lions reveal the nature of the species better in their natural habitat than in laboratories or zoos.
Aristotle is a collector of facts; but he is far from being just that. In all his major works his treatment of
the facts is informed by consciousness of philosophical issues, and it is here that he is most aware of
belonging to a long tradition of philosophy and developing it further. He collected books and read them
thoroughly and repeatedly; he worked in close familiarity with the works of his predecessors (including
Plato) and usually this resulted in close criticism. Often he will illuminate and expand a discussion by
referring to some treatment of it from the history of philosophy; and it is standard for him to begin a
discussion by running through previous positions, and pointing out -what in them is systematically
promising or mistaken. He has been attacked as though this were arrogant cannibalizing of previous
philosophy in the interests of his own ideas, but this is mistaken. His attitude in fact shows profound
intellectual humility:
No-one is able to attain the truth adequately, while, on the other hand, we do not collectively fail, but
everyone says something true about the nature of things, and while individually we contribute little or
nothing to the truth, by the union of all a considerable amount is amassed. (Met. 993{a} 31-{b}4, Ross
translation)
Aristotle never tries to make a radical break either in style or in aim with the cumulative and developing
body of philosophical thought available to him (indeed, his treatment of Plato is often insensitive to the
extent to which Plato begins by making such a break). He sees himself as a partner in a joint enterprise,
able to advance as he does thanks to the spade-work of others. Original achievement consists not in
pushing forward unaided but in making intelligent use of what others have provided:
We must first consider what is said by others, so that, if there is anything which they say wrongly, we
may not be liable to the same objections, while, if there is any opinion common to them and us, we shall
have no private grievance against ourselves on that account, for one must be content to state some points
better than one's predecessors and others no worse. (Met. 1076s 12-16, Ross translation)
Aristotle's philosophical methodology is subtle and avoids the trap of applying in one area an approach
suitable only in others. ('It is the mark of an educated mind to look for precision in each class of things
just so far as the nature of the subject admits' (Me. Ethics 1094b 23-5).)
In both the Physics and the Ethics he is explicit that a good treatment of an issue will do justice to the
appearances or 'phenomena', where these cover both 'the facts', the way the world appears to us, and the
observations and explanations that it prompts us to. He does not have uncritical respect for the
phenomena, but he feels no urge to find theories that explain them away: long familiarity with the
history of philosophy shows that such theories are likely to lead to dead ends. He begins by laying out
various views that recommend themselves to us about time, say, or space, or "weakness of will; then he
analyses problems and conflicts that these produce. His own answer tries to understand and rationalize
this material, showing why we are inclined to certain views, or why we tend to go wrong in accepting
others. This does not mean that his own answers will be conservatively respectful of common sense: