In life, it is wise to correct errors swiftly because otherwise they will grow and grow. The longer you wait, the worse it will get. The more lies you tell yourself, the higher the barriers to recovery. Eventually, you’ll reach the point where recovery is no longer possible.

Despite his enormous wisdom, Aristotle (384-322 BC) put forward the theory of the prime mover. He should have soon realized that the theory is false. Maybe he did realize, but the error remained uncorrected in the existing copies of his book “Metaphysics.”

According to the prime-mover theory, there has to exist one eternal, intangible entity responsible for all events taking place in the world. I draw your attention to the wording “there has to exist,” which is utter nonsense.

Examples of Aristotle’s theory of the prime mover

If you take the prime-mover theory seriously, it means that a mysterious eternal force is responsible for making your team win the league, or helping you pass an exam or get a good job.

Conversely, the prime mover is to blame when your puppy goes pissing all over the house, your car gets a flat tyre, or you get a toothache after eating four dozen cookies.

I cannot argue personally with Aristotle about his concept of a prime mover, but I can point to the catastrophic impact it has had in history. Century after century, the most inane theories had been predicated by referring to Aristotle’s prime mover.

Thomas Aquinas and Aristotle’s theory of the prime mover

Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) employed Aristotle’s concept of a prime mover to argue that God is ultimately behind all the events taking place in the world.

Even worse, Aquinas misused Aristotle’s theory of causality to propose a logical proof that God exists and that he is indeed the prime mover. The “proof” is as misleading and worthless as Aristotle’s prime-mover concept.

I can summarize Aquinas’ proof in a two sentences: Every entity in motion must necessarily be moved by something else, but this chain cannot regress infinitely. At the beginning of the chain, there has to be a first mover giving impulse to all others.

This alleged “proof” is fallacious. It is obvious that entities are often not moved by someone or something else; they move themselves, like in my example of a puppy pissing all over the house.

There is no prime mover making the puppy piss around the house, or making the clouds rain on your parade. It is certainly not God who is targeting you with those inconveniences.

In the same way that Aristotle had invented a lengthy array of attributes for his prime mover (eternal, intangible, singular, perfect, etc.), Aquinas expanded the list of attributes.

Aquinas called his prime mover “divine, all-knowing and omnipotent.” In this respect, Aquinas’ imagination was no less potent than Aristotle’s.

Opponents to Aristotle’s theory of the prime mover

The Scottish philosopher David Hume (1711-1776) pointed out the fallacious nature of Aristotle’s prime-mover theory. He argued that our observations of cause and effect are limited to a few events at a time. There is no reason to believe that events of all kinds taking place all over the world are sharing a single common cause.

A generation later, Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) expressed his scepticism about Aristotle’s prime-move theory. Kant didn’t call Aristotle’s theory fallacious, but simply pointed out that it’s impossible to prove. Human beings lack the ability to research an endless regression of causes. Thus, the prime-mover theory is not even worth discussing.

Karl Marx (1818-1883) placed the final nail on the coffin of Aristotle’s prime mover. He regarded it as a purely ideological construct whose only goal is to legitimize the existing power and economic structures.

While the Marxist critique applies more to Thomas Aquinas than to Aristotle, its message carries a strong weight. Marx was saying that the prime mover doesn’t exist. He viewed it as fiction or propaganda employed for ulterior purposes.

Lastly, Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980) pointed out that, if a prime mover existed, it would abolish all human freedom and responsibility. If a prime mover is responsible for all actions and events in the world, no person can be blamed for anything.

You do not need complex arguments to discard Aristotle’s theory of the prime mover because it is obviously false. There are great lessons to be learned from Aristotle’s works, but the prime-mover theory is not one of them.

If you are interested in applying Aristotelian philosophy in everyday life, I recommend you my book “The 10 principles of rational living.”

Related articles

Critique of Aristotle’s thoughts on human nature

Opponents to Aristotle’s thoughts on human nature

Aristotle’s thoughts on human nature

Aristotle’s theory of the prime mover

Morality in Aristotle’s teachings on logic and reasoning

The superiority of Aristotle’s teachings on logic and reasoning