Preview

Ancient Greek and Medieval Philosophy

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
477 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Ancient Greek and Medieval Philosophy
Carol Nguyen
Phil103: Ancient Greek and Medieval Philosophy

Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics Reading Questions
(1) In the Meno, Plato argued that it was impossible for us to learn something genuinely new: if you know x, you needn’t inquire about x, and if you don’t know x, you won’t recognize it when you find it. Thus, Plato argued, all learning is really recollection. Aristotle is trying to give a different answer to the Meno problem, one that doesn’t involve reincarnating or Platonic Forms. What is it?

Aristotle argues that knowledge must be displayed in the demonstrative structure of a science.
(2) How – and why – does Aristotle distinguish things “prior and better known to us” from things “prior and better known by nature?

He distinguishes things “prior and better known to us” from things “prior and better known by nature” in Posterior Analytics. What is better known to us versus what is known by nature is not the same thing because what is known to us is affected by our perception. Whereas we have what is prior and better known by nature which is furthest from perception (particular vs universal is how he describes such. He proves we will result in Plato’s theory in the Meno of confirming what we already know or learning nothing at all if we fail to distinguish between the two.
(3) Why does Aristotle deny that everything can be demonstrated?

Aristotle denies that not everything can be demonstrated. Those of which whom allow circular demonstration (i.e: If A, then B, then A must equal C.) are reiterating that in conclusion, A is A at all times. This method can be used to prove anything because we are not considering the distinctive properties of each factor. Also, concluding that the results are not deduction nor relevant to the things assumed.
(4) Can you explain Aristotle’s claim that “perception produces the universal in us”? How does this explain how something indemonstrable can be known?

Aristotle claims that “perception

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    In the Meno, Plato explores the relationship between knowledge and true opinion. For instance, Plato states, “As long as he has the right opinion about that of which the other has knowledge, he will not be a worse guide than the one who knows, as he has a…

    • 1669 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    He was an empiricist. This means that he believed knowledge comes to us through the senses. So knowledge for Aristotle is a posteriori (post experience) not a priori (prior to experience).…

    • 1179 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Summing up from these four points Aristotle came to a conclusion that something must exist which causes the motion and change to occur without being moved itself and the 'uncaused change' must be eternal. Aristotle reached this conclusion by observing that if something can change, it exists in one 'actual' state and has the 'potential' to become another state, for example, an actual child is potentially an adult and a cow in a field is potentially a piece of roast beef. He realised that if things come to existence they must be caused to exist by something else and if something is capable of change that means it is potentially…

    • 1238 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    1) The idea that all knowledge is attained through experience was referred to as _____ by the Greek philosopher Aristotle.…

    • 1126 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Hup 102 Short Paper #2

    • 940 Words
    • 4 Pages

    In this paper I will be discussing the view on the forms, of both Plato and Aristotle. For starts, Plato’s views on the Forms are basically describing the true meaning about material objects in the world. Like for example viewing a desk in a class room, should be looked at as more than just what we see, but thousands of atoms put together to make it look like a desk or something like that. His idea of an object was defined by what we might think something is it’s basically a form of something else. He said that we could be sitting on a chair but its quality is of an object which form is that of a chair. This idea of the form by Plato exists in a heavenly realm that could be understood by the mind. Plato’s views on the forms were aspects of everyday life, anything from a table to a bench As well as ideas and emotions. The essence of Plato's theory of Ideas Forms lay in the conscious recognition of the fact that there is a class of entities, in which the best name is probably universal, that are entirely different from sensible things, which is interesting. Plato's theory of Forms assumed that Forms are universal and exist as substances. On the other hand, Aristotle firmly disagrees with the idea of Forms being universal.…

    • 940 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    “The unexamined life is not worth living” according to Plato. He argued that we should always pursue knowledge and ask questions to do this. A key part of Plato’s philosophy is epistemology – his theory of how we know things. His concept of Ideals, also known as Forms, is Plato’s explanation of how true knowledge can be sought.…

    • 622 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Comparing Socrates To Meno

    • 1777 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Within the story Socrates and the character Meno began by searching for what virtue was. Meno simply wanted to know the nature of it, how it was acquired, but Socrates felt the definition was needed first. In the end Meno gets frustrated with the whole discussion and feels they can’t inquire about something they don’t know about. This where the concepts of knowledge and true belief come into the Meno. To prove to Meno they are able to conduct inquiry into the unknown Socrates does a demonstration with a slave boy to prove his assertion that all learning is recollection. In this demonstration he has the slave boy answer geometry questions. The slave boy does not know geometry. Throughout the demonstration Socrates simply draws pictures and asks questions to guide the boy to the answer. At the end of the discussion the slave boy who had no knowledge of geometry was able to answer a few geometrical questions. Socrates takes this to prove his assertion that the soul is immortal, and therefore all learning is recollection. Socrates says because the soul is immortal it possesses all knowledge within it, and what we call learning is really recollecting. We acquire knowledge through inquiring about things until we are able to ‘remember’ them as Socrates states it. Once we have done sufficient inquiry these true beliefs within us become knowledge once again as…

    • 1777 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Aristotle Research Paper

    • 767 Words
    • 4 Pages

    He thought that each thing or event has more than one reason that helps to explain what, why, and where that thing or event is. Greek thinkers from earlier on thought that only one kind of cause could explain itself. Aristotle, on the other hand, said four could. The four causes he spoke of were: material cause, efficient cause, formal cause, and the final cause. For example, he would say that the material cause of a house is the supplies from which it was built. The efficient cause of the house would be the builder. The formal cause would be the shape the builder decided upon. The final cause would be the house's function, to be a home. Aristotle said that something could be understood more when its causes are in specific terms rather than in general ones. Therefore, Aristotle would say that it is more informative to know that a builder built the house rather than to know that it was built by a man. Even further, he would say that it was more informative to know who the builder was rather than just knowing that a builder built…

    • 767 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    No Title

    • 276 Words
    • 2 Pages

    In the next column, based on Aristotle’s science of the first philosophy, analyze how Aristotle’s metaphysics may guide contemporary people to knowledge about the world.…

    • 276 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    After introducing the principle causes (efficient, formal, material, final), Aristotle talks about chance and spontaneity in Book II, (Physics) for the purpose of investigating their place among the said causes. Aristotle bases his enquiry on the observation that in history, these terms are conflictive in their interpretation. Some people say that everything that we consider luck or spontaneity really has some underlying definite cause. Yet there are other people, such as Empedocles, who invoke chance when describing the physics of air; or some, who “ascribe this heavenly sphere and all the worlds to spontaneity” (196a 25). In setting out to elucidate the nature of these terms and their place among the causes, Aristotle contends that chance and spontaneity are not explanatory causes of their own, but concurrent causes. By drawing from Aristotle’s view on nature and deliberate intention, this essay sets out to develop a clear understanding of the term concurrent in relation to chance and spontaneity.…

    • 2033 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Examples that Aristotle offered dealt with the five ultimate material elements of reality that he established. These elements of reality are earth, water, air, fire, and either. Each of these elements were moving to get to their telos, or final goal in life. He clearly defined the movement of each of these elements. Earth, such as rocks, fall to the ground to get to the center of the earth. Water also falls to the center of the earth and also lies on top of earth. Air is trying to rise above water. Finally…

    • 1755 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Plato put together a set of theories about the human soul and knowledge as follows. The theory of rationalism: Knowledge as an essential part of reasoning and the human soul cannot be eliminated. It is an innate feature of the human soul. The second is based on a theory of existence. It argues that the soul is immortal and cannot be annihilated. The soul pre-existed the body and will still be alive when the body dies. In addition, the third theory states that the soul secured all imaginable understanding during its preceding existences. This theory is showcased in the context of Meno and Socrates’s search for the essence of virtue. This paper will detail the confirmation of factual recollection with reference to Meno’s slave, its’ interpretation and the puzzle recollection aims to solve.…

    • 706 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Meno's Paradox Analysis

    • 560 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Further states that the “soul is reborn but never destroyed” and that the “soul has learned everything” (Meno 81b-c). Nothing is learned but “it (the soul) recollects the things it knew before”. Plato then attempts to provide some sort of formal proof that the theory is plausible (Cline 2). Socrates asks Meno to “call over one of these many attendants of yours” (Meno 82b). First Socrates asks a geometry question. The boy answers wrong twice even though he seemed confident about the first answer. Socrates then helps the boy to recollect the answer that his soul already knew through some questions with out exactly explaining anything. Plato infers that since the boy has not been taught the information but was able to come to the correct conclusion this must be proof of recollection. “If he has not acquired them(the anwers) in his present life, is it not clear that he had them and had learned them at some other time (Meno…

    • 560 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Aristotle (Light Travel)

    • 1169 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Aristotle uses two methods to prove light cannot travel. Besides his empirical explanation, where he observes that for the supposed motion of light to go “unnoticed from where the sun rises to where it sets is asking too much” (418b26), he also provides an argument that is understood through the “light of reason.” (418b24) To understand his contention we must refer to his definitions of light and the transparent. The transparent is, for Aristotle, the medium of sight; it is “what is visible but not visible in its own right.”(418b5) Aristotle remarks that “air and water and many solid bodies are of this sort”(418b5), i.e. the sort of things we associate with transparency, but they are not the transparent as such, but rather share a common quality, which is the transparent. Light is not the visible, but that through which what is properly visible is seen. The transparent is only identifiable in virtue of its being-at-work-staying-the-same, light, without which the visible could not set into motion that which was being-at-work-staying-transparent. This being said, we can now understand Aristotle’s contention for the impossibility of light travel, which begins at 418b15. One way of understanding the argument is thus: Even if we assume that light does in fact travel, which runs counter to the empirical evidence of Aristotle’s epoch, this implies illumination ought to be a local motion of light passing through the transparent, now local motion is restricted to bodies, therefore if Aristotle can prove light is not a body the whole argument crumbles to the ground. To prove light is not a body Aristotle makes the following assumption, “two bodies could not be in the same thing at the same time.”(418b17) Thus if light was a body it would be incapable of co-existing with a transparent body as such. But light does co-exist with transparent bodies, this is proved by examining light and its contrary, where Aristotle states that “since darkness is the absence…

    • 1169 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Thales of Miletus

    • 1024 Words
    • 5 Pages

    To understand (2) we need to examine its source. Archê is Aristotle’s word: it means beginning or source or principle (cf. “archaic,” “archaeology,” “architect”). Aristotle is here talking about what he called the material archê, which can be either the stuff from which something originated or the stuff of which it is composed. Thus, Thales thought (Aristotle tells us) that everything either originated in water (cosmogony) or is actually (now!) made of water (constituent analysis).…

    • 1024 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays