Unmoved mover
The unmoved mover (Ancient Greek: ὃ οὐ κινούμενον κινεῖ, romanized: ho ou kinoúmenon kineî, lit.
This Aristotelian concept had its roots in cosmological speculations of the earliest Greek pre-Socratic philosophers[4] and became highly influential and widely drawn upon in medieval philosophy and theology.
"[5] In the Physics (VIII 4–6) Aristotle finds "surprising difficulties" explaining even commonplace change, and in support of his approach of explanation by four causes, he required "a fair bit of technical machinery".
[7] Aristotle's "first philosophy", or Metaphysics ("after the Physics"), develops his peculiar theology of the prime mover, as πρῶτον κινοῦν ἀκίνητον: an independent divine eternal unchanging immaterial substance.
[8] Aristotle adopted the geometrical model of Eudoxus of Cnidus to provide a general explanation of the apparent wandering of the classical planets arising from uniform circular motions of celestial spheres.
But he does point out rightly that the unmoved mover fits the definition of an efficient cause—"whence the first source of change or rest" (Phys.
Their influence on lesser beings is purely the result of an "aspiration or desire,"[17] and each aetheric celestial sphere emulates one of the unmoved movers, as best it can, by uniform circular motion.
As the whole of nature depends on the inspiration of the eternal unmoved movers, Aristotle was concerned with establishing the metaphysical necessity of the perpetual motions of the heavens.
Through the Sun's seasonal action upon the terrestrial spheres, the cycles of generation and corruption give rise to all natural motion as efficient cause.
[15] The intellect, nous, "or whatever else it be that is thought to rule and lead us by nature, and to have cognizance of what is noble and divine" is the highest activity, according to Aristotle (contemplation or speculative thinking, theōríā).
According to Giovanni Reale, the first Unmoved Mover is a living, thinking, and personal God who "possesses the theoretical knowledge alone or in the highest degree...knows not only Himself, but all things in their causes and first principles.
"[20] In Book VIII of his Physics,[21] Aristotle examines the notions of change or motion, and attempts to show by a challenging argument, that the mere supposition of a 'before' and an 'after', requires a first principle.
Thus Democritus reduces the causes that explain nature to the fact that things happened in the past in the same way as they happen now: but he does not think fit to seek for a first principle to explain this 'always' ... Let this conclude what we have to say in support of our contention that there never was a time when there was not motion, and never will be a time when there will not be motion.The purpose of Aristotle's cosmological argument that at least one eternal unmoved mover must exist is to support everyday change.
[27]In Aristotle's estimation, an explanation without the temporal actuality and potentiality of an infinite locomotive chain is required for an eternal cosmos with neither beginning nor end: an unmoved eternal substance for whom the Primum Mobile[note 2] turns diurnally, whereby all terrestrial cycles are driven by day and night, the seasons of the year, the transformation of the elements, and the nature of plants and animals.
He notes that sensible substance is changeable and that there are several types of change, including quality and quantity, generation and destruction, increase and diminution, alteration, and motion.
"[citation needed] Near the end of Metaphysics, Book Λ, Aristotle introduces a surprising question, asking "whether we have to suppose one such [mover] or more than one, and if the latter, how many.
Nonetheless, he concludes his Metaphysics, Book Λ, with a quotation from the Iliad: "The rule of many is not good; one ruler let there be.
"[29][30] John Burnet (1892) noted[31] The Neoplatonists were quite justified in regarding themselves as the spiritual heirs of Pythagoras; and, in their hands, philosophy ceased to exist as such, and became theology.
