Necessity and the physicalist account in Aristotle’s Physics. Difficulties with the rainfall example

Jarosław Olesiak

About author

Jarosław Olesiak, PhD
Jagiellonian University
Department of Philosophy
ul. Grodzka 52
PL-31-044 Kraków

E-mail: j.olesiak@iphils.uj.edu.pl

Abstract


The aim of the present article is to consider the shortcomings of the physicalist rainfall example set forth by Aristotle in Physics II.8. I first outline the ancient physicalist account of the coming-to-be of natural organisms and the accompanying rejection of the teleological character of such processes. Then I examine the rainfall example itself. The fundamental difficulty is that rainfall does not appear to have a proper nature. Hence it is not natural in the strict sense and cannot be used in arguments either for or against natural teleology. Rainfall can at most have an end in a weak sense, which makes it inadequate as a paradigm. Furthermore, the physicalist conception of action for an end is itself flawed. I argue that they construe it anthropomorphically and falsely presuppose a symmetry between coming-to-be and ceasing-to-be.

 

I would like to thank Hasse Hamalainen and Marcin Karas for looking at earlier drafts of this paper. I am also especially grateful for the numerous remarks and suggestions of three anonymous referees.


Full Text:

PDF


References


  1. H.G. Apostle (trans.), Aristotle’s Physics. Translated with Commentaries and Glossary, Peripatetic Press, Grinnell, Iowa 1980.
  2. D.M. Balme, “Teleology and Necessity,” [in:] Philosophical Issues in Aristotle’s Biology, A. Gotthelf and J. Lennox (eds.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1987, p. 275–285.
  3. J. Barnes (trans.), The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation, 2 vols., Princeton University Press, Princeton 1991.
  4. M. Bradie and F.D. Miller, Jr., “Teleology and Natural Necessity in Aristotle,” History of Philosophy Quarterly 1 (2) 1984, p. 133–146.
  5. M. Boylan, “Mechanism and Teleology in Aristotle’s Biology,” Apeiron 15 (1) 1981, p. 96–102.
  6. D. Charles, “Teleological Causation in the Physics,” [in:] Aristotle’s Physics: A Collection of Essays, L. Judson (ed.), Oxford University Press, Oxford 1991, p. 101–128.
  7. A. Code, “The Priority of Final Causes over Efficient Causes in Aristotle’s Parts of Animals,” [in:] Aristotelische Biologie: Intentionen, Methoden, Ergebnisse, W. Kullmann and S. Föllinger (eds.), Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart 1997, p. 127–143.
  8. J.M. Cooper, “Aristotle on Natural Teleology,” [in:] Language and Logos, M. Schofield and M. Craven Nussbaum (eds.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1982, p. 197–222.
  9. J.M. Cooper, “Hypothetical Necessity,” [in:] Aristotle on Nature and Living Things, ed. A. Gotthelf, Mathesis Publications, Pittsburgh 1985, p. 151–167.
  10. J.M. Cooper, “Hypothetical Necessity and Natural Teleology,” [in:] Philosophical Issues in Aristotle’s Biology, A. Gotthelf and J. Lennox (eds.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1987, p. 243–274.
  11. R. Friedman, “Matter and Necessity in Physics B 9 200a15-30,” Ancient Philosophy (3) 1983, p. 8–11.
  12. R. Friedman, “Necessitarianism and Teleology in Aristotle’s Biology,” Biology and Philosophy (1) 1986, p. 355–365.
  13. R. Friedman, “Simple Necessity in Aristotle’s Biology,” International Studies in Philosophy 19 (1) 1987, p. 1–9.
  14. D. Furley, “The Rainfall Example in Physics ii 8,” [in:] Aristotle on Nature and Living Things, Allan Gotthelf (ed.), Mathesis Publications, Pittsburgh 1985, p. 177–182.
  15. A. Gotthelf, “Aristotle’s Conception of Final Causality,” Review of Metaphysics (30) 1976, p. 226–254.
  16. Reprinted in A. Gotthelf and J. Lennox (eds.), Philosophical Issues in Aristotle’s Biology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1987, p. 204–242.
  17. A. Gotthelf (ed.), Aristotle on Nature and Living Things, Mathesis Publications, Pittsburgh 1985.
  18. A. Gotthelf and J. Lennox (eds.), Philosophical Issues in Aristotle’s Biology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1987.
  19. A. Gotthelf and J. Lennox (eds.), “Introduction to Part III: Teleology and Necessity in Nature,” [in:] Philosophical Issues in Aristotle’s Biology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1987, p. 199–203.
  20. L. Judson, “Aristotelian Teleology,” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy (29) 2005, p. 341–366.
  21. S. Kelsey, “Aristotle’s definition of nature,” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy (25) 2003, p. 59–87.
  22. G.S. Kirk, J.E. Raven, and M. Schofield, The Presocratic Philosophers: A Critical History with a Selection of Texts, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1983.
  23. J. Lear, Aristotle: the desire to understand, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1988.
  24. J. Lennox, “Teleology, Chance, and Aristotle’s Theory of Spontaneous Generation,” Journal of the History of Philosophy (20) 1982, p. 219–238.
  25. J. Lennox, Aristotle’s Philosophy of Biology: Studies in the Origins of Life Science, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2001.
  26. M. Leunissen, Explanation And Teleology In Aristotle’s Science Of Nature, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2010.
  27. S. Sauvé Meyer, “Aristotle, Teleology, and Reduction,” Philosophical Review 101 (4) 1992, p. 791–825.
  28. M. Craven Nussbaum, “Aristotle on Teleological Explanation,” [in:] Aristotle’s De Motu Animalium. Text with Translation, Commentary, and Interpretive Essays, Princeton University Press, Princeton 1978, p. 59–106.
  29. A. Preus, “Aristotle’s Natural Necessity,” Studi Internazionali di Filosofia (1) 1969, p. 91–100.
  30. A. Preus, Science and Philosophy in Aristotle’s Biological Works, G. Olms, Hildesheim and New York 1975.
  31. W.D. Ross (ed.), Aristoteles. Physica, Clarendon Press, Oxford 1950.
  32. W.D. Ross, Aristotle’s Physics. A Revised Text with Introduction and Commentary, Clarendon Press, Oxford 1955.
  33. W.D. Ross, Aristotle, Routledge, London 1995.
  34. M. Scharle, “Elemental Teleology in Aristotle’s Physics II.8,” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy (34) 2008, p. 147–184.
  35. R. Sorabji, Necessity, Cause, and Blame. Perspectives on Aristotle’s Theory, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY 1980.
  36. S. Waterlow, Nature, Change, and Agency in Aristotle’s Physics, Clarendon Press, Oxford 1982.

DOI:

http://dx.doi.org/10.13153/diam.45.2015.795

Article links:

Default URL: http://www.diametros.iphils.uj.edu.pl/index.php/diametros/article/view/795
English abstract URL: http://www.diametros.iphils.uj.edu.pl/index.php/diametros/article/view/795/en

Share:






All works are licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.