Why would scientists disagree with Aristotle’s application of final cause to the natural world? Could final causes still make a kind of sense for talking about human activity? Expl
Need help with this assignment?Get an original answer from a qualified tutor — from $10/page.
Get it written →philosophy discussion question
Discussion from Sophie’s World]. For Aristotle, the final cause that grapes grow, is so people can eat them. Similarly, for Aristotle, the final cause of rain is because plants and animals need it to grow. This is their life path or purpose.
Why would scientists disagree with Aristotle’s application of final cause to the natural world? Could final causes still make a kind of sense for talking about human activity? Explain your answer.
————————
Things to consider:
Can plants grow in areas without rain?
Is water a condition that must be satisfied before things can grow?
What are examples of Aristotle’s four causes?
Requirements: 10 min
Get a plagiarism-free answer to this question
Send us your instructions and we’ll match you with the best writer in your subject.
- 100% human-written, zero AI
- Turnitin report included
- Confidential — we never share your data
- Free revisions & refunds