Chapter 5 argues that the identification of the form in the mind of the artisan with art amounts to ascribing it the role of efficient cause. As the chapter explains, the form in the mind of the artisan is responsible for both qualified and unqualified coming-to-be. Art is the only form that is an efficient cause, in contrast to the form inherent in the artefact. By resorting to Aristotle’s biological works, the chapter clarifies how artefacts come to lack an inner principle of their behaviour and how this is connected with their lack of an inner principle of unqualified coming-to-be. Two theses in particular are challenged. The first is that the form is transmitted from the mind to the object and, as a result, the form of an artefact is potential, because this is the status of the form in the mind in the artisan. The second thesis is that artefacts are not substances because their forms are not principles of changes. The chapter concludes with a reflection on the relation between eternity and substantiality.

It is in the domain of research methods that mainstream psychology makes the most direct claim of being an objective science, and it is also in this domain that the nature of psychology as ideology becomes crystal clear. The causal-reductionist model is followed in mainstream research methods, with most research samples being composed of undergraduate students. Ethics in research methods is defined in a narrow and misleading way, with no attention given to the most important issue: the research questions being addressed. The main focus of this narrow ethics is the treatment of individuals in the research process. The relevance of research questions to major issues confronting the poor, the lower-class and minorities is not considered part of ethics. Attempts are made to position psychology as a science that is the 'same as other sciences' such as chemistry and physics, with no consideration for the fact that human beings are different from chemicals and physical objects. Repeated 'crises' in psychology, such as the 'replication crisis,' have not had a serious impact on mainstream psychology. This is because the main function of mainstream psychology is to serve as ideology, in support of the status quo.

The introduction explains the significance of the study’s topics, efficient causation and causal powers. It explains why a study on Aquinas’s views of these topics is needed. It also describes the methodology for reconstructing Aquinas’s views and the organization of the book.

This chapter provides an introduction to Aquinas’s views on efficient causation and causal powers, as well as some background and context necessary for appreciating his views. The chapter first introduces Aquinas’s views on the nature of the relationship between an efficient cause and its effect and the various elements involved in paradigm cases of efficient causation. After presenting an overview of Aquinas’s theories, the chapter next contrasts Aquinas’s views with competing historical theories of causation. Comparison with these other theories helps to highlight what is philosophically significant in Aquinas’s theories. The chapter also discusses Aquinas’s sources and situates his views relative to medieval debates about causation. This background provides some context for appreciating what is original or controversial in Aquinas’s theories. Finally, the chapter includes an introduction to the technical terminology that Aquinas uses to express his views on efficient causation and causal powers.