FINAL CAUSALITY SERIES

Simply put, you cannot remove an extrinsic sufficient reason (cause) on which something depends, and still expect the effect to continue to be. The meaning of an effect is measured in terms of its being existentially dependent upon its cause.

FINAL CAUSALITY SERIES

ThomasвЂ™ Five Ways in terms of a series of causes going back in time. This leads people to think of the causal regresses in St. Thanks to David Hume, we are used to thinking of a cause as something that invariably precedes its effect in temporal sequence, just as we expect that parents come before their children. You cannot have something that is totally dependent, and yet, is adequately explained by a cause that accounts for only part of its effectвЂ™s existence.

Moreover, just as a reason must be sufficient, a cause must be proportionate to its effect. In sum, adding both intrinsic reasons to extrinsic reasons, the totality of the being in question must be fully explained (whether all such reasons are fully known or not). Thus, its heat, which is extrinsic to its nature, must be explained by some extrinsic agent, such as a hot stove. For example, while waterвЂ™s nature may explain why it is wet, it does not explain why it is hot. From this, it follows that an Uncaused First Cause, namely God, would have no need for a prior cause, since he would be his own sufficient reason for being.Д«ut what if we have something that partially explains itself? In that case, the formula is elucidated by saying that to the extent that a being does not explain itself, it needs to have an extrinsic reason, or cause, to account for whatever it does not explain of itself. The principle of causality is simply a subset of sufficient reason вЂ“ that part of it that deals with beings that are not their own sufficient reason, and thus, need a cause. The principle of causality states that every effect necessarily requires a cause. A cause is an extrinsic sufficient reason. Thus, an effect is a being whose sufficient reason is not intrinsic. If a being is not its own sufficient reason, it necessarily follows that something else, called a вЂњcause,вЂќ must be its reason. Logical division tells us that this reason must be found either within the being in question (intrinsically) or not within that being (extrinsically). The universally true metaphysical principle of sufficient reason states that every being must have a sufficient reason for its being or coming-to-be. Still, the metaphysical principle of causality starts from the other end: from the effect вЂ“ and reasons back to the cause. While Thomist metaphysicians would not accept the idealistic implications of HumeвЂ™s epistemology, they would agree that finite causes cannot be guaranteed to produce any given effect for much the same reason. Since event B can always be interfered with, strict causality can never be assured. Influenced by Hume, modern science translates causality to a formula, such as вЂњgiven event A, event B will necessarily and subsequently follow.вЂќ Effectively, this becomes a matter of predictability. 1В Since induction alone could never assure the necessity of such associations, he maintained that the вЂњlaw of causalityвЂќ cannot be rationally proven. Hume conceived causality as an habitual association of mental impressions, arising largely through constant conjunction of previous experiences вЂ“ connected through contiguity or temporal succession. No modern philosopher has had more impact on the understanding of causality than David Hume. This article will assume the validity of the metaphysical first principles of non-contradiction and sufficient reason, which were established as true in my previous Strange Notions article on the first principles вЂ“ and will not be reargued herein.В These principles will be employed as instruments with which to explore the genuine meaning of causality. In that context, many misunderstandings arise concerning the true metaphysical meaning of the principle of causality. Thomas AquinasвЂ™ Five Ways, employ the notion of causality вЂ“ both efficient and final. The classical proofs for GodвЂ™s existence, particularly St.

Final causality