Purpose and nature in Aristotle

Author(s)

Giorlando Madureira de Lima

• Document type: Master's Dissertation
• Press: Campinas, SP.
• Institution: Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP). Instituto de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas
• Defense date: 2010-09-30

Examining board members

Fátima Regina Rodrigues Évora; Márcio Augusto Damin Custódio; Tadeu Mazzola Verza

• Advisor: Fátima Regina Rodrigues Évora

Abstract

The relationship between purpose (hou heneka) and nature (physis) is an issue in dispute, as can be demonstrated from Physics, II, 8, 199b32. In that passage, Aristotle declares that "nature is a cause, a cause that operates for a purpose," this statement is the conclusion of an argument by analogy about the necessity that a cause has of a purpose. The analogy is between a craftsman who must have some purpose before starting work on a wood and nature that, similarly, would need to have a purpose before start moving beings. This Aristotelic image produces a question that accompanies the tradition of commentary, which is, "nature has a deliberator?". This dissertation investigates each of the three possible answers to that question: (i) exists and is distinct from nature, (ii) exists and is not separate from nature and (iii) does not exist. With the intent of, at the end of these investigations, find a conclusion about what can actually be said about the question. It achieves this goal by analyzing the structure of the text of Physics II, 8 (AU)