Aristotle

== Transmission ==
{{further | List of writers influenced by Aristotle}}
More than 2300 years after his death, Aristotle remains one of the most influential people who ever lived.{{sfn| Leroi | 2015 | p=8}}{{sfn| Aristotle's Influence | 2018}}<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/16/magazine/whos-more-famous-than-jesus.html|title=Who's More Famous Than Jesus?|newspaper=[[The New York Times]] |date=14 March 2014 |first1=Dwight |last1=Garner.|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210401095825/https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/16/magazine/whos-more-famous-than-jesus.html|archive-date=1 April 2021}}</ref> 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".{{sfn| Magee | 2010 | page=34}}

Among countless other achievements, Aristotle was the founder of [[formal logic]],{{sfn| Guthrie | 1990 | page=156}}<!--{{sfn| Case | p=518}}--> pioneered the study of [[zoology]], and left every future scientist and philosopher in his debt through his contributions to the scientific method.{{sfn| Aristotle (Greek philosopher)}}{{sfn| Durant | 2006 | page=92}}{{sfn| Kukkonen | 2010 | pages=70–77}} Taneli Kukkonen, 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."{{sfn| Kukkonen | 2010 | pages=70–77}} [[Jonathan Barnes]] wrote that "an account of Aristotle's intellectual afterlife would be little less than a history of European thought".{{sfn| Barnes | 1982 | page=86}}

Aristotle has been called the father of logic, biology, political science, zoology, embryology, natural law, scientific method, rhetoric, psychology, realism, criticism, individualism, teleology, and meteorology.{{refn|name=LitList|1=
* "the father of logic": Wentzel Van Huyssteen, Encyclopedia of Science and Religion: A-I, p. 27
* "the father of biology": S. C. Datt, S. B. Srivastava, Science and society, p. 93.{{sfn|Leroi|2015|page=352}}
* "the father of political science": N. Jayapalan, Aristotle, p. 12, Jonathan Wolff, Lectures on the History of Moral and Political Philosophy, p. 48.
* the "father of zoology": Josef Rudolf Winkler, A Book of Beetles, p. 12
* "the father of embryology": D.R. Khanna, Text Book Of Embryology, p. 2
* "the father of natural law": {{cite journal |last=Shellens |first=Max Solomon |title=Aristotle on Natural Law |journal=Natural Law Forum |volume=4 |issue=1 |year=1959 |pages=72–100 |doi=10.1093/ajj/4.1.72 |url=https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1039&context=nd_naturallaw_forum |ref=none}}
* "the father of scientific method": {{cite news |first=Martyn |last=Shuttleworth |url=https://explorable.com/history-of-the-scientific-method/ |title=History of the Scientific Method |newspaper=Explorable |ref=none}}, Riccardo Pozzo (2004) [https://books.google.com/books?id=vayp8jxcPr0C&pg=PA41 ''The impact of Aristotelianism on modern philosophy'']. CUA Press. p. 41. {{ISBN|0-8132-1347-9}}
* "the father of psychology": Margot Esther Borden, Psychology in the Light of the East, p. 4
* "the father of realism": Russell L. Hamm, Philosophy and Education: Alternatives in Theory and Practice, p. 58
* "the father of criticism": Nagendra Prasad, Personal Bias in Literary Criticism: Dr. Johnson, Matthew Arnold, T.S. Eliot, p. 70. [[Henry Home, Lord Kames|Lord Henry Home Kames]], Elements of Criticism, p. 237.
* "the father of meteorology":{{cite news |url=https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/what/what-is-meteorology|title=What is meteorology? |newspaper=Meteorological Office}}{{cite web |url=http://yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1994/5/94.05.01.x.html |title=94.05.01: Meteorology |access-date=16 June 2015 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20160721205842/http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1994/5/94.05.01.x.html |archive-date=21 July 2016 |url-status=dead}}
* "the father of individualism": Allan Gotthelf, Gregory Salmieri, A Companion to Ayn Rand, p. 325.
* "the father of teleology": Malcolm Owen Slavin, Daniel H. Kriegman, The Adaptive Design of the Human Psyche: Psychoanalysis, Evolutionary Biology, and the Therapeutic Process, p. 292.}}

The scholar Taneli Kukkonen notes that "in the best 20th-century scholarship Aristotle comes alive as a thinker wrestling with the full weight of the Greek philosophical tradition."{{sfn|Kukkonen|2010|pp=70–77}} What follows is an overview of the transmission and influence of his texts and ideas into the modern era.

=== His successor, Theophrastus ===
{{Main|Theophrastus | Historia Plantarum (Theophrastus)}}
[[File:161Theophrastus 161 frontespizio.jpg| thumb | upright | [[Book frontispiece|Frontispiece]] to a 1644 version of [[Theophrastus]]'s ''[[Historia Plantarum (Theophrastus)|Historia Plantarum]]'', originally written around 300 BC.]]

Aristotle's pupil and successor, [[Theophrastus]], wrote the ''[[Historia Plantarum (Theophrastus)|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.{{sfn| Hooker | 1831 | page=219}}
Theophrastus was much less concerned with formal causes than Aristotle was, instead pragmatically describing how plants functioned.{{sfn| Mayr | 1982 | pp= 90–91}}{{sfn| Mason | 1979 | p= 46}}

=== Later Greek philosophy ===
{{further | Peripatetic school}}

The immediate influence of Aristotle's work was felt as the [[Lyceum]] grew into the [[Peripatetic school]]. Aristotle's students included [[Aristoxenus]], [[Dicaearchus]], [[Demetrius of Phalerum]], [[Eudemos of Rhodes]], [[Harpalus]], [[Hephaestion]], [[Mnason of Phocis]], [[Nicomachus (son of Aristotle)|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 people|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?"{{sfn| Plutarch | 1919 | p= Part 1, 7:7}}

=== Hellenistic science ===
{{further | Ancient Greek medicine}}

After Theophrastus, the Lyceum failed to produce any original work. Though interest in Aristotle's ideas survived, they were generally taken unquestioningly.{{sfn| Annas | 2001 | page=252}} It is not until the age of [[Alexandria]] under the [[Ptolemaic Kingdom|Ptolemies]] that advances in biology can be again found.

The first medical teacher at Alexandria, [[Herophilos|Herophilus of Chalcedon]], corrected Aristotle, placing intelligence in the brain, and connected the nervous system to motion and sensation. Herophilus also distinguished between [[vein]]s and [[artery|arteries]], noting that the latter [[pulse]] while the former do not.{{sfn| Mason | 1979 | p= 56}} Though a few ancient [[atomism|atomists]] such as [[Lucretius]] challenged the [[teleology|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]] states that there was "nothing of any real consequence in biology after Lucretius and [[Galen]] until the Renaissance."{{sfn| Mayr | 1985 | pp=90–94}}

=== Revival ===
In the slumbering centuries following the decline of the Roman Empire, Aristotle's vast philosophical and scientific corpus lay largely dormant in the West. But in the burgeoning intellectual heartland of the Abbasid Caliphate, his works underwent a remarkable revival.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Gutas |first=Dimitri |title=The Graeco-Arabic Translation Movement in Baghdad and Early 'Abbasaid Society |publisher=Harvard University Press |year=1998 |isbn=978-0415061339 |edition=1st |language=English}}</ref> Translated into Arabic alongside other Greek classics, Aristotle's logic, ethics, and natural philosophy ignited the minds of early Islamic scholars.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Admin |date=2017-02-13 |title=The Reception of Aristotelian Science in Early Islam: A Historical Account |url=https://www.ihc.ucsb.edu/reception-of-aristotelian-science/ |access-date=2024-01-27 |website=Interdisciplinary Humanities Center UCSB |language=en-US}}</ref>

Through meticulous commentaries and critical engagements, figures like [[Al-Farabi]] and [[Avicenna|Ibn Sina]] (Avicenna) breathed new life into Aristotle's ideas. They harmonized his logic with Islamic theology, employed his scientific methodologies to explore the natural world, and even reinterpreted his ethics within the framework of Islamic morality. This revival was not mere imitation. Islamic thinkers embraced Aristotle's rigorous methods while simultaneously challenging his conclusions where they diverged from their own religious beliefs.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Fakhry |first=Professor Majid |title=A History of Islamic Philosophy |publisher=Columbia University Press |year=1987 |isbn=978-0231055338 |edition=2nd |language=English}}</ref>

=== Byzantine scholars ===
{{See also|Commentaries on Aristotle | Byzantine Aristotelianism}}

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 Philoponus, Elias, and David in the sixth century, and [[Stephen of Alexandria]] in the early seventh century.{{sfn| Sorabji | 1990 | pages=20, 28, 35–36}} [[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.{{sfn| Sorabji | 1990 | pages=233–724}} Philoponus questioned Aristotle's teaching of physics, noting its flaws and introducing the [[theory of impetus]] to explain his observations.{{sfn|Lindberg|1992|p=162}}

After a hiatus of several centuries, formal commentary by Eustratius and [[Michael of Ephesus]] reappeared in the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries, apparently sponsored by [[Anna Comnena]].{{sfn|Sorabji|1990|pp=20–21, 28–29, 393–406, 407–408}}

=== Medieval Islamic world ===
{{further|Logic in Islamic philosophy|Transmission of the Greek Classics}}
[[File:Ibn_Bakhtīshūʿ,_Kitāb_naʿt_al-ḥayawān_probably_Baghdad,_c._1225._London,_British_Library,_Or._2784,_A_student_sitting_with_Aristotle_(right).jpg|thumb|upright|Islamic portrayal of Aristotle (right) in the ''[[Kitāb naʿt al-ḥayawān]]'', {{Circa|1220}}.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Contadini |first1=Anna |title=A World of Beasts: A Thirteenth-Century Illustrated Arabic Book on Animals (the Kitāb Na't al-Ḥayawān) in the Ibn Bakhtīshū' Tradition |date=1 January 2012 |doi=10.1163/9789004222656_005 |publisher=Brill |url=https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004222656_005 |page=75}}</ref>]]
Aristotle was one of the most revered Western thinkers in early [[Islamic theology]]. Most of the still extant works of Aristotle,{{sfn|Kennedy-Day|1998}} 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]] greatly admired Aristotle's philosophy,{{sfn|Staley|1989}} and Averroes spoke of Aristotle as the "exemplar" for all future philosophers.{{sfn|Averroes|1953|p=III, 2, 43}} Medieval Muslim scholars regularly described Aristotle as the "First Teacher".{{sfn|Kennedy-Day|1998}} The title was later used by Western philosophers (as in the famous poem of [[Dante Alighieri|Dante]]) who were influenced by the tradition of [[Islamic philosophy]].{{sfn|Nasr|1996|pp=59–60}}

=== Medieval Europe ===
{{further|Aristotelianism|Syllogism#Medieval}}

With the loss of the study of ancient Greek in the early [[medieval]] Latin West, Aristotle was practically unknown there from {{Circa|CE 600}} to {{Circa|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]],{{sfn| Hasse | 2014}} and from the original Greek, such as those by [[James of Venice]] and [[William of Moerbeke]].

After the [[Scholasticism|Scholastic]] Thomas Aquinas wrote his ''[[Summa Theologica]]'', working from Moerbeke's translations and calling Aristotle "The Philosopher",{{sfn|Aquinas|2013}} the demand for Aristotle's writings grew, and the [[Greek language|Greek]] manuscripts returned to the West, stimulating a revival of Aristotelianism in Europe that continued into the [[Renaissance]].{{sfn| Kuhn | 2018}} 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.{{sfn| Lagerlund}}

According to scholar Roger Theodore Lafferty, [[Dante]] built up the philosophy of the ''[[Divine Comedy|Comedy]]'' with the works of Aristotle as a foundation, just as the scholastics used Aristotle as the basis for their thinking. Dante knew Aristotle directly from Latin translations of his works and indirectly through quotations in the works of [[Albert Magnus]].<ref>Lafferty, Roger. "[https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/40165857.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3A55f6bfc22f02768d5dcdc92005228933 The Philosophy of Dante]", pg. 4</ref> Dante even acknowledges Aristotle's influence explicitly in the poem, specifically when Virgil justifies the Inferno's structure by citing the ''[[Nicomachean Ethics]]''.<ref>''Inferno'', Canto&nbsp;XI, lines 70–115, Mandelbaum translation.</ref> Dante famously refers to him as "he / Who is acknowledged Master of those who know".<ref>''Inferno'', Canto&nbsp;IV, lines 115-16 trans., 131 original, Robert Pinksky translation (1994); note to line, p.384</ref>{{sfn| Kukkonen | 2010 | page=74}}

=== Medieval Judaism ===
[[Maimonides|Moses Maimonides]] (considered to be the foremost intellectual figure of medieval Judaism)<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|title=Moses Maimonides|encyclopedia=Britannica|date=26 March 2023 |url=https://www.britannica.com/biography/Moses-Maimonides}}</ref> adopted Aristotelianism from the Islamic scholars and based his ''[[Guide for the Perplexed]]'' on it and that became the basis of Jewish [[scholastic philosophy]]. Maimonides also considered Aristotle to be the greatest philosopher that ever lived, and styled him as the "chief of the philosophers".<ref>Levi ben Gershom, The Wars of the Lord: Book one, Immortality of the soul, p. 35.</ref><ref>Leon Simon, Aspects Of The Hebrew Genius: A Volume Of Essays On Jewish Literature And Thought (1910), p. 127.</ref><ref>Herbert A. Davidson, Herbert A. |q (Herbert Alan) Davidson, Professor of Hebrew Emeritus Herbert Davidson, Moses Maimonides: The Man and His Works, p. 98.</ref> Also, in his letter to [[Samuel ibn Tibbon]], Maimonides observes that there is no need for Samuel to study the writings of philosophers who preceded Aristotle because the works of the latter are "sufficient by themselves and [superior] to all that were written before them. His intellect, Aristotle's is the extreme limit of human intellect, apart from him upon whom the divine emanation has flowed forth to such an extent that they reach the level of prophecy, there being no level higher".<ref>Menachem Kellner, Maimonides on Judaism and the Jewish People, p. 77.</ref>

=== Early Modern science ===
[[File:William Harvey ( 1578-1657) Venenbild.jpg| thumb | [[William Harvey]]'s ''[[Exercitatio Anatomica de Motu Cordis et Sanguinis in Animalibus|De Motu Cordis]]'', 1628, showed that the [[circulation of the blood|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.{{sfn| Aird | 2011 | pp=118–29}} Galileo used more doubtful arguments to displace Aristotle's physics, proposing that bodies all fall at the same speed whatever their weight.{{sfn| Machamer | 2017}}

=== 18th and 19th-century science ===
The English mathematician [[George Boole]] fully accepted Aristotle's logic, but decided "to go under, over, and beyond" it with his system of [[Boolean algebra|algebraic logic]] in his 1854 book ''[[The Laws of Thought]]''. This gives logic a mathematical foundation with equations, enables it to solve equations as well as check [[Validity (logic)|validity]], and allows it to handle a wider class of problems by expanding propositions of any number of terms, not just two.{{sfn|Boole|2003}}

[[Charles Darwin]] regarded Aristotle as the most important contributor to the subject of biology. In an 1882 letter he wrote that "Linnaeus and Cuvier have been my two gods, though in very different ways, but they were mere schoolboys to old Aristotle".<ref name="Wilkins 2009">{{cite book |last=Wilkins |first=John |title=Species: a history of the idea |publisher=[[University of California Press]] | publication-place=Berkeley |year=2009 |isbn=978-0-520-27139-5 |oclc=314379168 |page=15}}</ref><ref name="Pasipoularides 2010">{{cite book |last=Pasipoularides |first=Ares |title=The heart's vortex: intracardiac blood flow phenomena |publisher=People's Medical Publishing House |publication-place=Shelton, Connecticut |year=2010 |isbn=978-1-60795-033-2 |oclc=680621287 |page=118}}</ref> Also, in later editions of the book "[[On the Origin of Species]]', Darwin traced evolutionary ideas as far back as Aristotle;<ref>{{harvnb|Darwin|1872|p=[http://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?viewtype=text&itemID=F391&pageseq=18 xiii]}}</ref> the text he cites is a summary by Aristotle of the ideas of the earlier Greek philosopher [[Empedocles]].<ref>{{cite web |author=Aristotle |title=Physics |url=http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/physics.2.ii.html |access-date=23 April 2009 |publisher=translated by Hardie, R. P. and Gayle, R. K. and hosted by MIT's Internet Classics Archive}}</ref>

=== Present science ===
The philosopher [[Bertrand Russell]] claims that "almost every serious intellectual advance has had to begin with an attack on some Aristotelian doctrine". Russell calls Aristotle's ethics "repulsive", and labelled his logic "as definitely antiquated as Ptolemaic astronomy". Russell states that these errors make it difficult to do historical justice to Aristotle, until one remembers what an advance he made upon all of his predecessors.{{sfn|Russell|1972|loc=Chapter 19 "Aristotle's Metaphysics"}}

The Dutch historian of science [[Eduard Jan Dijksterhuis]] writes that Aristotle and his predecessors showed the difficulty of science by "proceed[ing] so readily to frame a theory of such a general character" on limited evidence from their senses.{{sfn|Dijksterhuis|1969|p=72}} In 1985, the biologist [[Peter Medawar]] could still state in "pure seventeenth century"{{sfn|Leroi|2015|p=353}} 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".{{sfn|Leroi|2015|p=353}}{{sfn|Medawar|Medawar|1984|p=28}}

Zoologists have frequently mocked Aristotle for errors and unverified secondhand reports. However, modern observation has confirmed several of his more surprising claims.<ref>{{cite book |last=Ogilvie |first=Brian W. |chapter=Zoology |editor1=Grafton, Anthony |editor2=Most, Glenn W. |editor3=Settis, Salvatore |title=The Classical Tradition |publisher=[[Harvard University Press]] |date=2010 |isbn=978-0-674-07227-5 |pages=1000–1001}}</ref><ref name=Forbes>{{cite book |last=Forbes |first=Peter |date=2009 |title=[[Dazzled and Deceived: Mimicry and Camouflage]] |publisher=[[Yale University Press]] |isbn=978-0-300-12539-9 |pages=236–239}}</ref>{{sfn|Leroi|2015|pages=137–138}} Aristotle's work remains largely unknown to modern scientists, though zoologists sometimes mention him as the father of biology{{sfn|Leroi|2015|page=352}} or in particular of [[marine biology]].<ref name=MarineBio>{{cite web |title=A History of the Study of Marine Biology |url=http://marinebio.org/oceans/history-of-marine-biology/ |publisher=MarineBio Conservation Society |access-date=19 November 2016}}</ref> Practising zoologists are unlikely to adhere to Aristotle's chain of being, but its influence is still perceptible in the use of the terms "lower" and "upper" to designate taxa such as groups of plants.<ref name="Rigato & Minelli 2013">{{cite journal |last1=Rigato |first1=Emanuele |last2=Minelli |first2=Alessandro |title=The great chain of being is still here |journal=Evolution: Education and Outreach |date=28 June 2013 |volume=6 |issue=18 |pages=1–6 |doi=10.1186/1936-6434-6-18 |url=http://www.evolution-outreach.com/content/6/1/18 |issn=1936-6434|doi-access=free }}</ref> The evolutionary biologist [[Armand Marie Leroi]] has reconstructed Aristotle's biology,{{sfn|Leroi|2015}} while [[Tinbergen's four questions|Niko Tinbergen's four questions]], based on Aristotle's four causes, are used to analyse [[animal behaviour]]; they examine [[function (biology)|function]], [[phylogeny]], [[mechanism (biology)|mechanism]], and [[ontogeny]].{{sfn|MacDougall-Shackleton|2011|pp=2076–2085}}{{sfn|Hladký|Havlíček|2013}} The concept of [[Homology (biology)|homology]] began with Aristotle;<ref name="Panchen 1999 pp. 5–18; discussion 18–23">{{cite book | last=Panchen | first=A. L. | chapter=Homology — History of a Concept | title=Novartis Foundation Symposium 222 - Homology | series=Novartis Foundation Symposia | volume=222 | year=1999 | pmid=10332750 | pages=5–18; discussion 18–23| doi=10.1002/9780470515655.ch2 | isbn=9780470515655 }}</ref> the [[evo-devo|evolutionary developmental biologist]] [[Lewis I. Held]] commented that he would be interested in the concept of [[deep homology]].<ref name=Held2017>{{cite book |last1=Held |first1=Lewis I. |author-link=Lewis I. Held |title=Deep Homology?: Uncanny Similarities of Humans and Flies Uncovered by Evo-Devo |date=February 2017 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1316601211 |page=viii}}</ref>