more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 12737

[filed under theme 14. Science / D. Explanation / 3. Best Explanation / b. Ultimate explanation ]

Full Idea

All the phenomena of nature can be explained solely by final causes, exactly as if there were no efficient causes; and all the phenomena of nature can be explained solely by efficient causes, as if there were no final causes.

Gist of Idea

Nature can be fully explained by final causes alone, or by efficient causes alone

Source

Gottfried Leibniz (Definitiones cogitationesque metaphysicae [1678], A6.4.1403), quoted by Daniel Garber - Leibniz:Body,Substance,Monad 6

Book Ref

Garber,Daniel: 'Leibniz: Body, Substance, Monad' [OUP 2009], p.258


A Reaction

Somewhat speculative (a virtue!), but it is interesting to see him suggesting that there might be two complete and satisfactory explanations, which never touched one another. I can't see Aristotle agreeing with that.


The 12 ideas with the same theme [possibility of completely explaining anything]:

The best explanations get down to primary basics, but others go less deep [Boyle]
Nature can be fully explained by final causes alone, or by efficient causes alone [Leibniz]
If we find a hypothesis that explains many things, we conclude that it explains everything [Nietzsche]
Science does not aim at ultimate explanations [Popper]
It's not at all clear that explanation needs to stop anywhere [Rey]
Ultimate explanations are in 'grounds', which account for other truths, which hold in virtue of the grounding [Fine,K]
There are four types of bottom-level activities which will explain phenomena [Machamer/Darden/Craver]
Subatomic particles may terminate explanation, if they lack structure [Mumford]
Maybe dispositions can replace the 'laws of nature' as the basis of explanation [Mumford]
To avoid a regress in explanations, ungrounded dispositions will always have to be posited [Mumford]
If the ultimate explanation is a list of entities, no laws, patterns or mechanisms can be cited [Sider]
There is nothing wrong with an infinite regress of mechanisms and regularities [Leuridan]