This renders Ibn Bajja's four causes incomplete, since they classify only external cessation conditions while ignoring the internalization of motive power described in the impetus tradition.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

External cessation conditions(as what Ibn Bajja's theory supposedly focuses on): Reasons why something stops happening that come from outside—like a ball stopping because someone catches it, rather than stopping on its own.
Ibn Bajja(as a historical philosopher whose ideas are being discussed): A medieval Islamic philosopher (1095-1138) who studied how different categories of things relate to each other and argued that relations work differently than other properties.
Impetus tradition(as the alternative theory that Ibn Bajja's framework doesn't account for): A medieval school of thought arguing that moving objects have an internal force (impetus) that keeps them going, rather than requiring constant external pushing.
Internalization of motive power(as what Ibn Bajja's theory allegedly ignores): The idea that things can have the ability to move or act from within themselves, rather than needing an outside force to push them.

Based on where you are in your exploration