“On the Parts of Animals”
Written 350 B.C.E
Translated by William Ogle
Book 1
Part 1
Aristotle opens Book 1 by making a distinction of two kinds of proficiency.
"Every systematic science, the humblest and the noblest alike, seems to admit of two distinct kinds of proficiency; one of which may be properly called scientific knowledge of the subject, while the other is a kind of educational acquaintance with it. For an educated man should be able to form a fair off-hand judgment as to the goodness or badness of the method used by a professor in his exposition. To be educated is in fact to be able to do this; and even the man of universal education we deem to be such in virtue of his having this ability."
We can deduce that Aristotle is going to be inclined to prefer the latter kind of proficiency, that which is of the educated man.
“The causes concerned in the generation of the works of nature are, as we see, more than one. There is a final cause and there is the motor cause. Now we must decide which of these two causes comes first, which second. Plainly, however, that cause is the first which we call the final one. For this is the Reason, and the Reason forms the starting-point, alike in the works of art and in works of nature.” (page 2)
Aristotle is making a difference between a final and a motor cause. In other words, a final cause is the why and the motor is the how. As he explains later, man can only define the motor cause and that’s what he must focus on when studying animals, because trying to define the final cause is out of the capacity of man.
Then, he says that in order to discover the process of formation of each animal, one must “begin with the phenomena presented by each group of animals, and, when this is done, proceed afterwards to state the causes of those phenomena, and to deal with their evolution.” (page 3)
Aristotle states that if men and animals and their several parts are natural phenomena, then it must be considered the ultimate substances of which they are made (flesh, bone, blood), as well as the heterogenous parts (face, hand, foot), and examine how each of these comes to be what it is and in virtue of what force.
He says that “the true method is to state what the definitive characters are that distinguishes the animal as a whole; to explain it is both in substance and in form, and to deal after the same fashion with its several organs.” (page 5)
“There are then two causes, namely, necessity and the final end…I say, the body, if it is to do its work, must of necessity be of such and such a character, and made of such and such materials.” (page 6)
“For primary cause constitutes the nature of an animal much more than does its matter.” (page 6)
Part 3
In this part, Aristotle goes into the classification of animals. He is against a single dichotomous division, but proposes that a differentia shall express the whole essence of a species. These elements must be of the essence and not merely essential attributes.
Part 4
This is a continuation to the critique of the method of natural science and again, proposes a different form of classification and division for animals.
“Perhaps, then, it will be best to treat generically the universal attributes of the groups that have a common nature and contain closely allied subordinate forms, whether they are groups recognized by a true instinct of mankind or groups not popularly known by a common appellation, but withal composed of closely allied subordinate groups; and only to deal individually with the attributes of a single species, when such species, man, for instance, and any other such, if such there be-stands apart from others, and does not constitute with them a larger natural group.” (page 11)
Part 5
“Of things constituted by nature some are ungenerated, imperishable, and eternal, while others are subject to generation and decay…Both departments, however, have their special charm. The scanty conceptions to which we can attain of celestial things give us, from their excellence, more pleasure than all our knowledge of the world in which we live; just as a half glimpse of persons that we love is more delightful than a leisurely view of other things, whatever their number and dimensions. On the other hand, in certitude and in completeness our knowledge of terrestrial things has the advantage. Moreover, their greater nearness and affinity to us balances somewhat the loftier interest of the heavenly things that are the objects of the higher philosophy.” (page 11-12)
“Every realm of nature is marvelous…for each and all will reveal to us something natural and something beautiful. Absence of haphazard and conduciveness of everything to an end are to be found in Nature’s works in the highest degree, and the resultant end of her generations and combinations is a form of the beautiful.” (page 12)
“…the principal object of natural philosophy is not the material elements, but their composition, and the totality of the form, independently of which they have no existence.” (page 12)
“As every instrument and every bodily member subserves some partial end, that is to say, some special action, so the whole body must be destined to minister to some Plenary sphere of action…Similarly, the body too must somehow or other be made for the soul, and each part of it for some subordinate function, to which it is adapted.” (page 13)
Another Summary
“On the Parts of Animals, book I (PA I) begins by outlining its purpose, which is to establish a set of standards for judging natural investigations (639a15). Its five chapters pursue this purpose, discussing the appropriate level of generality for such studies, the modes of causality and of necessity to be used in biological explanations, the relation of form to matter in living things, the proper method of division for this subject matter, the means of identifying kinds and their activities at the proper level of abstraction, and much more.”
- Summary taken from somewhere in the web.
Aristotle opens Book 1 by making a distinction of two kinds of proficiency.
"Every systematic science, the humblest and the noblest alike, seems to admit of two distinct kinds of proficiency; one of which may be properly called scientific knowledge of the subject, while the other is a kind of educational acquaintance with it. For an educated man should be able to form a fair off-hand judgment as to the goodness or badness of the method used by a professor in his exposition. To be educated is in fact to be able to do this; and even the man of universal education we deem to be such in virtue of his having this ability."
We can deduce that Aristotle is going to be inclined to prefer the latter kind of proficiency, that which is of the educated man.
“The causes concerned in the generation of the works of nature are, as we see, more than one. There is a final cause and there is the motor cause. Now we must decide which of these two causes comes first, which second. Plainly, however, that cause is the first which we call the final one. For this is the Reason, and the Reason forms the starting-point, alike in the works of art and in works of nature.” (page 2)
Aristotle is making a difference between a final and a motor cause. In other words, a final cause is the why and the motor is the how. As he explains later, man can only define the motor cause and that’s what he must focus on when studying animals, because trying to define the final cause is out of the capacity of man.
Then, he says that in order to discover the process of formation of each animal, one must “begin with the phenomena presented by each group of animals, and, when this is done, proceed afterwards to state the causes of those phenomena, and to deal with their evolution.” (page 3)
Aristotle states that if men and animals and their several parts are natural phenomena, then it must be considered the ultimate substances of which they are made (flesh, bone, blood), as well as the heterogenous parts (face, hand, foot), and examine how each of these comes to be what it is and in virtue of what force.
He says that “the true method is to state what the definitive characters are that distinguishes the animal as a whole; to explain it is both in substance and in form, and to deal after the same fashion with its several organs.” (page 5)
“There are then two causes, namely, necessity and the final end…I say, the body, if it is to do its work, must of necessity be of such and such a character, and made of such and such materials.” (page 6)
“For primary cause constitutes the nature of an animal much more than does its matter.” (page 6)
Part 3
In this part, Aristotle goes into the classification of animals. He is against a single dichotomous division, but proposes that a differentia shall express the whole essence of a species. These elements must be of the essence and not merely essential attributes.
Part 4
This is a continuation to the critique of the method of natural science and again, proposes a different form of classification and division for animals.
“Perhaps, then, it will be best to treat generically the universal attributes of the groups that have a common nature and contain closely allied subordinate forms, whether they are groups recognized by a true instinct of mankind or groups not popularly known by a common appellation, but withal composed of closely allied subordinate groups; and only to deal individually with the attributes of a single species, when such species, man, for instance, and any other such, if such there be-stands apart from others, and does not constitute with them a larger natural group.” (page 11)
Part 5
“Of things constituted by nature some are ungenerated, imperishable, and eternal, while others are subject to generation and decay…Both departments, however, have their special charm. The scanty conceptions to which we can attain of celestial things give us, from their excellence, more pleasure than all our knowledge of the world in which we live; just as a half glimpse of persons that we love is more delightful than a leisurely view of other things, whatever their number and dimensions. On the other hand, in certitude and in completeness our knowledge of terrestrial things has the advantage. Moreover, their greater nearness and affinity to us balances somewhat the loftier interest of the heavenly things that are the objects of the higher philosophy.” (page 11-12)
“Every realm of nature is marvelous…for each and all will reveal to us something natural and something beautiful. Absence of haphazard and conduciveness of everything to an end are to be found in Nature’s works in the highest degree, and the resultant end of her generations and combinations is a form of the beautiful.” (page 12)
“…the principal object of natural philosophy is not the material elements, but their composition, and the totality of the form, independently of which they have no existence.” (page 12)
“As every instrument and every bodily member subserves some partial end, that is to say, some special action, so the whole body must be destined to minister to some Plenary sphere of action…Similarly, the body too must somehow or other be made for the soul, and each part of it for some subordinate function, to which it is adapted.” (page 13)
Another Summary
“On the Parts of Animals, book I (PA I) begins by outlining its purpose, which is to establish a set of standards for judging natural investigations (639a15). Its five chapters pursue this purpose, discussing the appropriate level of generality for such studies, the modes of causality and of necessity to be used in biological explanations, the relation of form to matter in living things, the proper method of division for this subject matter, the means of identifying kinds and their activities at the proper level of abstraction, and much more.”
- Summary taken from somewhere in the web.