東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Teleology and its Limits in Aristotl...

Marre, Thomas C.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Teleology and its Limits in Aristotle and Kant.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Teleology and its Limits in Aristotle and Kant./
Author:	Marre, Thomas C.
Published:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2018,
Description:	328 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 80-07, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International80-07A.
Subject:	Metaphysics. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=13819861
ISBN:	9780438775602

Teleology and its Limits in Aristotle and Kant.
Marre, Thomas C.

Teleology and its Limits in Aristotle and Kant. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2018 - 328 p.

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 80-07, Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Pittsburgh, 2018.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

Aristotle was a realist about natural teleology, Kant an anti-realist. My dissertation explains why each accorded it the epistemic and ontological status that he did. I articulate and defend novel conceptions of the problems they were addressing and their solutions to them. Aristotle's natural teleology constitutes an essential part of his solution to a larger problem: how is motion or change possible? Motion had been thought by some to be unlimited and, therefore, unknowable. If there is to be a science of natural motion, then, motion must have limits. The telos was one such limit. Aristotle often glosses telos with limit, and this association is consistent with prior usage. It was, in fact, one of the three standardly recognized limits, together with beginning and middle-arche and meson. All three figure in Aristotle's account of natural motion. The arche is the efficient cause, and the meson is that by which the arche brings about some telos. So understood, the telos has a natural relation to the possibility of motion: it serves as a limit in virtue of which motion is intelligible. Kant's teleology is intimately related to disputes about universals and our empirical classifications of things. Central to my account is the category of community. Our discursive intellects require that we approach nature as if it were ordered into a system of genera and species. In such a system, the species are parts of the genus and stand together in community under it, thereby constituting a whole. Similarly, an organism or natural end possesses the form of a system and its parts stand together in community under a common or communal ground. They too constitute a whole. But as with nature's kinds, we can only approach an organism as if its parts formed a real whole: their communal ground is simple and so not to be met with in space. They possess, in other words, a noumenal ground. Consequently, organisms can be explained neither teleologically nor mechanistically, and teleology itself can never be accorded genuinely scientific status. Natural ends can be understood only on analogy with ourselves.

ISBN: 9780438775602Subjects--Topical Terms:

517082
Metaphysics.

Teleology and its Limits in Aristotle and Kant.
LDR:03188nmm a2200325 4500 001 2206309
005 20190829083239.5
008 201008s2018 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9780438775602
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI13819861
035 $a AAI13819861
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Marre, Thomas C. $3 3433202
245 1 0 $a Teleology and its Limits in Aristotle and Kant.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2018
300 $a 328 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 80-07, Section: A.
500 $a Publisher info.: Dissertation/Thesis.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Pittsburgh, 2018.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
506 $a This item must not be added to any third party search indexes.
520 $a Aristotle was a realist about natural teleology, Kant an anti-realist. My dissertation explains why each accorded it the epistemic and ontological status that he did. I articulate and defend novel conceptions of the problems they were addressing and their solutions to them. Aristotle's natural teleology constitutes an essential part of his solution to a larger problem: how is motion or change possible? Motion had been thought by some to be unlimited and, therefore, unknowable. If there is to be a science of natural motion, then, motion must have limits. The telos was one such limit. Aristotle often glosses telos with limit, and this association is consistent with prior usage. It was, in fact, one of the three standardly recognized limits, together with beginning and middle-arche and meson. All three figure in Aristotle's account of natural motion. The arche is the efficient cause, and the meson is that by which the arche brings about some telos. So understood, the telos has a natural relation to the possibility of motion: it serves as a limit in virtue of which motion is intelligible. Kant's teleology is intimately related to disputes about universals and our empirical classifications of things. Central to my account is the category of community. Our discursive intellects require that we approach nature as if it were ordered into a system of genera and species. In such a system, the species are parts of the genus and stand together in community under it, thereby constituting a whole. Similarly, an organism or natural end possesses the form of a system and its parts stand together in community under a common or communal ground. They too constitute a whole. But as with nature's kinds, we can only approach an organism as if its parts formed a real whole: their communal ground is simple and so not to be met with in space. They possess, in other words, a noumenal ground. Consequently, organisms can be explained neither teleologically nor mechanistically, and teleology itself can never be accorded genuinely scientific status. Natural ends can be understood only on analogy with ourselves.
590 $a School code: 0178.
650 4 $a Metaphysics. $3 517082
650 4 $a Philosophy of Science. $3 894954
650 4 $a Philosophy. $3 516511
690 $a 0396
690 $a 0402
690 $a 0422
710 2 $a University of Pittsburgh. $b Philosophy. $3 3178651
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 80-07A.
790 $a 0178
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2018
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=13819861