Philosophical Biology in Aristotle's Parts of Animals, Chapter I (original) (raw)
What are we to do with the wealth of detailed information in the biological works of Aristotle? How easy is it to clearly distinguish between what some might describe as "merely" biological and the more philosophical, speculative discussions? Can the activity in which Aristotle is engaged be described as a philosophical biology? What would such an inquiry entail? This book aims to examine these questions through a detailed analysis of Aristotle's Parts of Animals in conjunction with revisiting the detailed natural history observations made by Aristotle that inform, and in many ways penetrate, the philosophical argument.
Sign up for access to the world's latest research.
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Related papers
THE CAMBRIDGE COMPANION TO ARISTOTLE' S BIOLOGY
's voluminous writings on animals have often been marginalized in the history of philosophy. Providing the first full-length comprehensive account of Aristotle's biology, its background, content, and influence, this Companion situates his study of living nature within his broader philosophy and theology and differentiates it from other medical and philosophical theories. An overview of empiricism in Aristotle's Historia Animalium is followed by an account of the general methodology recommended in the Parts of Animals. An account of the importance of Aristotle's teleological perspective and the fundamental metaphysics of biological entities provides a basis for understanding living capacities, such as nutrition, reproduction, perception, and self-motion, in his philosophy. The importance of Aristotle's zoology to both his ethics and political philosophy is highlighted. The volume explores in detail the changing interpretations and influences of Aristotle's biological works from antiquity to modern philosophy of science. It is essential for both students and scholars.
A comparative review of two recent books on Aristotle and biology: one a collection of philosophical essays, the other a study of Aristotle's works by a biologist. While the philosophers derive from Aristotle interesting solutions to modern issues in the philosophy of biology, the biologist shows a more empathetic understanding of the Stagirite's life and thought. To see other papers by this author relating Classics and science, see www.jamesjope.ca.
Towards an Integrated Approach to Aristotle as a Biological Philosopher
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. This content downloaded from 86.30.130.177 on Sat,
Reason Papers, 2013
Although readers of Reason Papers are no doubt familiar with Allan Gotthelf's extensive efforts aimed at a more widespread appreciation of Ayn Rand's philosophical thought, he is best known among historians of philosophy and science for his contributions to the understanding of Aristotle's biological works, which have shed much light on Aristotle's scientific methodology, epistemology, and metaphysics. Two new books allow us to take account of Gotthelf's contributions to Aristotelian studies. The first is a collection of Gotthelf's most important papers on Aristotle. 1 Although the papers were written independently, there is little superfluous repetition, and taken together they constitute a comprehensive and coherent account of Aristotle's biology and its philosophical significance. The second, which has its origin in a 2004 conference in Gotthelf's honor, is a collection of papers on Aristotle, most of which focus on themes that Gotthelf himself has discussed. 2 Some of the papers further his thought, taking it in new directions; others depart from Gotthelf in philosophically interesting ways. Gotthelf believes that one of his most important contributions to Aristotelian studies lies in his account of teleology in the biological writings. For this he gives credit to Rand (p. viii) (who personally led Gotthelf to the study of Aristotle), for she had argued that scientific explanation must identify potentials inherent in natures. This was in contrast to the predominant empiricist strategy of taking explanation to be a matter of subsuming an
Introduction, Cambridge Companion to Aristotle's Biology
An animal just like this was observed again in 1857 by the Swiss biologist Louis Agassiz and is now classified as Parasilurus aristotelis, Aristotle's catfish. Aristotle also explains that the octopus uses one of its tentacles as a penis (HA 5.6.541b8-12), a process only rediscovered in 1852 and now
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
Related papers
Aristotle on Mind and the Science of Nature
M. Rossetto, M. Tsianikas, G. Couvalis and M. Palaktsoglou (Eds.) "Greek Research in Australia: Proceedings of the Eighth Biennial International Conference of Greek Studies, Flinders University June 2009"., 2009