Page semi-protected


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Aristotle Altemps Inv8575.jpg
Roman copy in marble of a Greek bronze
bust of Aristotle by Lysippos, c. 330 BC.
The alabaster mantle is modern.
Born 384 BC
Chalcidian League,
Northern Greece
Died 322 BC (aged 62)
Euboea, Greece, Macedonian Empire
Era Ancient philosophy
Region Western philosophy
Main interests
Notable ideas

Aristotle (/ˈærɪˌstɒtəl/;[3] Greek: Ἀριστοτέλης Aristotélēs, pronounced [aristotélɛːs]; 384–322 BC)[4] was an ancient Greek philosopher and scientist born in the city of Stagira, Chalkidiki, in the north of Classical Greece. Along with Plato, Aristotle is considered the "Father of Western Philosophy", which inherited almost its entire lexicon from his teachings, including problems and methods of inquiry, so influencing almost all forms of knowledge.

His father, Nicomachus, died when Aristotle was a child, and Proxenus of Atarneus became his guardian.[5] At seventeen or eighteen years of age, he joined Plato's Academy in Athens[6] and remained there until the age of thirty-seven (c. 347 BC). His writings cover many subjects – including physics, biology, zoology, metaphysics, logic, ethics, aesthetics, poetry, theater, music, rhetoric, psychology, linguistics, politics and government – and constitute the first comprehensive system of Western philosophy. Shortly after Plato died, Aristotle left Athens and, at the request of Philip II of Macedon, tutored Alexander the Great beginning in 343 BC.[7] Teaching Alexander the Great gave Aristotle many opportunities. He established a library in the Lyceum which helped him to produce many of his hundreds of books, which were papyrus scrolls.[8] The fact that Aristotle was a pupil of Plato contributed to his former views of Platonism, but, following Plato's death, Aristotle immersed himself in empirical studies and shifted from Platonism to empiricism.[9] He believed all peoples' concepts and all of their knowledge was ultimately based on perception. Aristotle's views on natural sciences represent the groundwork underlying many of his works.

Aristotle's views on physical science profoundly shaped medieval scholarship. Their influence extended from Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages into the Renaissance, and were not replaced systematically until the Enlightenment and theories such as classical mechanics. Some of Aristotle's zoological observations, such as on the hectocotyl (reproductive) arm of the octopus, were disbelieved until the 19th century. His works contain the earliest known formal study of logic, studied by medieval scholars such as Peter Abelard and John Buridan. Aristotelianism profoundly influenced Jewish and Islamic thought during the Middle Ages, as well as Christian theology, especially the Neoplatonism of the Early Church and the scholastic tradition of the Catholic Church. Aristotle was revered among medieval Muslim scholars as "The First Teacher". His ethics, though always influential, gained renewed interest with the modern advent of virtue ethics.

All aspects of Aristotle's philosophy continue to be the object of active academic study today. Though Aristotle wrote many elegant treatises and dialogues for publication – Cicero described his literary style as "a river of gold"[10] – only around a third of his original output has survived, none of it intended for publication.[11] Aristotle has been depicted by major artists including Raphael and Rembrandt. Early Modern theories including William Harvey's circulation of the blood and Galileo Galilei's kinematics were developed in reaction to Aristotle's. In the 19th century, Martin Heidegger created a new interpretation of Aristotle's political philosophy, while George Boole gave Aristotle's logic a mathematical foundation with his system of algebraic logic. In the 20th century, Aristotle was widely criticised, even ridiculed by thinkers such as the philosopher Bertrand Russell and the biologist Peter Medawar. More recently, Aristotle has again been taken seriously, such as in the thinking of Ayn Rand and Alasdair MacIntyre, while Armand Marie Leroi has reconstructed Aristotle's biology. The image of Aristotle tutoring the young Alexander the Great remains current, as in the 2004 film Alexander, and the Poetics continues to play a role in the cinema of the United States.


School of Aristotle in Mieza, Macedonia, Greece

In general, the details of the life of Aristotle are not well-established. The biographies of Aristotle written in ancient times are often speculative and historians only agree on a few salient points.[12]

Aristotle, whose name means "the best purpose",[13] was born in 384 BC in Stagira, Chalcidice, about 55 km (34 miles) east of modern-day Thessaloniki.[14][15] His father Nicomachus was the personal physician to King Amyntas of Macedon. Aristotle was orphaned at a young age. Although there is little information on Aristotle's childhood, he probably spent some time within the Macedonian palace, making his first connections with the Macedonian monarchy.[16]

At the age of seventeen or eighteen, Aristotle moved to Athens to continue his education at Plato's Academy.[17] He remained there for nearly twenty years before leaving Athens in 348/47 BC. The traditional story about his departure records that he was disappointed with the Academy's direction after control passed to Plato's nephew Speusippus, although it is possible that he feared anti-Macedonian sentiments and left before Plato died.[18] Aristotle then accompanied Xenocrates to the court of his friend Hermias of Atarneus in Asia Minor. There, he traveled with his pupil Theophrastus to the island of Lesbos, where together they researched the botany and zoology of the island and its sheltered lagoon. Aristotle married Pythias, either Hermias's adoptive daughter or niece. She bore him a daughter, whom they also named Pythias. Soon after Hermias' death, Aristotle was invited by Philip II of Macedon to become the tutor to his son Alexander in 343 BC.[7]

Portrait bust of Aristotle; an Imperial Roman (1st or 2nd century AD) copy of a lost bronze sculpture made by Lysippos

Aristotle was appointed as the head of the royal academy of Macedon. During that time he gave lessons not only to Alexander, but also to two other future kings: Ptolemy and Cassander.[19] Aristotle encouraged Alexander toward eastern conquest and his attitude towards Persia was unabashedly ethnocentric. In one famous example, he counsels Alexander to be "a leader to the Greeks and a despot to the barbarians, to look after the former as after friends and relatives, and to deal with the latter as with beasts or plants".[19] By 335 BC, Aristotle had returned to Athens, establishing his own school there known as the Lyceum. Aristotle conducted courses at the school for the next twelve years. While in Athens, his wife Pythias died and Aristotle became involved with Herpyllis of Stagira, who bore him a son whom he named after his father, Nicomachus. According to the Suda, he also had an erômenos, Palaephatus of Abydus.[20]

This period in Athens, between 335 and 323 BC, is when Aristotle is believed to have composed many of his works.[7] He wrote many dialogues of which only fragments have survived. Those works that have survived are in treatise form and were not, for the most part, intended for widespread publication; they are generally thought to be lecture aids for his students. His most important treatises include Physics, Metaphysics, Nicomachean Ethics, Politics, De Anima (On the Soul) and Poetics. Aristotle studied and made significant contributions to "logic, metaphysics, mathematics, physics, biology, botany, ethics, politics, agriculture, medicine, dance and theatre."[21]

Near the end of his life, Alexander and Aristotle became estranged over Alexander's relationship with Persia and Persians. A widespread tradition in antiquity suspected Aristotle of playing a role in Alexander's death, but the only evidence of this is an unlikely claim made some six years after the death.[22] Following Alexander's death, anti-Macedonian sentiment in Athens was rekindled. In 322 BC, Demophilus and Eurymedon the Hierophant reportedly denounced Aristotle for impiety,[23] prompting him to flee to his mother's family estate in Chalcis, on Euboea, at which occasion he was said to have stated: "I will not allow the Athenians to sin twice against philosophy"[24][25] – a reference to Athens's prior trial and execution of Socrates. He died on Euboea of natural causes later that same year, having named his student Antipater as his chief executor and leaving a will in which he asked to be buried next to his wife.[26]



With the Prior Analytics, Aristotle is credited with the earliest study of formal logic,[27] and his conception of it was the dominant form of Western logic until 19th century advances in mathematical logic.[28] Kant stated in the Critique of Pure Reason that with Aristotle logic reached its completion.[29]


Aristotle "says that 'on the subject of reasoning' he 'had nothing else on an earlier date to speak of'".[30] However, Plato reports that syntax was devised before him, by Prodicus of Ceos, who was concerned by the correct use of words. Logic seems to have emerged from dialectics; the earlier philosophers made frequent use of concepts like reductio ad absurdum in their discussions, but never truly understood the logical implications. Even Plato had difficulties with logic; although he had a reasonable conception of a deductive system, he could never actually construct one, thus he relied instead on his dialectic.[31]

Plato believed that deduction would simply follow from premises, hence he focused on maintaining solid premises so that the conclusion would logically follow. Consequently, Plato realized that a method for obtaining conclusions would be most beneficial. He never succeeded in devising such a method, but his best attempt was published in his book Sophist, where he introduced his division method.[32]

Analytics and the Organon

One of Aristotle's types of syllogism[33]
In words In terms[34] In equations[35]
    All men are mortal.

    All Greeks are men.

All Greeks are mortal.
M a P

S a M

S a P
Modus Barbara Equations.svg

What we today call Aristotelian logic with its types of syllogism (methods of logical argument),[36] Aristotle himself would have labeled "analytics". The term "logic" he reserved to mean dialectics. Most of Aristotle's work is probably not in its original form, because it was most likely edited by students and later lecturers. The logical works of Aristotle were compiled into a set of six books called the Organon around 40 BC by some of his followers, sometimes identified specifically as Andronicus of Rhodes.[37] The books are:

  1. Categories
  2. On Interpretation
  3. Prior Analytics
  4. Posterior Analytics
  5. Topics
  6. On Sophistical Refutations

The order of the books (or the teachings from which they are composed) is not certain, but this list was derived from analysis of Aristotle's writings. It goes from the basics, the analysis of simple terms in the Categories, the analysis of propositions and their elementary relations in On Interpretation, to the study of more complex forms, namely, syllogisms (in the Analytics)[31][38] and dialectics (in the Topics and Sophistical Refutations). The first three treatises form the core of the logical theory stricto sensu: the grammar of the language of logic and the correct rules of reasoning. There is one volume of Aristotle's concerning logic not found in the Organon, namely the fourth book of Metaphysics.[31]


Plato (left) and Aristotle (right), a detail of Raphael's 1509 fresco, The School of Athens[39]

Like his teacher Plato, Aristotle's philosophy aims at the universal. Aristotle's ontology, however, finds the universal in particular things, which he calls the essence of things, while in Plato's ontology, the universal exists apart from particular things, and is related to them as their prototype or exemplar. For Aristotle, therefore, epistemology is based on the study of particular phenomena and rises to the knowledge of essences, while for Plato epistemology begins with knowledge of universal Forms (or ideas) and descends to knowledge of particular imitations of these. For Aristotle, "form" still refers to the unconditional basis of phenomena but is "instantiated" in a particular substance (see Universals and particulars, below). In a certain sense, Aristotle's method is both inductive and deductive, while Plato's is essentially deductive from a priori principles.[40]

In Aristotle's terminology, "natural philosophy" is a branch of philosophy examining the phenomena of the natural world, and includes fields that would be regarded today as physics, biology and other natural sciences. Aristotle's work encompassed virtually all facets of intellectual inquiry. In the larger sense of the word, Aristotle makes philosophy coextensive with reasoning, which he also would describe as "science". Note, however, that his use of the term science carries a different meaning than that covered by the term "scientific method". For Aristotle, "all science (dianoia) is either practical, poetical or theoretical" (Metaphysics 1025b25). By practical science, he means ethics and politics; by poetical science, he means the study of poetry and the other fine arts; by theoretical science, he means physics, mathematics and metaphysics.[41]


Aristotle defines metaphysics as "the knowledge of immaterial being", or of "being in the highest degree of abstraction".[42][43] He refers to metaphysics as "first philosophy",[44] as well as "the theologic science".[45]

Substance, potentiality and actuality

Aristotle examines the concepts of substance (ousia) and essence (to ti ên einai, "the what it was to be") in his Metaphysics (Book VII), and he concludes that a particular substance is a combination of both matter and form, a philosophical theory called hylomorphism. In Book VIII, he distinguishes the matter of the substance as the substratum, or the stuff of which it is composed. For example, the matter of a house is the bricks, stones, timbers etc., or whatever constitutes the potential house, while the form of the substance is the actual house, namely 'covering for bodies and chattels' or any other differentia (see also predicables) that let us define something as a house. The formula that gives the components is the account of the matter, and the formula that gives the differentia is the account of the form.[46][47]

With regard to the change (kinesis) and its causes now, as he defines in his Physics and On Generation and Corruption 319b–320a, he distinguishes the coming to be from:

  1. growth and diminution, which is change in quantity;
  2. locomotion, which is change in space; and
  3. alteration, which is change in quality.
Aristotle argued that a capability like playing the flute could be acquired – the potential made actual – by learning.

The coming to be is a change where nothing persists of which the resultant is a property. In that particular change he introduces the concept of potentiality (dynamis) and actuality (entelecheia) in association with the matter and the form. Referring to potentiality, this is what a thing is capable of doing, or being acted upon, if the conditions are right and it is not prevented by something else. For example, the seed of a plant in the soil is potentially (dynamei) plant, and if is not prevented by something, it will become a plant. Potentially beings can either 'act' (poiein) or 'be acted upon' (paschein), which can be either innate or learned. For example, the eyes possess the potentiality of sight (innate – being acted upon), while the capability of playing the flute can be possessed by learning (exercise – acting). Actuality is the fulfillment of the end of the potentiality. Because the end (telos) is the principle of every change, and for the sake of the end exists potentiality, therefore actuality is the end. Referring then to our previous example, we could say that an actuality is when a plant does one of the activities that plants do.[47]

For that for the sake of which a thing is, is its principle, and the becoming is for the sake of the end; and the actuality is the end, and it is for the sake of this that the potentiality is acquired. For animals do not see in order that they may have sight, but they have sight that they may see.[48]

In summary, the matter used to make a house has potentiality to be a house and both the activity of building and the form of the final house are actualities, which is also a final cause or end. Then Aristotle proceeds and concludes that the actuality is prior to potentiality in formula, in time and in substantiality. With this definition of the particular substance (i.e., matter and form), Aristotle tries to solve the problem of the unity of the beings, for example, "what is it that makes a man one"? Since, according to Plato there are two Ideas: animal and biped, how then is man a unity? However, according to Aristotle, the potential being (matter) and the actual one (form) are one and the same.[47][49][50]

Universals and particulars

Plato's forms exist as universals, like the ideal form of an apple. For Aristotle, both matter and form belong to the individual thing (hylomorphism).

Aristotle's predecessor, Plato, argued that all things have a universal form, which could be either a property or a relation to other things. When we look at an apple, for example, we see an apple, and we can also analyze a form of an apple. In this distinction, there is a particular apple and a universal form of an apple. Moreover, we can place an apple next to a book, so that we can speak of both the book and apple as being next to each other. Plato argued that there are some universal forms that are not a part of particular things. For example, it is possible that there is no particular good in existence, but "good" is still a proper universal form.[51][52] Aristotle disagreed with Plato on this point, arguing that all universals are instantiated at some period of time, and that there are no universals that are unattached to existing things. In addition, Aristotle disagreed with Plato about the location of universals. Where Plato spoke of the world of forms, a place where all universal forms subsist, Aristotle maintained that universals exist within each thing on which each universal is predicated. So, according to Aristotle, the form of apple exists within each apple, rather than in the world of the forms.[51][52]


The four classical elements (fire, air, water, earth) of Empedocles and Aristotle illustrated with a burning log. The log releases all four elements as it is destroyed.

Five elements

In his On Generation and Corruption, Aristotle related each of the four elements proposed earlier by Empedocles, Earth, Water, Air, and Fire, to two of the four sensible qualities, hot, cold, wet, and dry. [53] In the Empedoclean scheme, all matter was made of the four elements, in differing proportions. Aristotle's scheme added the heavenly Aether, the divine substance of the heavenly spheres, stars and planets.[53]

Aristotle's elements[53]
Element Hot/Cold Wet/Dry Modern state
of matter
Earth Cold Dry Solid
Water Cold Wet Liquid
Air Hot Wet Gas
Fire Hot Dry Plasma
Aether (divine


Aristotle's physics of moving bodies is either overlooked in philosophical accounts or dismissed as "intuitive", grossly erroneous, or not even science.[54] For example, it is stated that John Philoponus and Galileo showed by experiment that Aristotle's claim that a heavier object falls faster than a lighter object is incorrect.[41] However, the physicist Carlo Rovelli argues that this is "profoundly misleading", since Aristotle's physics of motion is based on observation, is counterintuitive, and correct within its domain of validity. Aristotle describes "violent (or unnatural) motion", such as that of a thrown stone, in the Physics (254b10), and "natural motion", such as of a falling object, in On the Heavens (300a20). In violent motion, as soon as the agent stops causing it, the motion stops also. Natural motion depends on the element concerned: the aether naturally moves in a circle around the heavens, while the 4 Empedoclean elements move vertically up (like fire, as is observed) or down (like earth) towards their natural resting places.[54]

Aristotle's laws of motion. In Physics he states that objects fall at a speed proportional to their weight and inversely proportional to the density of the fluid they are immersed in. This is a correct approximation for objects in Earth's gravitational field moving in air or water.[54]

In the Physics (215a25), Aristotle effectively states a quantitative law, that the speed, v, of a falling body is proportional (say, with constant c) to its weight, W, and inversely proportional to the density, ρ, of the fluid in which it is falling:[54]

though he implies that in a vacuum the speed of fall would become infinite, and concludes from this apparent absurdity that a vacuum is not possible. The equation then becomes, for some positive number n:[54]

The law is a "highly nontrivial" and "correct approximation of Newtonian physics" for objects in the Earth's gravitational field immersed in a fluid such as air or water, as everything in daily life is, with n=1/2 (square root). In this system, Aristotle was correct to state that heavy bodies in steady fall travel faster than light ones (whether friction is ignored, or not[54]), and that they fall more slowly in a denser medium. Philoponus and Galileo correctly objected that for the transient phase (still increasing in speed) with heavy objects falling a short distance, the law does not apply: Galileo used balls on a short incline to show this. Rovelli notes that "Two heavy balls with the same shape and different weight do fall at different speeds from an aeroplane, confirming Aristotle's theory, not Galileo's."[54]

For heavenly bodies like the Sun, Moon, and stars, the observed motions are "to a very good approximation" circular around the Earth's centre, (for example, the apparent rotation of the sky because of the rotation of the Earth, and the rotation of the moon around the Earth) as Aristotle stated.[54]

Rovelli notes that Archimedes corrected Aristotle's theory that bodies move towards their natural resting places; metal boats can float if they displace enough water; floating depends in Archimedes' scheme on the mass and volume of the object, not as Aristotle thought its elementary composition.[54]

Rovelli notes, too, that Newton's "forced" motion corresponds to Aristotle's "violent" motion with its external agent, but that Aristotle's assumption that the agent's effect stops immediately it stops acting (e.g., the ball leaves the thrower's hand) has awkward consequences: he has to suppose that surrounding fluid helps to push the ball along to make it continue to rise even though the hand is no longer acting on it, resulting in the Medieval theory of impetus.[54]

Four causes

Aristotle argued by analogy with a woodcarving that a thing takes its form from four causes: the wood used (material cause), its design (formal cause), the tools and techniques used (efficient cause), and its decorative or practical purpose (final cause).[55]

Aristotle suggested that the reason for anything coming about can be attributed to four different types of simultaneously active factors. His name aitia is traditionally translated as "cause", but it does not always refer to temporal sequence; it might be better translated as "explanation", but the traditional rendering will be employed here.[56][57]

  • Material cause describes the material out of which something is composed. Thus the material cause of a table is wood. It is not about action. It does not mean that one domino knocks over another domino.[56]
  • The formal cause is its form, i.e., the arrangement of that matter. It tells us what a thing is, that any thing is determined by the definition, form, pattern, essence, whole, synthesis or archetype. It embraces the account of causes in terms of fundamental principles or general laws, as the whole (i.e., macrostructure) is the cause of its parts, a relationship known as the whole-part causation. Plainly put, the formal cause is the idea existing in the first place as exemplar in the mind of the sculptor, and in the second place as intrinsic, determining cause, embodied in the matter. Formal cause could only refer to the essential quality of causation. A simple example of the formal cause is the mental image or idea that allows an artist, architect, or engineer to create a drawing.[56]
  • The efficient cause is "the primary source", or that from which the change under consideration proceeds. It identifies 'what makes of what is made and what causes change of what is changed' and so suggests all sorts of agents, nonliving or living, acting as the sources of change or movement or rest. Representing the current understanding of causality as the relation of cause and effect, this covers the modern definitions of "cause" as either the agent or agency or particular events or states of affairs. In the case of two dominoes, when the first is knocked over it causes the second also to fall over.[56] In the case of animals, this agency is a combination of how it develops from the egg, and how its body functions.[58]
  • The final cause (telos) is its purpose, or that for the sake of which a thing exists or is done, including both purposeful and instrumental actions and activities. The final cause is the purpose or function that something is supposed to serve. This covers modern ideas of motivating causes, such as volition.[56] In the case of living things, it implies adaptation to a particular way of life.[58]


Aristotle describes experiments in optics using a camera obscura in Problems, book 15. The apparatus contained a dark chamber that had a single small hole, or aperture, to allow for sunlight to enter. He used the device to make observations of the sun and noted that no matter what shape the hole was, the sun was correctly displayed as a round object. In modern cameras, this is analogous to the diaphragm. He also observed that when the distance between the aperture and the surface with the image increased, the image was magnified.[59]

Chance and spontaneity

According to Aristotle, spontaneity and chance are causes of some things, distinguishable from other types of cause such as simple necessity. Chance as an incidental cause lies in the realm of accidental things. It is "from what is spontaneous" (but note that what is spontaneous does not come from chance). There is also more a specific kind of chance, which Aristotle names "luck", that can only apply to human beings, because it is in the sphere of moral actions. According to Aristotle, luck must involve choice (and thus deliberation), and only humans are capable of these.[60][61]


In astronomy, Aristotle refuted Democritus's claim that the Milky Way was made up of "those stars which are shaded by the earth from the sun's rays," pointing out correctly that if "the size of the sun is greater than that of the earth and the distance of the stars from the earth many times greater than that of the sun, then... the sun shines on all the stars and the earth screens none of them."[62]

Aristotle noted that the ground level of the Aeolian islands changed before a volcanic eruption.


Aristotle was one of the first people to record any geological observations. He stated that geological change was too slow to be observed in one person's lifetime.[63][64] The geologist Charles Lyell noted that Aristotle described such change, including "lakes that had dried up" and "deserts that had become watered by rivers", giving as examples the growth of the Nile delta since the time of Homer, and "the upheaving of one of the Aeolian islands, previous to a volcanic eruption."'[65]


Among many pioneering zoological observations, Aristotle correctly described the reproductive hectocotyl arm of the octopus (bottom left).

Empirical research

Aristotle was the first person to study biology systematically, and biology forms a large part of his writings. He spent two years observing and describing the zoology of Lesbos and the surrounding seas, including in particular the Pyrrha lagoon in the centre of Lesbos.[66][67] His data in History of Animals, Generation of Animals, Movement of Animals, and Parts of Animals are assembled from his own observations, statements given by people with specialised knowledge such as beekeepers and fishermen, and less accurate accounts provided by travellers from overseas.[68] His apparent emphasis on animals rather than plants is a historical accident: his works on botany have been lost, but two books on plants by his pupil Theophrastus have survived.[69]

Aristotle reports on the sea-life visible from observation on Lesbos and the catches of fishermen. He describes catfish, electric ray and angler-fish in detail, as well as cephalopods, namely octopus, cuttlefish, and paper nautilus. His description of the hectocotyl arm, used in sexual reproduction, was widely disbelieved until its rediscovery in the 19th century.[70] He gave accurate descriptions of the four-chambered fore-stomachs of ruminants, and of the ovoviviparous embryological development of the hound shark.[71]

An example of his methods, including dissection and observation, comes from the Generation of Animals, where he describes breaking open fertilized chicken eggs at intervals to discover the sequence in which visible organs are generated.[72][73]

Scientific style

Aristotle inferred growth laws from his observations on animals, including that brood size decreases with body mass, whereas gestation period increases. He was correct in these predictions, at least for mammals: data are shown for mouse and elephant.

Aristotle did not do experiments in the modern sense.[74] He used the ancient Greek term pepeiramenoi to mean observations, or at most investigative procedures,[75] such as (in Generation of Animals) finding a fertilised hen's egg of a suitable stage and opening it so as to be able to see the embryo's heart inside.[76]

Instead, he practised a different style of science: systematically gathering data, discovering patterns common to whole groups of animals, and inferring possible causal explanations from these.[77][78] This style is common in modern biology when large amounts of data become available in a new field, such as genomics. It does not result in the same certainty as experimental science, but it sets out testable hypotheses and constructs a narrative explanation of what is observed. In this sense, Aristotle's biology is scientific.[77]

From the data he collected and documented, Aristotle inferred quite a number of rules relating the life-history features of the live-bearing tetrapods (terrestrial placental mammals) that he studied. Among these correct predictions are the following. Brood size decreases with (adult) body mass, so that an elephant has fewer young (usually just one) per brood than a mouse. Lifespan increases with gestation period, and also with body mass, so that elephants live longer than mice, have a longer period of gestation, and are heavier. As a final example, fecundity decreases with lifespan, so long-lived kinds like elephants have fewer young in total than short-lived kinds like mice.[79]

Classification of living things

Aristotle recorded that the embryo of a dogfish was attached by a cord to a kind of placenta (the yolk sac), like a higher animal; this formed an exception to the linear scale from highest to lowest.[80]

Aristotle distinguished about 500 species of animals,[81][82] arranging these in the History of Animals in a graded scale of perfection, a scala naturae, with man at the top.[83] His system had eleven grades of animal, from highest potential to lowest, expressed in their form at birth: the highest gave live birth to hot and wet creatures, the lowest laid cold, dry mineral-like eggs. Animals came above plants, and these in turn were above minerals.[70] He grouped what the modern zoologist would call vertebrates as the hotter 'animals with blood', and below them the colder invertebrates as 'animals without blood'. Those with blood were divided into the live-bearing (mammals), and the egg-laying (birds, reptiles, fish). Those without blood were insects, crustacea (non-shelled – cephalopods, and shelled) and the hard-shelled molluscs (bivalves and gastropods). He recognized that animals did not exactly fit into a linear scale, and noted various exceptions, such as that sharks had a placenta like the tetrapods.[84] He believed that purposive final causes guided all natural processes; this teleological view justified his observed data as an expression of formal design.[85]

Aristotle's Scala naturae (highest to lowest)
Group Examples
(given by Aristotle)
Blood Legs Souls
Man Man with blood 2 legs R, S, V Hot, Wet
Live-bearing tetrapods Cat, hare with blood 4 legs S, V Hot, Wet
Cetaceans Dolphin, whale with blood 4 legs S, V Hot, Wet
Birds Bee-eater, nightjar with blood 2 legs S, V Hot, Wet, except Dry eggs
Egg-laying tetrapods Chameleon, crocodile with blood 4 legs S, V Hot, Wet except scales, eggs
Snakes Water snake, Ottoman viper with blood none S, V Cold, Wet except scales, eggs
Egg-laying fishes Sea bass, parrotfish with blood none S, V Cold, Wet, including eggs
Placental selachians Shark, skate with blood none S, V Cold, Wet, but placenta like tetrapods
Crustaceans Shrimp, crab without many legs S, V Cold, Wet except shell
Cephalopods Squid, octopus without tentacles S, V Cold, Wet
Hard-shelled animals Cockle, trumpet snail without none S, V Cold, Dry (mineral shell)
Larva-bearing insects Ant, cicada without 6 legs S, V Cold, Dry
Spontaneously-generating Sponges, worms without none S, V Cold, Wet or Dry, from earth
Plants Fig without none V Cold, Dry
Minerals Iron without none none Cold, Dry



Aristotle proposed a three-part structure for souls of plants, animals, and humans, making humans unique in having all three types of soul.

Aristotle's psychology, given in his treatise On the Soul (peri psyche, often known by its Latin title De Anima), posits three kinds of soul ("psyches"): the vegetative soul, the sensitive soul, and the rational soul. Humans have a rational soul. The human soul incorporates the powers of the other kinds: Like the vegetative soul it can grow and nourish itself; like the sensitive soul it can experience sensations and move locally. The unique part of the human, rational soul is its ability to receive forms of other things and to compare them.[86]

For Aristotle, the soul is the form of a living being. Because all beings are composites of form and matter, the form of living beings is that which endows them with what is specific to living beings, e.g. the ability to initiate movement (or in the case of plants, growth and chemical transformations, which Aristotle considers types of movement).[87] In contrast to earlier philosophers, but in accordance with the Egyptians, he placed the rational soul in the heart, rather than the brain.[88] Notable is Aristotle's division of sensation and thought, which generally went against previous philosophers, with the exception of Alcmaeon.[89]


According to Aristotle, memory is the ability to hold a perceived experience in your mind and to have the ability to distinguish between the internal "appearance" and an occurrence in the past.[90] In other words, a memory is a mental picture (phantasm) in which Aristotle defines in De Anima, as an appearance which is imprinted on the part of the body that forms a memory. Aristotle believed an impression is left on a semi-fluid bodily organ that undergoes several changes in order to make a memory. A memory occurs when stimuli are so complex that the nervous system cannot receive all the impressions at once. These changes are the same as those involved in the operations of sensation, common sense, and thinking.[91] The mental picture imprinted on the bodily organ is the final product of the entire process of sense perception. It does not matter if the experience was seen or heard, as every experience ends up as a mental image in memory.[92]

Aristotle uses the term 'memory' for two basic abilities. The first is the actual retaining of the experience in the mnemonic impression that can develop from sensation. The second is the intellectual anxiety that comes with the impression because it is formed at a particular time and processing specific contents. These abilities can be explained as memory is neither sensation nor thinking because it arises only after a lapse of time. Therefore, memory is of the past, prediction is of the future, and sensation is of the present. The retrieval of our impressions cannot be performed suddenly. A transitional channel is needed and located in our past experiences, both for our previous experience and present experience.[93]

Because Aristotle believes people receive all kinds of sense perceptions and people perceive them as images or impressions, people are continually weaving together new impressions of things they experience. To search for these impressions, people search the memory itself.[94] Within the memory, if one experience is offered instead of a specific memory, that person will reject this experience until they find what they are looking for. Recollection occurs when one experience naturally follows another. If the chain of "images" is needed, one memory will stimulate the other. When people recall experiences, they stimulate certain previous experiences until they have stimulated the one that was needed.[95] Recollection is thus the self-directed activity of retrieving the information stored in a memory impression after some time has passed. Retrieval of stored information depends on the capabilities of a being (human or animal).[96] Only humans can remember impressions of intellectual activity, such as numbers and words. Animals that have perception of time can retrieve memories of their past observations. Remembering involves only perception of the things remembered and of the time passed.[97]

Senses, perception, memory, dreams, action in Aristotle's biology. Impressions are stored in the seat of perception, linked by his Laws of Association (similarity, contrast, and contiguity).

Aristotle believed the chain of thought, which ends in recollection of certain impressions, was connected systematically in relationships such as similarity, contrast, and contiguity, described in his Laws of Association. Aristotle believed that past experiences are hidden within our mind. A force operates to awaken the hidden material to bring up the actual experience. According to Aristotle, association is the power innate in a mental state, which operates upon the unexpressed remains of former experiences, allowing them to rise and be recalled.[98]


Aristotle gives an account of sleep in On Sleep and Wakefulness.[99] Sleep takes place as a result of overuse of the senses[100] or of digestion,[99] so it is vital to the body.[100] While a person is asleep, the critical activities, which include thinking, sensing, recalling and remembering, do not function as they do during wakefulness. Since a person cannot sense during sleep they can not have desire, which is the result of sensation. However, the senses are able to work during sleep,[100] albeit differently, because during sleep a person can still have sensory experiences.[99] Also, not all of the senses are inactive during sleep, only those that are weary.[100]

Dreams do not involve actually sensing a stimulus. In dreams, sensation is still involved, but in an altered manner.[100] Aristotle explains that when a person stares at a moving stimulus such as the waves in a body of water, and then look away, the next thing they look at appears to have a wavelike motion. When a person perceives a stimulus and the stimulus is no longer the focus of their attention, it leaves an impression.[99] When the body is awake and the senses are functioning properly, a person constantly encounters new stimuli to sense and so the impressions of previously perceived stimuli are ignored.[100] However, during sleep the impressions made throughout the day are noticed as there are no new distracting sensory experiences.[99] So, dreams result from these lasting impressions. Since impressions are all that are left and not the exact stimuli, dreams do not resemble the actual waking experience.[101] During sleep, a person is in an altered state of mind. Aristotle compares a sleeping person to a person who is overtaken by strong feelings toward a stimulus. For example, a person who has a strong infatuation with someone may begin to think they see that person everywhere because they are so overtaken by their feelings. When a person is asleep, their senses are not acting as they do when they are awake and this results in them thinking like a person who is influenced by strong feelings. Since a person sleeping is in this suggestible state, they become easily deceived by what appears in their dreams.[99] When asleep, a person is unable to make judgments as they do when they are awake; their senses are unable to help them judge what is happening in their dream. This leads the person to believe the dream is real, even when the dreams are absurd in nature.[99]

One component of Aristotle's theory of dreams disagrees with previously held beliefs. He claimed that dreams are not foretelling and not sent by a divine being. Aristotle reasoned naturalistically that instances in which dreams do resemble future events are simply coincidences.[102] Aristotle claimed that a dream is first established by the fact that the person is asleep when they experience it. If a person had an image appear for a moment after waking up or if they see something in the dark it is not considered a dream because they were awake when it occurred. Secondly, any sensory experience that is perceived while a person is asleep does not qualify as part of a dream. For example, if, while a person is sleeping, a door shuts and in their dream they hear a door is shut, this sensory experience is not part of the dream. Lastly, the images of dreams must be a result of lasting impressions of waking sensory experiences.[101]

Practical philosophy

Virtues and their accompanying vices[21]
Too little Virtuous mean Too much
Humbleness High-mindedness Vainglory
Lack of purpose Right ambition Over-ambition
Spiritlessness Good temper Irascibility
Rudeness Civility Obsequiousness
Cowardice Courage Rashness
Insensibility Self-control Intemperance
Sarcasm Sincerity Boastfulness
Boorishness Wit Buffoonery
Shamelessness Modesty Shyness
Callousness Just resentment Spitefulness
Pettiness Generosity Vulgarity
Meanness Liberality Wastefulness


Aristotle considered ethics to be a practical rather than theoretical study, i.e., one aimed at becoming good and doing good rather than knowing for its own sake. He wrote several treatises on ethics, including most notably, the Nicomachean Ethics.[103]

Aristotle taught that virtue has to do with the proper function (ergon) of a thing. An eye is only a good eye in so much as it can see, because the proper function of an eye is sight. Aristotle reasoned that humans must have a function specific to humans, and that this function must be an activity of the psuchē (soul) in accordance with reason (logos). Aristotle identified such an optimum activity (the virtuous mean, between the accompanying vices of excess or deficiency[21]) of the soul as the aim of all human deliberate action, eudaimonia, generally translated as "happiness" or sometimes "well being". To have the potential of ever being happy in this way necessarily requires a good character (ēthikē aretē), often translated as moral or ethical virtue or excellence.[104]

Aristotle taught that to achieve a virtuous and potentially happy character requires a first stage of having the fortune to be habituated not deliberately, but by teachers, and experience, leading to a later stage in which one consciously chooses to do the best things. When the best people come to live life this way their practical wisdom (phronesis) and their intellect (nous) can develop with each other towards the highest possible human virtue, the wisdom of an accomplished theoretical or speculative thinker, or in other words, a philosopher.[105]


In addition to his works on ethics, which address the individual, Aristotle addressed the city in his work titled Politics. Aristotle considered the city to be a natural community. Moreover, he considered the city to be prior in importance to the family which in turn is prior to the individual, "for the whole must of necessity be prior to the part".[106] He also famously stated that "man is by nature a political animal" and also arguing that humanity's defining factor among others in the animal kingdom is its rationality.[107] Aristotle conceived of politics as being like an organism rather than like a machine, and as a collection of parts none of which can exist without the others. Aristotle's conception of the city is organic, and he is considered one of the first to conceive of the city in this manner.[108]

Aristotle's classifications of political constitutions

The common modern understanding of a political community as a modern state is quite different from Aristotle's understanding. Although he was aware of the existence and potential of larger empires, the natural community according to Aristotle was the city (polis) which functions as a political "community" or "partnership" (koinōnia). The aim of the city is not just to avoid injustice or for economic stability, but rather to allow at least some citizens the possibility to live a good life, and to perform beautiful acts: "The political partnership must be regarded, therefore, as being for the sake of noble actions, not for the sake of living together." This is distinguished from modern approaches, beginning with social contract theory, according to which individuals leave the state of nature because of "fear of violent death" or its "inconveniences."[109]

Excerpt from a speech by the character 'Aristotle' in Protrepticus:[110]

For we all agree that the most excellent man should rule, i.e., the supreme by nature, and that the law rules and alone is authoritative; but the law is a kind of intelligence, i.e. a discourse based on intelligence. And again, what standard do we have, what criterion of good things, that is more precise than the intelligent man? For all that this man will choose, if the choice is based on his knowledge, are good things and their contraries are bad. And since everybody chooses most of all what conforms to their own proper dispositions (a just man choosing to live justly, a man with bravery to live bravely, likewise a self-controlled man to live with self-control), it is clear that the intelligent man will choose most of all to be intelligent; for this is the function of that capacity. Hence it's evident that, according to the most authoritative judgment, intelligence is supreme among goods.

Rhetoric and poetics

The Blind Oedipus Commending his Children to the Gods (1784) by Bénigne Gagneraux. In his Poetics, Aristotle uses the tragedy Oedipus Tyrannus by Sophocles as an example of how the perfect tragedy should be structured, with a generally good protagonist who starts the play prosperous, but loses everything through some hamartia (fault).[111]

Aritotle's Rhetoric proposes that a speaker can use three basic kinds of appeals to persuade his audience: ethos (an appeal to the speaker's character), pathos (an appeal to the audience's emotion), and logos (an appeal to logical reasoning).[112] He also categorizes rhetoric into three genres: epideictic (ceremonial speeches dealing with praise or blame), forensic (judicial speeches over guilt or innocence), and deliberative (speeches calling on an audience to make a decision on an issue).[113] Aristotle also outlines two kinds of rhetorical proofs: enthymeme (proof by syllogism) and paradeigma (proof by example).[114]

While it is believed that Aristotle's Poetics comprised two books – one on comedy and one on tragedy – only the portion that focuses on tragedy has survived. Aristotle taught that tragedy is composed of six elements: plot-structure, character, style, thought, spectacle, and lyric poetry.[115] The characters in a tragedy are merely a means of driving the story; and the plot, not the characters, is the chief focus of tragedy. Tragedy is the imitation of action arousing pity and fear, and is meant to effect the catharsis of those same emotions. Aristotle concludes Poetics with a discussion on which, if either, is superior: epic or tragic mimesis. He suggests that because tragedy possesses all the attributes of an epic, possibly possesses additional attributes such as spectacle and music, is more unified, and achieves the aim of its mimesis in shorter scope, it can be considered superior to epic.[116]

Aristotle considered epic poetry, tragedy, comedy, dithyrambic poetry and music to be imitative, each varying in imitation by medium, object, and manner.[117] For example, music imitates with the media of rhythm and harmony, whereas dance imitates with rhythm alone, and poetry with language. The forms also differ in their object of imitation. Comedy, for instance, is a dramatic imitation of men worse than average; whereas tragedy imitates men slightly better than average. Lastly, the forms differ in their manner of imitation – through narrative or character, through change or no change, and through drama or no drama.[118] Aristotle believed that imitation is natural to mankind and constitutes one of mankind's advantages over animals.[119]

Aristotle was a keen systematic collector of riddles, folklore, and proverbs; he and his school had a special interest in the riddles of the Delphic Oracle and studied the fables of Aesop.[120]

Views on women

Aristotle's analysis of procreation describes an active, ensouling masculine element bringing life to an inert, passive female element. On this ground, proponents of feminist metaphysics have accused Aristotle of misogyny[121] and sexism.[122] However, Aristotle gave equal weight to women's happiness as he did to men's, and commented in his Rhetoric that the things that lead to happiness need to be in women as well as men.[123]


More than 2300 years after his death, Aristotle remains one of the most influential people who ever lived. He contributed to almost every field of human knowledge then in existence, and he was the founder of many new fields. According to the philosopher Bryan Magee, "it is doubtful whether any human being has ever known as much as he did".[124] Among countless other achievements, Aristotle was the founder of formal logic,[125][126] pioneered the study of zoology, and left every future scientist and philosopher in his debt through his contributions to the scientific method.[127][128][129] Taneli Kukkonen, writing in The Classical Tradition, observes that his achievement in founding two sciences is unmatched, and his reach in influencing "every branch of intellectual enterprise" including Western ethical and political theory, theology, rhetoric and literary analysis is equally long. As a result, Kukkonen argues, any analysis of reality today "will almost certainly carry Aristotelian overtones ... evidence of an exceptionally forceful mind."[129] Jonathan Barnes wrote that "an account of Aristotle's intellectual afterlife would be little less than a history of European thought".[130]

On his successor, Theophrastus

Frontispiece to a 1644 version of Theophrastus's Historia Plantarum, originally written around 300 BC

Aristotle's pupil and successor, Theophrastus, wrote the History of Plants, a pioneering work in botany. Some of his technical terms remain in use, such as carpel from carpos, fruit, and pericarp, from pericarpion, seed chamber.[131] Theophrastus was much less concerned with formal causes than Aristotle was, instead pragmatically describing how plants functioned.[132]

On later Greek philosophers

The immediate influence of Aristotle's work was felt as the Lyceum grew into the Peripatetic school. Aristotle's notable students included Aristoxenus, Dicaearchus, Demetrius of Phalerum, Eudemos of Rhodes, Harpalus, Hephaestion, Mnason of Phocis, Nicomachus, and Theophrastus. Aristotle's influence over Alexander the Great is seen in the latter's bringing with him on his expedition a host of zoologists, botanists, and researchers. He had also learned a great deal about Persian customs and traditions from his teacher. Although his respect for Aristotle was diminished as his travels made it clear that much of Aristotle's geography was clearly wrong, when the old philosopher released his works to the public, Alexander complained "Thou hast not done well to publish thy acroamatic doctrines; for in what shall I surpass other men if those doctrines wherein I have been trained are to be all men's common property?"[133]

On Hellenistic science

After Theophrastus, the Lyceum failed to produce any original work. Though interest in Aristotle's ideas survived, they were generally taken unquestioningly.[134] It is not until the age of Alexandria under the Ptolemies that advances in biology can be again found.

The first medical teacher at Alexandria, Herophilus of Chalcedon, corrected Aristotle, placing intelligence in the brain, and connected the nervous system to motion and sensation. Herophilus also distinguished between veins and arteries, noting that the latter pulse while the former do not.[135] Though a few ancient atomists such as Lucretius challenged the teleological viewpoint of Aristotelian ideas about life, teleology (and after the rise of Christianity, natural theology) would remain central to biological thought essentially until the 18th and 19th centuries. Ernst Mayr claimed that there was "nothing of any real consequence in biology after Lucretius and Galen until the Renaissance."[136]

On Byzantine scholars

Greek Christian scribes played a crucial role in the preservation of Aristotle by copying all the extant Greek language manuscripts of the corpus. The first Greek Christians to comment extensively on Aristotle were John Philoponus, Elias, and David in the sixth century, and Stephen of Alexandria in the early seventh century.[137] John Philoponus stands out for having attempted a fundamental critique of Aristotle's views on the eternity of the world, movement, and other elements of Aristotelian thought.[138] After a hiatus of several centuries, formal commentary by Eustratius and Michael of Ephesus reappears in the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries, apparently sponsored by Anna Comnena.[139]

On the medieval Islamic world

Islamic portrayal of Aristotle, c. 1220

Aristotle was one of the most revered Western thinkers in early Islamic theology. Most of the still extant works of Aristotle,[140] as well as a number of the original Greek commentaries, were translated into Arabic and studied by Muslim philosophers, scientists and scholars. Averroes, Avicenna and Alpharabius, who wrote on Aristotle in great depth, also influenced Thomas Aquinas and other Western Christian scholastic philosophers. Alkindus considered Aristotle as the outstanding and unique representative of philosophy[141] and Averroes spoke of Aristotle as the "exemplar" for all future philosophers.[142] Medieval Muslim scholars regularly described Aristotle as the "First Teacher".[143] The title "teacher" was first given to Aristotle by Muslim scholars, and was later used by Western philosophers (as in the famous poem of Dante) who were influenced by the tradition of Islamic philosophy.[144]

In accordance with the Greek theorists, the Muslims considered Aristotle to be a dogmatic philosopher, the author of a closed system, and believed that Aristotle shared with Plato essential tenets of thought. Some went so far as to credit Aristotle himself with neo-Platonic metaphysical ideas.[140]

On medieval Europe

Woodcut of Aristotle ridden by Phyllis by Hans Baldung, 1515[145]

With the loss of the study of ancient Greek in the early medieval Latin West, Aristotle was practically unknown there from c. AD 600 to c. 1100 except through the Latin translation of the Organon made by Boethius. In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, interest in Aristotle revived and Latin Christians had translations made, both from Arabic translations, such as those by Gerard of Cremona,[146] and from the original Greek, such as those by James of Venice and William of Moerbeke. After the Scholastic Thomas Aquinas wrote his Summa Theologica, working from Moerbeke's translations and calling Aristotle "The Philosopher",[147] the demand for Aristotle's writings grew, and the Greek manuscripts returned to the West, stimulating a revival of Aristotelianism in Europe that continued into the Renaissance.[148] These thinkers blended Aristotelian philosophy with Christianity, bringing the thought of Ancient Greece into the Middle Ages. Scholars such as Boethius, Peter Abelard, and John Buridan worked on Aristotelian logic.[149]

The medieval English poet Chaucer describes his student as being happy by having

at his beddes heed
Twenty bookes, clad in blak or reed,
Of aristotle and his philosophie,[150]

A cautionary medieval tale held that Aristotle advised his pupil Alexander to avoid the king's seductive mistress, Phyllis, but was himself captivated by her, and allowed her to ride him. Phyllis had secretly told Alexander what to expect, and he witnessed Phyllis proving that a woman's charms could overcome even the greatest philosopher's male intellect. Artists such as Hans Baldung produced a series of illustrations of the popular theme.[151][145]

The Italian poet Dante says of Aristotle in The Divine Comedy:

L'Inferno, Canto IV. 131–135

vidi 'l maestro di color che sanno
seder tra filosofica famiglia.
Tutti lo miran, tutti onor li fanno:
quivi vid'ïo Socrate e Platone
che 'nnanzi a li altri più presso li stanno;

I saw the Master there of those who know,
Amid the philosophic family,
By all admired, and by all reverenced;
There Plato too I saw, and Socrates,
Who stood beside him closer than the rest.

On Early Modern scientists

William Harvey's Exercitatio Anatomica de Motu Cordis et Sanguinis in Animalibus, 1628, showed that the blood circulated, contrary to classical era thinking.

In the Early Modern period, scientists such as William Harvey in England and Galileo Galilei in Italy reacted against the theories of Aristotle and other classical era thinkers like Galen, establishing new theories based to some degree on observation and experiment. Harvey demonstrated the circulation of the blood, establishing that the heart functioned as a pump rather than being the seat of the soul and the controller of the body's heat, as Aristotle thought.[152] Galileo used more doubtful arguments to displace Aristotle's physics, proposing that bodies all fall at the same speed whatever their weight.[153]

On 19th century thinkers

The 19th century German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche has been said to have taken nearly all of his political philosophy from Aristotle.[154] However debatable this is, Aristotle rigidly separated action from production, and argued for the deserved subservience of some people ("natural slaves"), and the natural superiority (virtue, arete) of others. It was Martin Heidegger, not Nietzsche, who elaborated a new interpretation of Aristotle, intended to warrant his deconstruction of scholastic and philosophical tradition.[155]

The English mathematician George Boole fully accepted Aristotle's logic, but decided "to go under, over, and beyond" it with his system of algebraic logic in his 1854 book The Laws of Thought. This (1) gives logic a mathematical foundation with equations, (2) enables it to solve equations as well as check validity, and (3) allows it to handle a wider class of problems by expanding propositions of any number of terms, not just two.[156]

Modern rejection and rehabilitation

"That most enduring of romantic images, Aristotle tutoring the future conqueror Alexander".[129] Illustration by Charles Laplante (fr), 1866

During the 20th century, Aristotle's work was widely criticised. The philosopher Bertrand Russell argued that "almost every serious intellectual advance has had to begin with an attack on some Aristotelian doctrine". Russell also refers to Aristotle's ethics as "repulsive", and called his logic "as definitely antiquated as Ptolemaic astronomy". Russell stated that these errors made it difficult to do historical justice to Aristotle, until one remembered an advance he made upon all of his predecessors.[7] In 1985, the biologist Peter Medawar could still state in "pure seventeenth century"[157] tones that Aristotle had assembled "a strange and generally speaking rather tiresome farrago of hearsay, imperfect observation, wishful thinking and credulity amounting to downright gullibility".[157]

By the start of the 21st century, however, Aristotle was taken more seriously: Kukkonen noted that "In the best 20th-century scholarship Aristotle comes alive as a thinker wrestling with the full weight of the Greek philosophical tradition."[129] Ayn Rand accredited Aristotle as "the greatest philosopher in history" and cited him as a major influence on her thinking. More recently, Alasdair MacIntyre has attempted to reform what he calls the Aristotelian tradition in a way that is anti-elitist and capable of disputing the claims of both liberals and Nietzscheans.[155] Armand Marie Leroi has reonstructed Aristotle's biology.[158] Kukkonen observed, too, that "that most enduring of romantic images, Aristotle tutoring the future conqueror Alexander" remained current, as in the 2004 film Alexander, while the "firm rules" of Aristotle's theory of drama have ensured a role for the Poetics in Hollywood.[129]

Surviving works

First page of a 1566 edition of the Nicomachean Ethics in Greek and Latin

The works of Aristotle that have survived from antiquity through medieval manuscript transmission are collected in the Corpus Aristotelicum. These texts, as opposed to Aristotle's lost works, are technical philosophical treatises from within Aristotle's school. Reference to them is made according to the organization of Immanuel Bekker's Royal Prussian Academy edition (Aristotelis Opera edidit Academia Regia Borussica, Berlin, 1831–1870), which in turn is based on ancient classifications of these works.[159]

Loss and preservation of his works

Aristotle wrote his works on papyrus scrolls, or rolls, which was the common writing medium of that era.[8] Aristotle's "lost" works stray considerably in characterization from the surviving Aristotelian corpus. Whereas the lost works appear to have been originally written with an intent for subsequent publication, the surviving works mostly resemble lecture notes not intended for publication.[160][161] His writings are divisible into two groups: the "exoteric", intended for the public, and the "esoteric", for use within the Lyceum school.[162][163] One major question in the history of Aristotle's works is how the exoteric writings were all lost, and how the ones we now possess came to us.[164] The consensus is that Andronicus of Rhodes collected the esoteric works of Aristotle's school which existed in the form of smaller, separate works, distinguished them from those of Theophrastus and other Peripatetics, edited them, and finally compiled them into the more cohesive, larger works as they are known today.[165]


Depictions of Aristotle

Aristotle has been depicted by major artists including Lucas Cranach the Elder,[166] Justus van Gent, Raphael, Paolo Veronese, Jusepe de Ribera,[167] Rembrandt,[168] and Francesco Hayez over the centuries. Among the best-known is Raphael's fresco The School of Athens, in the Vatican's Apostolic Palace, where the figures of Plato and Aristotle are central to the image, at the architectural vanishing point, reflecting their importance.[169] Rembrandt's Aristotle with a Bust of Homer, too, is a celebrated work, showing the knowing philosopher and the blind Homer from an earlier age: as the art critic Jonathan Jones wrote, "this painting will remain one of the greatest and most mysterious in the world, ensnaring us in its musty, glowing, pitch-black, terrible knowledge of time."[170][171]


The Aristotle Mountains in Antarctica are named after Aristotle. He was the first person known to conjecture, in his book Meteorology, the existence of a landmass in the southern high-latitude region and called it "Antarctica".[173] Aristoteles is a crater on the Moon bearing the classical form of Aristotle's name.[174]

See also


  1. ^ Kantor, J. R. (1963). The Scientific Evolution of Psychology, Volume I. Chicago: Principia Press, p. 116.
  2. ^ Aristotle (350 B.C.). On the soul. Translated by J. A. Smith
  3. ^ "Aristotle" entry in Collins English Dictionary.
  4. ^ That these undisputed dates (the first half of the Olympiad year 384/383 BC, and in 322 shortly before the death of Demosthenes) are correct was shown already by August Boeckh (Kleine Schriften VI 195); for further discussion, see Felix Jacoby on FGrHist 244 F 38. Ingemar Düring, Aristotle in the Ancient Biographical Tradition, Göteborg, 1957, p. 253.
  5. ^ "Biography of Aristotle". Retrieved 12 March 2014. 
  6. ^ Georgios Anagnostopoulos (ed.), A Companion to Aristotle, Wiley-Blackwell, 2013: "First Athenian Period".
  7. ^ a b c d Bertrand Russell, A History of Western Philosophy, Simon & Schuster, 1972. Book One. Ancient Philosophy, Part II. Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, Chapter XXII.
  8. ^ a b "When libraries were on a roll". Telegraph Media Group. 19 May 2001. Retrieved 29 June 2017. When the Roman dictator Sulla invaded Athens in 86 BC, he brought back to Rome a fantastic prize - Aristotle's library. Books then were papyrus rolls, from 10 to 20 feet long, and since Aristotle's death in 322 BC, worms and damp had done their worst. The rolls needed repairing, and the texts clarifying and copying on to new papyrus (imported from Egypt - Moses' bulrushes). The man in Rome who put Aristotle's library in order was a Greek scholar, Tyrannio. 
  9. ^ Barnes, Jonathan (1995). "Life and Work". The Cambridge Companion to Aristotle. Cambridge University Press. p. 16. ISBN 978-0-521-42294-9. 
  10. ^ Cicero, Marcus Tullius (1874) [106–43 BC]. "Book II, chapter XXXVIII, §119". In Reid, James S. The Academica of Cirero. London: Macmillian and company.  "veniet flumen orationis aureum fundens Aristoteles", (Google translation: "Aristotle will come pouring forth a golden stream of eloquence")
  11. ^ Barnes 1995, p. 9.
  12. ^ See Shields, C., "Aristotle's Philosophical Life and Writings" in The Oxford Handbook of Aristotle (Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 3–16. Düring, I., Aristotle in the Ancient Biographical Tradition (Göteborg, 1957) is a collection of [an overview of?] ancient biographies of Aristotle.
  13. ^ Campbell, Michael. "Behind the Name: Meaning, Origin and History of the Name "Aristotle"". Behind the Name: The Etymology and History of First Names. Retrieved 6 April 2012. 
  14. ^ McLeisch, Kenneth Cole (1999). Aristotle: The Great Philosophers. Routledge. p. 5. ISBN 0-415-92392-1. 
  15. ^ "Aristoteles-Park in Stagira". Retrieved 20 March 2018. 
  16. ^ Anagnostopoulos, G., "Aristotle's Life" in A Companion to Aristotle (Blackwell Publishing, 2009), p. 4.
  17. ^ Blits, Kathleen C. (1999-04-15). <58::AID-AR6>3.0.CO;2-I/abstract "Aristotle: Form, function, and comparative anatomy". The Anatomical Record. 257 (2): 58–63. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0185(19990415)257:2<58::AID-AR6>3.0.CO;2-I. 
  18. ^ Carnes Lord. Introduction to The Politics by Aristotle (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984).
  19. ^ a b Peter Green, Alexander of Macedon, University of California Press Ltd. (Oxford, England) 1991, pp. 58–59
  20. ^ William George Smith, Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. 3, p. 88 Archived 28 June 2008 at the Wayback Machine.
  21. ^ a b c "Aristotle (384—322 B.C.E.)". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2009. 
  22. ^ Peter Green, Alexander of Macedon, University of California Press Ltd. (Oxford, England), 1991, p. 460.
  23. ^ Filonik, Jakub (2013). "Athenian impiety trials: a reappraisal". Dike (16): 72–73. doi:10.13130/1128-8221/4290Freely accessible. 
  24. ^ Jones, W. T. (1980). The Classical Mind: A History of Western Philosophy. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. p. 216. ISBN 0-15-538312-4. 
  25. ^ Vita Marciana 41, cf. Aelian Varia historica 3.36, Ingemar Düring, Aristotle in the Ancient Biographical Tradition, Göteborg, 1957, T44a-e.
  26. ^ Aristotle's Will, Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt by Hildegard Temporini, Wolfgang Haase.
  27. ^ Degnan, Michael, 1994. Recent Work in Aristotle's Logic. Philosophical Books 35.2 (April 1994): 81–89.
  28. ^ Corcoran, John (2009). "Aristotle's Demonstrative Logic". History and Philosophy of Logic, 30: 1–20.
  29. ^ Kant, Immanuel (1787) Critique of Pure Reason, Second Edition, Preface.
  30. ^ Bocheński, I. M. (1951). Ancient Formal Logic. Amsterdam: North-Holland. 
  31. ^ a b c Bocheński, 1951.
  32. ^ Rose, Lynn E. (1968). Aristotle's Syllogistic. Springfield: Charles C Thomas Publisher. 
  33. ^ This type of syllogism, with all three terms in 'a', is known by the traditional (medieval) mnemonic Barbara.
  34. ^ M is the Middle (here, Men), S is the Subject (Greeks), P is the Predicate (mortal).
  35. ^ The first equation can be read as 'It is not true that there exists an x such that x is a man and that x is not mortal.'
  36. ^ Zalta, Edward N., ed. (2016). "Medieval Theories of the Syllogism". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 
  37. ^ Pickover, Clifford A. (2009). The Math Book: From Pythagoras to the 57th Dimension, 250 Milestones in the History of Mathematics. Sterling. p. 52. ISBN 978-1-4027-5796-9. 
  38. ^ "Prior Analytics", 24b18–20; Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Ancient Logic: Aristotle: Non-Modal Syllogistic and Ancient Logic: Aristotle: Modal Logic
  39. ^ It is popularly supposed that Aristotle gestures to the earth, representing his belief in knowledge through empirical observation and experience, while holding a copy of his Nicomachean Ethics in his hand, whilst Plato gestures to the heavens, representing his belief in The Forms, while holding a copy of Timaeus. "The School of Athens by Raphael". Visual Arts Cork. Retrieved 22 March 2018. 
  40. ^ Jori, Alberto (2003). Aristotele. Milano: Bruno Mondadori Editore. 
  41. ^ a b "Philiponus". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 26 April 2009. 
  42. ^ Turner, William (1929). History of Philosophy. Boston: Ginn. p. 146. ISBN 978-1-105-91931-2. 
  43. ^ Counahan, James (1969). "The Quest for Metaphysics". The Thomist: A Speculative Quarterly Review. Johns Hopkins University Press. 33 (3): 519–572. doi:10.1353/tho.1969.0027. 
  44. ^ e.g., in Movement of Animals 700b9.
  45. ^ "Aristotle | Philosophy". Catholic Encyclopedia. Retrieved 20 March 2018. 
  46. ^ Aristotle, Metaphysics VIII 1043a 10–30
  47. ^ a b c Cohen, S. Marc (2016). "Aristotle's Metaphysics:". In Zalta, Edward N. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 
  48. ^ Aristotle, Metaphysics IX 1050a 5–10
  49. ^ Aristotle, Metaphysics VIII 1045a–b
  50. ^ Cohen, S. Marc (2016). "Aristotle's Metaphysics: Substance and Definition". In Zalta, Edward N. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 
  51. ^ a b Cohen, S. Marc (2016). "Aristotle's Metaphysics: Substances and Universals". In Zalta, Edward N. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 
  52. ^ a b Lloyd, G. E. R. (1968). The critic of Plato. Aristotle: The Growth and Structure of His Thought. Cambridge University Press. pp. 43–47. ISBN 0-521-09456-9. 
  53. ^ a b c Lloyd, G. E. R. (1968). Aristotle: The Growth and Structure of his Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 133–139, 166–169. ISBN 0-521-09456-9. 
  54. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Rovelli, Carlo (2015). "Aristotle's Physics: A Physicist's Look". Journal of the American Philosophical Association. 1 (1): 23–40. doi:10.1017/apa.2014.11. 
  55. ^ Leroi 2014, pp. 88–90.
  56. ^ a b c d e Lloyd, G. E. R. (1996). Causes and correlations. Adversaries and authorities: Investigations into ancient Greek and Chinese science. Cambridge University Press. pp. 96–100, 106–107. ISBN 0-521-55695-3. 
  57. ^ Hankinson, R. J. (1998). Cause and Explanation in Ancient Greek Thought. Oxford University Press. p. 159. doi:10.1093/0199246564.001.0001. ISBN 978-0198237457. 
  58. ^ a b Leroi 2014, pp. 91–92, 369–373.
  59. ^ Lahanas, Michael. "Optics and ancient Greeks". Archived from the original on 11 April 2009. Retrieved 26 April 2009. 
  60. ^ Aristotle, Physics 2.6
  61. ^ Miller, Willard M. (1973). "Aristotle on Necessity, Chance, and Spontaneity". New Scholasticism. 47 (2): 204–213. doi:10.5840/newscholas197347237. 
  62. ^ Aristotle, Meteorology 1.8, trans. E.W. Webster, rev. J. Barnes.
  63. ^ Moore, Ruth. The Earth We Live On. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1956. p. 13
  64. ^ Aristotle. Meteorology. Book 1, Part 14
  65. ^ Lyell, Charles, Principles of Geology, 1832, p. 17
  66. ^ Leroi 2014, p. 14.
  67. ^ Thompson, D'Arcy (1910). Ross, W.D.; Smith, J. A., eds. Historia animalium. The works of Aristotle translated into English. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. Prefatory Note. 
  68. ^ Leroi 2014, pp. 196, 248.
  69. ^ Day, J. (2013). "Botany meets archaeology: people and plants in the past". Journal of Experimental Botany. 64 (18): 5805–5816. doi:10.1093/jxb/ert068. 
  70. ^ a b Singer, Charles. A short history of biology. Oxford 1931.
  71. ^ Emily Kearns, "Animals, knowledge about," in Oxford Classical Dictionary, 3rd ed., 1996, p. 92.
  72. ^ Leroi, Armand Marie (Presenter) (3 May 2011). "Aristotle's Lagoon: Embryo Inside a Chicken's Egg". BBC. Retrieved 17 November 2016. 
  73. ^ Leroi 2014, pp. 197–200.
  74. ^ Taylor, 1922. p. 42
  75. ^ Leroi 2014, pp. 361–365.
  76. ^ Leroi, Armand Marie (Presenter) (3 May 2011). "Aristotle's Lagoon: Embryo Inside a Chicken's Egg". BBC. Retrieved 17 November 2016. 
  77. ^ a b Leroi 2014, pp. 365–368.
  78. ^ Taylor 1922, p. 49.
  79. ^ Leroi 2014, p. 408.
  80. ^ Leroi 2014, pp. 72–74.
  81. ^ Bergstrom, Carl T.; Dugatkin, Lee Alan (2012). Evolution. Norton. p. 35. ISBN 978-0-393-92592-0. 
  82. ^ Rhodes, Frank Harold Trevor (1974). Evolution. Golden Press. p. 7. ISBN 978-0-307-64360-5. 
  83. ^ Mayr, Ernst. The Growth of Biological Thought, pp. 201–202; see also: Lovejoy, Arthur O. The Great Chain of Being
  84. ^ Leroi, Armand Marie (2014). The Lagoon: How Aristotle Invented Science. Viking. pp. 111–119. ISBN 978-0670026746. 
  85. ^ Mason, A History of the Sciences pp. 43–44
  86. ^ Leroi, Armand Marie (2014). The Lagoon: How Aristotle Invented Science. Bloomsbury. pp. 370–373. ISBN 978-1-4088-3622-4. 
  87. ^ Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, article "Psychology".
  88. ^ Mason, A History of the Sciences pp. 45
  89. ^ Guthrie, A History of Greek Philosophy Vol. 1 p. 348
  90. ^ Bloch, David (2007). Aristotle on Memory and Recollection. p. 12. ISBN 90-04-16046-9. 
  91. ^ Bloch 2007, p. 61.
  92. ^ Carruthers, Mary (2007). The Book of Memory: A Study of Memory in Medieval Culture. p. 16. ISBN 978-0-521-42973-3. 
  93. ^ Bloch 2007, p. 25.
  94. ^ Warren, Howard (1921). A History of the Association Psychology. p. 30. 
  95. ^ Warren 1921, p. 25.
  96. ^ Carruthers 2007, p. 19.
  97. ^ Warren 1921, p. 296.
  98. ^ Warren 1921, p. 259.
  99. ^ a b c d e f g Holowchak, Mark (1996). "Aristotle on Dreaming: What Goes on in Sleep when the 'Big Fire' goes out". Ancient Philosophy. 16 (2): 405–23. doi:10.5840/ancientphil199616244. Retrieved 7 November 2014. 
  100. ^ a b c d e f Shute, Clarence (1941). The Psychology of Aristotle: An Analysis of the Living Being. Morningsdie Heights: New York: Columbia University Press. pp. 115–18. 
  101. ^ a b Modrak, Deborah (2009). "Dreams and Method in Aristotle". Skepsis: A Journal for Philosophy and Interdisciplinary Research. 20: 169–81. 
  102. ^ Webb, Wilse (1990). Dreamtime and dreamwork: Decoding the language of the night. Los Angeles, CA, England: Jeremy P. Tarcher. pp. 174–84. ISBN 0-87477-594-9. 
  103. ^ Kraut, Richard (1 May 2001). "Aristotle's Ethics". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 19 March 2018. 
  104. ^ Nicomachean Ethics Book I. See for example chapter 7 1098a.
  105. ^ Nicomachean Ethics Book VI.
  106. ^ Politics 1253a19–24
  107. ^ Aristotle (2009). Politics. Translated by Ernest Barker and revised with introduction and notes by R. F. Stalley (1st ed. 1995 ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 320–21. ISBN 978-0-19-953873-7. 
  108. ^ Ebenstein, Alan; William Ebenstein (2002). Introduction to Political Thinkers. Wadsworth Group. p. 59. 
  109. ^ For a different reading of social and economic processes in the Nicomachean Ethics and Politics see Polanyi, K. (1957) "Aristotle Discovers the Economy" in Primitive, Archaic and Modern Economies: Essays of Karl Polanyi ed. G. Dalton, Boston 1971, 78–115
  110. ^ Hutchinson, D. S.; Johnson, Monte Ransome (2015). "Protrepticus | New Reconstruction, includes Greek text". p. 22. 
  111. ^ Kaufmann, Walter Arnold (1968). Tragedy and Philosophy. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. pp. 56–60. ISBN 0-691-02005-1. 
  112. ^ Garver, Eugene (1994). Aristotle's Rhetoric: An Art of Character. Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press. pp. 109–110. ISBN 0-226-28425-5. 
  113. ^ Rorty, Amélie Oksenberg (1996). "Structuring Rhetoric". In Rorty, Amélie Oksenberg. Essays on Aristotle's Rhetoric. Berkeley, California, Los Angeles, California, and London, England: University of California Press. pp. 3–7. ISBN 0-520-20227-9. 
  114. ^ Grimaldi, William M. A. (1998). "Studies in the Philosophy of Aristotle's Rhetoric". In Enos, Richard Leo; Agnew, Lois Peters. Landmark Essays on Aristotelian Rhetoric. Landmark Essays. 14. Mahwah, New Jersey and London, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. p. 71. ISBN 1-880393-32-8. 
  115. ^ Aristotle, Poetics VI
  116. ^ Aristotle, Poetics XXVI
  117. ^ Aristotle, Poetics I 1447a
  118. ^ Aristotle, Poetics III
  119. ^ Aristotle, Poetics IV
  120. ^ Temple, Olivia, and Temple, Robert (translators), The Complete Fables By Aesop Penguin Classics, 1998. ISBN 0-14-044649-4 Cf. Introduction, pp. xi–xii.
  121. ^ Freeland, Cynthia A. (1998). Feminist Interpretations of Aristotle. Penn State University Press. ISBN 0-271-01730-9. 
  122. ^ Morsink, Johannes (Spring 1979). "Was Aristotle's Biology Sexist?". Journal of the History of Biology. 12 (1): 83–112. doi:10.1007/bf00128136. JSTOR 10.2307/4330727. 
  123. ^ Roberts, Aristotle;. "Book I, Chapter 5". In Honeycutt, Lee. Rhetoric. Translated by Rhys, W. Archived from the original on 13 February 2015. Where, as among the Lacedaemonians, the state of women is bad, almost half of human life is spoilt. 
  124. ^ Magee, Bryan (2010). The Story of Philosophy. Dorling Kindersley. p. 34. 
  125. ^ W. K. C. Guthrie (1990). "A history of Greek philosophy: Aristotle : an encounter". Cambridge University Press. p. 156. ISBN 0-521-38760-4
  126. ^ Wikisource-logo.svg Case, Thomas (1911). "Aristotle". In Chisholm, Hugh. Encyclopædia Britannica. 2 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 518. 
  127. ^ "Aristotle (Greek philosopher) – Britannica Online Encyclopedia". Archived from the original on 22 April 2009. Retrieved 26 April 2009. 
  128. ^ Durant, Will (2006) [1926]. The Story of Philosophy. United States: Simon & Schuster. p. 92. ISBN 978-0-671-73916-4. 
  129. ^ a b c d e Kukkonen, Taneli (2010). Grafton, Anthony et al, eds. The classical tradition. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. pp. 70–77. ISBN 978-0-674-03572-0. 
  130. ^ Barnes, Jonathan (1982). Aristotle: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. p. 86. 
  131. ^ Hooker, Sir William Jackson (1831). The British Flora: Comprising the Phaenogamous, Or Flowering Plants, and the Ferns. Longman. p. 219. 
  132. ^ Mayr, The Growth of Biological Thought, pp. 90–91; Mason, A History of the Sciences, p. 46
  133. ^ Plutarch, Life of Alexander
  134. ^ Annas, "Classical Greek Philosophy", 2001, p. 252
  135. ^ Mason, A History of the Sciences p. 56
  136. ^ Mayr, The Growth of Biological Thought, pp. 90–94; quotation from p. 91
  137. ^ Richard Sorabji, ed. Aristotle Transformed London, 1990, pp. 20, 28, 35–36.
  138. ^ Richard Sorabji, ed. Aristotle Transformed (London, 1990) pp. 233–74.
  139. ^ Richard Sorabji, ed. Aristotle Transformed (London, 1990) pp. 20–21; 28–29, 393–406; 407–08.
  140. ^ a b Encyclopedia of Islam, Aristutalis
  141. ^ Rasa'il I, 103, 17, Abu Rida
  142. ^ Comm. Magnum in Aristotle, De Anima, III, 2, 43 Crawford
  143. ^ al-mua'llim al-thani, Aristutalis
  144. ^ Nasr, Seyyed Hossein (1996). The Islamic Intellectual Tradition in Persia. Curzon Press. pp. 59–60. ISBN 0-7007-0314-4. 
  145. ^ a b "Phyllis and Aristotle | The Triumph of Seduction over Intellect". Louvre. Retrieved 22 March 2018. 
  146. ^ Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). "Influence of Arabic and Islamic Philosophy on the Latin West". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 
  147. ^ E.g. Summa Theologica, Part I, Question 3
  148. ^ Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). "Aristotelianism in the Renaissance". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 
  149. ^ Lagerlund, Henrik. "Medieval Theories of the Syllogism". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward N. Zalta. Retrieved 17 February 2014. 
  150. ^ Geoffrey Chaucer, The Canterbury Tales, Prologue, lines 295–295
  151. ^ "Aristotle and Phyllis". Art Institute Chicago. Retrieved 22 March 2018. 
  152. ^ Aird, W. C. (2011). "Discovery of the cardiovascular system: from Galen to William Harvey". Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis. Wiley-Blackwell. 9: 118–129. doi:10.1111/j.1538-7836.2011.04312.x. 
  153. ^ Zalta, Edward N., ed. (10 May 2017). "Galileo Galilei". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 
  154. ^ Durant, p. 86
  155. ^ a b Knight, Kelvin (2007). Aristotelian Philosophy. Polity Press. pp. passim. 
  156. ^ Boole, George (2003) [1854]. The Laws of Thought, facsimile, with introduction by J. Corcoran. Buffalo: Prometheus Books (2003). Reviewed by James van Evra in Philosophy in Review 24 (2004). pp. 167–169.
  157. ^ a b Leroi 2014, p. 353.
  158. ^ Leroi 2014.
  159. ^ Bekker, Immanuel (editor). (1831–1870) Aristotelis Opera edidit Academia Regia Borussica, Berlin. (5 volumes).
  160. ^ Terence Irwin and Gail Fine, Cornell University, Aristotle: Introductory Readings. Indianapolis, Indiana: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. (1996), Introduction, pp. xi–xii.
  161. ^ Barnes 1995, p. 12.
  162. ^ Barnes 1995, p. 12; Aristotle himself: Nicomachean Ethics 1102a26–27. Aristotle himself never uses the term "esoteric" or "acroamatic". For other passages where Aristotle speaks of exōterikoi logoi, see W. D. Ross, Aristotle's Metaphysics (1953), vol. 2, pp. 408–10. Ross defends an interpretation according to which the phrase, at least in Aristotle's own works, usually refers generally to "discussions not peculiar to the Peripatetic school", rather than to specific works of Aristotle's own.
  163. ^ House, Humphry (1956). Aristotles Poetics. p. 35. 
  164. ^ The definitive, English study of these questions is Barnes, Jonathan (1997). Barnes, J.; Griffin, M., eds. Roman Aristotle. Philosophia Togata. II. Oxford. pp. 1–69. 
  165. ^ Anagnostopoulos, G., "Aristotle's Works and Thoughts", A Companion to Aristotle (Blackwell Publishing, 2009), p. 16. See also, Barnes 1995, pp. 10–15.
  166. ^ "Lucas Cranach the Elder | Phyllis and Aristotle". Sotheby's. 2008. Retrieved 23 March 2018. 
  167. ^ Lee, Ellen Wardwell; Robinson, Anne (2005). Indianapolis Museum of Art: Highlights of the Collection. Indianapolis: Indianapolis Museum of Art. ISBN 0936260777. 
  168. ^ "Aristotle with a Bust of Homer, Rembrandt (1653)". The Guardian. 27 July 2002. Retrieved 23 March 2018. 
  169. ^ Phelan, Joseph (September 2002). "The Philosopher as Hero: Raphael's The School of Athens". ArtCyclopedia. Retrieved 23 March 2018. 
  170. ^ Held, Julius (1969). Rembrandt's Aristotle and Other Rembrandt Studies. Princeton University Press. 
  171. ^ Jones, Jonathan (27 July 2002). "Aristotle with a Bust of Homer, Rembrandt (1653)". The Guardian. Retrieved 23 March 2018. 
  172. ^ Compare the medieval tale of Phyllis and Alexander above.
  173. ^ "Aristotle Mountains". SCAR Composite Antarctic Gazetteer. Programma Nazionale di Ricerche in Antartide. Department of the Environment and Energy, Australian Antarctic Division, Australian Government. Retrieved March 1, 2018. 
  174. ^ "Aristoteles". Gazetteer of Planetary Nomenclature. Retrieved 19 March 2018. 

Further reading

The secondary literature on Aristotle is vast. The following references are only a small selection.

  • Ackrill J. L. (1997). Essays on Plato and Aristotle, Oxford University Press, US.
  • Ackrill, J. L. (1981). Aristotle the Philosopher. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. 
  • Adler, Mortimer J. (1978). Aristotle for Everybody. New York: Macmillan.  A popular exposition for the general reader.
  • Ammonius (1991). Cohen, S. Marc; Matthews, Gareth B, eds. On Aristotle's Categories. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. ISBN 0-8014-2688-X. 
  • Aristotle (1908–1952). The Works of Aristotle Translated into English Under the Editorship of W. D. Ross, 12 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press.  These translations are available in several places online; see External links.
  • Bakalis, Nikolaos. (2005). Handbook of Greek Philosophy: From Thales to the Stoics Analysis and Fragments, Trafford Publishing ISBN 1-4120-4843-5
  • Bocheński, I. M. (1951). Ancient Formal Logic. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company. 
  • Bolotin, David (1998). An Approach to Aristotle's Physics: With Particular Attention to the Role of His Manner of Writing. Albany: SUNY Press. A contribution to our understanding of how to read Aristotle's scientific works.
  • Burnyeat, M. F. et al. (1979). Notes on Book Zeta of Aristotle's Metaphysics. Oxford: Sub-faculty of Philosophy.
  • Cantor, Norman F.; Klein, Peter L., eds. (1969). Ancient Thought: Plato and Aristotle. Monuments of Western Thought. 1. Waltham, Mass: Blaisdell. 
  • Chappell, V. (1973). "Aristotle's Conception of Matter". Journal of Philosophy. 70: 679–96. doi:10.2307/2025076. 
  • Code, Alan (1995). Potentiality in Aristotle's Science and Metaphysics, Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 76.
  • Ferguson, John (1972). Aristotle. New York: Twayne Publishers. 
  • De Groot, Jean (2014). Aristotle's Empiricism: Experience and Mechanics in the 4th Century BC, Parmenides Publishing, ISBN 978-1-930972-83-4
  • Frede, Michael (1987). Essays in Ancient Philosophy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  • Fuller, B.A.G. (1923). Aristotle. History of Greek Philosophy. 3. London: Cape. 
  • Gendlin, Eugene T. (2012). Line by Line Commentary on Aristotle's De Anima, Volume 1: Books I & II; Volume 2: Book III. Spring Valley, New York: The Focusing Institute.
  • Gill, Mary Louise (1989). Aristotle on Substance: The Paradox of Unity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Guthrie, W. K. C. (1981). A History of Greek Philosophy. 6. Cambridge University Press. 
  • Halper, Edward C. (2009). One and Many in Aristotle's Metaphysics, Volume 1: Books Alpha – Delta, Parmenides Publishing, ISBN 978-1-930972-21-6.
  • Halper, Edward C. (2005). One and Many in Aristotle's Metaphysics, Volume 2: The Central Books, Parmenides Publishing, ISBN 978-1-930972-05-6.
  • Irwin, T. H. (1988). Aristotle's First Principles. Oxford: Clarendon Press, ISBN 0-19-824290-5.
  • Jaeger, Werner (1948). Robinson, Richard, ed. Aristotle: Fundamentals of the History of His Development (2nd ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press. 
  • Jori, Alberto (2003). Aristotele, Milano: Bruno Mondadori Editore (Prize 2003 of the "International Academy of the History of Science") ISBN 88-424-9737-1.
  • Kiernan, Thomas P., ed. (1962). Aristotle Dictionary. New York: Philosophical Library. 
  • Knight, Kelvin (2007). Aristotelian Philosophy: Ethics and Politics from Aristotle to MacIntyre, Polity Press.
  • Leroi, Armand Marie (2014). The Lagoon: How Aristotle Invented Science. Viking. ISBN 978-0670026746. 
  • Lewis, Frank A. (1991). Substance and Predication in Aristotle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Lloyd, G. E. R. (1968). Aristotle: The Growth and Structure of his Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Pr., ISBN 0-521-09456-9.
  • Lord, Carnes (1984). Introduction to The Politics, by Aristotle. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
  • Loux, Michael J. (1991). Primary Ousia: An Essay on Aristotle's Metaphysics Ζ and Η. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
  • Maso, Stefano (Ed.), Natali, Carlo (Ed.), Seel, Gerhard (Ed.) (2012) Reading Aristotle: Physics VII.3: What is Alteration? Proceedings of the International ESAP-HYELE Conference, Parmenides Publishing. ISBN 978-1-930972-73-5
  • McKeon, Richard (1973). Introduction to Aristotle (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 
  • Owen, G. E. L. (1965c). "The Platonism of Aristotle". Proceedings of the British Academy. 50: 125–150.  [Reprinted in J. Barnes, M. Schofield, and R. R. K. Sorabji, eds.(1975). Articles on Aristotle Vol 1. Science. London: Duckworth 14–34.]
  • Pangle, Lorraine Smith (2003). Aristotle and the Philosophy of Friendship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Aristotle's conception of the deepest human relationship viewed in the light of the history of philosophic thought on friendship.
  • Plato (1979). Allen, Harold Joseph; Wilbur, James B, eds. The Worlds of Plato and Aristotle. Buffalo: Prometheus Books. 
  • Reeve, C. D. C. (2000). Substantial Knowledge: Aristotle's Metaphysics. Indianapolis: Hackett.
  • Rose, Lynn E. (1968). Aristotle's Syllogistic. Springfield: Charles C Thomas Publisher. 
  • Ross, Sir David (1995). Aristotle (6th ed.). London: Routledge.  A classic overview by one of Aristotle's most prominent English translators, in print since 1923.
  • Scaltsas, T. (1994). Substances and Universals in Aristotle's Metaphysics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
  • Strauss, Leo (1964). "On Aristotle's Politics", in The City and Man, Chicago; Rand McNally.
  • Swanson, Judith (1992). The Public and the Private in Aristotle's Political Philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 
  • Taylor, Henry Osborn (1922). "Chapter 3: Aristotle's Biology". Greek Biology and Medicine. Archived from the original on 27 March 2006. Retrieved 3 January 2017. 
  • Veatch, Henry B. (1974). Aristotle: A Contemporary Appreciation. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.  For the general reader.
  • Woods, M. J. (1991b). "Universals and Particular Forms in Aristotle's Metaphysics". Aristotle and the Later Tradition. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy. Suppl. pp. 41–56. 

External links

Collections of works