What do you think?
Rate this book
Aristotle: The First Teacher
The first modern biography of Aristotle—student of Plato, tutor to Alexander, and architect of ideas still studied around the world
Aristotle stands among the most brilliant and influential figures in history, the inventor of almost every subject studied in universities today, from biology to political science to literary criticism to logic. Yet until now his life has remained a mystery.
In this book, Philip Freeman brings Aristotle (384–322 BCE) vividly to life, from his orphan childhood to his years as Plato’s student in Athens and his role as tutor to Alexander the Great in Macedonia. Drawing on ancient sources and modern scholarship, Freeman traces Aristotle’s journey through a world of political upheaval and intellectual revolution, revealing Aristotle not only as a philosopher but as a scientist, literary critic, and seeker of happiness—a man who dissected sea creatures, mapped the stars, and invented logic to make sense of life’s complexities.
Aristotle’s ideas still shape how we think about truth, virtue, and the good life. This is the definitive portrait of one of history’s greatest minds—the thinker Dante called “the master of those who know.”
Aristotle stands among the most brilliant and influential figures in history, the inventor of almost every subject studied in universities today, from biology to political science to literary criticism to logic. Yet until now his life has remained a mystery.
In this book, Philip Freeman brings Aristotle (384–322 BCE) vividly to life, from his orphan childhood to his years as Plato’s student in Athens and his role as tutor to Alexander the Great in Macedonia. Drawing on ancient sources and modern scholarship, Freeman traces Aristotle’s journey through a world of political upheaval and intellectual revolution, revealing Aristotle not only as a philosopher but as a scientist, literary critic, and seeker of happiness—a man who dissected sea creatures, mapped the stars, and invented logic to make sense of life’s complexities.
Aristotle’s ideas still shape how we think about truth, virtue, and the good life. This is the definitive portrait of one of history’s greatest minds—the thinker Dante called “the master of those who know.”
188 pages, Kindle Edition
Published September 15, 2026
About the author
Philip Freeman
90 books563 followersI teach Classics and Celtic studies at Luther College in the beautiful little town of Decorah, Iowa. I did my doctoral work at Harvard and taught at Boston University and Washington University in St. Louis before coming to Luther to help run the Classics department. I love teaching and see my writing as an extension of my work in the classroom. I hope you enjoy the books as much as I enjoyed writing them.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review
November 1, 2026
The Lost and Found Department
One of the most astounding facts about Aristotle is that he is still one of the most influential intellectual figures in history with most of his works being lost. Best estimates are that only one-fifth to one-third of his work is still extant and we are fortunate to have this much. This being the case, we can never refer to something we think of as missing in the work of Aristotle as an omission on the part of Aristotle. Perhaps the so-called omission is buried in one of the lost works. For example, the fact that there is no mention of Alexander's conquest of Persia in Aristotle’s writing cannot be taken as an omission by Aristotle. Perhaps such mentions have simply been lost. At one point, the author falls into this trap in remarking that Aristotle never mentions Jews even though there was large Jewish community in Greece and Asia Minor during his lifetime. Again, such mentions may have simply been lost. But the trouble with the lost and found department is that we cannot even be sure that the lost works of Aristotle were by Aristotle or by Pseudo-Aristotle. So, did Aristotle write about the Jews? Who knows? Even if such a work attributed to Aristotle is found, who can really say if it was by Aristotle?
The Other Half of the Story - Contra Heidegger
We cannot just look at ‘the philosophy’ without looking at the person behind the philosophy. All thinking is contingent. That is, contingent upon life circumstances and social context. I believe that understanding the conditions and circumstances of a phosphor’s life is essential to understanding the thought and thinking of the philosopher. Context and contingency are everything, or almost everything. I completely disagree with those who teach that the life of a great thinker is immaterial, that only their thought matters. This is only half the story. Not only does understanding a thinker’s biography help us to appreciate them more as human beings, but it is also essential to understanding how their thinking germinated and developed over the course of their life in very particular historical and socially contingent circumstances. No idea becomes idea on its own, in a vacuum, it must have a basis in the lives of people and historical events.
The Aristotelian Cool 😎
That is to say: Aristotle is cool. Following the Aristotelian mean in ethics results in a person being “cool” in our more modern parlance or as the French might say, a person with “savoir-faire”. This refers to the capacity for appropriate action, social smoothness, or a polished sureness in handling difficult situations in social or diplomatic interactions. Aristotelian ethics is all about this appropriate action in given circumstances. For example, humor. A person who is a constant jokester is a buffoon but a person who cannot take a joke is a dour bore. The virtuous middle is the cool person with a sense of humor, tact and wit; knowing what to say at the right time. Avoiding the extremes in language and behavior is just “cool”. I guess we can also think of this as the Goldilocks theory of ethics, the middle course is always “just right.”
Aristotle Loses his Cool Card
Where Aristotle loses his ‘cool’ is when he moves from the realm of individual ethics to the ethics of the community, i.e., politics. In this realm Aristotle sees nothing wrong with slavery, which he characterizes as natural for some people, i.e., those who happen to be slaves. Wait what?! Where is that famous Aristotelian logic now? Aristotle’s view on slavery is an example of begging the question - motivated circular reasoning.
To state this in proper Aristotelian form:
1. Since a person has a "slave nature", it is just to enslave them
2. People are justly enslaved because they have a "slave nature"
That is, some people are slaves by nature because nature as fitted them out to be slaves. Slavery is natural because some people are naturally slaves. There is no exit from this circle. It is no better for women whom he regards as inferior creatures because, you guessed it, it is their nature to be inferior because nature made them inferior, ugh. Women are just one step above slaves. At least Plato, apart from all his unrealistic utopian political ideas, was very realistic about including women fully in the political life of the city. It was Aristotle who was unrealistic. This is not cool with me.
One of the most astounding facts about Aristotle is that he is still one of the most influential intellectual figures in history with most of his works being lost. Best estimates are that only one-fifth to one-third of his work is still extant and we are fortunate to have this much. This being the case, we can never refer to something we think of as missing in the work of Aristotle as an omission on the part of Aristotle. Perhaps the so-called omission is buried in one of the lost works. For example, the fact that there is no mention of Alexander's conquest of Persia in Aristotle’s writing cannot be taken as an omission by Aristotle. Perhaps such mentions have simply been lost. At one point, the author falls into this trap in remarking that Aristotle never mentions Jews even though there was large Jewish community in Greece and Asia Minor during his lifetime. Again, such mentions may have simply been lost. But the trouble with the lost and found department is that we cannot even be sure that the lost works of Aristotle were by Aristotle or by Pseudo-Aristotle. So, did Aristotle write about the Jews? Who knows? Even if such a work attributed to Aristotle is found, who can really say if it was by Aristotle?
The Other Half of the Story - Contra Heidegger
We cannot just look at ‘the philosophy’ without looking at the person behind the philosophy. All thinking is contingent. That is, contingent upon life circumstances and social context. I believe that understanding the conditions and circumstances of a phosphor’s life is essential to understanding the thought and thinking of the philosopher. Context and contingency are everything, or almost everything. I completely disagree with those who teach that the life of a great thinker is immaterial, that only their thought matters. This is only half the story. Not only does understanding a thinker’s biography help us to appreciate them more as human beings, but it is also essential to understanding how their thinking germinated and developed over the course of their life in very particular historical and socially contingent circumstances. No idea becomes idea on its own, in a vacuum, it must have a basis in the lives of people and historical events.
The Aristotelian Cool 😎
That is to say: Aristotle is cool. Following the Aristotelian mean in ethics results in a person being “cool” in our more modern parlance or as the French might say, a person with “savoir-faire”. This refers to the capacity for appropriate action, social smoothness, or a polished sureness in handling difficult situations in social or diplomatic interactions. Aristotelian ethics is all about this appropriate action in given circumstances. For example, humor. A person who is a constant jokester is a buffoon but a person who cannot take a joke is a dour bore. The virtuous middle is the cool person with a sense of humor, tact and wit; knowing what to say at the right time. Avoiding the extremes in language and behavior is just “cool”. I guess we can also think of this as the Goldilocks theory of ethics, the middle course is always “just right.”
Aristotle Loses his Cool Card
Where Aristotle loses his ‘cool’ is when he moves from the realm of individual ethics to the ethics of the community, i.e., politics. In this realm Aristotle sees nothing wrong with slavery, which he characterizes as natural for some people, i.e., those who happen to be slaves. Wait what?! Where is that famous Aristotelian logic now? Aristotle’s view on slavery is an example of begging the question - motivated circular reasoning.
To state this in proper Aristotelian form:
1. Since a person has a "slave nature", it is just to enslave them
2. People are justly enslaved because they have a "slave nature"
That is, some people are slaves by nature because nature as fitted them out to be slaves. Slavery is natural because some people are naturally slaves. There is no exit from this circle. It is no better for women whom he regards as inferior creatures because, you guessed it, it is their nature to be inferior because nature made them inferior, ugh. Women are just one step above slaves. At least Plato, apart from all his unrealistic utopian political ideas, was very realistic about including women fully in the political life of the city. It was Aristotle who was unrealistic. This is not cool with me.
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review