Abstract

The dissertation concludes by noting that Aristotle's concept of nature as that which contains its own principle of development is supported by the model of systems. Physical reality thus is not identified with reduced material substance, as it is in materialism and some versions of physicalism. The Aristotelian twist is to place the study of this intrinsic physical order and finality at the center of the study of nature. ;In the last chapter of this section, form is correlated with the functional organization of a system, and ultimately with Pattee's concept of a constraint or "semantic form." Matter is correlated with the lower levels of order in hierarchical systems. Finally, arguments are presented in support of Aristotle's hylomorphic and anti-reductionistic view of ousia. Upper levels cannot be reduced in structural hierarchies because the levels are not completely decomposable, in complex systems, the whole-part orderings of the system are often unclear, and because increasingly precise scientific descriptions generate several levels of theory, not a single-level theory. Further, in control hierarchies, the program, or "software," is a separate formal principle added to the "hardware," or material substratum. For these reasons Aristotle's hylomorphic theory appears to be a better approach to the study of systems than is reductionism. ;The last two chapters focus on the core of Aristotle's philosophy of nature, viz., teleology and hylomorphism. Two objections to the claim that systems are teleological are considered. First there is the claim that goal-seeking activity must involve conscious intent. Second, there is the objection that final causes do not precede their effects, and so are not real causes. In response to the first charge, two interpretations of "entertaining an end" are given, one in terms of hierarchical constraints, and the other in terms of storing information. Neither requires conscious intentions. In answer to the second objection, Sayre's cybernetic definition of causation is used to show that the temporal order and causal order are distinguishable, and hence, cause and effect need not be ordered in the direction of forward time. It is also noted that final causes are not temporal events, but event types. ;In the initial chapters, scientific theories of systems, hierarchies, and information are discussed. The thesis here is that nature is an interactionally complex hierarchy of hierarchical, cybernetic systems. This claim is then correlated in detail with Aristotle's view of nature as a hierarchy of protai ousiai. ;The dissertation aims at laying a foundation for a post-modern, Aristotelian philosophy of nature. In the first half of the dissertation, a model of hierarchical, cybernetic systems is developed. In the second half, this model is correlated with Aristotle's concept of prote ousia. The thesis of the work is that an Aristotelian philosophy of nature, interpreted in the light of systems theory and cybernetics, is a viable alternative to materialistic and reductive physicalistic philosophies of nature. ;Because of paradigm shifts in the sciences, and because of the persistence in modern philosophy of problems about the place of human beings in nature, it is necessary to rethink the categories used to characterize the physical. Modern philosophies of nature are outmoded, but they continue to be influential and to generate problems. In order to eliminate these problems, an alternative, post-modern philosophy of nature needs to be worked out