Abstract
The Aristotelian causality is irreducible to the empiricist’s conception of causality. We have inherited several problems from the modern conception of causality. In order to confront them it is necessary to expose the fundamental differences between the Aristotelian theory of causality and the modern, empiricist idea of causality, and, in particular, the relationships between the principle of causality and the principle of identity, as well as the difference between a predictive causality and an explanatory one. In modern philosophy, law takes the place of cause. Given that often scientists and philosophers are no longer interested by the question: why things are produced as they are, but only by: how natural phenomena succeed each other, a simple description of things satisfies the empiricist and idealistic demand of perception. The idealist’s demand of simplicity concerning natural laws annihilates the complexity of the causal relationships present in living beings. Such causal relationships are not equivalent to the set of motive causes which, without the orientation of formal and final causes, are insufficient to explain (i) the variety and stability of nature, and (ii) the generation and corruption of things and beings.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2026 Eikasia Filosofia
