A Doctor Healing Himself

For the last several class periods we have been focusing on retracing the historical course that philosophy has taken to define what nature “is”. However, up until this point we have examined the history of the philosophy of nature through the lens of third parties. This week that trend comes to an end with an analysis of Aristotle’s physics. Much like our class, in the physics there is much inquisition into what kind of thing nature “is”.

In our study of mechanism we focused on the ways in which nature seems to be ordered by a omnipresent, omnipotent being. According to this view nature is also explained by direct causes that precede one another in time. Lastly, the mechanical conception of nature understands the world as ether, a machine, something waiting to be turned into a machine, or something waiting to be changed by a machine.

Aristotle’s conception of nature is much different than the view of mechanism we have been exploring. I think the most interesting conception of nature that Aristotle presents in opposition to nature is the idea that nature is teleological. Teleology is what Aristotle dubs as the “final” cause. It is “that for the sake of which” something is preformed. Aristotle argues that if art (things that are man made) is purposeful, then nature must also be purposeful.

That nature is purposeful in and of itself is an idea that, in our day and age, is I think is given little credence. In the present day Most Americans are always concerned with what nature can provide us with. We look to nature for our own purposes and to complete our own ends. Whether it is to build our homes, or fuel our cars, we are constantly depending on nature to meet our needs, and using nature to achieve our own ends. Given that we understand our relationship with nature as one that is completely one sided (we are always taking from nature and rarely considering nature's well being outside of ourselves), it is understandable that we would not understand nature as having its own ends.

Aristotle recognizes that nature acts on itself. Nature is constantly creating and destroying itself. Aristotle likens the way that nature acts on itself to a doctor who heals himself. The doctor in this situation is both the cause of his healing, and the source of it. In this way nature distinguishes itself by being both its own cause and its own end. This is observable in all of nature. Whenever nature is destroyed in some way it heals itself. If you trim the dead leaves off of a plant it will cause the plant to grow and flourish.

We have encountered the idea that nature has purpose outside of humankind, before. But Aristotle’s understating of nature as being teleological isn’t simply the idea that nature has purpose outside of humanity, but goes a step further. It claims that nature actually has its own ends to meet, and is the cause of itself meeting those ends completely outside of mankind. When a forest fire begins in order to fertilize the soil beneath it, it has little concern for the people inhabiting its boarders. All the same, the fire must happen for nature to meet its end of continuing to grow and propagate.

In our philosophical exploration of the environment, nature being teleological means several things. We can be like nature and seek our own ends without consideration of the environment just as nature seeks its own ends without consideration of man. We can recognize that nature has little concern for our interests and attempt to control it by building damns, and razing entire forests. Finally we could understand that nature has its own ends independent of us and we should respect those ends in seeking to create those things which Aristotle says will bring nature to a higher potential, not those kinds of creation which eliminate the presence of nature.