What do you think?
Rate this book
Topics
This book is a treatise on dialectical argument, a practice perhaps as old as human language, systemized for the first time by Aristotle. This seminal text offers many important insights into his conception of logic, his development of the notion of the predicables, and his ideas on the method of philosophical inquiry itself. Aristotle's works have influenced science, religion, and philosophy for nearly two thousand years. He could be thought of as the father of logical thought. Aristotle wrote: "There is nothing in the intellect that was not first in the senses." He wrote that everything that is learned in life is learned through sensory perception. Aristotle was the first to establish the founding principle of logic. The great writer Dante called Aristotle "The Master of those who know."
148 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 351
30 people are currently reading
304 people want to read
About the author
Aristotle
4,342 books5,580 followersAristotle (Greek: Αριστοτέλης; 384–322 BC) was an Ancient Greek philosopher and polymath. His writings cover a broad range of subjects spanning the natural sciences, philosophy, linguistics, economics, politics, psychology, and the arts. As the founder of the Peripatetic school of philosophy in the Lyceum in Athens, he began the wider Aristotelian tradition that followed, which set the groundwork for the development of modern science.
Little is known about Aristotle's life. He was born in the city of Stagira in northern Greece during the Classical period. His father, Nicomachus, died when Aristotle was a child, and he was brought up by a guardian. At 17 or 18, he joined Plato's Academy in Athens and remained there until the age of 37 (c. 347 BC). Shortly after Plato died, Aristotle left Athens and, at the request of Philip II of Macedon, tutored his son Alexander the Great beginning in 343 BC. He established a library in the Lyceum, which helped him to produce many of his hundreds of books on papyrus scrolls.
Though Aristotle wrote many treatises and dialogues for publication, only around a third of his original output has survived, none of it intended for publication. Aristotle provided a complex synthesis of the various philosophies existing prior to him. His teachings and methods of inquiry have had a significant impact across the world, and remain a subject of contemporary philosophical discussion.
Aristotle's views profoundly shaped medieval scholarship. The influence of his physical science extended from late antiquity and the Early Middle Ages into the Renaissance, and was not replaced systematically until the Enlightenment and theories such as classical mechanics were developed. He influenced Judeo-Islamic philosophies during the Middle Ages, as well as Christian theology, especially the Neoplatonism of the Early Church and the scholastic tradition of the Catholic Church.
Aristotle was revered among medieval Muslim scholars as "The First Teacher", and among medieval Christians like Thomas Aquinas as simply "The Philosopher", while the poet Dante Alighieri called him "the master of those who know". His works contain the earliest known formal study of logic, and were studied by medieval scholars such as Pierre Abélard and Jean Buridan. Aristotle's influence on logic continued well into the 19th century. In addition, his ethics, although always influential, gained renewed interest with the modern advent of virtue ethics.
Little is known about Aristotle's life. He was born in the city of Stagira in northern Greece during the Classical period. His father, Nicomachus, died when Aristotle was a child, and he was brought up by a guardian. At 17 or 18, he joined Plato's Academy in Athens and remained there until the age of 37 (c. 347 BC). Shortly after Plato died, Aristotle left Athens and, at the request of Philip II of Macedon, tutored his son Alexander the Great beginning in 343 BC. He established a library in the Lyceum, which helped him to produce many of his hundreds of books on papyrus scrolls.
Though Aristotle wrote many treatises and dialogues for publication, only around a third of his original output has survived, none of it intended for publication. Aristotle provided a complex synthesis of the various philosophies existing prior to him. His teachings and methods of inquiry have had a significant impact across the world, and remain a subject of contemporary philosophical discussion.
Aristotle's views profoundly shaped medieval scholarship. The influence of his physical science extended from late antiquity and the Early Middle Ages into the Renaissance, and was not replaced systematically until the Enlightenment and theories such as classical mechanics were developed. He influenced Judeo-Islamic philosophies during the Middle Ages, as well as Christian theology, especially the Neoplatonism of the Early Church and the scholastic tradition of the Catholic Church.
Aristotle was revered among medieval Muslim scholars as "The First Teacher", and among medieval Christians like Thomas Aquinas as simply "The Philosopher", while the poet Dante Alighieri called him "the master of those who know". His works contain the earliest known formal study of logic, and were studied by medieval scholars such as Pierre Abélard and Jean Buridan. Aristotle's influence on logic continued well into the 19th century. In addition, his ethics, although always influential, gained renewed interest with the modern advent of virtue ethics.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
Read
April 21, 2014Nobody reads the Topics?
I read it ages ago and would like to revisit it soonish. Because it seems to me that it could serve well as a possible alternative to the dogmatic position that things like aesthetic judgements are irreducibly subjective and capricious. That is, how to talk about a region of experience which is not submittable to an analysis built upon self-evident and apodictic foundational first-principles.
[from the first paragraph, 100a20, ff] "Our treatise proposes to find a line of inquiry whereby we shall be able to reason from reputable opinions about any subject presented to us, and also shall ourselves, when putting forward an argument, avoid saying anything contrary to it. First, then, we must say what deduction is, and what its varieties are, in order to grasp dialectical deduction; for this is the object of our search in the treatise before us.
"[...] Things are true and primitive which are convincing on the strength not of anything else but of themselves; for in regard to the first principles of science it is improper to ask any further for the why and wherefore of them; each of the first principles should command belief in and by itself. On the other hand, those opinions are reputable which are accepted by everyone or by the majority or by the wise--i.e. by all, or by the majority, or by the most notable and reputable of them."
I have the Pickard-Cambridge translation in the Barnes Complete Works.
I read it ages ago and would like to revisit it soonish. Because it seems to me that it could serve well as a possible alternative to the dogmatic position that things like aesthetic judgements are irreducibly subjective and capricious. That is, how to talk about a region of experience which is not submittable to an analysis built upon self-evident and apodictic foundational first-principles.
[from the first paragraph, 100a20, ff] "Our treatise proposes to find a line of inquiry whereby we shall be able to reason from reputable opinions about any subject presented to us, and also shall ourselves, when putting forward an argument, avoid saying anything contrary to it. First, then, we must say what deduction is, and what its varieties are, in order to grasp dialectical deduction; for this is the object of our search in the treatise before us.
"[...] Things are true and primitive which are convincing on the strength not of anything else but of themselves; for in regard to the first principles of science it is improper to ask any further for the why and wherefore of them; each of the first principles should command belief in and by itself. On the other hand, those opinions are reputable which are accepted by everyone or by the majority or by the wise--i.e. by all, or by the majority, or by the most notable and reputable of them."
I have the Pickard-Cambridge translation in the Barnes Complete Works.
May 4, 2020
Yeah, this one was good, really good. But whereas I thought Prior analytics absolutely necessary, I think this book and Posterior Analytics are really just a collection, a pot pourri if you will, of several points about dialectic and argument, which while interesting, are not really necessary. I would recommend this to anyone who is interested in how and why the Platonic dialogues were constructed, or how a correct dialectic is supposed to take place. I liked how the last section brought it all together, in so subverting so many things, a conversion of the original argument takes place. Really, what this book is all about is defining the difference of the Faciendums (paralogisms) and Demonstradums (syllogisms) of philosophical or mathematical arguments. If you are involved in mathematics as well, this book will help you out immensely also.
March 5, 2021
This book rivals his Categories in terms of clarity and focus. I found it far more enjoyable than Prior Analytics. It does get fairly technical at the end, though.
Every proposition is either of a genus or a particular. That which is peculiar to an entity signifies its essence (1.4). This is known as the definition. There are four elements in the Topics: property, definition, genus, accident.
A property is a predicate that doesn’t indicate the essence of a thing, yet belongs to that thing alone. An essential property distinguishes a thing from everything else (5.1). A relative property states the difference x and y.
Sameness: if we say x is the same as y, do we mean it numerically, generically, or specifically?
Def. thesis = supposition of some general philosopher.
Try to note how the proposition would sound in its most universal form. Aristotle means you need to have it in a categorical universal (All A is B). This allows you to then turn the one into many.
A term is unclear if it has more than one intermediary. For example, if a term’s contrary bears several senses, then it is probably unclear.
A brief primer on rhetoric:
How to reason through a problem (1.20).
1) Secure the proposition.
2) Distinguish in what sense the expression is used.
3) Note the differences and likenesses.
4) Induction is more persuasive than deduction, since it relies on the senses.
5) When you develop a point (or seek to overthrow one), your term should be both specific yet framed in an easy, familiar way (II.4).
6) If you are confused by a thesis, convert it to a negative and see if the contrary makes sense (6.2).
7) Make your strongest point your last point, as people are likely to doubt your earlier points. This has a cumulative rhetorical effect (8.1).
Success for life. For some reason this is easily convertible to business.
1) That which is more lasting is more desirable than that which is less so.
2) Desire that which is the cause of the Good more than what results from it (III.1).
3) The goal is more desirable than the means.
Every proposition is either of a genus or a particular. That which is peculiar to an entity signifies its essence (1.4). This is known as the definition. There are four elements in the Topics: property, definition, genus, accident.
A property is a predicate that doesn’t indicate the essence of a thing, yet belongs to that thing alone. An essential property distinguishes a thing from everything else (5.1). A relative property states the difference x and y.
Sameness: if we say x is the same as y, do we mean it numerically, generically, or specifically?
Def. thesis = supposition of some general philosopher.
Try to note how the proposition would sound in its most universal form. Aristotle means you need to have it in a categorical universal (All A is B). This allows you to then turn the one into many.
A term is unclear if it has more than one intermediary. For example, if a term’s contrary bears several senses, then it is probably unclear.
A brief primer on rhetoric:
How to reason through a problem (1.20).
1) Secure the proposition.
2) Distinguish in what sense the expression is used.
3) Note the differences and likenesses.
4) Induction is more persuasive than deduction, since it relies on the senses.
5) When you develop a point (or seek to overthrow one), your term should be both specific yet framed in an easy, familiar way (II.4).
6) If you are confused by a thesis, convert it to a negative and see if the contrary makes sense (6.2).
7) Make your strongest point your last point, as people are likely to doubt your earlier points. This has a cumulative rhetorical effect (8.1).
Success for life. For some reason this is easily convertible to business.
1) That which is more lasting is more desirable than that which is less so.
2) Desire that which is the cause of the Good more than what results from it (III.1).
3) The goal is more desirable than the means.
February 6, 2021
On non-demonstrative/dialectical reasoning. It's like an introduction to critical thinking/debating.
August 22, 2018
Tratado de Aristóteles sobre a dialética.
Aristóteles acertadamente diz que é mais fácil refutar do que construir um argumento, já que o processo de construção deve ser verdadeiro para todos os casos particulares, muitas vezes incorrendo em exames individuais para testar sua validade.
Lembra que o silogismo é mais adequado para debater com os dialéticos, enquanto a indução é a melhor para a multidão. Ele diz ainda que um bom inquiridor deve desenvolver o argumento de forma que leve quem está respondendo aos mais absurdos paradoxos que se seguem de sua posição, o bom reductio ad absurdum que Aristóteles gostava.
Finaliza ressaltando boas práticas argumentativas e que não se deve argumentar com qualquer um na rua, até porque seria uma perda de tempo.
O livro poderia ser melhor se tivesse se atido na parte final, o início é entediante, com as definições de propriedade, acidente, etc.
Aristóteles acertadamente diz que é mais fácil refutar do que construir um argumento, já que o processo de construção deve ser verdadeiro para todos os casos particulares, muitas vezes incorrendo em exames individuais para testar sua validade.
Lembra que o silogismo é mais adequado para debater com os dialéticos, enquanto a indução é a melhor para a multidão. Ele diz ainda que um bom inquiridor deve desenvolver o argumento de forma que leve quem está respondendo aos mais absurdos paradoxos que se seguem de sua posição, o bom reductio ad absurdum que Aristóteles gostava.
Finaliza ressaltando boas práticas argumentativas e que não se deve argumentar com qualquer um na rua, até porque seria uma perda de tempo.
O livro poderia ser melhor se tivesse se atido na parte final, o início é entediante, com as definições de propriedade, acidente, etc.
March 26, 2017
Establishing a clear system of dialectical categories, Aristotle proffers a meticulous inquiry into the rules and form of dialectical argumentation and in doing so provides with some fascinating nuggets of ethical and metaphysical philosophizing. A particularly enjoyable addition to the Organon. Don't miss it friends
February 16, 2021
This book made me long for a time when people paused to actually argue the merits of their positions based on the clarity and correctness of the argument and on the first principles of its premises. Too often today, people hold many beliefs very strongly without bothering to think about why they hold them. Arguments are not logical or based upon verifiable truth, but who can yell the loudest (or get the most likes).
In general, society has improved its positions and beliefs (in regards to equality, violence, etc.). However, how long will these improvements hold if our only means of moving people towards these improved positions is through public shame or cancellation? This line of thinking has inspired me to think through the reasons behind my beliefs in a way that allows me to defend them and explain them clearly to others. Or maybe the processes of building cohesive arguments results in a change of opinion or two?
This book isn’t about any of the above, but it gives a thorough explanation of how one should construct arguments, how to refute them, and how to acceptably play the role of questioner/answerer. It was a dense read, but well worth it for those who have already read Prior and Posterior Analytics. If you have not read Aristotle’s prior writings on this subject, I would not recommend this book.
In general, society has improved its positions and beliefs (in regards to equality, violence, etc.). However, how long will these improvements hold if our only means of moving people towards these improved positions is through public shame or cancellation? This line of thinking has inspired me to think through the reasons behind my beliefs in a way that allows me to defend them and explain them clearly to others. Or maybe the processes of building cohesive arguments results in a change of opinion or two?
This book isn’t about any of the above, but it gives a thorough explanation of how one should construct arguments, how to refute them, and how to acceptably play the role of questioner/answerer. It was a dense read, but well worth it for those who have already read Prior and Posterior Analytics. If you have not read Aristotle’s prior writings on this subject, I would not recommend this book.
April 24, 2024
Nadie lee los tópicos y no me sorprende, son un coñazo.
He sido incapaz de acabarlos atentamente y he leído por encima buena parte de la obra a pesar de que tampoco son tan complicados en comparación con otras obras del corpus si entiendes el libro I y lees atentamente.
Lo que son es insufribles, llenos de trivialidades y despropósitos, con poco recuperable, quizá el primero que tiene contenido teórico y definicional interesante para comprender correctamente la filosofía del autor y su epistemología (el párrafo a partir de 101a35) o el último libro que es más práctico (aunque no aporta demasiado) y es interesante leer junto a la retórica.
Probablemente algún día revisitaré la obra, a ver si mi opinión cambia entonces
He sido incapaz de acabarlos atentamente y he leído por encima buena parte de la obra a pesar de que tampoco son tan complicados en comparación con otras obras del corpus si entiendes el libro I y lees atentamente.
Lo que son es insufribles, llenos de trivialidades y despropósitos, con poco recuperable, quizá el primero que tiene contenido teórico y definicional interesante para comprender correctamente la filosofía del autor y su epistemología (el párrafo a partir de 101a35) o el último libro que es más práctico (aunque no aporta demasiado) y es interesante leer junto a la retórica.
Probablemente algún día revisitaré la obra, a ver si mi opinión cambia entonces
Read
January 18, 2024This book is part of what scholars call “The Organon” which if I’m understanding correctly is a kind of guide to logic, forming ideas and helping one constructing well formed dialectical arguments, etc. Topics is about a few different things but from my reading and other secondary sources (for me it’s essential to read about other people talking about Aristotle) it’s about forming non contradicting dialectical arguments and provides ways to find a middle ground dialectally. It’s one of those books that is essential in the library as a way to help form a really good argument
Read
March 4, 2025This is the longest of Aristotle works on logic. Though this is more of a debate strategy book. Some of it was interesting, just thinks to keep in mind when having a discussion. How to come up with questions quickly.
But mostly, I'm excited to be done reading the logic works and get into Aristotle actual arguments, not just talking about how to make an argument.
Anyway, thins was a big accomplishment for me. I can see the end of the tunnel for completing the logic works!
But mostly, I'm excited to be done reading the logic works and get into Aristotle actual arguments, not just talking about how to make an argument.
Anyway, thins was a big accomplishment for me. I can see the end of the tunnel for completing the logic works!
to-keep-reference
August 9, 2017"En los ocho libros de los Tópicos, Aristóteles expone todas las relaciones mutuas que pueden tener los conceptos entre sí en estos cuatro aspectos e indica las reglas para toda relación posible..."
El arte de tener razón Pág.22
El arte de tener razón Pág.22
October 3, 2021
I skipped Topics while I was reading through the Organon earlier this year, and thought I'd skim through it now to see if I missed anything essential before I move on to modern philosophy. I didn't - this did not add anything significantly new to the rest of the Organon, and even appeared unnecessary to me.
October 6, 2019
Gostei, embora as noções apresentadas por ele ainda estão um pouco confusas. Terei que revisar e fazer umas considerações sobre algumas páginas marcadas. Mas no geral, gosto muito de Aristóteles e suas obras são de suma importância.
August 1, 2020
Utmärkt beskrivning av argumentationsteknik, med särskilt fokus på det som vi hade kallat källkritik och logiska felslut. Utifrån ett rent nyttovärde har den full poäng. Textmässigt är den ointressant, men inte svårläst.
July 7, 2019
A classic read. This is the continuation for Categories. More likely this is interpretation and examples of what Aristotle write in Categories applied in many things.
May 15, 2013
Topics by Aristotle translated by W. A. Pickard-Cambridge is a book dealing with reasoning by using the dialectic. Dialectical reasoning is at the heart of most ancient philosophy where two parties discuss a point which is expressed as a question with a yes or no answer. Examples that people may be familiar with include Plato's Socratic dialogues as well as the book of Job in the Bible. The basic idea of a dialectic argument is a theses and so Aristotle starts his discussion by stating what types of theses are valid for debate. After defining the basics of dialectical argumentation Aristotle goes on to discuss the various parts which are used to make premises for the argumentation. The first premises he deals with are those which are accidental. An accident is defined by Aristotle as something of which opposites could exist in the same species. For example when dealing with a human being's skin color as one could be white and another dark brown but both are members of the same species. Aristotle then discusses all of the rules for including and using accidents to either prove ones own case or refute an opposed thesis. After dealing with accident Aristotle turns his attention to genus. Genus is the wider group of which a species is a part. For example color is the genus of the species white. There are many parts which can be used to prove or disprove whether a given species belongs to a particular genus and Aristotle discusses most of them. He then shows how genus relations can be used to prove a that a theses is correct or incorrect. Then Aristotle goes into the topic of property which is that which is true of a particular species. A property will be present in all examples of particular species even unusual ones otherwise it is not a property. From a property many universal conclusions can be reached which can help prove or disprove a thesis. Next Aristotle pulls these last three together to make the definition of an object possible. When the definition has been proved either side has ground to make their argument stick as it allows changes to things and is universal. After going through these points as well as defining sameness Aristotle tells how to go about winning a dialectical argument as well as how to lose one with honor. The form of the dialectic is more important than the facts of which one can be mistaken. Overall a difficult book which I believe to have use for lawyers, philosophers and anyone else trying to defend their viewpoint logically.
January 1, 2026
A's work on dialectical logic, most of it was an exhaustive survey of how to refute & establish designations of genus, properties, definitions, etc. mostly tedious bc of how condensed & repetitive A's prose was, w/ some interesting bits scattered throughout
October 17, 2016
E assim termino a leitura de um livro fantástico!
Read
November 5, 2018review constructive and destructive analytics for Definition (Book VI), Property (Book V), Genus (Book IV), and Accidents
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews