David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
British Journal for the History of Philosophy 20 (5):855-879 (2012)
Like many realists about causation and causal powers, Aristotle uses the language of necessity when discussing causation, and he appears to think that by invoking necessity, he is clarifying the manner in which causes bring about or determine their effects. In so doing, he would appear to run afoul of Humean criticisms of the notion of a necessary connection between cause and effect. The claim that causes necessitate their effects may be understood? or attacked? in several ways, however, and so whether the view or its criticism is tenable depends on how we understand the necessitation claim. In fact, Aristotelian efficient causation may be said to involve two distinct necessary connections: one is a relation between causes considered as potential, while the other relates them considered as active. That is, the claims that (1) what has the power to heat necessarily heats what has the power to be heated, and that (2) a particular flame which is actually under a pot necessarily heats it, both of which appear to be true for Aristotle, involve distinct notions of necessity. The latter kind of necessity is based on the facts, as Aristotle sees them, about change, whereas the former is based in the nature of properties. Though different, both kinds of necessity are instances of what contemporary philosophers would call metaphysical necessity, and together they also amount to a theory of causal determination
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Scott A. Shalkowski (1992). Supervenience and Causal Necessity. Synthese 90 (1):55-87.
Markus Schrenk (2010). The Powerlessness of Necessity. Noûs 44 (4):725-739.
Brian Ellis (2000). Causal Laws and Singular Causation. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 61 (2):329-351.
Paolo Fait (2004). Aristotle on a Puzzle About Logical Consequence: Necessity of Being Vs. Necessity of Saying. Topoi 23 (1):101-112.
Richard Sorabji (1980/2006). Necessity, Cause, and Blame: Perspectives on Aristotle's Theory. University of Chicago Press.
Robert K. Shope (1988). Powers, Causation, and Modality. Erkenntnis 28 (3):321 - 362.
David H. Sanford (1978). Causal Necessity and Logical Necessity. Philosophical Studies 33 (2):185 - 194.
Rom Harré (1975). Causal Powers: A Theory of Natural Necessity. Rowman and Littlefield.
David H. Sanford (1975). Causal Necessity and Logical Necessity. Philosophical Studies 28 (2):185 - 194.
Markus Schrenk (2005). The Bookkeeper and the Lumberjack. Metaphysical Vs. Nomological Necessity. In G. Abel (ed.), Kreativität. XX. Deutscher Kongress für Philosophie. Sektionsbeiträge Band 1. Universitätsverlag der Technischen Universität.
Brian Skyrms (1980). Causal Necessity: A Pragmatic Investigation of the Necessity of Laws. Yale University Press.
Markus Schrenk (2011). Interfering with Nomological Necessity. Philosophical Quarterly 61 (244):577-597.
Christopher Byrne (2002). Aristotle on Physical Necessity and the Limits of Teleological Explanation. Apeiron 35 (01):19-46.
Uwe Meixner (2004). Causation in a New Old Key. Studia Logica 76 (3):343 - 383.
Added to index2012-09-25
Total downloads13 ( #98,969 of 1,011,474 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #28,090 of 1,011,474 )
How can I increase my downloads?