In the third part, Paul Kalligas and Kevin Flannery explore Aristotle's
influence on later theoretical accounts of evil.
Drawing a wealth of connections between Aristotle's
life and thinking, Natali demonstrates how the two are mutually illuminating.
"Everything that makes us civilized beings," she wrote, "every rational value that we possess--including the birth of science, the industrial revolution, the creation of America, even the [logical] structure of our language, is the result of Aristotle's
Academics and researchers have planned celebrations of Aristotle's
life this year to mark the 2,400-year anniversary of his teachings.
Therefore, Jaffa concluded in his resulting book, Ehomism and Aristotelianism (1952), that Aquinas's purpose in writing the commentary was to lure readers into thinking Aristotle's
ethical philosophy more compatible with Christian theology than it really was--to make Aristotle safe for Christianity.
To the extent that Crespo's Aristotle is not quite right, I suggest that it is because he is insufficiently familiar with Aristotle's
most sympathetic yet rigorous commentator, Thomas Aquinas.
A challenge to this reading is Aristotle's
account of the development of the embryo in GA II.6, which appears to appeal primarily to material and mechanistic causes.
In the first essay of Teleology, "Aristotle's
Conception of Final Causality," Gotthelf works through the interpretation of Aristotelian teleology with which he is most commonly associated: Aristotle's
view is that in order to explain a feature of a natural substance, one must appeal to an "irreducible potency for form." On this account, the functioning or development of a biological organ, for example, cannot be explained on the basis of underlying material or chemical processes alone.
David Charles, for one, argues that Aristotle has two main aims in his History of Animals: to 'separate distinct genera and (where required) species and to determine which properties belong per se to them.' (3) On this interpretation, the identification of genuine animal kinds, including greatest kinds, is a goal of Aristotle's
Where there is no evidence of the similarity or dissimilarity of Plato's views to Aristotle's
, we take the simplest hypothesis, that is, concord rather than controversy.
Both sides of the debate believe that Aristotle's
defense of natural teleology depends on his conception of the relationship between complex living entities and the four elements that (at an ultimate remove) compose them.