Posterior Analytics

By Aristotle

The Posterior Analytics is a text from Aristotle's Organon that deals with demonstration, definition, and scientific knowledge. The demonstration is distinguished as a syllogism productive of scientific knowledge, while the definition is marked as the statement of a thing's nature, ... a statement of the meaning of the name, or an equivalent nominal formula.

• Language: English
• Publisher: DigiCat
• Release date: Aug 10, 2022
• ISBN: 8596547158363

Aristotle

Aristotle was an ancient Greek philosopher and scientist whose works have profoundly influenced philosophical discourse and scientific investigation from the later Greek period through to modern times. A student of Plato, Aristotle’s writings cover such disparate topics as physics, zoology, logic, aesthetics, and politics, and as one of the earliest proponents of empiricism, Aristotle advanced the belief that people’s knowledge is based on their perceptions. In addition to his own research and writings, Aristotle served as tutor to Alexander the Great, and established a library at the Lyceum. Although it is believed that only a small fraction of his original writings have survived, works such as The Art of Rhetoric, Nicomachean Ethics, Poetics, and Metaphysics have preserved Aristotle’s legacy and influence through the ages.

Book preview

Aristotle

Posterior Analytics

EAN 8596547158363

DigiCat, 2022

Contact: [e-mail]

Table of Contents

Book I.

Book II.

Chapter I: Whether a Demonstrative Science exists

Chapter II: What Knowing is, what Demonstration is, and of what it consists

Chapter III: A refutation of the error into which some have fallen concerning Science and Demonstration

Chapter IV: The meaning of ‘Distributive,’ ‘Essential,’ ‘Universal’

Chapter V: From what causes mistakes arise with regard to the discovery of the Universal. How they may be avoided

Chapter VI: Demonstration is founded on Necessary and Essential Principles

Chapter VII: The Premises and the Conclusion of a Demonstration must belong to the same genus

Chapter VIII: Demonstration is concerned only with what is eternal

Chapter IX: Demonstration is founded not on general, but on special and indemonstrable principles; nor is it easy to know whether one really possesses knowledge drawn from these principles

Chapter X: The Definition and Division of Principles

Chapter XI: On certain Principles which are common to all Sciences

Chapter XII: On Questions, and, in passing, on the way in which Sciences are extended

Chapter XIII: The difference between the Demonstration and Science of a thing’s Nature and those of its Cause

Chapter XIV: The figure proper to Demonstrate Syllogism

Chapter XV: On immediate negative propositions

Chapter XVI: On ignorance resulting from a defective arrangement of terms in mediate propositions

Chapter XVII: On ignorance resulting from a defective arrangement of terms in immediate propositions

Chapter XVIII: On ignorance as resulting from defective sense perception

Chapter XIX: Whether the Principles of Demonstration are finite or infinite

Chapter XX: Middle terms are not infinite

Chapter XXI: In Negations some final and ultimate point is reached where the series must cease

Chapter XXII: In Affirmations some final and ultimate point is reached where the series must cease

Chapter XXIII: Certain Corollaries

Chapter XXIV: Whether Universal or Particular Demonstration is superior

Chapter XXV: That Affirmative is superior to Negative Demonstration

Chapter XXVI: Direct Demonstration is superior to Reduction per impossible

Chapter XXVII: What science is more certain and prior, and what less certain and inferior

Chapter XXVIII: What constitutes one or many Sciences

Chapter XXIX: Concerning many Demonstrations of the same thing

Chapter XXX: On fortuitous occurrences

Chapter XXXI: Sense perception cannot give Demonstrative Science

Chapter XXXII: On the difference of Principles corresponding to the difference of Syllogisms

Chapter XXXIII: The distinction between Science and Opinion

Chapter XXXIV: On Sagacity

Chapter I: On the number and arrangements of Questions

Chapter II: Every question is concerned with the discovery of a Middle Term

Chapter III: The distinction between Definition and Demonstration

Chapter IV: The Essence of a thing cannot be attained by Syllogism

Chapter V: Knowledge of the Essence cannot be attained by Division

Chapter VI: The Essence cannot be proved by the Definition of the thing itself or by that of its opposite

Chapter VII: Whether the Essence can in any way be proved

Chapter VIII: How the Essence can be proved

Chapter IX: What Essences can and what cannot be proved

Chapter X: The nature and forms of Definition

Chapter XI: The kinds of Causes used in Demonstration

Chapter XII: On the Causes of events which exist, are in process, have happened, or will happen

Chapter XIII: On the search for a Definition

Chapter XIV: On the discovery of Questions for Demonstration

Chapter XV: How far the same Middle Term is employed for demonstrating different Questions

Chapter XVI: On inferring the Cause from the Effect

Chapter XVII: Whether there can be several causes of the same thing

Chapter XVIII: Which is the prior cause, that which is nearer the particular, or the more universal?

Chapter XIX: On the attainment of Primary Principles

Appendix

Book I.

Table of Contents

Chap. I.: Whether a Demonstrative Science exists

Chap. II.: What Knowing is, what Demonstration is, and of what it consists

Chap. III.: A refutation of the error into which some have fallen concerning Science and Demonstration

Chap. IV.: The meaning of ‘Distributive,’ ‘Essential,’ ‘Universal’

Chap. V.: From what causes mistakes arise with regard to the discovery of the Universal. How they may be avoided

Chap. VI.: Demonstration is founded on Necessary and Essential Principles

Chap. VII.: The Premises and the Conclusion of a Demonstration must belong to the same genus

Chap. VIII.: Demonstration is concerned only with what is eternal

Chap. IX.: Demonstration is founded not on general, but on special and indemonstrable principles; nor is it easy to know whether one really possesses knowledge drawn from these principles

Chap. X.: The Definition and Division of Principles

Chap. XI.: On certain Principles which are common to all Sciences

Chap. XII.: On Questions, and, in passing, on the way in which Sciences are extended

Chap. XIII.: The difference between the Demonstration and Science of a thing’s Nature and those of its Cause

Chap. XIV.: The figure proper to Demonstrate Syllogism

Chap. XV.: On immediate negative propositions

Chap. XVI.: On ignorance resulting from a defective arrangement of terms in mediate propositions

Chap. XVII.: On ignorance resulting from a defective arrangement of terms in immediate propositions

Chap. XVIII.: On ignorance as resulting from defective sense perception

Chap. XIX.: Whether the Principles of Demonstration are finite or infinite

Chap. XX.: Middle terms are not infinite

Chap. XXI.: In Negations some final and ultimate point is reached where the series must cease

Chap. XXII.: In Affirmations some final and ultimate point is reached where the series must cease

Chap. XXIII.: Certain Corollaries

Chap. XXIV.: Whether Universal or Particular Demonstration is superior

Chap. XXV.: That Affirmative is superior to Negative Demonstration

Chap. XXVI.: Direct Demonstration is superior to Reduction per impossible

Chap. XXVII.: What science is more certain and prior, and what less certain and inferior

Chap. XXVIII.: What constitutes one or many Sciences

Chap. XXIX.: Concerning many Demonstrations of the same thing

Chap. XXX.: On fortuitous occurrences

Chap. XXXI.: Sense perception cannot give Demonstrative Science

Chap. XXXII.: On the difference of Principles corresponding to the difference of Syllogisms

Chap. XXXIII.: The distinction between Science and Opinion

Chap. XXXIV.: On Sagacity

Book II.

Table of Contents

Chap. I.: On the number and arrangements of Questions

Chap. II.: Every question is concerned with the discovery of a Middle Term

Chap. III.: The distinction between Definition and Demonstration

Chap. IV.: The Essence of a thing cannot be attained by Syllogism

Chap. V.: Knowledge of the Essence cannot be attained by Division

Chap. VI.: The Essence cannot be proved by the Definition of the thing itself or by that of its opposite

Chap. VII.: Whether the Essence can in any way be proved

Chap. VIII.: How the Essence can be proved

Chap. IX.: What Essences can and what cannot be proved

Chap. X.: The nature and forms of Definition

Chap. XI.: The kinds of Causes used in Demonstration

Chap. XII.: On the Causes of events which exist, are in process, have happened, or will happen

Chap. XIII.: On the search for a Definition

Chap. XIV.: On the discovery of Questions for Demonstration

Chap. XV.: How far the same Middle Term is employed for demonstrating different Questions

Chap. XVI.: On inferring the Cause from the Effect

Chap. XVII.: Whether there can be several causes of the same thing

Chap. XVIII.: Which is the prior cause, that which is nearer the particular, or the more universal?

Chap. XIX.: On the attainment of Primary Principles

Appendix.

Chapter I: Whether a Demonstrative Science exists

Table of Contents

Previous knowledge is required for all scientific studies or methods of instruction. Examples from Mathematics, Dialectic and Rhetoric. Previous knowledge as variously expressed in theses concerning either the existence of a thing or the meaning of the word denoting it. Learning consists in the conversion of universal into particular knowledge.

All communications of knowledge from teacher to pupil by way of reasoning pre-suppose some pre-existing knowledge. The truth of this statement may be seen from a complete enumeration of instances:—it is thus that the mathematical sciences are attained and every art also. The same is the case with dialectical arguments whether proceeding by means of the syllogism or of induction, for the former kind makes such assumptions as people who understand the meaning admit, the latter uses the recognized clearness of the particular as an indication of the universal, so that both convey their information by means of things already known. So too orators produce conviction in a like manner, using either Example, which is equivalent to induction, or Enthymeme, which corresponds to syllogism.

Pre-existing knowledge of two kinds is required: one must either assume beforehand that something exists, or one must understand what the word means, while sometimes both sorts of knowledge are required. As an example of the first case we may take the necessity for previously knowing the proposition ‘everything must be either affirmed or denied.’ Of the second case an instance would be the knowledge of the meaning conveyed by the word ‘triangle’; of the combination of both kinds, the knowledge both of what ‘Unit’ means, and of the fact that ‘Unit’ exists. The distinction is necessary, since the grounds of certainty differ in the two cases.

Some facts become known as a result of previously acquired knowledge, while others are learned at the moment of perceiving the object. This latter happens in the case of all things comprised under a universal, with which one is already acquainted. It is known to the pupil, before perceiving any particular triangle, that the interior angles of every triangle are equal to two right angles; but it is only at the moment of sense-perception that he learns that this figure inscribed in the semi-circle is a triangle.

In some cases knowledge is only acquired in this latter way, and the particular is not learned by means of a middle term: that is to say, in the cases where we touch the concrete particular, that is in the case of things which are not predicable of any subject. We ought to admit that, even before arriving at particulars, and so obtaining a syllogism, we do, from one point of view perhaps, possess knowledge, although from another we do not. For how, it may be asked, when he did not know whether the thing existed at all or not, could he have known absolutely that it contains two right angles? The answer is that he knows it from a particular point of view, in that he knows the universal, but he does not know it absolutely. On any other view we shall have the dilemma of the Meno—a man will either learn nothing at all or only what he knows before. This difficulty must not be solved as some try to do. The question is asked, ‘Do you or do you not know every dyad to be even?’ On receiving an affirmative reply they bring forward some dyad of the existence of which the other was ignorant, and so could not have known it to be even. The solution suggested is to say that one does not know every dyad to be even, but only that which one knows to be a dyad. On the other hand one knows that of which one possesses or has received a demonstration, and no demonstration concerns merely (e.g.) every triangle, or number, one may happen to know, but every possible triangle or number. No demonstrative proposition is taken as referring to ‘any number you may know of,’ or ‘any straight line you may know of,’ but to the entire subject. Nothing, however, I should suppose, precludes our knowing already what we learn from one point of view and not knowing it from another. The absurdity would consist