Understanding the Nature of the Essence of a Given Experience

"At first these more or less unnecessary processes are all enclosed in a specific atmosphere and will disappear if they look carefully" (§ 173). The last sentence of section 173 of Wittgenstein philosophy studies expresses concern that the remainder of this section is focused on this problem. This part of the survey (and its surroundings) pays attention to the problem he encounters in defining the "essence" of a particular experience (in other cases the relevant "process" and "concept") . ")) As a 'guide' / 'guidance'.

Under an influential philosophical tradition, understanding the essence of human beings is to grasp the essence of human beings. As generally understood, "essence" is the basic existence or reality that is embodied in a particular thing. The essence explains the characteristics of things. But it can not be simplified to these functions; it is eternal. There is an essential existence of its essence, in a sense, it is more realistic than what actually shares it. Furthermore, it is generally considered that essence is to connect different kinds of things to each other. Essence ties individuals to larger classes or categories; all members of a particular type have an essence and other types of members are missing it. According to the group of ancient scholars, their work uses Aristotle, the reasonable need is

As the GA paragraph states, the shape of a given natural object is the nature of the object, that is what it is. That is, F is the biological type, the ultimate of F is the embryo, immature or developing F tends to grow. The goal of growing tigers is to become tigers. Bay Aristotle opposed the ultimate cause of opportunity or randomness. Indeed, he rejects another explanatory hypothesis (natural phenomenon has no final cause, but only for necessity).

Lastly let's consider the third possibility. The law of nature is just a way to explain how natural substances tend to behave according to their nature or nature. This Aristotle's concept has nothing to do with the causal effect that the naturalist needs, as it gives us a normal legal concept; the law describes the mode of operation of any given problem So, they must assume the need for a final interpretation. Something: Natural thing itself