Any type of efficient causality is typically associated with
being an unscientific explanation—explanations nonetheless but
unscientific. It is believed that if biology, chemistry,
physics, etc. rested explanations in final causation then it
would be a science stopper. This is where the distinction
between Duhemian science and Augustinian science must be made. I
would deny the use of Duhemian science. This method, or
philosophy, has a goal of stripping science from all
metaphysical imports. Augustinian science is open to
metaphysical presuppositions with science. Francis Bacon and
Descartes used and allowed for formal and final causation in
scientific explanation. Newton entered science and postulated
that the universe was entirely mechanistic, which was a denial
of Baconian and Cartesian science (at least their versions of
scientific explanation) but offered no explanation for the
appearance of final causation and efficient causation. Darwin
came along and provided a plausible material mechanism for the
appe