![]()
1
ARISTOTLE’S LIFE AND WRITINGS
ARISTOTLE’S THOUGHT AND HIS CHARACTER
One of the most memorable descriptions of Aristotle comes from the medieval poet Dante, in his Inferno, the first part of his epic poem, Divine Comedy. The Inferno tells the story of Dante as he journeys with his guide, the poet, Virgil, through hell in search of his beloved Beatrice. In the first ring of hell, Dante meets poets, next, heroic warriors, and finally a group of philosophers. Foremost among this group is Aristotle, who is deemed so renowned that he is one whom other prominent philosophers, including his teacher, Plato (427–347 BCE) and Socrates (470–399 BCE), the teacher of Plato, look upon with veneration. Aristotle’s reputation as one of the world’s most influential philosophers had been well established by the time Dante writes his poem in the fourteenth century.
This recognition was a long time coming. Aristotle died in 322 BCE. Many of his works were lost, including dialogues similar in nature to those of Plato, of which only fragments have survived.1 Most of the writings that did survive were likely not written for a broad public: they are not polished works, and in places they are written in an obscure and abbreviated manner that is not easy to follow. It was not until the first century BCE that the ancient collection of Aristotle’s existing writings was put together. It took two more centuries of commentary on the works for philosophers to grasp the philosophical brilliance of Aristotle’s ideas. Finally, by the Middle Ages, Aristotle was so well known that Dante does not see a need to name him: he simply is referred to by the title: “The Master of Those Who Know” (Inferno 4.131).
If an ancient legend is to be believed, it is somewhat of a fortunate accident that we have come to know of Aristotle and his writings at all. When Aristotle died, he left his library, which included his writings, to his friend and colleague, Theophrastus, whom he had named as the successor of his school. When Theophrastus died, he passed Aristotle’s writings to his non-philosopher ancestors, who in the first part of the second century BCE buried the writings in a damp, underground tunnel in Asia Minor, leaving them to suffer mildew and worms. Luckily, the story continues, Aristotle’s library was sold to a bibliophile and edited in Rome during the early first century BCE. From this was established a canon of legitimately Aristotelian works.2 However colorful, there is a scholarly debate as to whether this ancient story of how Aristotle’s works came to us is true, for the legend relies on sources that are difficult for us to verify.3
There is much else that we do not know about Aristotle. A major source about his life comes from Diogenes Laertius’ third-century Lives of Eminent Philosophers, a work that cites some two hundred sources to give biographies of ancient philosophers ranging from the fifth to the third centuries BCE. This work is helpful because it is one of the few ancient biographies that have come down to us. Still, Diogenes’ biography is not critical historiography; it was written some five centuries after Aristotle’s death and in a style of literature whose aim was to entertain with ancient anecdote and gossip.4 So, for example, regarding Aristotle’s appearance, Diogenes reports, “he spoke with a lisp . . . further, his calves were slender (so they say), his eyes small, and he was conspicuous by his attire, his rings, and the cut of his hair” (Book V, Chapter One).5 One bust of Aristotle that has come down to us, on the other hand (likely a copy of an original that was commissioned by Aristotle’s pupil, Alexander the Great), depicts a dignified figure bearing the wise and bearded look of a philosopher, rather than the ostentatious personality as described by Diogenes. Unfortunately, we lack reliable and independent sources that would help us decide if either of these representations is true or if they were taken from two different periods in Aristotle’s life.
When it comes to Aristotle’s character, conflicting accounts in the ancient biographical tradition have also passed down to us. One has it that Aristotle was an arrogant self-promoter, someone who regarded himself as a self-styled genius, and that he was ungrateful for all he learned at Plato’s school the Academy. On the other hand, another tradition speaks of Aristotle as a kind and generous friend and family man, and a grateful pupil who was devoted to teaching and research.6 Most scholars think that we have no reliable direct reports to which we can appeal to determine what sort of person he was.
Nevertheless, we do have Aristotle’s writings, although only about one-fifth of his prodigious output has survived. They give us some indirect evidence about what sort of thinker he was and also what sort of activities and pursuits he valued.
What picture of Aristotle as a thinker and a person emerges, from his writings? Aristotle was a philosopher and polymath with a wide range of interests. He invented many of the major areas in philosophy today, including ethics, logic, metaphysics, aesthetics, history of philosophy, philosophy of mind, philosophical psychology, and philosophy of science. He was an empirically minded philosopher who whenever possible strove to make use of the observations of science in his philosophy. Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics shows the great value he placed on friendship in the good life of a human being. Aristotle was an appreciative student who believed he owed his teacher, Plato, a debt of gratitude that was impossible fully to repay.
From his writings we also get some insights into Aristotle’s philosophical temperament. Some philosophers think the task of philosophy is descriptive: philosophers should clarify and systematize pre-existing beliefs and concepts, such as justice, knowledge, God, as they are expressed in everyday language. Philosophers of this stripe do not seek to challenge everyday opinion; rather, the goal is to explain and shed light on our everyday beliefs and concepts, which are sometimes vague, incoherent, or poorly articulated. Other types of philosophers can be described as more radical in their approach. These philosophers are revisionists who want to correct and challenge our commonplace views, to show where these views have gone wrong. Philosophers are also divided by their views on how we obtain knowledge. Rationalists hold that reason, and not sense experience, is the source of all our knowledge. Empiricists maintain that all knowledge comes from sense experience.
Plato, Aristotle’s teacher, is often categorized as a revisionist, for he takes views—such as that the ultimate reality is immaterial objects, Forms, such as Beauty-Itself or Justice-Itself, and not sensible particulars, such as beautiful flowers or just actions—that fly in the face of common sense beliefs. He is also a rationalist, for like another famous rationalist, René Descartes, the seventeenth-century philosopher and mathematician, Plato insists that the senses cannot be trusted, and instead human reason is the source of all knowledge.
Aristotle, on the other hand, is often thought to be a descriptivist and an empiricist. It is thought he is a descriptivist for he advocates a philosophical method that seeks to preserve as many of the widely accepted beliefs, or endoxa, as possible. Aristotle also has the leanings of a philosophical empiricist. He gives extended discussions in Metaphysics and Posterior Analytics on how knowledge is acquired, and he is clear that sense perception is the basis of scientific knowledge (epistēmē):
(Metaphysics 1.1.980a22–27)
As this passage makes clear, Aristotle has solid empiricist credentials; but his method of inquiry does not make exclusive use of direct sense experience, as latter day empirically minded philosophers often do. The phenomena that Aristotle consults when he inquires are drawn from a wide range of sources. There are: direct observations of the facts; the reports and testimonies of skilled practitioners, such as hunters, fisherman, and those involved in the care of animals; the reputable opinions held by his philosophical and scientific predecessors; and the widely held opinions of everyone or most people.
Aristotle’s use of widely held opinions in his philosophical method has given Aristotle a reputation as a common sense philosopher who commits himself to the view that philosophy should seek to support our everyday beliefs rather than offer philosophical theories that revise or possibly shake up those beliefs. However, Aristotle’s way of doing philosophy does not fit easily into either the descriptive or the revisionist views of philosophy.7
It is true that Aristotle holds the view that we can count on people’s ability, in the right circumstances and over a period of time, to arrive at the truth. “It may also be noted that men have a sufficient natural instinct for what is true, and usually do arrive at the truth” (Rhetoric 1.1.1355a15–16).8 He goes on to say that anyone who inquires on the basis of that which is generally accredited (ta endoxa) advances on the basis of what is likely to be true (1.1.1355a16–18). These comments support the view that Aristotle thinks the commonly accepted beliefs have epistemic weight or evidentiary value, meaning that they should be taken into consideration in an inquiry into the truth of some matter.
That said, Aristotle does not equate the views that have proven true over time and are supported by all or the majority with the opinions of the “many” that he sometimes ends up rejecting. So, for example, in Nicomachean Ethics 1.4.1095a20–25, Aristotle ends up disagreeing with “the many” who say that p...
