Empiricism and Hearsay in Aristotle’s Zoological Collection of Facts

doi:10.1017/9781108181792.005

Chapter 4 - Empiricism and Hearsay in Aristotle’s Zoological Collection of Facts

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 May 2021

Mariska Leunissen

Edited by

Sophia M. Connell

Show author details

Sophia M. Connell: Affiliation:
Birkbeck College, University of London

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Aristotle’s biological treatises are full of explicit commitments to empiricism, expressing both his own views about how one should conduct biological investigations while using observation and sharp critiques of his predecessors for failing to see the facts. This chapter examines some of the most prominent features of Aristotle’s commitments to empirical methods as they can be observed to be at work at the most basic level of his science of biology, that is, at the level of establishing the facts about the parts, activities, lives, and characters of animals as collected in his History of Animals (HA). Specifically, the chapter discusses Aristotle’s methods for establishing and evaluating facts as well as the sometimes all too important role played by folklore, fables, and hearsay in Aristotle’s collection of zoological facts.

Keywords

empiricism facts History of Animals sources folklore fables

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge Companion to Aristotle's Biology , pp. 64 - 82

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108181792.005 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Guide to Further Reading

Balme, D. 1991. Aristotle’s Historia Animalium, Vol. 3: Books 7–10 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar

Balme, D. 2002. Aristotle: Historia Animalium, Vol. 1: Books 1–10. Text (Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar

Gotthelf, A. 1988/2012f. “Historiae I: Plantarum et Animalium,” in Fortenbaugh, W. W. and Sharples, R. W. (eds.), Theophrastean Studies (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press), 100–135.Google Scholar

Peck, A. L. 1965. Aristotle: Historia Animalium, Vol. 1: Books 1–3 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar

Thompson, D. 1910. Historia Animalium (Oxford: Clarendon Press).Google Scholar

Leroi, A. M. 2014. The Lagoon. How Aristotle Invented Science (London: Bloomsbury).Google Scholar

Devereux, D. and Pellegrin, P. 1990. Biologie, Logique et Métaphysique chez Aristote (Paris: Éditions du CNRS).Google Scholar

Gotthelf, A. (ed.) 1985a. Aristotle on Nature and Living Things: Philosophical and Historical Studies Presented to David M. Balme on his Seventieth Birthday (Pittsburgh, PA: Matheus Publications).Google Scholar

Gotthelf, A. 2012a. Teleology, First Principles and Scientific Method in Aristotle’s Biology (Oxford University Press).CrossRef Google Scholar

Gotthelf, A. and Lennox, J. G. (eds.) 1987. Philosophical Issues in Aristotle’s Biology (Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar

Kullmann, W. and Föllinger, S. (eds.) 1997. Aristotelische Biologie: Intentionem, Methoden, Ergebnisse (Stuttgart: Steiner).Google Scholar

Lennox, J. G. 2001b. Aristotle’s Philosophy of Biology: Studies in the Origins of Life Science (Cambridge Studies in Philosophy and Biology) (Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar

Lloyd, G. E. R. 1996a. Aristotelian Explorations (Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar

Bemer, K. 2014. “A Philosophical Examination of Aristotle’s History of Animals.” Dissertation (University of Pittsburgh: http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/22674).Google Scholar

Charles, D. 2000. Aristotle on Meaning and Essence (Oxford University Press).Google Scholar

Gotthelf, A. 1997a. “The Elephant’s Nose: Further Reflections on the Axiomatic Structure of Biological Explanation in Aristotle,” in Kullmann, W. and Föllinger, S. (eds.), Aristotelische Biologie (Stuttgart: Steiner), 85–96.Google Scholar

Gotthelf, A. 2012d. “Data‐organization, Classification, and Kinds, the Place of the History of Animals in Aristotle’s Biological Enterprise,” in Gotthelf, A., Teleology, First Principles, and Scientific Method in Aristotle’s Biology (Oxford University Press), 261–292.CrossRef Google Scholar

Lennox, J. G. 1987a. “Divide and Explain: The Posterior Analytics in Practice,” in Gotthelf, A and Lennox, J. G. (eds.), Philosophical Issues in Aristotle’s Biology (Cambridge University Press), 90–119.Google Scholar

Lennox, J. G. 1990. “Notes on David Charles on HA,” in Devereux, D. and Pellegrin, P. (eds.), Biologie, Logique et Métaphysique chez Aristote (Paris: Éditions du CNRS), 169–183.Google Scholar

Lennox, J. G. 1991. “Between Data and Demonstration: The Analytics and the Historia Animalium,” in Bowen, A. (ed.), Science and Philosophy in Classical Greece (New York: Garland Publishing), 261–295.Google Scholar

Lennox, J. G. 2006. “Aristotle’s Biology and Aristotle’s Philosophy,” in Gill, M. L. and Pellegrin, P. (eds.), A Companion to Ancient Philosophy (Oxford: Blackwell), 292–315.Google Scholar

Lones, T. E. 1912. Aristotle’s Researches in Natural Science (London: West, Newman & Co.).CrossRef Google Scholar

Balme, D. 1962. “Genos and Eidos in Aristotle’s Biology,” The Classical Quarterly 12(1): 81–98.Google Scholar

Balme, D. 1987b. “Aristotle’s Use of Division and Differentiae,” in Gotthelf, A. and Lennox, J. G. (eds.), Philosophical Issues in Aristotle’s Biology (Cambridge University Press), 69–89.Google Scholar

Charles, D. 1990. “Aristotle on Meaning, Natural Kinds and Natural History,” in Devereux, D. and Pellegrin, P. (eds.), Biologie, Logique et Métaphysique chez Aristote (Paris: Éditions du CNRS), 145–167.Google Scholar

Gotthelf, A. 2012e. “History of Animals I.6 490b7-491a6: Aristotle’s Megista Gênê,” in Gotthelf, A., Teleology, First Principles, and Scientific Method in Aristotle’s Biology (Oxford University Press), 293–306.CrossRef Google Scholar

Henry, D. 2011b. “Aristotle’s Pluralistic Realism,” The Monist 94: 197–220.CrossRef Google Scholar

Lennox, J. G. 2001c. “Kinds, Forms of Kinds, and the More and the Less in Aristotle’s Biology,” in Lennox 2001b, 160–181.Google Scholar

Pellegrin, P. 1982. La classification des animaux chez Aristote (Paris: Les Belles Lettres). [Translated by Preus, A. 1986. Aristotle’s Classification of Animals (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).]Google Scholar

Pellegrin, P. 1985. “Aristotle: A Zoology Without Species,” in Gotthelf, A. (ed.), Aristotle on Nature and Living Things: Philosophical and Historical Studies Presented to David M. Balme on his Seventieth Birthday (Pittsburgh, PA: Mathesis Publications), 95–116.Google Scholar

1987. “Logical and Biological Difference: The Unity of Aristotle’s Thought,” in Gotthelf, A. and Lennox, J. (eds.), Philosophical Issues in Aristotle’s Biology (Cambridge University Press), 313–338.Google Scholar

Stoyles, B. J. 2013. “Megista Genê and Division in Aristotle’s Generation of Animals,” Apeiron 46(1): 1–25.Google Scholar