The World Explored, the World Suffered Science and tech Issue Nr. 11 October 2018(clone) - Page 5

Sciences, Psychology and Aesthetics. Unfortunately all we have left of the presence of these thinkers is their words and their works in the midst of a culture that is rejecting its past as irrelevant to our futures. This journal/ magazine intends to remind us of what we are in danger of forgetting, namely that the answers to many of our most pressing and complex contemporary questions may lie in the pages of the works of the above thinkers. a composite of causes of different kinds. We have referred in earlier lectures to the importance of Aristotelian hylomorphism in our explanations of such diverse kinds of phenomena. In a complex human situation such as the game of billiards all 4 causes or kinds of explanation will be needed for a complete explanation and understanding of all of the phenomena involved. Two kinds of explanation will be needed for the material involved in the motion and the immediate proximal causes of the bringing about of motion in the game. Two of the causes or kinds of explanations will refer to the intentions, tactics and strategies tied up with the agents involved in the game and also perhaps to life projects and plans extending beyond the space-time continuum of the game. These latter two types of explanation will combine what Aristotle called the formal and final causes. All 4 causes are interwoven.” Sutton then turns to Aristotle to combat the modern scientists tendency to divide logical wholes into physical parts : Let me conclude by distancing myself from the flat world of the billiard table, where the event of one billiard ball impacting another encourages the idea that we are witnessing two events happening and not just one holistic change. Aristotle takes us to the building- site to reflect upon such matters: houses are built on building sites, and, according to Aristotle there is only one activity going on and that is the builder building the house. One change is occurring. The divided whole, namely, the builder building and the finished house are theoretically possible at a descriptive level. But we should not then proceed from this theoretical possibility to ask about the practical relation between the two events. Answers will necessarily be two-dimensional and appeal to billiard- ball kinds of mechanisms linking these two “imaginative hypotheticals”. This process of the house being built is teleological. The process is conceptualized in terms of the end of the activity, or the good being brought about by the activity. Proceeding in the opposite direction in search of a linear regression and asking about the event preceding the part of the activity one is currently perceiving will cut the whole process into unrecognizable ribbons. One terminus of such a scientific regression could end somewhat paradoxically in Platonism. Here the search may end up at an idea of the house in the builders mind. Another possible outcome of this scientific regression is that the process is broken into so many fragments that no principle uniting them into a whole activity can be thought of or imagined. In the attempt to frantically re-introduce the whole into the fragments, mereological fallacies are committed such as “the brain understands language”: which a number of brain researchers believe to be true. A brain is a part of a man but only a man understands language. You can try, as some have, to avoid the issue by placing “understand” in quotation marks but that will not help matters. You will also need to make highly artificial stipulations to the effect that “by “understand” I mean that such and such brain circuits will jump into operation. Neural circuits of co ͔յѼɅѥݡ$)ɍٔаȁ͍ٔȁЁ䁙ȁݡ$ɥ䁄]ѡ́)ѕЁѡɅ͍ѥЁѡ͕́ЁѼɕ́ݕɅɍե̸Q)̰ɥ́ѼɥѽѕɴѡɅɍե̸Qݡ)ٕѥѥЁѡ́Ё́ͼٽѕѡЁѡͽȁ́Ёٔѡ)ЁѼѕѡ͍ѥЁ́ѡɽ