The Philosophy Book

59

Plato and Aristotle differed in their

opinion of the nature of universal

qualities. For Plato, they reside in the

higher realm of the Forms, but for

Aristotle they reside here on Earth.

now call the biological sciences,
whereas Plato’s background had
been firmly based in mathematics.
This difference in background
helps to explain the difference in
approach between the two men.
Mathematics, especially geometry,
deals with abstract concepts that
are far removed from the everyday
world, whereas biology is very much
about the world around us, and is
based almost solely on observation.
Plato sought confirmation of a realm
of Forms from notions such as the
perfect circle (which cannot exist
in nature), but Aristotle found that
certain constants can be discovered
by examining the natural world.

Trusting the senses
What Aristotle proposed turned
Plato’s theory on its head. Far from
mistrusting our senses, Aristotle
relied on them for the evidence

to back up his theories. What he

learnt from studying the natural

world was that by observing the

characteristics of every example

of a particular plant or animal that

he came across, he could build up

a complete picture of what it was

that distinguished it from other

plants or animals, and deduce what

makes it what it is. His own studies

confirmed what he already

believed—that we are not born

with an innate ability to recognize

Forms, as Plato maintained.

Each time a child comes across

a dog, for example, it notes what it

is about that animal that it has in

common with other dogs, so that

it can eventually recognize the

things that make something a

dog. The child now has an idea

of “dogginess”, or the “form”, as

Aristotle puts it, of a dog. In this

way, we learn from our experience

of the world what the shared

characteristics are that make

things what they are—and

the only way of experiencing

the world is through our senses.

The essential form of things

Like Plato, then, Aristotle is

concerned with finding some kind of

immutable and eternal bedrock in a

world characterized by change, but

he concludes that there is no need

to look for this anchor in a world of

Forms that are only perceptible to

the soul. The evidence is here in the

world around us, perceptible through

the senses. Aristotle believes that

things in the material world are not

imperfect copies of some ideal

Form of themselves, but that the

essential form of a thing is actually

inherent in each instance of that

thing. For example, “dogginess”

is not just a shared characteristic

of dogs—it is something that is

inherent in each and every dog. ❯❯

See also: Socrates 46–49 ■ Plato 50–55 ■ Avicenna 76–79 ■ Averroes 82–83 ■ René Descartes 116–123 ■
John Locke 130–33 ■ Gottfried Leibniz 134–37 ■ George Berkeley 138–41 ■ David Hume 148–53 ■ Immanuel Kant 164–71

THE ANCIENT WORLD

Everything that

depends on the action

of nature is by nature

as good as it can be.

Aristotle