Final and Formal Causality

  • Thread starter Thread starter ServusDei1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

ServusDei1

Guest
How do we defend the concepts of formal and final causality? How do we defend the notion that the teleology of an act determines its morality?
 
Last edited:
The intention or thought out goal of an action comes before the motion of acquiring the perfection of the intention.
In other words, reason for action precedes motion of fulfilling an action
 
The final cause(God) implants a nature within the formal cause which tends toward its finality. For example, a fire tends to burn due to its nature. Or a man tending or inclining to happiness, ultimately found eternally only in God. All men desire to be happy, all fire burns.
 
The formal cause (nature of a thing) has embedded (by the final cause) within it an inclination for its fulfillment. Humans are inclined towards happiness. Ex. Even those who commit suicide (mistakenly) think they are seeking and will be happy in the end.
 
Sure, maybe.

But Socrates had no problem critically analyzing interpersonal institution’s abstract systems of thinking. Which was what I was driving at.

Also, Aristotle was wrong about like… Most things.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top