20% Special Sale Ends Today! Hurry Up!!!
Back to Course

Philosophy (Optional) Notes & Mind Maps

0% Complete
0/0 Steps
  1. 1. Plato and Aristotle: Ideas; Substance; Form and Matter; Causation; Actuality and Potentiality

    1.1 Plato's Philosophy of Ideas
  2. 1.2 Plato's Understanding of Substance
  3. 1.3 Aristotle's Philosophy of Form and Matter
  4. 1.4 Aristotle's Theory of Substance
  5. 1.5 Plato's View on Causation
  6. 1.6 Aristotle's Four Causes
  7. 1.7 Actuality and Potentiality in Aristotle's Philosophy
  8. 1.8 Comparative Analysis of Plato and Aristotle's Philosophies
  9. 2. The Foundations of Rationalism: Method, Substance, God, and Mind-Body Dualism
    2.1 Rationalism (Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz)
  10. 2.2 Cartesian Method and Certain Knowledge
  11. 2.3 Substance (Aristotle, Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz)
  12. 2.4 Philosophy of God (Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz)
  13. 2.5 Mind-Body Dualism
  14. 2.6 Determinism and Freedom (Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz)
  15. 3. Empiricism (Locke, Berkeley, Hume)
    3.1 Introduction to Empiricism
  16. 3.2 Theory of Knowledge (Locke, Berkeley, Hume)
    3 Submodules
  17. 3.3 Substance and Qualities (Locke, Berkeley, Hume)
  18. 3.4 Self and God (Locke, Berkeley, Hume)
  19. 3.5 Scepticism (Locke, Berkeley, and Hume)
  20. 4. Kant
    4.1 Introduction to Kant's Philosophy
  21. 4.2 Kant: The Possibility of Synthetic a priori Judgments
  22. 4.3 Kant's Space and Time
  23. 4.4 Kant's Categories
  24. 4.5 Kant's Ideas of Reason
  25. 4.6 Kant's Antinomies
  26. 4.7 Kant's Critique of Proofs for the Existence of God
  27. 5. Hegel
    5.1 Hegel: Dialectical Method; Absolute Idealism
  28. 6. Moore, Russell, and Early Wittgenstein
    6.1 Defence of Commonsense (Moore, Russell, and Early Wittgenstein)
  29. 6.2 Refutation of Idealism (Moore, Russell, and Early Wittgenstein)
  30. 6.3 Logical Atomism (Moore, Russell, and Early Wittgenstein)
  31. 6.4 Logical Constructions (Moore, Russell, and Early Wittgenstein)
  32. 6.5 Incomplete Symbols (Moore, Russell, and Early Wittgenstein)
  33. 6.6 Picture Theory of Meaning (Moore, Russell, and Early Wittgenstein)
  34. 6.7 Saying and Showing (Moore, Russell, and Early Wittgenstein)
  35. 7. Logical Positivism
    7.1 Verification Theory of Meaning
  36. 7.2 Rejection of Metaphysics
  37. 7.3 Linguistic Theory of Necessary Propositions
  38. 8. Later Wittgenstein
    8.1 Meaning and Use (Later Wittgenstein)
  39. 8.2 Language-games (Later Wittgenstein)
  40. 8.3 Critique of Private Language (Later Wittgenstein)
  41. 9. Phenomenology (Husserl)
    9.1 Method - Phenomenology (Husserl)
  42. 9.2 Theory of Essences - Phenomenology (Husserl)
  43. 9.3 Avoidance of Psychologism - Phenomenology (Husserl)
  44. 10. Existentialism (Kierkegaard, Sartre, Heidegger)
    10.1 Existence and Essence
  45. 10.2 Choice, Responsibility and Authentic Existence
  46. 10.3 Being–in–the–world and Temporality
  47. 11. Quine and Strawson
    11.1 Critique of Empiricism (Quine and Strawson)
  48. 11.2 Theory of Basic Particulars and Persons (Quine and Strawson)
  49. 12. Cârvâka
    12.1 Cârvâka: Theory of Knowledge
  50. 12.2 Cârvâka: Rejection of Transcendent Entities
  51. 13. Jainism
    13.1 Jainism: Theory of Reality
  52. 13.2 Jainism: Saptabhaòginaya
  53. 14. Schools of Buddhism
    14.1 Pratîtyasamutpâda (Schools of Buddhism)
  54. 14.2 Ksanikavada (Schools of Buddhism)
  55. 14.3 Nairâtmyavâda (Schools of Buddhism)
  56. 15. Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika
    15.1 Theory of Categories (Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika)
  57. 15.2 Theory of Appearance (Nyâya-Vaiśeṣika)
  58. 15.3 Theory of Pramâna (Nyâya-Vaiśeṣika)
  59. 15.4 Self, Liberation, God, Proofs for the Existence of God (Nyâya-Vaiśeṣika)
  60. 15.5 Theory of Causation & Atomistic Theory of Creation (Nyâya-Vaiśeṣika)
  61. 16. Sâmkhya
    16.1 Prakrti (Sâmkhya)
  62. 16.2 Purusa (Sâmkhya)
  63. 16.3 Causation (Sâmkhya)
  64. 16.4 Liberation (Sâmkhya)
  65. 17. Yoga
    17.1 Introduction to Yoga Philosophy
  66. 17.2 Citta (Yoga)
  67. 17.3 Cittavrtti (Yoga)
  68. 17.4 Klesas (Yoga)
  69. 17.5 Samadhi (Yoga)
  70. 17.6 Kaivalya (Yoga)
  71. 18. Mimâmsâ
    18.1 Mimâmsâ: Theory of Knowledge
  72. 19. Schools of Vedânta
    19.1 Brahman (Schools of Vedânta)
  73. 19.2 Îúvara (Schools of Vedânta)
  74. 19.3 Âtman (Schools of Vedânta)
  75. 19.4 Jiva (Schools of Vedânta)
  76. 19.5 Jagat (Schools of Vedânta)
  77. 19.6 Mâyâ (Schools of Vedânta)
  78. 19.7 Avidyâ (Schools of Vedanta)
  79. 19.8 Adhyâsa (Schools of Vedanta)
  80. 19.9 Moksa (Schools of Vedanta)
  81. 19.10 Aprthaksiddhi (Schools of Vedanta)
  82. 19.11 Pancavidhabheda (Schools of Vedanta)
  83. 20.1 Aurobindo: Evolution
  84. 20.2 Aurobindo: Involution
  85. 20.3 Aurobindo: Integral Yoga
  86. 21. Socio-Political Ideals
    21.1 Equality (Social and Political Ideals)
  87. 21.2 Justice (Social and Political Ideals)
  88. 21.3 Liberty (Social and Political Ideals)
  89. 22. Sovereignty
    22. Sovereignty: Austin, Bodin, Laski, Kautilya
  90. 23. Individual and State
    23.1 Rights (Individual and State)
  91. 23.2 Duties (Individual and State)
  92. 23.3 Accountability (Individual and State)
  93. 24. Forms of Government
    24.1 Monarchy (Forms of Government)
  94. 24.2 Theocracy (Forms of Government)
  95. 24.3 Democracy (Forms of Government)
  96. 25. Political Ideologies
    25.1 Anarchism (Political Ideologies)
  97. 25.2 Marxism (Political Ideologies)
  98. 25.3 Socialism (Political Ideologies)
  99. 26. Humanism; Secularism; Multiculturalism
    26.1 Humanism
  100. 26.2 Secularism
  101. 26.3 Multiculturalism
  102. 27. Crime and Punishment
    27.1 Corruption
  103. 27.2 Mass Violence
  104. 27.3 Genocide
  105. 27.4 Capital Punishment
  106. 28. Development and Social Progress
    28. Development and Social Progress
  107. 29. Gender Discrimination
    29.1 Female Foeticide
  108. 29.2 Land, and Property Rights
  109. 29.3 Empowerment
  110. 30. Caste Discrimination
    30.1 Gandhi (Caste Discrimination)
  111. 30.2 Ambedkar (Caste Discrimination)
  112. Philosophy of Religion
    31. Notions of God: Attributes; Relation to Man and the World (Indian and Western)
  113. 32. Proofs for the Existence of God and their Critique (Indian and Western)
  114. 33. The problem of Evil
  115. 34. Soul: Immortality; Rebirth and Liberation
  116. 35. Reason, Revelation, and Faith
  117. 36. Religious Experience: Nature and Object (Indian and Western)
  118. 37. Religion without God
  119. 38. Religion and Morality
  120. 39. Religious Pluralism and the Problem of Absolute Truth
  121. 40. Nature of Religious Language: Analogical and Symbolic
  122. 41. Nature of Religious Language: Cognitivist and Noncognitive
Module 7 of 122
In Progress

1.7 Actuality and Potentiality in Aristotle’s Philosophy

Introduction

Aristotle’s concepts of potentiality and actuality are fundamental principles in his philosophy, playing a crucial role in his analysis of motion, causality, ethics, and physiology. Potentiality refers to the inherent possibilities or capacities that a thing possesses, while actuality represents the realization or fulfillment of these possibilities when they become fully real. These concepts are deeply intertwined and serve as a basis for understanding various aspects of Aristotle’s thought, including his metaphysics, natural philosophy, and ethics

1: Aristotle’s Concepts of Potentiality and Actuality

Definition and Explanation of Potentiality and Actuality

  • Potentiality: Refers to any “possibility” that a thing can be said to have. Aristotle emphasized the importance of possibilities that become real of their own accord when conditions are right and nothing stops them.
  • Actuality: In contrast to potentiality, actuality is the motion, change, or activity that represents an exercise or fulfillment of a possibility when it becomes real in the fullest sense.

The Role of Potentiality and Actuality in Aristotle’s Works

Physics

  • Aristotle used potentiality and actuality principles to analyze motion and causality.
  • He linked actuality to his concept of a formal cause, while potentiality (or potency) is linked to his concepts of hylomorphic matter and material cause.

Metaphysics

  • Aristotle discussed potentiality and actuality in relation to substance, causality, and being.
  • He proposed that a substance is a “starting-point and cause” of being, and he established a hierarchy among ways of being, claiming that actualities are prior to and better than their corresponding potentialities.

Nicomachean Ethics

  • Aristotle used potentiality and actuality principles to analyze ethics.
  • He emphasized the importance of actualizing one’s potential in order to achieve happiness and virtue.

De Anima

  • Aristotle applied potentiality and actuality principles to analyze physiology.
  • He discussed perception as the actualization of a potentiality in the organ of sense.

Distinctions Between Things That Exist or Do Not Exist Based on Potentiality and Actuality

  • Aristotle described potentiality and actuality as one of several distinctions between things that exist or do not exist.
  • A thing that exists potentially does not exist in actuality, but the potential does exist.
  • This distinction is expressed for several different types of being within Aristotle’s categories of being.

2: Motion, Causality, and Change

Aristotle’s Analysis of Motion and Change Through Potentiality and Actuality

  • Aristotle used potentiality and actuality principles to analyze motion, causality, ethics, and physiology in his works.
  • Motion, for Aristotle, refers to any kind of change, and he defines motion as the actuality of a potentiality.

The Concept of Motion as the Actuality of a Potentiality

  • Motion is the actualizing of a potentiality of the subject, and this actualization is the composition of the form of the thing that comes to be.
  • Aristotle’s definition of motion involves the actuality of a potentiality, which initially seems to involve a contradiction.

Aristotle’s Definition of Motion and Its Place in Nature

  • Aristotle’s account of motion and its place in nature can be found in his work, Physics.
  • He aimed to establish general principles of change that govern all natural bodies, both living and inanimate, celestial and terrestrial.
  • Aristotle believed that everything in motion is moved by something else, and he provided several arguments to support this principle.
  • Natural motion arises from the nature of an object and does not require an external cause to occur.
  • Aristotle’s concepts of potentiality and actuality are essential for understanding his analysis of motion, causality, and change.

3. Aristotle’s Metaphysics and Ontology

The Role of Potentiality and Actuality in Aristotle’s Metaphysics

  • Aristotle’s metaphysics is concerned with the study of being and the principles that govern it.
  • Potentiality and actuality are central concepts in Aristotle’s metaphysics, as they help to explain the nature of change, causality, and substance.
  • Aristotle used potentiality and actuality to analyze the nature of being and to establish a hierarchy among ways of being.
  • In his metaphysics, Aristotle argued that actualities are prior to and better than their corresponding potentialities.

The Relationship Between Potentiality and Actuality in Aristotle’s Ontology

  • Ontology is the study of the nature of being, existence, and reality.
  • Aristotle’s ontology is closely related to his metaphysics, as it also deals with the nature of being and the principles that govern it.
  • In Aristotle’s ontology, potentiality and actuality are used to explain the nature of being and the distinctions between different types of being.
  • The relationship between potentiality and actuality in Aristotle’s ontology is essential for understanding the nature of change, causality, and substance.

The Hierarchy of Ways of Being in Aristotle’s Metaphysics

  • Aristotle established a hierarchy among ways of being, claiming that actualities are prior to and better than their corresponding potentialities.
  • This hierarchy is based on the idea that actuality is more complete and perfect than potentiality.
  • Aristotle’s hierarchy of ways of being is an essential aspect of his metaphysics, as it helps to explain the nature of change, causality, and substance.

4. Aristotle’s Natural Philosophy

Aristotle’s Interest in the Study of Nature

  • Aristotle had a lifelong interest in the study of nature, investigating a variety of topics, ranging from general issues like motion, causation, place, and time, to systematic explorations and explanations of natural phenomena across different kinds of natural entities.
  • He considered the investigation of living things, especially animals, central to the theoretical study of nature.
  • Aristotle’s natural philosophy aimed to establish general principles of change that govern all natural bodies, both living and inanimate, celestial and terrestrial.

The Integration of Potentiality and Actuality in Aristotle’s Natural Philosophy

  • Aristotle integrated potentiality and actuality principles into his natural philosophy, using them to analyze motion, causality, and change.
  • In his Physics, Aristotle provided a general theoretical framework for the study of nature, which included the concepts of potentiality and actuality.
  • These principles allowed Aristotle to develop a comprehensive understanding of the natural world and its underlying principles.

The Concepts of Matter, Form, and Substance in Relation to Potentiality and Actuality

  • Aristotle’s hylomorphism is a doctrine that states every physical object is a compound of matter and form.
  • Matter (hulê) is the indeterminate principle that serves as the foundation for all change and potentiality.
  • Form (eidos or morphê) is the principle of determination, actuality, and perfection that determines matter.
  • In Aristotle’s metaphysics, substance is a compound of matter and form, and it is not just a heap or pile but has a structure essential to its being.
  • The relationship between matter, form, and substance is crucial for understanding Aristotle’s natural philosophy and its implications for various fields of study.

5: Aristotle’s Psychology and the Soul

The Role of Potentiality and Actuality in Aristotle’s Psychology

  • Aristotle’s psychology is an integral part of his philosophical system, and it is closely related to his metaphysics, ontology, and natural philosophy.
  • Potentiality and actuality principles play a significant role in Aristotle’s psychology, as they help to explain the nature of the soul, its relationship with the body, and its various functions.
  • In his work De Anima, Aristotle applied potentiality and actuality principles to analyze the soul and its faculties, such as perception, thought, and desire.

The Concept of the Soul as the First Actuality of a Natural Body

  • Aristotle defined the soul as the first actuality of a natural body that has life potentially within it.
  • The soul is the form, or actuality, of a living body, and it is responsible for the various functions and activities that characterize living beings.
  • According to Aristotle, the soul is not a separate substance from the body but rather the organizing principle that gives life and structure to the body.
  • This concept of the soul as the first actuality of a natural body is essential for understanding Aristotle’s psychology and its implications for various fields of study.

The Relationship Between the Soul, the Body, and Potentiality and Actuality

  • The relationship between the soul and the body is central to Aristotle’s psychology, and it is closely related to his concepts of potentiality and actuality.
  • The soul, as the first actuality of a natural body, actualizes the body’s potential for life and various functions.
  • The body, on the other hand, provides the material basis for the soul’s activities and serves as the substrate for the soul’s potentialities.
  • Aristotle’s analysis of the soul and the body in terms of potentiality and actuality helps to explain the nature of living beings and their various faculties, such as perception, thought, and desire.

6: Aristotle’s Ethics and the Notion of Potentiality

The Role of Potentiality and Actuality in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics

  • Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics is a central work in his philosophical system, focusing on the study of human character, virtues, and the pursuit of happiness.
  • Potentiality and actuality play a significant role in Aristotle’s ethics, as they help to explain the nature of human flourishing, the development of virtues, and the actualization of human potential.
  • In his ethics, Aristotle emphasized the importance of actualizing one’s potential in order to achieve happiness and virtue.

The Concept of Human Flourishing and the Actualization of Potential

  • Aristotle’s concept of human flourishing, or eudaimonia, is the ultimate goal of human life and the highest good that humans can achieve.
  • Human flourishing involves the actualization of one’s potential, which includes the development of virtues and the pursuit of a life of excellence.
  • According to Aristotle, the actualization of potential is essential for human flourishing, as it allows individuals to live a life that is in accordance with their nature and purpose.

The Relationship Between Virtue, Potentiality, and Actuality in Aristotle’s Ethics

  • Virtue, in Aristotle’s ethics, is a disposition or habit that enables individuals to act in accordance with reason and achieve their potential for excellence.
  • Virtues are developed through a process of habituation, which involves the repeated performance of virtuous actions and the cultivation of good character traits.
  • The relationship between virtue, potentiality, and actuality is central to Aristotle’s ethics, as virtues are the means through which individuals actualize their potential and achieve human flourishing.
  • By developing virtues and actualizing their potential, individuals can live a life of excellence and achieve the ultimate goal of human life, which is happiness or eudaimonia.

7: Medieval and Modern Developments

The Influence of Aristotle’s Concepts of Potentiality and Actuality on Medieval Theology

  • Aristotle’s concepts of potentiality and actuality had a significant impact on medieval theology, particularly in the works of Christian, Jewish, and Islamic philosophers.
  • The integration of Aristotelian philosophy into Christian theology was facilitated by the works of early Christian philosophers such as Augustine and Boethius, and later by the Scholastic philosophers, including Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus.
  • Thomas Aquinas, in particular, made extensive use of Aristotle’s concepts of potentiality and actuality in his theological works, such as the Summa Theologica, to explain the nature of God, creation, and the human soul.
  • Jewish philosophers, such as Maimonides, and Islamic philosophers, like Avicenna and Averroes, also engaged with Aristotle’s concepts of potentiality and actuality in their theological works, demonstrating the widespread influence of these ideas across different religious traditions.

The Gradual Decline of the Dichotomy’s Importance in Modern Times

  • With the advent of modern philosophy and the scientific revolution, the importance of Aristotle’s concepts of potentiality and actuality began to decline.
  • The rise of mechanistic and materialistic philosophies, as well as the development of new scientific methods, led to a shift in focus away from Aristotelian metaphysics and toward empirical investigation and mathematical modeling of the natural world.
  • Despite this decline in importance, the concepts of potentiality and actuality continued to influence some modern philosophers, such as Leibniz and Hegel, who incorporated these ideas into their own philosophical systems.

Contemporary Interpretations and Applications of Potentiality and Actuality

  • In contemporary philosophy, the concepts of potentiality and actuality have been revisited and reinterpreted in various ways, often in response to new developments in science and technology.
  • For example, the concept of potentiality has been applied to discussions of human cloning, genetic engineering, and artificial intelligence, as these technologies raise questions about the potential for creating new forms of life and the ethical implications of such developments.
  • Additionally, some philosophers have explored the relevance of potentiality and actuality to contemporary metaphysics and the philosophy of mind, examining how these concepts can help to clarify issues related to causation, modality, and the nature of consciousness.

8: Criticisms and Debates

The Compatibility of Potentiality and Actuality in Aristotle’s Philosophy

  • Aristotle’s concepts of potentiality and actuality have been subject to various criticisms and debates throughout history, with some philosophers questioning the compatibility of these ideas within his philosophical system.
  • One criticism is that the concepts of potentiality and actuality seem to involve a contradiction, as actuality is defined as the fulfillment of a potentiality, yet potentiality implies the possibility of change or development.
  • Some philosophers have argued that Aristotle’s concepts of potentiality and actuality are not entirely consistent with his other philosophical ideas, such as his theory of substance and his account of change and motion.

Challenges and Controversies Surrounding Aristotle’s Concepts of Potentiality and Actuality

  • Aristotle’s concepts of potentiality and actuality have faced various challenges and controversies, both in terms of their internal coherence and their applicability to different philosophical issues.
  • One challenge is the difficulty of providing a clear and consistent account of potentiality and actuality that can be applied to various aspects of Aristotle’s philosophy, such as his metaphysics, ethics, and natural philosophy.
  • Another controversy is the relationship between potentiality and actuality in Aristotle’s ontology, with some philosophers arguing that the distinction between potential and actual being is not as clear-cut as Aristotle suggests.
  • Additionally, some critics have questioned the relevance and usefulness of Aristotle’s concepts of potentiality and actuality in contemporary philosophical debates, arguing that these ideas may be outdated or overly abstract.

The Relationship Between Potentiality, Actuality, and Gender in Aristotle’s Metaphysics

  • The relationship between potentiality, actuality, and gender in Aristotle’s metaphysics has been a subject of debate and criticism, particularly in feminist philosophy.
  • Aristotle’s views on gender have been criticized for perpetuating gender stereotypes and reinforcing patriarchal norms, as he often associated potentiality with the female and actuality with the male.
  • Some feminist philosophers have argued that Aristotle’s concepts of potentiality and actuality are inherently gendered and that this gender bias has influenced the development of Western philosophy and science.
  • Others have sought to reinterpret or revise Aristotle’s concepts of potentiality and actuality in light of contemporary feminist theory, exploring alternative ways of understanding these ideas that challenge traditional gender norms and assumptions.

Conclusion

The Lasting Impact of Aristotle’s Concepts of Potentiality and Actuality on Philosophy

  • Aristotle’s concepts of potentiality and actuality have had a lasting impact on the history of philosophy, shaping the development of metaphysics, ethics, natural philosophy, and psychology.
  • These concepts have been influential in various philosophical traditions, including medieval Christian, Jewish, and Islamic thought, as well as in the works of modern philosophers such as Leibniz and Hegel.
  • The enduring significance of potentiality and actuality in philosophy can be attributed to their ability to provide a comprehensive framework for understanding the nature of being, change, causality, and substance.

The Relevance of Potentiality and Actuality in Contemporary Philosophical Discussions

  • Aristotle’s concepts of potentiality and actuality remain relevant in contemporary philosophical discussions, as they continue to inform debates on topics such as causation, modality, the philosophy of mind, and the ethics of emerging technologies.
  • In recent years, philosophers have revisited and reinterpreted potentiality and actuality in light of new developments in science and technology, exploring their implications for issues such as human cloning, genetic engineering, and artificial intelligence.
  • Additionally, potentiality and actuality have been the subject of ongoing debates and criticisms in feminist philosophy, with some scholars challenging the gendered assumptions underlying these concepts and others seeking to reinterpret them in light of contemporary feminist theory.

Future Directions for Research on Potentiality and Actuality in Aristotle’s Philosophy

  • Future research on potentiality and actuality in Aristotle’s philosophy may focus on further exploring the internal coherence and consistency of these concepts within his philosophical system, as well as their compatibility with other aspects of his thought.
  • Scholars may also continue to investigate the historical and contemporary significance of potentiality and actuality, examining their influence on various philosophical traditions and their relevance for addressing contemporary philosophical and ethical questions.
  • Additionally, future research may explore alternative interpretations and applications of potentiality and actuality, seeking to develop new ways of understanding these concepts that challenge traditional assumptions and open up new avenues for philosophical inquiry.
  1. Analyze Aristotle’s concepts of actuality and potentiality, and discuss their implications for understanding the nature of change, causality, and the relationship between form and matter in his metaphysics. (250 words)
  2. Compare and contrast Aristotle’s concepts of actuality and potentiality with the views of other philosophers, such as Plato’s theory of Forms or Leibniz’s monadology, focusing on their respective approaches to understanding the nature of reality and the process of change. (250 words)
  3. Examine the role of actuality and potentiality in Aristotle’s ethics, particularly in relation to the development of virtues, the pursuit of happiness, and the concept of moral growth. (250 words)
  4. Discuss the impact of Aristotle’s concepts of actuality and potentiality on the development of subsequent philosophical thought, including their influence on medieval scholasticism, modern metaphysics, and contemporary debates in philosophy of mind and action. (250 words)
  5. Assess the relevance and applicability of Aristotle’s concepts of actuality and potentiality in contemporary philosophical discussions, particularly in the context of debates about free will, determinism, and the nature of causality. (250 words)

Responses

X
Home Courses Plans Account
20% Special Sale Ends Today! Hurry Up!!!