Substantial Knowledge: Aristotle's Metaphysics

by C.D.C. Reeve

In this groundbreaking work, C. D. C. Reeve uses a fundamental problem--the Primacy Dilemma--to explore Aristotle's metaphysics, epistemology, dialectic, philosophy of mind, and theology in a new way. At a time when Aristotle is most often studied piecemeal, Reeve attempts to see him both in detail and as a whole, so that it is from detailed analysis of hundreds of particular passages, drawn from dozens of Aristotelian treatises, and translated in full that his overall picture of Aristotle emerges. Primarily a book for philosophers and advanced students with an interest in the fundamental problems with which Aristotle is grappling, Substantial Knowledge's clear, non-technical and engaging style will appeal to any reader eager to explore Aristotle’s difficult but extraordinarily rewarding thought.

Genres: Philosophy

341 pages, Paperback

First published March 1, 2000

About the author

C. D. C. Reeve is a philosophy professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He works primarily in Ancient Greek philosophy, especially Plato and Aristotle. He is also interested in philosophy generally, and has published work in the philosophy of sex and love, and on film. He has also translated many Ancient Greek texts, mostly by Plato and Aristotle.

Reviews

[David Haines · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a must read for anybody who is interested in Aristotle's Metaphysics. It is not an easy read, however, and I would not recommend it for beginners. C. D. C. Reeve takes on the Primacy Dilemma and shows how Aristotle's Metaphysics, seen as Theology, is able to answer the Primacy Dilemma. Though parts of Reeve's conclusions seem strange, he does point out that one of the major problems with modern philosophy is that it does not deal appropriately with the Primacy Dilemma.

[Aaron Cliff · Rating 3 out of 5]

Marketed as useful for beginners. That is a bald faced lie. 75% went right over my head, and I wanted to understand this book.

It was interesting to me that philosophers wouldn't take Reeve seriously when he says "maybe Aristotle was primarily interested in Primacy" without him writing an absurdly dense book to justify this claim. It seemed fairly self evident to me, as I always assumed philosophy was about primacy.

I guess I wished that this book would be about Primacy, but it was a justification for believing that Aristotle was mainly interested in philosophy.

Read at your own peril.