Document Type : Research Paper
Authors
1
Department of philosophy, Faculty of Humanities, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.
2
Department of philosophy,, Faculty of Humanities, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.
3
Associate professor of philosophy, Department of philosophy. Faculty of Humanities, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.
10.22091/jptr.2024.9620.2916
Abstract
Proposing the theory of influx, Francisco Suárez argued that each of the four causes “inflows” its being into the effect. This theory takes the concept of four causes, especially the final cause, similar to the efficient cause. By this move, Suárez could account for God's purposeless and free will as well as his purposeful action through nature. Influenced by Suárez's theory, Descartes excluded the final cause from his philosophy, which paved the way for the mechanical explanation of nature. It was thus possible for the theory developed with theological objectives to provide the basis for the scientific explanation of nature. In this study, we examine the differences and similarities between Descartes' and Suárez's natural teleology. Comparing these two metaphysical systems reveals how two theories may be influenced by the same principles, but produce contradictory results. Thus, we will first analyze the concept of theory of influx. Then, we present textual evidence to highlight the impact of influx theory on Descartes and Suárez's natural teleology. Subsequently, we examine how Descartes took causal (viz. efficient) necessity as the only good in nature by developing Suárez's theory of causality.
Keywords
Main Subjects
)
Send comment about this article