
or can be done as a means to something else (extrinsic).
The underlying goal of all our action, Aristotle calls the “good”, but along
with the “good,” comes happiness. For Aristotle, then, all human are just trying to be happy.
The good life, then, is a life of happiness; Aristotle says such a life can be achieved by excellence (arete) in two areas of virtue:
intellectual and moral. First, we will have to analyze moral virtue in order to understand fully the notion of intellectual virtue. More or
The Essay on Aristotle And Virtue Happiness Man One
... fulfillment of our potential as human beings. Aristotle says that a thing (or person) achieves happiness when it does (and does well) ... demarcation between vice and virtue have been blurred by public opinion. In conclusion, Aristotle taught that happiness stems from fulfilling our ... moderation is the key to virtue, we know that happiness isn't found in the accumulation of goods or money or contacts. ...
less, for Aristotle, the life of moral virtue, not being an exact science, is a life of moderation. This is a common theme with most all the
ancient philosophers and authors (especially the playwrights).
It is practical wisdom which is not “a priori,” but rather it is a learned
trade which varies from situation to situation; it can not be taught, it must be learned from experience. What, then, exactly is moral
virtue? It is acting in accordance with our nature and our striving towards the “good,” by means of moderate actions is everyday life.
Knowing this practical type of reason, we can now examine the theoretical type of reason, intellectual virtue.
Happiness is an activity, it is not a passive state for Aristotle. It is our potential which allows us to be motivated by the concept of
the “Unmoved Mover,” towards a state of perfection or perfect happiness. In order to achieve this state, a human, according to Aristotle,
must partake in an activity which is both sought for intrinsic purposes and is in itself perfect. Intellectual virtue is this activity. It is a
theoretical principle which each person knows “a priori;” it is the act of doing what is most natural for all humans to do, to reason. It
is our nature according to Aristotle, to reason, and it follows that if we achieve the perfectness or excellence (arete) in our nature, we
achieve perfect happiness. Specifically, for Aristotle, the best way to come close to achieving the perfect “good” is to act as a seeker of
truth. The philosopher is the way to go according to Aristotle; “Philosophical thoght is the way to consummate perfect happiness, but it
doesn’t pay well.”
