RE: The Best Logique Evidence of God Existence
July 16, 2019 at 2:55 am
(This post was last modified: July 16, 2019 at 2:56 am by Belacqua.)
(July 16, 2019 at 2:36 am)polymath257 Wrote: So, the formal cause is the dynamics of the interaction of the parts? So it is dependent on the material cause?
The formal cause includes the interaction. It is dependent on the material cause in that a body that isn't a physical object can't operate in the physical world.
Quote:If you go that route, then the 'ultimate cause of the heart is reproductive success. The pumping of the blood is just a means to get that success.
But the 'ultimate cause' of reproductive success is, what? the laws of thermodynamics that determine whether energy is available for reproduction?
Once again, this seems to be a poor division of concepts. There is no 'ultimate cause' for the heart. It simply does not have a purpose in any reasonable sense. It has *effects* such as differential survival, but that isn't the same as the ultimate cause.
But let's go with this. Yes, the heart pumps blood. What identifies that 'function' as its 'ultimate cause'? Why not all the other things that the heart does? Because it isn't *just* a pump.
It's possible for things to have more than one Final Cause. The Final Causes of a pleasure boat would include: floating, impressing women, smuggling cocaine, etc.
But Final Cause doesn't point to some ultimate "meaning of life." But this may be simpler than it appears. If a child asks you "what are the lungs for?" the answer is pretty obvious.
Quote:Then I am confused about what you did say. I agree that having a non-existent thing (whatever *that* means) be the cause of existent things is strange. So why not just admit that some things have no cause? And that there could well be many such things?
Let's not slip back into "cause" as only "efficient cause" here.
If the brute fact of existence is the First Cause, as we've been discussing it here, then can there be any essential chain that doesn't end in this brute fact? In other words, can any existent thing not depend on the fact that things just exist? As far as I can see, the existence of every single extant thing has this same First Cause.
Quote:And we can go further. Many quantum level events have no cause (and certainly none by Ari's definitions). This means there are quintillions of uncaused events all around us all the time.
Here you've slipped entirely back into "cause" as efficient cause only. Quantum level events couldn't occur if things didn't exist. Though they may or may not have efficient causes, they depend for their occurrence on the laws of physics, on the fact that the universe exists. In the sense I have been using this all along -- Aristotle's sense -- all of these events certainly have a First Cause.