Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Books
  3. Being, Nature, and Life in Aristotle
  • Cited by 7
Publisher:
Cambridge University Press
Online publication date:
December 2010
Print publication year:
2010
Online ISBN:
9780511919275
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511919275
Subjects:
Classical Studies, Classical Philosophy, Ancient Philosophy, Philosophy
Information

Book description

This volume of essays explores major connected themes in Aristotle's metaphysics, philosophy of nature, and ethics, especially themes related to essence, definition, teleology, activity, potentiality, and the highest good. The volume is united by the belief that all aspects of Aristotle's work need to be studied together if any one of the areas of thought is to be fully understood. Many of the papers were contributions to a conference at the University of Pittsburgh entitled 'Being, Nature, and Life in Aristotle', to honor Professor Allan Gotthelf's many contributions to the field of ancient philosophy; a few are contributions from those who were invited but could not attend. The contributors, all longstanding friends of Professor Gotthelf, are among the most accomplished scholars in the field of ancient philosophy today.

Reviews

'This outstanding collection of ten essays pays handsome tribute to Allan Gotthelf for his many years at the center of scholarship on Aristotelian philosophy of biology and science.'

Source: Bryn Mawr Classical Review

Refine List

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

Contents

Contents
  • 1 - Teleology, Aristotelian and Platonic
    pp 5-29
  • View abstract

    Summary

    Aristotle was Plato's student for two decades before founding his own school. Plato, like nearly every other thinker in and well after antiquity, associated teleology with conscious purpose. To make the world a purposive structure just is to posit an intelligent mind as its cause. In positing a detached and self-absorbed god, one who is above any inclination to intervene in our world, Aristotle sounds surprisingly similar to Epicurus. The goal of life, as Plato's followers expressed his idea, is 'to become as like god as possible'. This chapter describes how Aristotle's treatment of plants as inverted human beings has its origin in Plato's elevation of human beings to the status of inverted plants. It considers two areas in which Aristotle's teleology seems to me to reflect his Platonic beginnings. One is the role of the craft model; the other is global teleology.
  • 2 - Biology and metaphysics in Aristotle
    pp 30-55
  • View abstract

    Summary

    Biology, for Aristotle, is an autonomous theoretical science. Biology is separate from and autonomous with respect to metaphysics. Since this relation of autonomy and separateness is symmetrical, if biology is separate from and autonomous with respect to metaphysics, for Aristotle, then metaphysics is equally autonomous and separate from biology. General metaphysics is only concerned with the study of what is qua being and the proper attributes of what is qua being, and none of the other sciences is concerned with this. This chapter explores some of the more important claims already mentioned according to which Aristotle would appear to violate his strictures concerning the autonomy both of metaphysics and biology. The predication of a biological species or genus of a primary substance, as understood in the Categories, is reduced, in the Metaphysics, to a predication of form of matter.
  • 3 - The unity and purpose of On the Parts of Animals 1
    pp 56-77
  • View abstract

    Summary

    This chapter talks about the unity and structure of Aristotle's investigation of animals, and its place in his wider investigation of nature. The investigation is framed not as exploring methods for an inquiry into animals, but for an inquiry into nature. On the Parts of Animals I is regularly characterized as lacking any overall sense of unity and purpose. These characterizations are sometimes supported by statements about radical differences in style from one section to the next and by conjectures about parts being written for different purposes or at different periods of Aristotle's philosophical career. He begins simply by stipulating that it is correct that those animals with parts that differ only in degree or by more and less should be designated as kinds, while those with features that are analogous have been "kept apart".
  • 4 - An Aristotelian puzzle about definition: Metaphysics Ζ.12
    pp 78-96
  • View abstract

    Summary

    This chapter explores and elaborates a puzzle about definition that Aristotle raises in a variety of forms in APo. 2.6 in Metaphysics Z.I2, and again in Metaph. H.6. It gives some indications that Aristotle rejects the idea that an account of essence reached through division is one that captures the ousia or being of that item. Literacy and musicality are attributes that may be possessed by certain substances, and if and when a substance is characterized by both of these simultaneously it is both a literate thing and a musical thing. The substance could have existed without being either literate or musical and could continue to exist as the very same substance even were he to lose the attributes by virtue of which he is correctly called musical and literate.
  • 5 - Unity of definition in Metaphysics Η.6 and Ζ.12
    pp 97-121
  • View abstract

    Summary

    Aristotle is looking for basic entities, whose being is fully determined by their essence and not by other entities which claim priority. Aristotle discusses three sorts of examples: substantial forms, material composites, and categorial properties. Aristotle investigates the unity of definition in Metaphysics Z.I2, and that is the place to look for help with the unity of form in H.6. He explicitly distinguishes genus-differentia combinations from accidental compounds. Metaphysics Z.I2 presents itself as Aristotle's first attempt to explain the unity of definition, and he explicitly denies that a genus is related to its differentia in the way that a particular white man is related to whiteness. Aristotle turns to categorial properties: substantial kinds, qualities, quantities, and other properties. Aristotle's proposal about the manifestation of categorial properties again extends his solution for the unity of form.
  • 6 - Definition in Aristotle's Posterior Analytics
    pp 122-146
  • View abstract

    Summary

    Two of them contributed more than the others to the shaping of a new conception of the Posterior Analytics, which, according to the author, is still alive and active, namely the papers by Jonathan Barnes and Jacques Brunschwig. Aristotle first developed his doctrine on demonstration in the Posterior Analytics before he built up a 'general syllogistic' in the Prior Analytics. Barnes considers two of the requirements for the premises that make, in Aristotle's view, a demonstration scientific: immediacy and universality. These requirements seem to be taken from the developments in syllogistic in the Prior Analytics, but Barnes shows that even in the case of universality, apodeictic can fly with its own wings, without any help from syllogistic. The paper by Brunschwig shares with that by Barnes the same chronological perspective, but Brunschwig insists much more on the gaps that are internal to the Posterior Analytics.
  • 7 - Male and female in Aristotle's Generation of Animals
    pp 147-167
  • View abstract

    Summary

    Aristotle's theory is not that the male provides the form and the female the matter of the generated animal, but that the male, in an act analogous to what one can call fertilization, begins the process by which the female grows within herself and bears their mutual offspring. It is this process, the process of the generation of animals, in relation to which Aristotle speaks of the male as the formal and the female as the material principle, and in relation to which he identifies the male as active and the female as passive. The author suggested that if Aristotle's theory of animal generation depicts the father as providing the form of an animal and the mother its matter, it is a theory inconsonant with his larger metaphysical views. With very few exceptions, Aristotle does not characteristically describe the male as providing the form of the animal.
  • 8 - Metaphysics Θ.7 and 8: Some issues concerning actuality and potentiality
    pp 168-197
  • View abstract

    Summary

    Aristotle's strategy in Metaphysics ϴ appears relatively clear: he begins by examining a basic sense of 'capacity' and 'actuality' in which the active power to produce a change in something else is called a 'capacity' and the change it produces (an activity) is called 'an actuality'. This chapter offers a reading of parts of ϴ.7 and of certain lines in ϴ.8. It sketches Aristotle's answers to the questions, commenting on their significance for his account of matter and substance. Aristotle, in introducing talk of actuality and potentiality, provided a way of conceptualizing matter and form so as to make his teleological commitments perspicuous and explicit. The nature of the matter and the composite are clear to us once one can follow Aristotle's advice and see them as teleologically explained and defined by the presence of the relevant goal-laden actuality. Aristotle's master-builder exemplifies the kind of intelligibility sought.
  • 9 - Where is the activity?
    pp 198-211
  • (An Aristotelian worry about the telic status of energeia)
  • View abstract

    Summary

    Aristotle is seeking to establish that actuality or activity (energeia) is prior in substance (ousia) to potentiality. More precisely, he is trying to show that a given energeia is prior in ousia to the corresponding dunamis. The demonstration that energeia is prior in ousia to the corresponding dunamis is third in a battery of arguments showing that energeia is prior to dunamis in many ways. He is aiming to establish that energeia is prior in ousia to dunamis, by way of the intermediate theses that energeia is prior in respect of form, and that energeia is the telos of dunamis. Aristotle gives two considerations in favour of viewing transitive activity. First, this activity is in the patient, in what is being worked upon by the agent so as to produce the house. Secondly, the activity 'comes into being, and is, simultaneously with the house'.
  • 10 - Political community and the highest good
    pp 212-264
  • View abstract

    Summary

    This chapter explains what Aristotle intends by the essentially "political" orientation of the activity of virtue, that is, of the activity constituting human happiness. Aristotle holds that to think assertively of something as being good is to be moved thereby toward it: this being moved is part of or an immediate effect of that thought itself. Due to the essential connection to motivation implied in the very act of understanding something good as good for oneself as a human being, this is a special sort of understanding. Aristotle's analyses and arguments in the Nicomachean Ethics about virtue and its place in a well-lived life. Aristotle reasonably thinks that that way of common living is impossible without the possession and use of the full knowledge of political science. His account in the Politics of the polis "as it exists according to nature" describes such a community.
References
References
Ackrill, J. L. 1972/3, “Aristotle's Definitions of Psyche,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 73: 119–33. (Reprinted in Ackrill, J. L. 1997, Essays on Plato and Aristotle, Oxford.)
Annas, J. 1999, Platonic Ethics Old and New, Ithaca and London.
Balme, D. M. 1987, “Aristotle's Use of Division and Differentiae,” in Gotthelf, and Lennox, 1987, 69–89.
Balme, D. M. 1992, Aristotle: De partibus animalium I and De generatione animalium I (with passages from II. 1–3), Oxford.
Barnes, J. 1981, “Proof and the Syllogism,” in Berti, 1981, 17–59.
Barnes, J (ed.) 1984. The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation, Princeton.
Barnes, J. 1994, Aristotle: Posterior Analytics, 2nd edn., Oxford.
Berti, E. (ed.) 1981, Aristotle on Science: The “Posterior Analytics,”Padua.
Bleier, R. 1984, Science and Gender: A Critique of Biology and its Theories on Women, New York.
Bodéus, R. 1982, Le philosophe et la cité, Paris.
Bodéus, R. 1993, The Political Dimensions of Aristotle's Ethics, trans. J. E. Garrett, Albany.
Bodéus, R. 2000, Aristotle and the Theology of the Living Immortals, Albany. (Original French edn.: Bodéüs, R. 1992, Aristote et la théologie des vivants immortels, Paris and Montreal.)
Bodnár, I. 2005, “Teleology across Natures,” Rhizai 2: 9–29.
Bolton, R. 1993, “Division, définition et essence dans la science aristotélicienne,” Revue Philosophique de la France et de l'Étranger 2: 197–222.
Bolton, R. 1995, “Science and the Science of Substance in Aristotle's Metaphysics Ζ,” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 76: 419–69.
Bolton, R. 2002, “Substance and the Definition of Definition in Aristotle,” in Canto-Sperber, and Pellegrin, 2002, 155–81.
Bostock, D. 1994, Aristotle's Metaphysics, Books Z and H, Oxford.
Broadie, S. 1990, “Nature and Craft in Aristotelian Teleology,” in Devereux, and Pellegrin, 1990, 389–403.
Broadie, S. and Rowe, C. 2002, Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics, Translation, Introduction, and Commentary, Oxford.
Brunschwig, J. 1981, “L'objet et la structure des Seconds Analytiques d'après Aristote,” in Berti, 1981, 61–96.
Burnet, J. 1900, Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics, London.
Burnyeat, M. F. 1984, Notes on Eta and Theta of Aristotle's Metaphysics, Oxford.
Burnyeat, M. F. 1990, The Theatetus of Plato, trans. M. J. Levett, revised by M. F. Burnyeat, Indianapolis.
Burnyeat, M. F. 2001, A Map of Metaphysics Zeta, Pittsburgh.
Burnyeat, M. F. 2004, “Introduction: Aristotle on the Foundations of Sublunary Physics,” in Haas, and Mansfeld, 2004, 7–24.
Burnyeat, M. F. 2008, “Kinēsis vs. Energeia: A Much-Read Passage in (but not of) Aristotle's Metaphysics,” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 34: 219–92.
Canto-Sperber, M. and Pellegrin, P. (eds.) 2002, Le style de la pensée, Paris.
Charles, D. 1984, Aristotle's Philosophy of Action, London.
Charles, D. 1986, “Aristotle: Ontology and Moral Reasoning,” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 4: 119–44.
Charles, D. 1988, “Aristotle on Hypothetical Necessity and Irreducibility,” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 69: 1–53.
Charles, D. 1991, “Teleological Causation in the Physics,” in Aristotle's Physics, ed. Judson, L., Oxford, 101–28.
Charles, D. 1994, “Matter and Form: Unity, Persistence, and Identity,” in Scaltsas, , Charles, , and Gill, 1994, 75–105.
Charles, D. 2000, Aristotle on Meaning and Essence, Oxford.
Charles, D. 2004, “GC I.5: Simple Genesis and Prime Matter,” in Haas, and Mansfeld, 2004, 151–69.
Christ, W. (ed.) 1885, Aristotelis Metaphysica, Leipzig.
Code, A. 1996, “Owen on the Development of Aristotle's Metaphysics,” in Aristotle's Philosophical Development, ed. Wians, W., Lanham, 303–26.
Code, A. 1997, “The Priority of Final Causes over Efficient Causes in Aristotle's PA,” in Kullmann, and Föllinger, 1997, 127–43.
Colli, G. 1955, Aristotele, Organon, Turin.
Cooper, J. M. 1982, “Aristotle on Natural Teleology,” in Language and Logos, ed. Schofield, M. and Nussbaum, M., Cambridge, 197–222.
Cooper, J. M. 1999, Reason and Emotion, Princeton.
Cooper, J. M. 2004, Knowledge, Nature, and the Good, Princeton and Oxford.
Cooper, J. M. 2009, “Nicomachean Ethicsvii 1–2: Introduction, Method, and Puzzles,” in Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, Book VII. Symposium Aristotelicum, ed. Natali, Carlo, Oxford, 9–39.
Haas, F. and Mansfeld, J (eds.) 2004, Aristotle's On Generation and Corruption, Book I. Symposium Aristotelicum, Oxford.
Denniston, J. D. 1966, The Greek Particles, 2nd edn. Oxford.
Deslauriers, M. 1998, “Sex and Essence in Aristotle's Metaphysics and Biology,” in Feminist Interpretations of Aristotle, ed. Freeland, Cynthia, University Park, 138–67.
Devereux, D. and Pellegrin, P. (eds.) 1990, Biologie, Logique et Métaphysique chez Aristote, Paris.
Diels, H. and Kranz, W. 1951, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, 3 vols., 6th edn., Dublin and Zurich.
Duke, E. A., Hicken, W. F., Nicoll, W. S. M., Robinson, D. B., and Strachan, J. C. G. (eds.) 1995, Platonis opera, vol. i, Oxford.
Düring, I. 1943, Aristotle's De partibus animalium: Critical and Literary Commentaries, Göteborg.
Elshtain, J. B. 1981, Public Man, Private Woman, Princeton.
Falcon, A. 2005, Aristotle and the Science of Nature, Cambridge.
Frede, M. 1987, “Categories in Aristotle,” Essays in Ancient Greek Philosophy, Minneapolis, 29–48.
Frede, M. 1990, “The Definition of Sensible Substances inMetaphysics Z,” in Devereux and Pellegrin 1990, 113–29.
Frede, M. 1994, “Potentiality in the Metaphysics,” in Scaltsas, , Charles, , and Gill, 1994, 188–93.
Frede, M. and Patzig, G. 1988, Aristoteles Metaphysik Z, Munich.
Freeland, C. 1987, “Aristotle on Bodies, Matter, and Potentiality,” in Gotthelf, and Lennox, 1987, 392–407.
Furley, D. 1985, “The Rainfall Example in Physics ii.8,” in Gotthelf, 1985a, 177–82.
Gerson, L. P. 2005, Aristotle and Other Platonists, Ithaca and London.
Gill, M. L. 1989, Aristotle on Substance: The Paradox of Unity, Princeton.
Gill, M. L. 1995, “Aristotle on Substance and Predication,” Ancient Philosophy 15: 511–20.
Gill, M. L. 2003, “The Unity of Substances in Metaphysics H.6,” (in Portuguese) in Cadernos de História e Filosofia da Ciência, Series 3, 13: 177–203.
Gill, M. L. 2008, “Form–Matter Predication in Metaphysics Θ.7,” in Dunamis: Autour de la puissance chez Aristote, ed. Crubelier, M., Jaulin, A., and Lefebvre, D., Leuven, 391–427.
Gill, M. L. 2009, “The Divine Method in Plato's Philebus,” in Plato's Philebus. Selected Papers from the Eighth Symposium Platonicum, ed. Dillon, J. and Brisson, L., Augustin, Sankt, 36–46.
Goldin, O. 1996, Explaining an Eclipse. Aristotle's Posterior Analytics 2.1–10, Ann Arbor.
Gotthelf, A. (ed.) 1985a, Aristotle on Nature and Living Things, Pittsburgh and Bristol.
Gotthelf, A. 1985b, “Notes towards a Study of Substance and Essence in Aristotle's Parts of Animals ii–iv,” in Gotthelf, 1985a, 27–54.
Gotthelf, A. 1987, “First Principles in Aristotle's Parts of Animals,” in Gotthelf, and Lennox, 1987, 167–98.
Gotthelf, A. 1989, “The Place of the Good in Aristotle's Natural Teleology,” in Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy vol. iv, ed. Cleary, J. J. and Shartin, D., Lanham, MD, 113–39.
Gotthelf, A. 1997a, “Division and Explanation in Aristotle's Parts of Animals,” in Beiträge zur antiken Philosophie. Festschrift für Wolfgang Kullmann, ed. Hans-Christian Günther, and Rengakos, A., Stuttgart, 215–30.
Gotthelf, A. 1997b, “The Elephant's Nose: Further Reflections on the Axiomatic Structure of Biological Explanation in Aristotle,” in Kullmann, and Föllinger, 1997, 85–96.
Gotthelf, A. 1997c, “Understanding Aristotle's Teleology,” in Final Causality in Nature and Human Affairs, ed. Hassling, R. F., Washington, 71–85.
Gotthelf, A. and Lennox, J. G. (eds.) 1987, Philosophical Issues in Aristotle's Biology, Cambridge.
Gregoric, P. 2005, “Plato's and Aristotle's Explanation of Human Posture,”Rhizai 2: 183–96.
Halper, E. 1989, One and Many in Aristotle's Metaphysics, Columbus.
Harte, V. 1996, “Aristotle's Metaphysics H6: a Dialectic with Platonism,” Phronesis 41: 276–304.
Hayduck, M. (ed.), 1981, Alexander: Aristotelis Metaphysica commentaria, Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca, vol. i, Berlin.
Henry, D. 2006a, “Aristotle on the Mechanism of Inheritance,” Journal for the History of Biology 39: 425–55.
Henry, D. 2006b, “Understanding Aristotle's Reproductive Hylomorphism,” Apeiron 39.3: 269–300.
Irwin, T. H. 1990, “The Good of Political Activity,” in Aristoteles' Politik, ed. Patzig, G., Göttingen, 73–98.
Jaeger, W. (ed.) 1957, Aristotelis Metaphysica, Oxford.
Johnson, M. R. 2005, Aristotle on Teleology, Oxford.
Judson, L. 1991, “Chance and ‘Always or For the Most Part,’” in Aristotle's Physics, ed. Judson, L., Oxford, 73–99.
Judson, L. 2005, “Aristotelian Teleology,” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 29: 341–66.
Kahn, C. H. 1985, “The Place of the Prime Mover in Aristotle's Teleology,” in Gotthelf, 1985a, 183–205.
Keyt, D. 1991, “Three Basic Theorems in Aristotle's Politics,” in A Companion to Aristotle's Politics, ed. Keyt, D. and Miller, F., London, 54–79.
Kosman, A. 1984, “Substance, Being and Energeia: The Argument of Metaphysics Theta,” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 2: 121–49.
Kosman, A. 1987, “Animals and Other Beings in Aristotle,” in Gotthelf, and Lennox, 1987, 360–91.
Kullmann, W. and Föllinger, S. (eds.) 1997, Aristotelische Biologie: Intentionen, Methoden, Ergebnisse, Stuttgart.
Lamb, C. 1823, “A Dissertation upon Roast Pig,” Essays of Elia, London.
Lear, G. R. 2004, Happy Lives and the Highest Good, Princeton.
Lee, Mi-Kyoung 2005, Epistemology after Protagoras, Oxford.
Lennox, J. G. 1985, “Theophrastus on the Limits of Teleology,” in Theophrastus of Eresus: On his Life and Works, ed. Fortenbaugh, W. W., Huby, P. M., and Long, A. A., New Brunswick, NJ and Oxford, 143–64. (Reprinted in Lennox 2001b, 259–79.)
Lennox, J. G. 1987a, “Divide and Explain: the Posterior Analytics in Practice,” in Gotthelf, and Lennox, 1987, 90–119. (Reprinted in Lennox 2001b, 7–32.)
Lennox, J. G. 1987b, “Kinds, Forms of Kinds, and the More and the Less in Aristotle's Biology,” in Gotthelf, and Lennox, 1987, 339–59. (Reprinted in Lennox 2001b, 160–81.)
Lennox, J. G. 1996. “Putting Philosophy of Science to the Test: The Case of Aristotle's Biology,” in PSA Proceedings: 1994, vol. ii, ed. Forbes, M., Hull, D., and Burian, R., East Lansing, 239–47.
Lennox, J. G. 2001a, Aristotle: On the Parts of Animals I–IV, Oxford.
Lennox, J. G. 2001b, Aristotle's Philosophy of Biology: Studies in the Origins of Life Science, Cambridge.
Lennox, J. G. 2005a, “Getting a Science Going: Aristotle on Entry Level Kinds,” in Wolters, and Carrier, 2005, 87–100.
Lennox, J. G. 2005b, “The Place of Zoology in Aristotle's Natural Philosophy,” in Sharples, 2005a, 58–70.
Lennox, J. G. 2010, “Bios and Explanatory Unity in Aristotle's Biology,” in Definition in Greek Philosophy, ed. Charles, D., Oxford, chapter 9.
Lewis, F. 1991, Substance and Predication in Aristotle, Cambridge.
Lewis, F. 1994, “Aristotle on the Relation between a Thing and its Matter,” in Scaltsas, , Charles, , and Gill, 1994, 247–77.
Lewis, F. 1995, “Aristotle on the Unity of Substance,” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 76: 222–65. (Reprinted in Lewis, F. A. and R. Bolton [eds.] 1996, Form, Matter, and Mixture in Aristotle, Oxford, 39–81.)
Liddell, H. G., Scott, R., and Jones, H. S. 1940, A Greek–English Lexicon, Oxford.
Liddell, H. G., Scott, R., and Jones, H. S. 1996, A Greek–English Lexicon, 9th edn. revised, Oxford.
Lloyd, G. E. R. 1966, Polarity and Analogy, Cambridge.
Lloyd, G. E. R. 1990, “Aristotle's Zoology and his Metaphysics,” in Devereux, and Pellegrin, 1990, 7–35.
Lloyd, G. E. R. 1993, “L'idée de la nature dans la Politique d'Aristote,” in Aristote, Politique, ed. Aubenque, P., Paris, 135–59. (Eng. trans. in Lloyd, G. E. R. 1996, Aristotelian Investigations, Cambridge, 184–204.)
Loux, M. J. 1995a, “APA Symposium on Aristotle's Metaphysics,” Ancient Philosophy 15: 495–510.
Loux, M. J. 1995b, “Composition and Unity: An Examination of Metaphysics Η.6,” in The Crossroads of Norm and Nature: Essays on Aristotle's Ethics and Metaphysics, ed. Sim, May, Lanham, 242–79.
Maier, H. 1896–1900, Die Syllogistik des Aristoteles, 3 vols., Tübingen.
Makin, S. 2003, “What Does Aristotle Mean by Priority in Substance?,” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 34: 209–38.
Makin, S. 2006, Aristotle: Metaphysics Book Θ, Oxford.
Mansion, S. 1976, Le jugement d'existence chez Aristote, 2nd edn., Louvain.
Matthen, M. 2001, “The Holistic Presuppositions of Aristotle's Cosmology,” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 20: 171–99.
Mayhew, R. 2004, The Female in Aristotle's Biology: Reason or Rationalization, Chicago.
McDowell, J. 1973, Plato's Theaetetus, Oxford.
McDowell, J. 1979, “Virtue and Reason,” The Monist 72: 331–50.
McKirahan, R. D. 1992, Principles and Proofs: Aristotle's Theory of Demonstrative Science, Princeton.
Mignucci, M. 1975, L'argomentazione dimostrativa in Aristotele: commento agli Analytici Secondi, vol. i, Padua.
Modrak, D. 2001, Aristotle's Theory of Language and Meaning, Cambridge.
Modrak, D. 2007, “Form and Function,” Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy 22: 111–35.
Mure, G. R. G. 1928, Analytica posteriora: The Works of Aristotle Translated into English, Oxford.
Osborne, C. 1988, “Topography in the Timaeus: Plato and Augustine on Mankind's Place in the Natural World,” Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 214: 104–14.
Peck, A. L. (trans.) 1963, Aristotle: Generation of Animals, London and Cambridge, MA.
Pellegrin, P. 1982, La classification des Animaux chez Aristote, Paris.
Pellegrin, P. 1985, “Zoology without Species,” in Gotthelf, 1985a, 95–115.
Pellegrin, P. 2002, “Les ruses de la nature et l'éternité du mouvement. Encore quelques remarques sur la finalité chez Aristote,” in Canto-Sperber, and Pellegrin, 2002, 296–323.
Pellegrin, P. 2005, Aristote: Seconds Analytiques Organon IV, Paris.
Peramatzis, M. 2008, “Aristotle's Notion of Priority in Nature and Substance,” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 35: 187–247.
Reeve, C. D. C. 1998, Aristotle: Politics. Indianapolis and Cambridge.
Reeve, C. D. C. 2002, Substantial Knowledge, Indianapolis.
Reydams-Schils, G. 1997, “Plato's World Soul: Grasping Sensibles without Sense-perception,” in Interpreting the Timaeus–Critias, ed. Calvo, T. and Brisson, L., Augustin, Sankt, 261–5.
Rhenius, R. 2005, Die Einheit der Substanzen bei Aristoteles, Berlin.
Romeyer Dherbey, G. 1996, Corps et Ame: Sur le De Anima d'Aristote, Paris.
Rorty, R. 1973, “Genus as Matter: A Reading of Metaphysics Z–H,” in Exegesis and Argument (Suppl. vol. i of Phronesis), ed. Lee, E. N., Mourelatos, A. P. D., and Rorty, R. M., New York, 393–420.
Ross, W. D. 1924, Aristotle's Metaphysics, 2 vols., Oxford.
Ross, W. D. 1928, Metaphysica. The Works of Aristotle Translated into English, Oxford.
Ross, W. D. 1949, Aristotle's Prior and Posterior Analytics, Oxford.
Scaltsas, T. 1994, “Substantial Holism,” in Scaltsas, , Charles, , and Gill, 1994, 107–28.
Scaltsas, T., Charles, D., and Gill, M. L. (eds.) 1994, Unity, Identity and Explanation in Aristotle's Metaphysics, Oxford.
Sedley, D. 1991, “Is Aristotle's Teleology Anthropocentric?,” Phronesis 36: 179–96.
Sedley, D. 2000a, “The Ideal of Godlikeness,” in Plato, vol. ii, ed. Fine, G., Oxford, 309–28.
Sedley, D. 2000b, “Metaphysics Lambda 10,” in Aristotle's Metaphysics Lambda, ed. Frede, M. and Charles, D., Oxford, 327–50.
Sedley, D. 2005, “Les origines des preuves stoïciennes de l'existence de dieu,” Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 4: 461–87.
Sedley, D. 2007, Creationism and its Critics in Antiquity, Berkeley and Los Angeles.
Sellars, W. 1967, “Aristotle's Metaphysics: An Introduction,” Philosophical Perspectives, Springfield.
Sharples, R. W. 1983, Alexander of Aphrodisias on Fate, London.
Sharples, R. W. 2003, “Threefold Providence: The History and Background of a Doctrine,” in Ancient Approaches to Plato's Timaeus, ed. Sharples, R. W. and Sheppard, A., London, 107–27.
Sharples, R. W. (ed.) 2005a, Philosophy and the Sciences in Antiquity, London.
Sharples, R. W. 2005b, “Some Thoughts on Aristotelian Form: With Special Reference to Metaphysics Z.8,” Science in Context 18: 93–109.
Shorey, P. 1924, “The Origin of Syllogism,” Classical Philology 19: 1–19.
Smyth, H. W. 1984, Greek Grammar, Cambridge.
Solmsen, F. 1929, Die Entwicklung der aristotelischen Logik und Rhetorik, Berlin.
Solmsen, F. 1963, “Nature as Craftsman in Greek Thought,” Journal of the History of Ideas 24: 473–96.
Sorabji, R. 1980, Necessity, Cause and Blame, London.
Todd, R. B. 1976, “The Four Causes: Aristotle's Exposition and the Ancients,” Journal of the History of Ideas 37: 319–22.
Tricot, J. 1962, Les Seconds analytiques, Paris.
Verdenius, W. J. 1981, “Notes on Some Passages from Book i,” in Berti, 1981, 343–57.
Villee, C. A. and Dethier, V. G. 1971, Biological Principles and Processes, Philadelphia.
Wallies, M. (ed.) 1900, Themistius: In Analyticorum posteriorum paraphrasis, Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca, vol. v.1, Berlin.
Wallies, M. (ed.) 1909, Philoponus: In Aristotelis Analytica posteriora commentaria cum Anonymo in Librum II, Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca, vol. xiii.3, Berlin.
Wardy, R. 1993, “Aristotelian Rainfall or the Lore of Averages,” Phronesis 38: 18–30.
Wardy, R. 2005, “The Mysterious Aristotelian Olive,” Science in Context 18: 69–91.
Watson, J. D. 1970, Molecular Biology of the Gene, New York.
Witt, C. 1989, Substance and Essence in Aristotle, Ithaca.
Wolters, G. and Carrier, M. (eds.) 2005, Homo Sapiens und Homo Faber, Berlin.
Zabarella, J. 1594, In duos Aristotelis libros Posteriores analyticos commentarii (in Opera Logica), Bale.

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Book summary page views

Total views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between #date#. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.