The human being and their causes
Raúl Arreola ∙ 10 min of reading
Introduction
This essay describes Aristotle's causality based on his ‘four-causal explanatory scheme’. This scheme presents a material, formal, efficient, and final cause to explain a vast amount of objects and phenomena in our world. First, to identify and understand these causes, some generalities will be presented accompanied by a brief description. Second, an example of these causes applied to an everyday object. Third, some exceptions to the causes are presented. Fourth, the final cause is developed in-depth and how these causes apply to human beings. Finally, it is questioned whether these causes vary over time or they remain immutable.
Generalities of the four causes
Aristotle states that we have knowledge of a thing only when we have known its causes. Under this idea, Aristotle thought that his predecessors had not delved deeply enough into these causes since, although they had described certain causes, they did not have a complete understanding of the possible causes and how they relate to each other and generally only recognized the material cause and the efficient cause.
One of Aristotle's greatest philosophical contributions is ‘the four-causal explanatory scheme’, which attempts to explain the world around us by answering four fundamental questions about an object. These causes are:
a) The material cause, which answers what the object in question is made of.
b) The formal cause, which answers what form it has.
c) The efficient cause, which is who and/or how this object was created.
d) The final cause, which refers to what it is made for.
To exemplify these causes, we will take as a reference an everyday object such as a jacket. Its material cause is the textiles and polymers of which it is made. Its formal cause is its design, the disposition of its pockets, its color, etc. Its efficient cause could be said to be the factory and the workers who produced it. Its final cause would be to protect its buyer from the climate in which they will wear it. In this way, we not only describe the object in question, but we go further and explain the object in a fundamental way. So also, Aristotle tells us that citing the ‘four-causal scheme’ is not only necessary for adequate explanation, but also sufficient for adequate explanation.
Exceptions
Aristotle does not present the ‘four-causal scheme 'as a way to explain the world in general, because if we pay attention to these causes, we realize that they cannot be applicable to everything around us since not everything necessarily has each of these causes. For example, an idea, although it has a final cause, since it is not part of the physical world, it does not possess matter, therefore it does not have a material cause.
The formal cause tells us that not only the matter is not enough, but that it must present a specific form or form for the object to be that object, that returning to the previous example of the jacket, it is not only enough to have the materials of a jacket, but it must have the form of a jacket and not the form of another object.
The efficient cause explains the potential of an object, since not by having the matter available for the formation of an object it will take the required form spontaneously, but there must be an agent that unites those materials in a certain disposition. The final cause states the purpose, in other words, the intention of the object, so that what happens by chance lacks a final cause, since the result is given by chance and not by a specific purpose, for example, coincidences.
Final Cause
Aristotle uses two examples, one to describe what is not a final cause and one to describe what is. The first example is the rain, which when it falls on a crop of corn, it may either nourish or spoil it by the mentioned phenomenon, however, the consequence is not a result of a final cause, but is just a coincidence, i.e., it does not rain to nourish or spoil a crop. The second example, also based on nature, is the arrangement of the teeth, which are in a position where the front ones are sharp and serve to tear the food, while the back ones are wide and serve to grind the food. In this second example, it can be said that this is simply a coincidence, but Aristotle states that they are always, or at least on most occasions, distributed in the same way, so it is a predictable occurrence and something predictable, unlike a coincidence, must have an explanation. That explanation, at least for Aristotle, is the final cause.
The four causes of human beings
If we apply these four causes to human beings, we can realize that they are particularly tricky, since it would be simple to say that the material cause of a person is all the matter of which they are made, of which their organs, bones, cells, and so on are made. The formal cause would be their physical features such as their height, complexion, skin color, among others. The efficient cause would be their parents. And finally, the final cause would be their purpose in life, that is, that which makes us happy and fulfills us, which in Aristotle's words it is called 'eudaimonia' (this last point about the final cause will be discussed in more detail later). However, the purpose of this essay is not simply to describe the ‘four-causal scheme’ and how they apply to human beings, but rather to delve into those relevant arguments and questions that might arise following Aristotle's work.
With respect to the human being, in the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle posits that the final good of the human being must have the following characteristics:
“1. To be pursued for its own sake.
2. Be such that we wish for other things for its sake.
3.Be such that we do not wish for it on account of other things.
4.Be complete, in the sense that it is always choice worthy and always chosen for itself.
5.Be self-sufficient, in the sense that its presence suffices to make a life lacking in nothing”.
Earlier we mentioned that the final cause of the human being is related to 'eudaimonia' and this is because it fulfills all these points raised by Aristotle above. The word 'eudaimonia' despite not having a direct English translation, is often translated simply as 'happiness' or 'flourishing'. However, the definition proposed in this essay based on Aristotle’s philosophy is: "Eudaimonia is performing our highest capacities by using reason and following virtue."
If we look in detail at the causes in human beings, we realize that some of these causes are not immovable, but are constantly changing due to our nature. By this, we mean that matter is changing, since at the microscopic level, there is a series of changes, such as our cells are dying and giving way to new cells; the nutrients contained in the food we consume give way to the formation of our muscles, skin, hair, among others; also throughout our lives we grow, gain weight, lose weight, etc. and following the law of conservation of matter, this must come from somewhere, so we can say that, indeed, the material cause in the human being changes.
Likewise, our shape changes throughout our life, if we see an adult person and compare them with how they were when they were born, it is evident that they do not look the same even though they are in fact the same person. And not only these changes are noticeable over a longer time scale, but they can also occur in a short period of time, such as changes due to a haircut, beard, or surgery. With the above in mind, we can say that the formal cause in the human being also changes.
On the other hand, the efficient cause in the human being is their parents, this cause behaves in a different way from the other two since it does not change and the parents will always be the same.
Following Aristotle's philosophy, it seems to be clear that the final cause of the human being is their 'flourishing', however, if we ask a child what this flourishing means to them, possibly their answer will be very far from what a young adult could answer; and this in turn, possibly also far from what an old man could answer. Following this example, asking this question to different people seems obvious that the answers will be different since these capabilities vary from person to person. But what if we ask this question to the same person but at these different stages, would we have different answers?
Taking into account the above and how subjective a person's purpose can be or what those higher capacities are for one person with respect to another, it seems that it is not clear whether or not the final cause can change with the passage of time, since if it behaves like the first two (the material cause and the formal cause), it would change, but if it behaved like the third one (the efficient cause), the final cause would remain rigid.
In short, and in a formal argumentation, we could present this idea in the following way:
Premise 1: the material cause in the human being changes.
Premise 2: the formal cause in the human being changes.
Premise 3: the efficient cause in the human being does not change.
Argument: if the first and second causes change in human beings, but the third does not change, is it possible that the final cause changes over time or does it remain immutable?
‘Eudaimonia’, undoubtedly, is related to purpose in life. These capacities seem to be subject not only to the individual in question but also to the stage of life in which they find themselves and we could quickly answer that yes, the final cause changes according to the stage of life in which we find ourselves. However, we should stop to see in detail how Aristotle describes the final cause.
First of all, let us assume that the final cause is a function of the purpose that the object has had since the beginning and is not subject to subsequent coincidences, as in the rain and teeth example described before. For example, the creation of a computer that was initially designed so that the user could access information, but for other reasons, the user is committing fraud through that computer. Its final cause is still the same as the one it was created with, even though at that moment it is not fulfilling it due to random factors. Second, if we say that the final cause is to perform their highest capacities using reason and following virtue, a small child cannot be virtuous since virtue is given only through practice and in a fully developed life, however, this does not mean that the small child lacks a final cause, but simply that they are not yet executing it, as in the previous example. Third, if we join the two previous ideas, the human being has a final cause since the beginning of their life and the fact that they do not perform it at all times does not mean that it changes, but simply that, due to situations non-related to the individual, they do not yet perform it or is not performing it at all times, since the final cause is as much the subject's own as the subject himself.
Conclusion
Aristotle's ‘four-causal scheme’ helps us to understand the world around us through fundamental questions about the object in question. The causes are the material, formal, efficient, and final cause, these causes answer ‘what it is made of’, ‘what form it has’, ‘how it was made’ and ‘what it is made for’. Although these causes are not applicable to everything around us, they are connected to each other and are applicable to the human being and it is concluded that the material and formal causes present changes throughout the life of the subject, but that the efficient and formal causes remain intact during the life of the subject. These causes are very important since they help us to understand, mainly, what our purpose is, since the final cause of the human being is ‘eudaimonia’, which means: “to perform our highest capacities, using reason and pursuing virtue”.
Bibliography
Falcon, Andrea, "Aristotle on Causality", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2019 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2019/entries/aristotle-causality/>.
Shields, Christopher, "Aristotle", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/aristotle/>
Contacta al autor: raul.arreola.glz@gmail.com