Aristotle the Philosopher

by J.L. Ackrill

Aristotle is widely regarded as the greatest of all philosophers; indeed, he is traditionally referred to simply as `the philosopher'. Today, after more than two millennia, his arguments and ideas continue to stimulate philosophers and provoke them to controversy.

In this book J.L. Ackrill conveys the force and excitement of Aristotle's philosophical investigations, thereby showing why contemporary philosophers still draw from him and return to him. He quotes extensively from Aristotle's works in his own notably clear English translation, and a picture emerges of a lucid, lively, subtle and tough-minded thinker of astonishing range and penetration.

Professor Ackrill identifies many striking connections between Aristotle's ideas and ideas in recent philosophy; he also raises philosophical questions of his own, and exemplifies the way in which Aristotle can still be argued with and learned from.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Biography

170 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1981

Reviews

[Riku Sayuj · Rating 4 out of 5]

ARGUING WITH ARISTOTLE

This book is a highly selective and impressionistic view of/guide-book to Aristotle's philosophy. Ackrill’s aim in this book is not just to impart information, but to arouse interest in the philosophical problems Aristotle tackles, and in his arguments and ideas.

To Ackrill, what really characterizes Aristotle as a philosopher is not the number and weight of his conclusions / ‘doctrines’, but the power and subtlety of his arguments and ideas and analyses.

It is as well that this should be so. For having to learn a doctrine is a boring task, and specially depressing when you know that it is false; but interesting arguments give pleasure and profit whether or not they really establish the alleged conclusions. Aristotle's key ideas have provoked and stimulated philosophers over many centuries, precisely because they are not cut and dried doctrines, but can be applied and interpreted and developed in various ways, still relevant to problems that confront us.

Ackrill shows us how enjoyable and rewarding it is to engage in philosophical arguments with Aristotle. Even as we enjoy the refinement, conciseness and suggestiveness of Aristotle's arguments — we should know that we would enjoy them even more, the more we engage ourselves in them.

Ackrill’s next point was what I found very personal and invigorating:

Now if our aim is only to understand Aristotle, this 'engagement' will have to be carefully limited; we must enter into his thoughts but not go beyond them, we must try to relive his intellectual journey, taking care not to carry with us any twentieth-century baggage or equipment. To achieve such an understanding is certainly a worthwhile aim, calling for both imagination and intellectual power. However, we may desire not only to gain some understanding of Aristotle, but also to understand better some of the philosophical problems he confronts. In this case we are entitled to engage him in argument as if he were a contemporary.

It is not in itself a fault to use modern notions in discussing arguments in ancient philosophers, and to argue with them as if they were contemporaries. It is a fault (the fault of anachronism) only if one's aim and claim is to be doing purely historical work.

To argue with Aristotle, and to learn from him, is not difficult. For the problems he struggled so hard to formulate are still central to philosophy, and the concepts and terminology he used in trying to solve them have not lost their power. Keeping to the aim of the book — to rouse active interest in Aristotle’s philosophy — Ackrill raises many philosophical questions and makes philosophical comments of his own, in order to remind the reader that what Aristotle says is there to be argued about, and to provoke him into further thought on the various problems.

This approach of argumentation is precisely what Plato allows through his Dialogue form, and it is encouraging to hear from Ackrill that a reader might expect the same from Aristotle as well, even if with extra effort.

While I am sure that the exposure Ackrill provides will come in handy, I have a feeling this sort of engagement with Aristotle’s ideas would be more useful for a seasoned reader than for a mere beginner like me. I will be coming back to this often as I go through Aristotle’s works.

[Jack · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good introduction if slightly out of date - many of the problems mentioned against Aristotle have now been solved

[Jacob Aitken · Rating 4 out of 5]

J. L. Ackrill undertakes to examine the highlights of Aristotle's thought and use them to springboard into philosophical inquiry. Ackrill begins the book with a brief biography of Aristotle and an introduction to his thought. Ackrill aims to clear up misconceptions concerning Aristotle's methodology and to see that criticisms that are raised against Aristotle should actually be leveled against his followers who had different interests, and less ability, than Aristotle (81). The major themes of Aristotle that are presented in this book are the analysis of change, formal logic, the mind-body problem, metaphysics, ethics, and philosophical logic.



An Examination of Aristotelian Themes



The Analysis of Change. Ackrill begins illustrating Aristotle's thought on matter and change by referring to Aristotle's response to the problem raised by Parmeninedes and his school, the Eleatics; namely, "What is, is one and unchangeable"-making predication and distinctions in thought and communication impossible. Aristotle deals with this as an absurdity based on deliberate misunderstanding. He makes two simple points: he attacks the Eleatics' central thesis by showing their equivocation of the verb "to be." Aristotle deals with this problem by stating that all logical communication assumes the qualifications of its terms. Secondly, he attacks their unwarranted dismal of ascribing characteristics or saying that things cannot change (25). Ackrill then outlines the three important aspects of Aristotle's analysis of change-"x comes to be by y," "y comes to be from x," and "y comes into being" (27, 28).



Explanation of the Natural Sciences. In the previous chapter Ackrill used the analysis of change to show that in any changeable object matter and form can be distinguished. In the same way he shows that changes of life in nature depend upon its material make-up; namely, a thing in nature's behavior will be determined by what it is made of and how it is put together. This would seem to present a problem for Aristotle were it not for his asking the nature of the thing being changed (35). Ackrill then begins to examine Aristotle's inquiry into the nature of causation. Aristotle notes four types of causality for gaining knowledge, all of which may contribute to the "cause" of a thing. In doing so, Aristotle is seeking to ask the "why" of a thing, not just the "what." Ackrill first notes the material cause, that from which a constituent thing come to be. He then notes the formal cause; the form or mode is the cause. Ackrill locates the source of the change in the efficient cause. The end result of an action is its final cause (37).



Logic. Ackrill's chapter on logic is the most difficult to comprehend in the book. One does not suggest that Ackrill's material his factually wrong, nor that he does not understand Aristotelian logic, but he does not go to great lengths to communicate the material clearly. In speaking of Aristotelian logic Ackrill means formal logic manifested primarily in the syllogism (an argument containing two premises and a conclusion). This is where Ackrill begins to lose his audience. Traditional logic textbooks state, for example, "All men are mortal;" Ackrill, going upon the natural reading of the Greek, turns it around saying, "Mortal belongs to every man" (82).[1] He proceeds to justify his unique formation of syllogistic reasoning by saying that it has certain advantages, although he never says what they are. He then spends five pages describing moods, forms, and figures-much to the confusion of the reader. He notes, correctly I believe, that syllogistic logic has its limits and would fall under heavy criticism by the philosophers John Locke and Immanuel Kant (80, 87).



Ironically, one of the most interesting chapters is the one on scientific analysis. ALthough Aristotle has been discredited in the realms of science, many scientists operate on the same basic epistemological framework that Aristotle does (ie, sensory perception is the root of knowledge). It makes one wonder if thirty years from now they too will be embarrassed, their dogmatic claims notwithstanding. Ackrill did a good job on this claim.

[Hassan Zayour · Rating 4 out of 5]

One must not be fooled by the size of this rather condensed and comprehensive book that briefly discusses the several aspects of the first master's philosophy. Although relatively small, Ackrill demonstrated an extremely thorough understanding of Aristotle in his book, and had it not been for that, he would not have managed to give this piece that summarizes most of what the philosopher had to say. The chapters are arranged in a logical and suitable manner, and the author was not parochial in his perception of the philosophy as a whole. When it was necessary, Ackrill supported or discursively opposed some of Aristotle's views, providing some insightful inquiries in the process. These are all signs of top-notch professional scholarship, an attribute of the utmost importance for such a field of study. I found this book to be of extreme benefit particularly in the discussion on metaphysics, which is itself a bit vague. The author chunked it down a bit and made it easier to move forward with more complex and comprehensive texts.
The main aim of the author was to galvanize the reader towards a further study of Aristotle, one of the most influential philosophers to ever live; thus, I think that Ackrill did an excellent job with that.

[Toon Pepermans]

(read: chapter on ethics)

[Ronald Wise · Rating 2 out of 5]

An overview of the philosophical writings of Aristotle. Ackrill encourages the reader to view the development of Aristotle's hypotheses without the prejudice of subsequent philosophical and scientific developments. Some of this book was quite interesting, but much of it was very dry.

[Jerrod · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great supplemental text to the study of Aristotle.