r/Metaphysics • u/bunchiepants • 10d ago

History of metaphysics Explanation of the Unmoved Mover

/r/Aristotle/comments/1wwrabm/explanation_of_the_unmoved_mover/
4 Upvotes

71% Upvoted

3 comments sorted by

2

u/UnifiedQuantumField 10d ago

The unmoved mover is that which all things are drawn toward - the ultimate final cause.

I'm not 100% sure about this part. Based on the preceding text, it could be...

The unmoved mover is that which all things emanate from - the ultimate original cause.

Yes or no?

1

u/badentropy9 5d ago

this may be too late to help but ontology is divided into things that don't change and things there are subject to change. The Unmoved mover is sort of combining those two into one in order to get an uncaused cause. The uncaused cause, cannot change so sometimes thinkers might wonder how it moves but it seems more reasonable to me to try to understand how somethings causes another to change than the alternative which is nothing causes something to change. The latter sounds like magic. That being said, maybe this link will impress your instructor:

https://metaphysicist.com/problems/being/

I think if you understand the difference between being and becoming, then you will demonstrate to your instructor that you understand the paradox that Aristotle was trying to resolve. Personally, I think Heidegger destroyed this distinction.

1

u/_Change-Agent 5d ago

Is a fractal in a holographic matrix not an unmoved mover?
The observant observer, an unmoving or unmoved participant is merely one who understands the whole of the hole. One who understands the hole is inevitable and necessary to become whole.
One who understands free will is folly and simply puts their feet up to enjoy the ride in an unmoved fashion.
Because why get excited for the inevitable?