QCT

View

Untitled Deck

Study

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

The correct always fixes upon something pertinent in whatever is under consideration. However, in order to be correct, this fixing by no means needs to uncover the thing in question in its essence. Only at the point where such an uncovering happens does the true come to pass. For that reason, the merely correct is not yet the true. Only the true brings us into a free relationship with that which concerns us from its essence. Accordingly, the correct instrumental definition of technology still does not show us technology's essence. In order that we may arrive at this, or at least come close to it, we must seek the true by way of the correct. We must ask: What is the instrumental itself? Within what do such things as means and end belong? A means is that whereby something is effected and thus attained. Whatever has an effect as its consequence is called a cause. But not only that by means of which something else is effected, is a cause. The end, in keeping with which the kind of means to be used is determined, is also considered a cause. Wherever ends are pursued and means are employed, wherever instrumentality reigns, there reigns causality. For centuries, philosophy has taught that there are four causes: 1) the causa materialis (the material), the matter out of which, for example, a silver chalice is made; 2) the causa formalis (the form), the shape into which the material enters; 3) the causa finalis (the end), for example, the sacrificial rite in relation to which the chalice required is determined as to its form and matter; 4) the causa efficiens, which brings about the effect, that is, the finished actual chalice. In this instance, the silversmith. What technology is, when represented as a means, discloses itself when we trace instrumentality back to fourfold causality. But suppose that causality, for its part, is veiled in darkness with respect to what it is. Certainly, for centuries, we have acted as though the doctrine of the four causes had fallen from heaven as a truth, as clear as daylight. But it might be that the time has come to ask: Why are there only four causes? In relation to the aforementioned four, what does cause really mean? From whence does it come that

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer