> The error does not lie in teleology and substantial change in
> themselves. The error lies in the treatment of these as absolutely
> certain foundations of natural philosophy. A sign of this absolute
> certitude is that the demonstration of the existence of the prime
> mover in the Physics directly depends on the idea that motion tends
> towards a stopping point, and that substantial change exists. Thus,
> if these are not certain, then the status of physics as a certain
> science is destroyed. It would be reduced to one theory among
> others, which Aristotle directly denies in several passages in which
> he refers to the necessary truths proven in natural philosophy. The
> specific challenges to the certitude of teleology and substantial
> change comes from natural selection and classical atomic theory, the
> mere possibilities of which are enough to destroy the certitude of
> Aristotelian physics.
Do you have a book with this point of view that you can recommend? I can
recommend books with opposing views. ;-)
> Let's take this to the Aristotle list.
Cool. Where's that?
Chris
/********************************************************
MORE.C
a Microsoft Solution Provider
*********************************************************/
#include <stdio.h>
#define NAM "Chris Morrissey, President"
#define BUS "More C Communications Inc."
#define WWW "
http://www.moreC.com";
#define EML "morrissey@xxxxxxxxx"
#define PHN "(604) 877-7731"
void main()
{
printf("Computer Consulting\n");
printf("Software Development\n");
printf("Multimedia Productions\n");
return;
}
void GetFreeDemoSoftware()
{
printf("\nDownload our Latin Quote of the Day software");
printf("\nAvailable for free at
http://www.moreC.com";);
return;
}
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
