To explain something by reducing it to the matter (physicism) is an old style of presocratic philosophy. Empedocles explained things in this way. He looked at ‘becoming’ and using ‘becoming’ explained ‘being’. Aristotle rejects this method as life cannot be explained by material terms. He is trying to combine goals, necessity with the matter.

If the goal of the wall is protection, the of necessity you need stones, wooden logs in this order. If G form, then of necessity A,B,C (matter). Why does a saw have such and such features? The function of sawing is cutting. In order to perform cutting, a saw requires teeth made of iron (matter). This form of a saw with teeth made of iron is as an end, while iron (matter) is conditional. It is necessary, but not necessary as an end. Necessity is in the matter, whereas the end is in the form.

So, if I want to understand the process I need to start with being, not becoming. Lets take a giraffe. Given the form, giraffe has a long neck, teeth, etc. Such and such is necessary for being a giraffe. The necessity present in nature is conditional, not unqualified. The end (the wall) does not exist because of stones, logs, but in order to give shelter and protection. The same is true in all other cases that are for something.

Bibliography:

  • Aristotle, “Book 5, section 1013a”, Metaphysics, Translated by Hugh Tredennick, Aristotle in 23 Volumes, Vols. 17, 18, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1933