Hylomorphic Teleology in Aristotle’s Physics II
This study draws attention to the ordering of matter and form argued for in Aristotle’s Physics II, 8 (199a30–32). This argument for hylomorphic teleology relies on the presentation of nature earlier in Physics II, 1. In this way, it highlights the connections between chapter one’s account of nature...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
International Étienne Gilson Society
2019-03-01
|
| Series: | Studia Gilsoniana |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://cejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/element/bwmeta1.element.desklight-ea770dca-5d75-49b5-91b1-c1cd485ddbc3?q=bwmeta1.element.cejsh-a8aa0684-5035-4515-8782-990f275adce3;4&qt=CHILDREN-STATELESS |
| Summary: | This study draws attention to the ordering of matter and form argued for in Aristotle’s Physics II, 8 (199a30–32). This argument for hylomorphic teleology relies on the presentation of nature earlier in Physics II, 1. In this way, it highlights the connections between chapter one’s account of nature as matter and form and chapter eight’s defense of final causality. Grounding final causality in the principles of nature reveals its central importance for Aristotle’s view of nature. To clarify the meaning of hylomorphic teleology I contrast my interpretation of Aristotle with that of Wolfgang Wieland regarding the scope and foundation of the final cause, countering his claim that chance and universal final causality are mutually exclusive. I contend that the presentation of teleology in chapter eight supports a diverse interpretation of the final cause, one that admits chance events while not sacrificing the intrinsic ordering of matter to form. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2300-0066 2577-0314 |