What do you think?
Rate this book
Aristotle
- GenresPhilosophy
309 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1960
45 people are currently reading
125 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
September 8, 2008
Reading this book was an homage to a professor I had years ago and didn't fully appreciate. He was in his seventies then, and now no longer with us, and I felt that I wanted to understand what he was trying to impart to me.
John Herman Randall was a naturalist influenced by John Dewey, and wrote about Aristotle as a naturalist also. He argues that Aristotle emphasized the study of science not only in a formal, logical (Platonic) way but also in an organic, functional way. For example, in studying the eye one has to understand the functionality of the eye (seeing) in order to understand the structure of the eye (why there is a lens, etc.) This kind of approach conflicts with Newton, but anticipates Darwin.
My reading helped me understand Aristotle better, but it also at times put me off in the same way it had years ago. Some of the Aristotelian distinctions, such as between the potentiality of seeing and the actuality of seeing, seem largely verbal and scientifically fruitless. But Aristotle's approach casts light on the study of living things, even to the study of ethics.
My favorite Aristotelian insight (which Randall doesn't mention) is the difference between being virtuous and acting virtuously. The virtuous person is one who not only acts virtuously, but who has also learned to take pleasure in acting virtuously, so that virtue has become a part of the way the person functions.
John Herman Randall was a naturalist influenced by John Dewey, and wrote about Aristotle as a naturalist also. He argues that Aristotle emphasized the study of science not only in a formal, logical (Platonic) way but also in an organic, functional way. For example, in studying the eye one has to understand the functionality of the eye (seeing) in order to understand the structure of the eye (why there is a lens, etc.) This kind of approach conflicts with Newton, but anticipates Darwin.
My reading helped me understand Aristotle better, but it also at times put me off in the same way it had years ago. Some of the Aristotelian distinctions, such as between the potentiality of seeing and the actuality of seeing, seem largely verbal and scientifically fruitless. But Aristotle's approach casts light on the study of living things, even to the study of ethics.
My favorite Aristotelian insight (which Randall doesn't mention) is the difference between being virtuous and acting virtuously. The virtuous person is one who not only acts virtuously, but who has also learned to take pleasure in acting virtuously, so that virtue has become a part of the way the person functions.
September 1, 2025
A stream of pure gold! Randall's Aristotle is witty, funny, and endlessly fascinating. I enjoyed it tremendously - a brilliant blend of humor and insight that sparkles from start to finish.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews