Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Ancient philosophical influences - Coggle Diagram
Ancient philosophical influences
Plato
Existence of forms
If there are multiple objects that share the same feature, they are copies of an original exemplar
All green things have the same feature
So all green things are copies of the form of the green
Analogy / quote
'There is one form for each set of many things to which we give the same name'
Things that share the same feature have a perfect form
Weakness: Aristotle
There is no further explanation as to why different things have the same feature
It may be a coincidence for things to look the same, for example stunt doubles
Weakness as Plato assumes that all things that have the same feature are copies of a form
Overcoming: Plato
It is normally the case that when there are many similar things, they are copies of an original
One exception, like stunt doubles, doesn't disprove this
Weakness: Aristotle
Plato's view is incomplete
He does not explain how the forms are copied - no efficient cause
Thus, his argument does not make sense
Overcoming: Plato
Plato posits the existence of the existence of a demiurge
A kind of creator that makes the copies of the forms
Forms are more real than its copies
If there is an original and imperfect copy, the original is more real than the imperfect copy
Forms exist
Forms are the originals and things in the world are copies
So forms are more real than the things in the world
Analogy / quote
Cave analogy
Prisoners see the shadows, which are copies of the forms
Escaped prisoners see the real objects (forms) that the shadows are imitations of
The sun represents the form of the good, which makes everything light
Overcoming: Plato
Forms don't need their own forms as they are not imperfect as they are the originals
Particulars need a form because they are imperfect and are probably copies
They have not been made imperfect by copying by a non omnipotent creator (demiurge)
Weakness: Aristotle's third man fallacy
And the form of the man has a form - the form of the form of the man
So a man has a form - the form of the man
Plato assumes that everything has a form
So there would be an infinite regress of forms
But infinite regress is impossible
So Plato must be wrong that everything has a form
Aristotle
Four causes
There are four causes that explain all objects in the world
Material, efficient, formal, and final cause
For example, a chair is made of wood, by a person in a factory. Its formal cause would be its shape, and final cause is to be sat on
Weakness: Darwin / Democritus
Darwin argues that nothing has a purpose
Everything is created by random mutations and natural selection
Democritus also argues that there are no purposes
Everything is made of random atoms that coincidentally join, so there is no final cause of life
For example, the human eye was a random mutation that happened to benefit us, so it remained
Overcoming: Science
Modern science still uses the idea of purposes
For example, cacti have spikes in order to reduce water loss
Analogy / quote: Bronze statue
Material cause is bronze
Efficient cause is the sculptor
Formal cause is its shape
Final cause is to be admired
Inductive proof to know this, from a few examples of things with 4 causes to assuming that each thing has 4 causes
Prime mover
There is something that causes individual changes to happen
Infinite regress is impossible
There must be something that causes every change to happen
Analogy / quote
Metal being attracted to a magnet
Shows how it moves it, causing it to change, but not by physically moving it, but rather through attraction
Weakness: Hume
Fallacy of composition
Assuming that if something applies to each individual thing, then it applies to the whole group
Just because each thing has something that causes it to change, doesn't mean that everything has the same first cause
For example, there may be multiple prime movers
Overcoming: Ockham's razor
It is simpler to argue that there is one prime mover than that there are multiple prime movers
Simpler explanations are more likely to be true
So it is more likely that there is only one prime mover
Prime mover moves through final / efficient causation
So the prime mover cannot move things by pushing
So the prime mover must move all things by efficient / final causation
Prime mover cannot change
Efficient cause as it causes the movement / change
Final cause as it is the final purpose to move / change
Analogy / quote: Kitten and milk
Kitten is attracted to milk so moves towards it
Movement by attraction is the efficient cause
Milk causes the movement of the kitten to milk by attraction, which is its purpose, so it moves through final causation
Weakness: Fallacy of composition
Assumes that if each thing has an ultimate efficient and final cause, then everything has the same ultimate and final cause
There may be multiple prime movers that are the efficient and final causes of different things
Assuming that if something applies to each thing, then it applies to the group
Overcoming: Ockham's razor
Simpler to argue that there is one prime mover than multiple prime movers
Simpler explanations are more likely to be true
So it is more likely that there is only one prime mover that is the ultimate efficient and final cause of everything
Prime mover is final and efficient cause of everything