World's Great Philosophers:
The Early Greeks
Socrates And Plato
Epicurus, Zeno, Pyrrho
Read More Articles About: World's Great Philosophers
( Originally Published Early 1900's )
Aristotle is credited with being almost everything except a god. He was too much a man of science for that. He is said to have been the first to collect a library. He was the first man to make a study of animals and to attempt a classification of living creatures. He was the inventor of the art of logic. He was the originator of "categories." He is said to have received more remuneration for his books than any other writer before or since his time; specifically, a sum that is the equivalent of one million dollars. He was the beginning of physical science. He taught the first approach to a rational theory of the world, or, at least suggested that by observation alone can man learn of his body or of his mind. He was the master of Alexander the Great and from Philip, King of Mace don, he received this letter, which, in view of later events and the glory of his immortal pupil, conveys a compliment from monarch to scholar that is unparalleled in history.
"Philip to Aristotle, wishing health :
"Be informed that I have a son, and that I am thankful to the gods not so much for his birth as that he was born in the same age with you; for if you will undertake the charge of his education I assure myself that he will become worthy of his father, and of the kingdom which he will inherit."
The tender was indeed an inviting one and Aristotle accepted it. He went to Macedon and was quartered in the palace of Philip. At this time the future conqueror of the world had just entered into his fifteenth year. But we will see more of this in another place and soon.
It was in the 99th Olympiad, or about 384 B.C., that Aristotle was born. His native Stagira, or Stageira, was a city of Macedonia, in the Greek colony of Thrace, sited on the western shore of the Strymonic Gulf. The father of the philosopher was Nicomachus, a physician and a learned man. He claimed lineage from Macaon, who was himself a grandson of AEsculapius, but this descent is fabulous. As a child Aristotle was placed under the tuition of Proxenus, of Atarna, in Mysia. Among his other graces the Stagirite possessed the rare and beautiful virtue gratitude. He never forgot. his friends. When he grew great he erected a monument to the memory of the tutor of his childhood days and adopted the son of Proxenus, Nicanor, as his heir, and instructed him in the liberal sciences.
The precocity of the Aristotelian mind and character is almost incredible. His parents died while he was still a boy, and Aristotle, when he came into his patrimony, turned his attention from his studies to the lavish expenditure of his newly acquired wealth. It is said that he plunged into dissipation and debauchery. Perhaps this was well, for when his estates were all flung to the winds by the excesses he practised, the problem of debit and credit faced him and led him to philosophy. He entered the army a mere boy. But the camp was not suited to the pupil of Proxenus and he soon tired of the alternate business and idleness of the bivouac and the barracks. Giving up arms as a profession, he knew not which way to turn and in this perplexity he consulted the oracle at Delhi. There he was told to go to Athens and study philosophy.
When he entered the famed and brilliant city, Aristotle was only 18 years old. Plato was then teaching his peculiar doctrines from under the delicious shades of the sycamores at the Academy, and to the Academy the youth from Macedonia went. From Laertius we learn that Aristotle was of small stature. His legs were thin, his frame slender, his voice high pitched to the extreme of squeakiness. His eyes were small, but full of passionate wonder and of the light of deep desire for knowledge. Intensely active and restless, he could not contain himself and be still for any length of time at all. He was only at ease when his body was in motion. Afterwards, when he himself became a master, he could not deliver his lectures while standing, but walked up and down, here and there, and so won for himself the title of the Peripatetic Philosopher, and his school became known as the Peripatetics.
This deep-reaching young intellect soon saw through the thin philosophy of Plato, which it so readily and thoroughly mastered as to win from the founder of the Academic school unstinted and spontaneous praise. Plato called him "The Mind of the School." And when he was absent from the Academy Plato would say: "Intellect is not here." For twenty years he was a familiar figure in the garden of plane-trees. Meanwhile, he was thinking for himself and working out in his marvelous brain that scheme of things which was to rule the mind of man with despotic and cruel sway for fifteen centuries. There has been no more independent thinker than Aristotle. If Socrates can be called an epoch-maker what shall we call Aristotle? But although Aristotle did not accept the system of Plato with all its unintelligible terminology, he did not found his own school until after the master's death.
He had listened in the Academy. He was grateful for what he had learned, even though to his observing and somewhat common-sense mind, the Platonic system was a mere metaphysic, a logomachy in which one turned round and round in a maze of words to dizziness. The innate delicacy of Aristotle's nature here again manifested itself. How admirable of him to erect a monument to Plato as he had to Proxenus ! The epitaph he wrote himself :
To Plato's sacred name this tomb is reared,
He likewise wrote elegiacs to the memory of his master and an eulogium on his character. A score of years' association with a man, and that man a teacher, could have but one effect on AristotleŚreverence, if not love. We may therefore discredit the story of Aristoxenus that Plato and his "Intellect" of the Academy quarreled.
But when Speusippus succeeded Plato in the Academy Aristotle was in no mood to linger longer in Athens. He was now nearing the age of 40 and he had long been eminent as an able if not an original philosopher. He was not the man to content himself sitting at the feet of a teacher whom he knew to be inferior to himself. His memory probably reverted to the sunny days of his boy-hood, which were spent under the tender care of his old master in Atarna. Hermias, who was now the King of Atarna, had been his friend and his fellow student, and Aristotle decided upon paying him a visit at his capital. Hermias renewed the friendship with every mark of esteem and consideration. With a comfortable lodgement in the palace of the king, Aristotle was enabled to pursue his studies and push those researches which were after-wards to give him the reputation of the greatest of the philosophers. For three years he was the guest of his royal and gracious co-disciple. But ill fortune now put an end to this delightful association. Memnon, the Rhodian, captured Hermias and sent him to the Persian monarch Artaxerxes, who ordered him killed. Again we see the noble character of Aristotle revealed. Hermias destroyed, his personal property was seized and his royal sister left a beggar. The memory of Hermias was preserved by Aristotle, who placed a statue in the temple at Delphos in honor of his dead patron, and made the sister his wife. Soon afterwards the philosopher left Atarna, probably to escape the sad associations of the place, and took up his residence at Mitylene. Meanwhile his fame continued to grow, and he had lived in his new abode but two years when King Philip, hearing of his talent and his great learning, engaged him as tutor for Alexander.
When he repaired to Macedon Aristotle was ripe in years, learning, and experience. One who carefully studies the biographies of both men cannot but be struck with a similarity between many aspects of the characters of Aristotle and Bacon. The versatility and originality of both are proverbial. Both were close observers of nature. Both were rhetoricians of the highest type. Aristotle invented, we may say, the art of rhetoric. Bacon created new words and enriched the English language with numerous forms. One can escape the charge of Baconianism and yet compare the "Promus" with the Aristotelian rhetoric. A study of the former work, now happily written within the reach of the student of English through the indefatigable industry of Mrs. Pott, will more than pay for the time so spent. Bacon found leisure for the consideration of political science as well as philosophy. Aristotle, when he took the young prince in his charge, was familiar with courts and kings and if not a Machiavelli was at least a competent master for a youth who was destined to rule over men.
Philip received the distinguished scholar with a cordiality and deference commensurate with the latter's dignity and learning. The King and the Queen gave ring that full confidence that was really necessary to the adequate fulfillment of the important task before him. He was loaded with honor, not of the empty kind that too often, even now, falls to the lot of the man of science after the fashion of the French statesman who proposed that he would make dukes so common that the title would confer no honor on those who possessed it, while not to be a duke would be a burning shame. On the contrary, he was given substantial emolument and a high place in the councils of the state. Aristotle used his power for the public good, preferring that to private gain. The city of his birth, Stagira. which had been destroyed, was restored, at his request, by Philip, and the status of its citizens reestablished. In grateful remembrance of this deed the people of Stagira instituted an annual festival in honor of the philosopher.
Of Aristotle's preceptorship of Alexander there are conflicting stories. It is said that the philosopher instructed his princely pupil in politics, ethics, and the philosophy of the time as well as in his own peculiar theories and metaphysics. It is also related that the Prince was taught the beauties of Homer and that Aristotle in this way instilled into the plastic mind of his charge the love of heroic deeds, and that admiration of conquest which were afterwards to give the life of Alexander its bent. When Alexander's education was finished Aristotle left him, but the two corresponded for a long time and until there came the breach between them that was never healed. On bidding good-bye to Alexander Aristotle commended to the Prince Callisthenes, the nephew and the pupil of the master. Callisthenes accompanied Alexander on his famous Asiatic expedition, but unfortunately, presuming upon his standing as a philosopher, he made light of the ruler's dignity and incurred the great displeasure of Alexander. On the pretext that Callisthenes was conspiring against the state Alexander ordered the philosopher put to death. For this he was never forgiven by Aristotle, and Alexander in turn used his power and influence to harass _ his old master as much as was possible. It was this resentment that led Alexander to promote the interests of Xenocrates, who became the head of the Academy through the efforts of his royal patron.
When Aristotle returned to Athens, possibly with the intention of himself taking the principalship of the now famous school, he found Xenocrates installed in Plato's place. It was this fact that induced Aristotle to desert the Academy and open a school of his own in the Lyceum. "It will be shameful for me to be silent when Xenocrates speaks," he said.
The capacity of the two men was well gauged by Plato, who said that for Aristotle he needed reins, while for Xenocrates he needed spurs. If Plato gave us the word Academy, Aristotle gave us the word Lyceum. The garden in which Plato taught was named for Academus, the original owner of the ground. The Lyceum was likewise a suburban garden, deriving its name from the fane of Apollo, erected within it to the honor of the god as a slayer of wolves. In the Lyceum Aristotle taught his philosophy to those who came to hear. But he divided the hours of the day between pupils who were capable of understanding his metaphysics and those whose minds were not yet sufficiently advanced for these abstruse studies. This custom gave rise to the belief that Aristotle, like Pythagoras, taught an esoteric and an exoteric doctrine, but this view has not been substantiated.
For twelve years the Stagirite taught in the Lyceum and made numerous friends, but at the same time he was not free from enmities. So long as Alexander lived his person was free from injury, and he was not subjected to open insult. Yet the novelty of his doctrine and his strikingly original methods were displeasing to many. When Alexander died his enemies were free to harass him and Aristotle feared the persecution of those who had small respect for learning and who had been embittered by the great distinction he had wor as the teacher of the world-renowned Alexander. Eurymedon, a priest, was induced to lodge charges of impiety against the Peripatetic and of these charges Aristotle too well knew he was guilty. He deserted the Lyceum and departed forever from Athens before he could be brought to a trial. Retiring to Chalcis he there remained until his death, spending his last days in teaching the few faithful disciples who followed him thither.
The founder of the Peripatetic school lived to the age of 63, and might have endured to be much older were it not for his peculiar habits of life. It is said that so passionate was his love of study and meditation that he allowed himself little time for his meals and even less for sleep. While in bed he thought. And lest he should waste valuable time in too much slumber he devised a manner of keeping himself awake that was hardly short of the diabolical. At his bedside he placed a vessel of brass. Over this basin he extended one of his hands, in which was clasped a small iron ball. When overcome by somnolence, the muscles of the hand relaxed, the ball of iron was released, and the sound of its contact with the metal of the basin immediately and thoroughly aroused him. The wisdom of this procedure is questionable, and what the wonderful brain of this man might have done had he allowed it the refreshment of sleep there is no saying.
Great as was the founder of the Aristotelian system, he vas not without his foibles and failures. Not naturally attractive of person, he sought to remedy the defect by a scrupulous attention to dress. His hair was always neatly trimmed, his face clean shaven, and his attire rich, even fanciful. He, the philosopher, was not above wearing finger rings and bedecking his body with ornaments and jewels. As was natural with a man of his habits, he suffered from disorders of the nervous system, and was a victim of indigestion, a malady he mitigated by a careful attention to his diet.
According to one account he died at the age of 70, after having taken a dose of aconite and the same historian is authority for the statement that Aristotle was as old as 30 years when he first met Plato. Modern scholars, how-ever, have generally accepted the biographical data first given here, and believe that the earlier account is the true one. After the death of Pythias, his first wife, the sister of his friend Hermias, he wedded Herpyllis, a native of his own city, who bore to him a son, whom he named for the child's grandfather, Nicomachus. To this son he dedicated his work, "Greater Morals." While in friendly relations with Alexander, Aristotle was enabled to make his celebrated biological collection. The King sent expeditions, numbering in all several thousand persons, into many parts of Europe and Asia. The fruits of these expeditions including birds, animals, and fishes of every available species, were expressed to the philosopher at Athens, where Aristotle, after much time spent in the study of the specimens, wrote his celebrated history of creation or animated nature. The work is said to have been expanded into fifty volumes, but of these only a meagre ten now remain.
Of all that Aristotle has left behind there is nothing that brings us into closer touch with his personality than his will. That the reader may have the pleasure of seeing for himself the disposition the great man made of his, worldly effects, the will is here transcribed in part : "Many things turn out well; but if anything happens to him, in that case Aristotle has made the following disposition of his affairs : That Antipater shall be the general and universal executor. And until Nicanor marries my daughter, I appoint Aristomedes, Timarchus, Hipparchus, Dioteles, and Theophrastus, if he will consent and accept the charge, to be the guardians of my children and of Herpyllis, and the trustees of all the property I leave behind me; and I desire them, when my daughter is old enough, to give her in marriage to Nicanor; but if anything should happen to the girl, which may God forbid, either before or after she is married, but before she has any children, then I will that Nicanor shall have the absolute disposal of my son, and of all other things, in the full confidence that he will arrange them in a manner worthy of me and of himself. Let him also be the guardian of my daughter and son Nicomachus, to act as he pleases with respect to them, as if he were their father or their brother. But if anything should happen to Nicanor, which may God forbid, either before he receives my daughter in marriage, or after he is married to her, or before he has any children by her, then any arrangements which he may make by will shall stand. But if Theophrastus, in this case, should choose to take my daughter in marriage, then he is to stand exactly in the same position as Nicanor. And if not, then I will that my trustees, consulting with Antipater concerning the boy and the girl, shall arrange everything respecting them as they shall think fit; and that my trustees and Nicanor, remembering both me and Herpyllis, and how well she has behaved to me, shall take care, if she be inclined to take a husband, that one be found for her that shall not be unworthy of us: and shall give her, in addition to all that Iii has been already given her, a talent of silver, and three maid servants, if she please to accept them, and the handmaid whom she has now, and the boy, Pyrrhaeus. And if she likes to dwell at Chalcis, she shall have the house which joins the garden; but if she likes to dwell in Stagira." then she shall have my father's house. And whichever of these houses she elects to take, I will that my executors do furnish it with all necessary furniture, in such manner as shall seem to them and to Herpyllis to be sufficient. And let Nicanor be the guardian of the child Myrmex, so that he shall be conducted to his friends in a manner worthy of us, with all of his property which I received.
"I also will that Aubracis shall have her liberty, and that there shall be given to her when her daughter is married, 500 drachmas, and the handmaid whom she now has, and I will that there be given to Thales, besides the hand-maiden whom she now has, who was bought for her, 1,000 drachmas and another handmaid. And to Timon, in addition to the money that has been given to him before for another boy, an additional slave, or a sum of money which shall be equivalent. I also will that Tychon shall have his liberty when his daughter is married, and Philon and Olympius, and his son. Moreover, of those two boys who wait upon me, I will that none shall be sold, but my executors may use them, and when they are grown up, they shall emancipate them if they deserve it.
"I desire, too, that my executors will take under their care the statues which it has been entrusted to Gryllion to make, that when they are made they may be erected in their proper places; and so, too, shall the statues of Nicanor and of Proxenus, which I was intending to give him a commission for, and also that of the mother of Nicanor. I wish them also to erect in its proper place the statue of Arimnestes, which is already made, that it may be a memorial of her, since she has died childless. I wish them also to dedicate a statue of my mother to Ceres at Nemea, or wherever else they think fit. And wherever they bury me, there I desire that they shall also place the bones of Pythias (his first wife), having taken them up from the place where they now lie, as she herself enjoined. And I desire that Nicanor, as he has been preserved, will perform the vow which I made on his behalf, and dedicate some figures of animals in stone (4 cubits high), to Jupiter the Savior, and Minerva the Savior, in Stagira."
Among other fancies of the great philosopher was one he had for the collection of dishes. It is said that he was accustomed to bathe in warm oil, and to dispose of the oil used in this way by selling it.
Aristotle was not a wit, but many wise sayings are quoted as his. Once when he was asked why he had given alms to a beggar, he replied : "I do not pity the man him-self, but his state pains me." Frequently he was wont to say : "Sight receives light from the air surrounding it, and in like manner, The soul receives light from science." When he was requested for the definition of a friend, he replied : "One soul that abides in two bodies." His delicate appreciation of the slightest favor or kindness is exposed in one of his apothegms. Asked what grew old most speedily, he answered, "Gratitude." But he himself was an exception to his own rule. "What is hope?" he was asked. "The dream of a waking man," he replied. Diogenes found no instrument for his cynicisms in the Stagyrite. Once the Cynic offered the Peripatetic a dry fig. Knowing that if he refused the gift "the Dog" had ready his sally, as usual, Aristotle accepted it, thus depriving Diogenes of both his badinage and fig.
When, at another time, Diogenes offered him a similar gift and Aristotle took it and held it up in the manner of a child, saying : "O Great Diogenes," and returned it to the giver.
Of learning he said that its root was bitter but its fruit was sweet. Some men, he said, were as miserly as if they believed they would live forever; others so extravagant as if they expected to die within an hour. When he was asked why it was that beauty of face and figure were the most attractive qualities of men and women, he replied that the question was one for a blind man to ask. Of personal beauty Aristotle is quoted as saying that it was best of all recommendations; Carneades defined it as "a sovereignty that stood in no need of guards"; Theophrastus as "a silent deceit" ; Theocritus as "an ivory mischief" ; Plato as "the privilege of nature"; Socrates as "a short-lived tyranny."
The educated, said Aristotle, are to the ignorant as the living are to the dead. Philosophy he called a refuge in adversity, an ornament in prosperity. When a man boasted in his presence of being a native of a famous city, he asked the boaster if he was worthy of his home. "Do not wait for those who are behind you," he would say to his pupils, "but rather press upon those who are in advance of you."
To a wag who undertook to ridicule him and asked him if he had not deserved the jeers, Aristotle replied : "I do not know. I have not been listening to you." One of his favorite sayings was: "The man who has friends has no friend."
Aristotle was too precise a thinker to adopt the method of the Ideal philosophy. He admitted that ideas existed, but held that they existed only in the mind. He scouted the notion that they had independent being of their own. He held that Ideas are the production of Reason, and if he did not arrive at the true nature and origin of ideas this was left for modern psychology to discover he at least achieved a great advance by distinctly pointing out the radical error into which his master had fallen. He likened Plato to those who, desiring to find out the exact number of a quantity of things, began by adding to the number they had already to enumerate. Men believed that things were red or black, and heavy. Plato complicated the problem by separating these qualities from the things themselves and establishing the general, independent existences of color and weight. Ideas, then, being merely the mental reflex of the relations between Things, Aristotle concluded that it was Things alone that had existence. And things were known only as they affected the senses. Aristotle's philosophy was really an inductive philosophy. Plato postulated general existences Ideas, General Terms and these existences were taken on faith. From these he came down to particulars. Aristotle reversed this method. He arrived at generals through the consideration of particulars.
Plato's celebrated doctrine of Reminiscence was this : He accounted for the fact that at times the mind seems to recall certain experiences as having been known before, sometime and some place in the past, by his theory of rein-carnation. We see a landscape, a face, a painting; or we hear a sentence or read one, and feel certain that this is not our first acquaintance with the sensation. It seems as if we have beheld the very scene, read or heard the very words, before. They come to us like the memory of a forgotten dream. From this Plato argued that the soul preexisted in another body an impossible explanation, as a little thought will make obvious. Aristotle taught that such reminiscences were due to the experiences in the present life. Plato leaped blindly at his premises and drew his conclusions at his leisure; Aristotle built up his premises with infinite care and arrived at general conclusions tardily. Plato's philosophy was brilliant and inviting. Its terms were beautiful, and easily repeated, even if one did not know precisely what they meant, and there are many modern imitators of the Academicians in this respect; persons who use words and phrases such as "transcendental," "idealism," "the occult," "eternal principles," "the under-lying Cause of all things," "the destiny of the Human Race," implying that they have a perfectly clear conception of these logomachies.
Aristotle, at first, had small use for these indefinite terms. His process was slow and toilsome. "Art commences," he says, "when from a great number of experiences one general conception is formed which will embrace all similar experiences." And again, "If we properly observe celestial phenomena we may demonstrate the laws by which they are regulated." Aristotle proposed a scheme of philosophy very well in its way, but utterly impossible in his time. His results, in so far as physical science is concerned, are scarcely worthy of consideration. His speculations are childish; if not as childish as were similar speculations of Plato, at least pitiably so.
Professor Draper ("Intellectual Development of Europe") thus summarizes the conclusions of Aristotle, physical and metaphysical, leaving out the details of his method : "He asserts that matter contains a triple form simple substance, higher substance, which is eternal, and absolute substance, or God himself; that the universe is immutable and eternal, and, though in relation with the vicissitudes of the world, it is unaffected thereby; that the primitive force which gives rise to all the motions and changes we see is Nature; it also gives rise to Rest; that the world is a living being, having a soul ; that since every-thing is for some particular thing, the soul of man is the end of his body; that Motion is the condition of all nature; that the world has a definite boundary and a limited magnitude; that Space is the immovable vessel in which what-ever is may be moved; that Space, as a whole, is without motion, though its parts may move; that it is not to be conceived of without contents; that it is impossible for a vacuum to exist, and hence there is not beyond and surrounding the world a void which contains the world; that there could be no such thing as Time unless there is a soul, for Time being the number of motion, number is impossible except there be one who numbers; that perpetual motion in a finite right line being impossible, but in a curvilinear path possible, the world, which is limited and even in motion, must be of a spherical form; that the earth is its central part, the heavens its circumferential: hence the heaven is nearest to the prime cause of motion; that the orderly, continuous and unceasing movement of the celestial bodies implies an unmoved mover, for the unchangeable alone can give birth to uniform motion; that unmoved existence is God; that the stars are passionless beings, having attained the end of existence and worthy above other things of human adoration; that the fixed stars are in the outermost heaven, and the sun, moon, and planets beneath; the former receive their motion from the prime moving cause, but the planets are disturbed by the stars; that there are five elements earth, air, fire, water, and ether; that the earth is in the center of the world, since earthy matter settles uniformly round a central point; that fire seeks the circumferential region, and intermediately water floats upon the earth, and air upon water; that the elements are transmutable into one another, and hence many intervening substances arise; that each sphere is interconnection with the others; the earth is agitated and disturbed by the sea, the sea by the winds, which are movements of the air, the air by the sun, moon, and planets.
"Each inferior sphere is controlled by its outlying or superior one, and hence it follows that the earth, which is thus disturbed by the conspiring or conflicting action of all above it, is liable to the most irregularities; that, since animals are nourished by the earth, it needs must enter their composition, but that water is required to hold the earthy matters together; that every element must be looked upon as living, since it is pervaded by the soul of the world; that there is an unbroken chain from the simple element through the plant and animal up to man, the different groups merging by insensible shades into one an-other; thus Zo÷phytes partake partly of the vegetable and partly of the animal, and serve as an intermedium between them; that plants are inferior to animals in this, that they do not possess a single principle of life or soul, but many subordinate ones, as is shown by the circumstance that, when they are cut to pieces each piece is capable of perfect or independent growth or life. Their inferiority is like-wise betrayed by their belonging especially to the earth to which they are rooted, each root being a true mouth; and this again displays their lowly position, for the place of the mouth is ever an indication of the grade of a creature : thus in man, who is at the head of the scale, it is in the upper part of the body; that in proportion to the heat of an animal is its grade higher : thus those that are aquatic are cold, and therefore of very little intelligence, and the same be said of plants; but of man, whose warmth is very great, the soul is much more excellent; that the possession of locomotion by an organism always implies the possession of sensation; that the senses of taste and touch indicate the qualities of things in contact with the organs of the animal, but that those of smell, hearing and sight extend the sphere of its existence and indicate to it what is at a distance; that place of reception of the various sensations is the soul, from which issue forth the emotions; that the blood, as the general element of nutrition, is essential to the support of the body, though insensible in itself; it is also essential to an activity of the soul; that the brain is not the recipient of sensations that function belongs to the heart; all the animal activities are united in the last; it contains the principle of life, being the principle of motion; it is the first part to be formed and the last to die; that the brain is a mere appendix to the heart, since it is formed after the heart, is the coldest of the organs, and is devoid of blood ; that the soul is the reunion of all the functions of the body; it is an energy or active essence; being neither body nor magnitude, it cannot have extension, for thought has no parts, nor can it be said to move in space; it is as a sailor, who is motionless in a ship which is moving; that, in the origin of the organism, the male furnishes the soul and the female the body; that the body being liable to decay and of a transitory nature, it is necessary for its well being that its disintegration and nutrition should balance one another; that sensation may be compared to the impression of a seal on wax, the wax receiving form only, but no sub-stance or matter; that imagination arises from impressions thus made which endure for a length of time, and that this is the origin of the memory; that man alone possesses recollection, but animals share with him memory, memory being unintentional or spontaneous, but recollection implying voluntary exertion or search; that recollection is necessary for acting with design."
There may be those who will say that Aristotle had many true conceptions of things, but it must be remembered that these were like those of the Greeks who preceded him mere guesswork. It was on Memory and its function that he built up his method. Memory retains and revives impressions. Likenesses and differences are qualitatively and quantitatively weighed and measured thus, and so we arrive at truth. This process Aristotle calls Art. Art is possible only to man. His exemplification of Art is as follows : "If you know that a certain remedy has cured Callias of a certain disease and the same remedy has produced the same effect on Socrates, and on several other persons, that is Experience; but to know that a certain remedy will cure all persons attacked with that disease is Art. For Experience is a knowledge of individual things and Art is that of Universals." This is the method of modern science. When he says (in doubt as to a conclusion) : "We must wait for further phenomena, since phenomena are more to be trusted than the conclusions of reason," he utters the universal dictum of Science. But when Aristotle attempted to apply his method he signally failed, and this failure induced him to abandon the rigorous rule he had set down for philosophy and to plunge blindly into speculation that ended nowhere. With Aristotle Induction led to an arid metaphysic; with Bacon it led to the highest generalizations of experience that are now described by the term natural laws.
In his logic Aristotle introduced the syllogism, the principal use of which has been to furnish mental gymnastic exercise for sophomoric collegians in schools where metaphysics has been taught instead of science. Aristotle cut his own fingers deeply with this double-edged instrument of reason. A syllogism consists of a "major premise," a "minor premise," and a "conclusion." For a true conclusion the major premise must be true and must include the minor promise. For examples let us say :
(I.) All men are animals;
(2.) Barabbas is a man : Therefore,
(3.) Barabbas is an animal.
This is a good syllogism. The major premise (I) is true; the minor premise (2) is included, hence the conclusion is true. But if we say :
(I.) All dogs are animals;
(2.) Barabbas is an animal : Ergo,
(3.) Barabbas is a dog,
the syllogism is false, because the major premise does not include the minor, or, in other words, all animals are not dogs. But if we go a little farther we will see that this form of logic will lead to some rather odd conclusions, as for instance :
All that is true is beautiful;
It is true that men steal : Ergo,
Theft is beautiful.
With nonsense such as this have metaphysicians harried the minds of students for centuries. The great major premise has been made to cover innumerable errors, and deductions drawn from the assumed, and false, datum in the first proposition have been held up as demonstrated truths. Thus we may prove that white is black, and that odd is even if only the truth of the major premise be granted. The most sublime absurdities have been held up for ages as absolute truth, because men have granted the major premise. But granting and demonstrating are not precisely the same thing, and that is why the whole scheme of the metaphysics of all the schools is a crumbling and abandoned ruin to-day. Science is not argumentative. It is self-constructive and what it surely builds surely stands.
Aristotle's "Categories" are ten in number: Substance, quantity, quality, relation, action, passion, the where, the when, position in space, possession. A category is a summum genus, and it was Aristotle's delusion that his categories formed a classification to which all things could be referred; that in some one of them any object or any state of mind could be placed. These categories were later called Predicables, but the change of nomenclature did not alter their essential inadequacy. They are totally useless as instruments of investigation. They are not highest genera, and they are redundant when they are not incomplete. Aristotle's syllogism is as useless as his categories. The truth of the conclusion and of the minor premise is demonstrated with the demonstration of the major premise. When we know, for example, that all bodies attract one another with a force that varies in direct ratio to the mass and in inverse ratio to the square of the distance, we have no need of a syllogism to prove that the moon, being a body, so attracts and is so attracted. Both minor premise and conclusion are stated in the formula in which the law of gravitation is laid down.
Were it not that Aristotle's philosophy is upheld to-day by no inconsiderable body of men, much space need not be given it here. He is interesting to us in a measure almost as great as is Gautama, for his philosophy is taught in hundreds of colleges and universities to men who go out into the world with no clearer conception of the Baconian Method and its application to scientific investigation than is derived from the jugglery of the majors and minors of the Aristotelian syllogism. If such schools do not call their philosophy by its honest Greek name it is none the less true that Aristotle and his categories and predicables are the root of it. Floating high up in the dim mists of metaphysical misconception, that philosophy is blind to the running river of progress that flows forward past it on the earth below.