Aristotle on the growth of corn

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by noahfor, Mar 20, 2006.

  1. noahfor Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    32
    Is anyone here a big Aristotle buff? If so, can you answer me this:

    As rain is not for the sake of corn, but causes the growth of corn incidentally, so are teeth, in that they are not for nutrition but cause it by accident.

    Aristotle opposes this view, stating that what happens all and for the most part can not be by accident, but must be by nature and for something.

    My question is: "Why either by accident or by nature, and why if by nature then for something?"

    And does he also oppose the view that rain causes the growth of corn by accident, and think, rather, that rain is for the growth of corn?

    Physics Book 2 Chapter 8
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2006
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Rosnet Philomorpher Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    681
    Thanks! But you really aren't supposed to copy long stuff like that. Didn't read the rules? Next time, you could put up a link.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. noahfor Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    32
    I did manage to read it before it was deleted, so thanks. It didn't realy answer my question, so if anyone can, still please do, but it did help solidify the concepts in my head. Thanks.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Facial Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,225
    Aristotle? Corn?
    Corn is native to the Americas.
     
  8. noahfor Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    32
    Corn is a term that originally referred to the kernel of any grain
     
  9. Pete It's not rocket surgery Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,167
    The word "corn" originally meant any cereal grain.
    In the US, Canada, and Australia (at least), its meaning has changed to refer only to maize.
     
  10. Spectrum Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    459
    What about lightning? That is without any purpose (except perhaps to alleviate electrical build-up).
     
  11. toole Registered Member

    Messages:
    12
    Aristotle might have been driven to 'conclude' that the term nature was intentionally built to describe that in nature, a begining, a middle and an end; all had a purposful step; an accident being something that is inconsequential to a 'circle of life' theory, but one that can occur and produce something.

    The idea of a natural occurence might be solely a product of misinterpretation, being that 'nature' could maybe surmise a series of 'accidents' forming a term or pattern that isn't familiar to the definition of the other. Being as vague as that was, it falls true, there have been plenty of instances of not having a direct hold on a theory or pattern and when there is a shift, there must be a new term for it.

    (post-facetious example)
    Aristotle witnessed rain for the first time when he was 4 years old, but obviously he thought nothing of it, by the age of 14 he realized that there have been accidental rains his whole life, maybe once a month, maybe once a day: he felt that since this happened so many times, it could no longer be considered an accident, but now that it had pattern and later to find: a purpose (to assist corn in growth) and thus resulting in his definition and usage of 'nature' or a natural occurence.

    Its a highly un-justified thought, but on the brink, it seems to hold true.
     
  12. Cyperium I'm always me Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,058
    I think the lightning do have purpouse, as it is vibrating the whole magnetic field of the world through the many lightning strikes throughout the world. Tesla made the highest man-made lightning when vibrating the electric fields in harmony with the earths magnetic fields. He is also said to have caused earthquakes using the same technique (where his lab was in the epicentrum and he didn't notice anything

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ). He was rather excentric saying that if he found the right frequency he could split the earth in two

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    It probably has purpouse because of air freshning (and so on too), also there is a slight possibility that lightning gave the first lifeform the spark it needed to "become alive" (like Frankenstein

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ).
     
  13. Cyperium I'm always me Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,058
    If it is by nature, thus natural, then it is the applied concept, a concept prevailing in reality naturally must be a very strong concept and much meaningful.

    A interesting concept is also, does the corn (or the plant that comes from it) support the rain, giving out something that makes it rain more?

    One corn probably couldn't accomplish that, but many many corns could, with the right chemicals somehow releasing the rain.
     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2006

Share This Page