wm • - •••••• s eZcJ &*te/est/ Z^ ey*^JZ~4 . if. / . j-3. ~i KA ? 30 Lturssc. AIKHSUWILi fromVisconti's looiiographie Grecque. Unqmi'oJ. for ///«.- - / 'jUu \ilir Reid's Analysis of Aristotle’s Logic. MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. (io in his writings ; considering that the greatest, and perhaps the best, part of them are lost, and that his copyists and interpreters have ascribed to him innu- merable opinions which he did not hold ; while by universally confounding his solid sense with the fan- cies of Plato, they have introduced incongruities and absurdities of which he was never guilty. We do not say with some of his extravagant ad- mirers, that he treated all his subjects in a manner complete, so as to surpass every preceding exertion of the human intellect. This eulogium is only partial- ly true. But the praise and merit must be allowed him of having introduced and exemplified a stricter method of philosophising thpn what had been before observed in the Grecian schools. In every doctrine and theory he excluded the mixtures of poetry and fable which, in some degree, still prevailed ; and he endeavoured to subject every hypothesis to the test of reason and argument. He framed with penetra- tion and acuteness superior to all others, the rules of logical induction and demonstrative reasoning. It was from the accuracy and the novelty of his sys- tem in this respect, as well as from the universality of his genius, which appeared to master every subject of study with equal facility, that some of the ablest judges in antiquity, on perusing his elaborate treatises on the different branches of knowledge, hesitated not to pronounce him “ the most excellent in all science, Plato only excepted.” This is the opinion of Cicero, to whose philosophical works the world at large is E 66 MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. more indebted for a familiar notion of several of Aris- totle’s most important doctrines, than to the labours of all bis commentators collectively.* The enco- mium, however, must not be understood to imply that the ancients approved exclusively of his physi- cal and moral theories as preferable to all other sys- tems ; or that they gave an entire and unlimited as- sent to all his tenets. Even his own disciples and successors in the Lycseum disagreed with him on cer- tain points ; nor did the followers of other sects, who commented on parts of his works which they thought most ingenious, espouse liis general principles, or acknowledge him their master in philosophy. Such servile adoration did not obtain until the dark age of literature arose, in which all taste for liberal inquiry became extinct, and the human faculties themselves appeared to be sunk in irretrievable torpor. It was then that the benighted world embraced him as an infallible guide, and bowed with submissive indolence to his dogmas. Revering him as an oracle, they be- lieved that where his text was obscure, it was to be explained into some profound meaning which, being inexpressible by any known words, might be denot- ed by terms of their own invention, that had either a very dubious sense, or were as unintelligible as * “ Cum omnis ratio diligens disserendi dnas habet partes, unam inveniendi, alteram judicandi, utriusque Princeps, ut mihi quidem videtur, Aristoteles fuit .” — Cicero in Topic. And again, “Aristoteles longo omnibus (Platonem semper excipio) prsestans et ingenio, et diligent.ia.” — Tusculan. ( incest . lib. i. MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. 67 the original. By those means was Aristotle at length not merely exalted to the throne of philosophy, but enshrined as it were the inspired and presiding ge- nius of science. Never was papal despotism over the consciences of men more absolute, than was the authority of the Stagirite over their minds and opi- nions. The power of the greatest monarchs on earth must appear fleeting and precarious, when compared with his long and solitary reign in the schools of the middle ages. From this summary of the life and character of Aristotle, tve must now turn to give a condensed survey of his voluminous works. According to the most credible accounts, he composed about 400 dif- ferent treatises on. the various subjects which then formed the curriculum of scholastic study, including Logic, Rhetoric, Ethics, Politics, Physics, Meta- physics, Mathematics, Optics, Astronomy, Music, Mechanics, Medicine, Philology, Physiology, Natu- ral History, Epistles, and many other topics, which it would be tedious to enumerate. It appears that neither he nor Theophrastus were at pains to secure the publication of their works during their lifetime ; and the cause of their negligence or nonperformance of this important task, has been the theme of much conjecture. The solution of the question may de- pend on collateral circumstances with which we are altogether unacquainted : but the current persuasion was, that it arose either from an excess of modesty or prudence ; or, from a diffidence of success in com- 68 MEMOIR OP ARISTOTLE. peting with Plato, who then stood pre-eminent in philosophical fame, and whose opinions he had in se- veral material points impugned. Whatever the fact may be, the carelessness or timidity of Aristotle was fatal to his writings, and had well nigh created a blank in literary history, which might have for ever deprived the world of this invaluable treasury of an- cient learning. The extraordinary fate and miraculous preserva- tion of these works, form a curious episode in the biography of their author ; and the regret which every friend to science must feel, that so much has perished, is heightened by reflecting on the imperfect and mutilated state of the little that re- mains. Whilst the Stagirito distributed his other property to his surviving family, he left the more precious bequest of his library and manuscripts to his favourite disciple Theophrastus, who in his turn bequeathed them to his own scholar Neleus, by whom they were conveyed from Athens to Scepsis, bis na- tive place, a city of the ancient Troas, in Asia Mi- nor. The heirs of Neleus, to whom they next de- scended, being neither men of letters, nor lovers of books, (as Strabo relates,) totally neglected the intel- lectual treasure that had most unworthily devolved to them. The magnificence of kings had then be- gun to display itself in collecting works of ge- nius, which were sought out with an eager and la- vish curiosity. It was a taste happy for the cause of literature in general, although in the present in- MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. 69 stance, the occasion of serious misfortune. The Scepsions on hearing that Eumenes, king of Perga- mus, in whose dominions they lived, was making ex- tensive researches with the view of forming a large library, resorted to a selfish expedient for securing their literary property from the rapacious hands of their sovereign. With the caution incident to the subjects of a despot, who often have recourse to con- cealment in order to avoid robbery, they hid the books under ground ; and in this subterranean ce- metery the writings of Aristotle, as well as the vast collection of materials from which they had been composed, lay buried for many generations, a prey to dampness and worms. Some authors, such as Bayle and Patricius, allege that Neleus sold the original works and the whole library to Ptolemy Philadel- phus of Egypt, after having transcribed them ; and that it was only the copies and not the originals that were exposed to the unworthy fate of rotting in a humid cell. But the supposition is altogether im- probable. On the one hand it is hardly credible that so many thousand volumes could have been tran- scribed in so short a time ; and on the other, it is reasonable to believe that the philosophy of the Ly- caeum would have struck deeper root and made greater progress in the Egyptian capital than it ever did, bad the genuine works of the Stagirite adorned the library of Alexandria, under the first Ptolemies. In their catacomb at Scepsis, the manuscripts re- mained until their very existence seems to have been 70 MEMOTR OF ARISTOTLE. forgotten. At length, after the lapse of 130 years, and when all hope of their ever seeing the light must have vanished, vanity and avarice accomplished what a nobler motive ought to have done. Apellicon, a rich disciple of the Peripatetic school, whose name has been already mentioned, while residing at Athens, had turned his attention to the collecting of books ; and although a “ bibliosophist rather than a philoso- pher,” (as Strabo calls him), he courted the ostenta- tion of scholarship, by ordering them to be pur- chased at the dearest rate. The “ witless felons of philosophy” at Scepsis heard of his premiums and opened their vault. The volumes of Aristotle and his illustrious successor were thus released from pri- son, or rather dug from the grave, and, with all the injuries of moths and mouldering upon them, sold for a large sum, and carried back to the city where they had been originally written. Their new owner was at the expense of employing a number of copy- ists to transcribe them, himself superintending the task. The work of restoring them was very imper- fectly executed, and this must be attributed not only to the ignorance of the transcribers, but to the tat- tered condition of the manuscripts, and the abstruse nature of the subjects. The most considerable part of his Acroatic works, which are almost the whole of those now remaining, consist of little else than text-books, containing the detached heads of his discourses ; and from a want of connexion in the matter, they have been exposed to additional cor- MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. 71 ruption from the conjectural emendations of subse- quent commentators. What became of Aristotle’s original manuscripts we are not informed ; but tbe copy remained at Athens until the spoliation of that city by the Ro- mans under Sylla. The library of Apellicon was a tempting object of plunder to the conquerors, who were then awakened to the value of literature ; and accordingly, the whole of this philosophical trea- sure, with other rich booty, were transmitted to Rome. There the works of the Stagirite expe- rienced a better fortune, owing to their having at- tracted the attention of Tyrannio, the famous gram- marian, a native of Amysus in Pontus, who had been taken prisoner by Lucullus in the Mithridatic war, but was afterwards manumitted, in consideration of his learning and merits. By paying court to Sylla’s librarian, he obtained leave, after much solicitation, to take copies of the manuscripts, which were commu- nicated to Audronicus of Rhodes, who flourished as a philosopher at Rome in the time of Cicero and Pompey. Having undertaken tire task of arranging and correcting those long-injured writings, the Rho- dian performed the duty of a skilful editor, by giving them to the world in a more perfect shape than they had hitherto appeared. Though considerably amend- ed and illustrated, the severe ordeal through which they passed had, in the lapse of nearly 300 years, greatly abridged their number. Out of the 400 books recorded by Laertius (and some have made 72 . MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. them double that amount), only forty-eight have been transmitted to the present age. But many of these last consist of several books ; and, according to the estimate of the laborious Fabricius, the whole of these remains, taken together, form a golden stream of Greek erudition, exceeding four times the collective bulk of the Iliad and Odyssey*. Though the works edited by Andronicus had suf- fered injuries which the utmost diligence and saga- city could not completely repair, yet, in consequence of those labours, the Peripatetic philosophy began to resume the lustre of which it bad been deprived since the days of Theophrastus. In the Lycatum, the precepts of the sect were preserved through a line of successive teachers, by viva voce instructions ; and it is not impossible that the disciples may have had portions of their great- master’s lectures written down ; yet the details of the system were evidently entrusted to the tablets of memory'. At Rome, the productions of the Stagirite made few converts at first; and even in Cicero's time, their perusal was confined to a few of the learned. This sect, there- fore, in the Augustan age, made no considerable ap- pearance in that capital ; and, with the exception of Lucretius, we scarcely find among the Roman poets * By this calculation, the whole of Aristotle’s works must have contained a quantity of prose equal to sixteen times 28,08)1 verses — a tact the more extraordinary, since the greater part of his writings are merely outlines or text- books, giving the heads of his lectures, or the chief topics of discussion in the different branches of science. MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. 73 of that period any allusion to the doctrines of the Peripatetic school, or the philosophical renown of its founder. The edition of Andronicus made them better known, as his example of studying and illus- trating them was soon followed by various other commentators. To enumerate the host of Greek, Latin, Jewish, Arabic, and Christian writers who imitated the Rhodian editor in giving expositions and criticisms on the different works of Aristotle, would be foreign to our purpose. Their very names would fill a vo- lume. From the era of Augustus to the invention of printing, the works of the Stagirite passed through the hands of more than 10,000 commentators; and after that period, several thousands more were added to the catalogue, amongst whom are to be classed not a few of the venerable fathers of the church, who borrowed from this armoury the intellectual weapons which rendered them invincible in their theological wars. The first generation of these expositors be- gan in the age of the Antoniues with the labours of Taurus the Berisiean, Adrastus, Alexander the Apbrodistean at Rome, Galen the celebrated physi- cian, Atticus the Platonist, and Ammonius Sacchus of Alexandria. Under the Roman emperors, they continued to flourish ; aud in the long list we find the once revered names of Aspasius, Syrianus, Olympiodorus, Plotinus, Porphyry, Themistius, Pro- clus, the second Ammonius, Damascius, Simplicius, Philoponus, and Johannes Damascenus. By the 74 MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. Arabs or Saracens, Aristotle was superstitiously adored, and his philosophy was ardently studied in their schools during upwards of four centuries. His metaphysical niceties were well adapted to the acute mental temperament of that ingenious people. In dispute all parties acknowledged his supremacy, and appealed to his assistance. The doctors of the Mosque easily laid prostrate the most stubborn ar- guments both of Jews and Christians against the truth of the Koran with the resistless artillery of his syllogisms. To translate or produce a commen- tary on his works, appeared to them the highest pitch of excellence to which the genius of man could attain. The most eminent of these oriental exposi- tors, whose fame long resounded even in the schools of Europe, were Alkendi, Alfarahi, llhazes, Avi- cenna, and Averroes, who, in the felicitous obscu- rity of their opinions, often surpassed their master. When the literature of the Saracens was extinguish- ed at the taking of Bagdad by the Tartars in 1258, the illustration of the Aristotelian philosophy was prosecuted with unabated vigour in the Western Empire. So early as the sixth century, his logic assumed a Latin dress in the translation of Boethius Severinus, the last illustrious Consul of Rome. In this field the venerable Bede has also signalized him- self ; and during the middle ages, a few learned monks exercised their ingenuity on the same sub- ject. After a long interval of nearly 700 years, translations and commentaries in the same language MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. 75 began to abound, through the industry of Albertus Magnus, Thomas Aquinas, Duns Scotus, John Ma- jor (a native of Haddington), Theodore Gaza, Fran- ciscus, a Jesuit of Cordova, with a swarm of gram- marians and scholastics whom the art of typography had multiplied so abundantly that, towards the close of the sixteenth century, Patricias reckoned their number at 12,000. This cold and unintelligible mass of Gothic and Saracenic dulness is now con- signed to just oblivion. It may seem extraordinary that a philosophy thus disfigured by a succession of interpreters often more worthy of ridicule than of admiration, should have so long maintained an absolute ascendency over the minds of men. But the fact is easily explained. During the intellectual slumber of the western world, the human faculties had neither the light of letters to detect false glosses, nor mental energy to eman- cipate reason and conscience from the thraldom of ignorance and superstition. The sway of the Sta- gnate, however, was not always untroubled. Launoy enumerates eight different revolutions of his autho- rity in the University of Paris, the oldest and long the most distinguished school in Europe. In the year 1209, his writings were condemned as the pes- tilent sources of heresy, and committed to the flames. In 154*2, the same writings were held in such veneration, that whoever denied their ortho- doxy was persecuted as an infidel. Peter Ramus, a Parisian Professor of that age (1551-1572), signa- 76 MEMOIR OP ARISTOTLE. lized himself as among the earliest to impugn the in- fallibility of this great oracle of philosophy. He wrote twenty hooks of Animadversions against Aris- totle’s Logic, eight againBt his Physics, and fourteen against his Metaphysics — a boldness which proved fatal, as it made him first an exile and at length a martyr. It is but fair to add, that in the glory or disgrace which the schools then attached to his opi- nions, the Stagirite had no concern. The true spi- rit and meaning of his philosophy was completely re- fined away by the fanciful glosses of copyists and cri- tics ; so that those scholastic combatants who banish- ed or murdered each other in his name, fought mere- ly about the husks of science, without the kernel. These observations are particulaily just as ap- plied to the absurd jargon or logomachy which pass- ed for learning, and during five centuries and a half divided Europe between the two renowned sects of Nominalists and Realists ; so called because the for- mer, whose reputed founder was Iloscellinus, Canon of Compeigne, in the eleventh century, held tho doc- trine of universals in logic to depend solely on names or w'ords, and treated as mere illusions of fancy the Platonic ideas of their opponents, who regarded as their founder the celebrated monk Abelard, immor- talized by his amorous follies and misfortunes, and numbered among their champions Anselm, arch- bishop of Canterbury. Under the banners of one or other of these factions, the learning of Christen- dom arrayed itself during a succession of many ge- MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. 77 Derations. In their fierce and scandalous disputes, the pugilistic doctors proceeded from words to blows, which often terminated in mutilation or death. In the hottest of the fray, the name of Aristotle was continually invoked, and his doctrines appealed to on both sides, though both parties flagrantly violated his authority — the Realists embodying their wild fan- cies under the name of substantial forms — while the Nominalists subtilised all knowledge, even theology itself, into shadowy notions and unmeaning terms. During the prevalence of these gross corruptions in the Schools, and even amid the gloom of Go- thic and Saracenic darkness, a few stars brightened the literary horizon, and voices were raised in favour of genuine philosophy. The calumniated and per- secuted Roger Bacon, soaring above the ignorance of his times, maintained that Aristotle, rightly un- derstood, was the fountain of all knowledge ; and he asserted, with equal candour and firmness, that those who had undertaken to translate him were totally unfit for the task. But the beams of this luminary were quenched in the barbarism of the age ; and his ■uperior erudition, instead of enlightening, dazzled the weaker eyes of his contemporaries, who referred his wonderful discoveries to magic and the infernal arts. His illustrious namesake, Lord Verulam, ri- valled his fame, but did not possess his candour in regard to Aristotle, whom he studiously copies, and continually abuses, for errors that belong to his in- terpreters and commentators. It is not a little sin- 8 MEMOIR OP ARISTOTLE. pular, that the Stagnate did precisely ivhat he is clamed by Lord Bacon, Hobbes, Malebranche, and other French philosophers, for not doing. The au- thor of the Leviathan frequently combats, under the name of the Peripatetic philosophy, abstract essences, substantial forms, and innumerable other doctrines, metaphysical as well as moral and political, with nearly the same arguments by which Aristotle, their supposed author, had long before victoriously re- futed them. The evil of confounding the simpli- city of this philosophy with ' Platonism, was igno- rantly perpetuated from age to age, through a suc- cession of critics and commentators, not excepting the latest of them all, Mr Harris and Lord Mon- boddo, who perpetually ascribe to Aristotle the doc- trine of general ideas, which he repeatedly and for- mally denied. His logic was misrepresented by Locke and Lord Karnes ; and even Dr Reid speaks of him harshly, as having purposely obscured his analytical rules by unmeaning illustrations. But wherever his principles and tenets have been studied with a competent degree of honesty and informa- tion, they have never failed to produce a conviction of their soundness and perspicuity; and, at the same time, an admiration for the wonderful discoveries and attainments in a man deemed the wisest of an- tiquity, ami to whom, even in modem times, it will be easier to name many superiors in particular branches of knowledge, than to find any one rival in universal science. MEMOIR OP ARISTOTLE. 79 To give an analysis of the philosophical and scho- .astic writings of Aristotle, belongs not to a work on natural history. A genera] notion of their contents may be communicated to the reader in a brief out- line. The syBtem of knowledge which prevailed in the schools when the Stagirite began to teach, and in which lie bad himself been trained, was not such as was likely to satisfy his penetrating mind. It was, in fact, a vast undigested scheme of theoretical wisdom, jumbled together without order, and fluc- tuating in its form and character, according to the talents and circumstances of its leading professors. The Pythagorenns blended physical, mathematical, and moral truth in mystic combination, as exhibited in the mythology of Egypt. In the hands of So- crates, philosophy assumed a more ethical com- plexion ; but the fanciful imagination of Plato in- vested it once more with a mixed character, by em- bodying in one compressed view the various preceding systems. Considering that definitions could not ap- ply to every perceptible object, if (according to the doctrine of Heraclitus) all such objects were constantly changing; and that numbers (as taught by Pythagoras) could not sufficiently account for that immense variety of objects which the universe pre- sented, he concluded that there must be some exist- ences, independent of the perceptible universe, to serve as the objects of definitions. Hence his famous doctrine of Ideas, or archetypes, corresponding to the different classes of external objects ; and to these 80 MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. abstract images be assigned a real being, but capable of intellectual apprehension alone. In this manner he reared a motley system of physical philosophy, on a basis of metaphysics and logic conjointly. Although educated in this school, Aristotle had thought too deeply ‘and accurately not to perceive that the cardinal doctrine of Platonism (ideas), how- ever specious, was rather a shadowy representation, than a solid structure. He saw that the various branches of philosophy were separated from their parent root, or grafted on unnatural stocks ; and that, in order to rest the sciences on a sure founda- tion, a more exact analysis of the principles of hu- man knowledge was required. Accordingly, his grand aim was to develope a truly intellectual sys- tem, instead of the ingenious phantom which the en- thusiasm of Plato had raised. The idols which had been set up in the niches and shrines of the schools, he swept away with a daring hand. In overthrow- ing the doctrine of ideas, he was no less a reformer of the ancient philosophy, than were Bacon and Boerhaave of the modern. It was the object of the one, as well as of the others, to cleanse and recon- struct the temple of science ; to recall men from un- profitable speculations to the realities of nature ; and to lay down rules to guide them in the discovery of sound and infallible principles. Philosophy was regarded by Aristotle, either as furnishing the mind with the means of contemplating external nature, or ministering to the improvement MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. 81 anil right direction of human life. The three grand divisions into which he distributed it were, 1st, Theo- retic ; 2d, Efficient ; 3d, Practical ; including under the first, Physics, Mathematics, and Theology or Me- taphysics ; under the second, Rhetoric, Poetics, and Logic or Dialectics, comprehending what are com- monly termed the liberal arts ; under the third, Poli- tics and Ethics, or the moral sciences. The Ethics of Aristotle, as we already observed, display a wonderful degree of moral knowledge, and practical experience of mankind. Though composed amidst the darkness of heathen supersti- tion, they abound with pure and just sentiments ; and iustead of depressing man to the low standard of manners and opinions then existing, they tend to elevate him to that perfection which a higher autho- rity has pronounced to be an indispensable element in the Christian character. They are directed, no doubt, solely to the improvement of man in this pre- sent life ; but so sound are the principles of conduct laid down, that they may be readily extended to those nobler views of our nature and destiny opened up to us in the inspired volume. To us who live in the sunshine of revelation, it may be difficult fully to appreciate the reach of thought it required in those times to see the science of ethics in its proper light, as a refinement of human character in order to human happiness. Yet to this merit the Stagi- ri.te is fairly entitled ; and no greater praise can be given to a writer of heathen morality than to say r 82 MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. (as may be truly said of his) that it contains nothing which a Christian may dispense with, and no pre- cept of life at variance with the Christian virtues. In this department, Aristotle has left three prin- cipal treatises, viz. 1st, The Nicomachean Ethics, in ten books, addressed to his son ; 2d, The Magna Moralia, in two books ; 3d, The Eudemian Ethics, in seven books, addressed to Eudemus ; besides a short popular tract on the Virtues and Vices. The first of these exhibits the most formal and complete development of his theory, and is the work on which his fame as a moral philosopher chiefly rests. The other treatises are illustrations of the same subjects, entertaining similar views, and sometimes expressed in the same language. In these writings, his primary aim is to investi- gate the law or philosophical principle, according to which human actions attain the good or happiness which is their object ; and which, as being the end really designed in all actions, whatever may be their immediate and particular object, is the great final cause of all. The doctrine of virtue, happiness, pleasure, friendship, justice, temperance, self-love, the affec- tions, the passions, the motives and effects of actions, are the important themes which he discusses. In these inquiries, he takes a safer guide than the fanciful speculations of the Greek schools concern- ing the chief good, which imagined that there was some quality of good, admitting of abstract disquisi- tions into its nature. Hence the superiority of his MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. 83 Ethics as a practical system, coming home with gentle yet resistless conviction to the hearts and un- derstandings of men. His morality is neither too rigid nor over-indulgent. In many respects, indeed, it is imperfect, as every thing must be that rests on no higher authority than the sanction of reason or na- ture ; but it gives juster views, and lays down nobler principles of duty, than any other system of antiquity. From not having clear light as to the real immor- tality of man, he was compelled to determine the excellence of human virtue and happiness from a view of his present .condition only ; but, at the same time, whilst he recommends the active discharge of those duties and virtues which are within our reach, and which belong to us as men, he directs us to pur- sue that happiness which is beyond our attainment, and which he himself describes as an immortalizing of our nature — a living according to what is divine in man, and what renders him most god-like, and most dear to the Divinity. Considering his disad- vantages, it must excite our wonder that a philoso- pher living, as Aristotle did, amidst the darkness and disorder resulting from the want of a purer re- ligion, should have given such sound practical ob- servations on human nature, and formed such accurate conceptions of the perfection of human virtue. The work on Politics, comprising eight books, was a necessary sequel to that on Ethics, inasmuch as the precepts of the one, to have a moral effect on man, require to be enforced by the external sanction 84 MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. of the other ; for it was the current notion of ancient philosophy, that the laws of the State, and the in- stitution of rewards and punishments, were the great instruments for bringing mankind to that course of action in which their real interest consisted. On this imperfect principle, Aristotle, in common with other Greek philosophers, constructed his theory of politics, which embraces three very important sub- jects, viz. the origin of society and government, the distinctions of rank in a commonwealth, and a com- parison of the best plans of political economy. In the prosecution of this task, besides examining and criticising the systems of others, as Plato, Hippoda- mus, Phaleas, Diodes ; and the polities of Sparta, Lacedaemon, Athens, Crete, Carthage, &c. he dis- cusses all the great leading questions both in civil and economical science ; — the duties of citizens and magistrates ; the different orders of priests ; the best plans of education ; naval and military force ; causes of sedition ; unions and combinations ; monopolies ; commerce and manufactures ; slavery ; freedom ; na- ture of property ; accumulation of stock ; and many other topics, in which the extent of bis knowledge is not more remarkable than the soundness of bis views. Of the various kinds of government, the monarchical, the aristocratical, the republican, and the democra- tic, he considers the most “ perfect polity” to be a mixture of oligarchy and democracy, so blended, that both appear, yet neither preponderate ; and in which no one of the component elements of society has an MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. 85 undue influence, but an equal regard is shewn to the claims of freedom, wealth, and virtue. He admits, however, that the public welfare may be promoted under other forms — a monarchy or an aristocracy — as well as under a “ polity but the latter he pre- fers, as tending to maintain a due equality of rights and relations among the membors of the community. One excellence of his system is, that it admits only the general pursuit of the common weal, which, like the private happiness sketched in his Ethics, is not to be made a distinct object under any particular form, but must be the universal aim of the whole organization of the society, as individual happiness is the result of the general regulation of all the mo- ral principles. It is true that he supposes a society to constitute itself in order to its own moral happi- ness, and herein is the defect of his scheme ; but this selfish principle must be considered as a neces- sary substitute in his system for a divine providence, the operation of which not being admitted or under- stood, he was obliged to have recourse to the agency of nature. Aristotle appears the only political theorist among the ancients who never lost sight of the moral nature of man in his speculations. While moBt others, not excepting Plato himself, treated human society mere- ly as a physical mass, capable of being moulded into particular forms by the mechanism of external cir- cumstances, he ascribes the formation of the best so- cial constitution to the force of custom, philosophy, 86 MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. and laws. His whole treatise well deserves to be studied, both for its political maxims and its histori- cal information. It lays open the elements of stabi- lity and decay inherent in the different theories of government; and it points out the common principles on which the maintenance of civil order, under any form whatever, must essentially depend. “ In this incomparable work (says Dr Gillies), the reader will perceive the genuine spirit of laws, deduced from the specific and unalterable distinctions of governments ; and, with a small effort of attention, may discern not only those discoveries in science unjustly claimed by the vanity of modern writers (Montesquieu, Machia- vel, Locke, Hume, Smith, &c.) ; but many of those improvements in practice, erroneously ascribed to the fortunate events of time and chance in these later and more enlightened times. The same invaluable treatise discloses the pure and perennial spring of all legitimate authority ; for in Aristotle’s Politics, and his only, government is placed on such a natural and solid foundation, as leaves neither its origin incom- prehensible, nor its stability precarious ; and his con- clusions, had they been well weighed, must have sur- mounted or suppressed those erroneous and absurd doctrines, which long upheld despotism on the one hand, and those equally erroneous and still wilder suppositions of conventions and compacts which have more recently armed popular fury on the other.” Tire second grand division of Aristotle's philoso- phy, called the Efficient, includes Dialectics or Logic, MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. 87 Rhetoric and Poetics, with their accessory and colla- teral sciences. Dialectic, or the art of reasoning, taken in its widest sense, is the method of deducing the probabilities on either side of a question, so framed as to involve one of two contradictory propositions in the answer, according as the affirmative or nega- tive side is adopted. No part of scholastic science stood more in need of amendment than this ; and accordingly his treatise on the subject is the refor- mation of the irregular and confused system in use before his time. Not only does he explain the ge- neral notion of the science, as the art of defending or impugning an opinion ; ho takes a wider and more philosophical view, by investigating the grounds both in the structure of language and the connexion of thought, on which all arguments must rest. , This art presented a field for the display of singular acuteness, and it was carried by Aristotle to a degree of perfection beyond what any before him had con- ceived. He pointed out the method by which the defender of a thesis might be invincible, and taught the opponent to shew no less insuperable skill in his attacks ; so that every question could easily be per- plexed with endless disputation, and all reasoning made to revolve in a circle. To excel in the ma- nagement of the syllogism was the pride and glory of the sclmols in the dark ages ; but the extravagant height to which it was carried, was an impediment to knowledge, and a burlesque on moral science. This, however, was an abuse of the system, and 88 MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. ought not to be charged as any impeachment of the labours of the Stagirite. His four books of Analytics divided into Prior and Posterior , testify how dis- tinct and comprehensive a view he took of this dry and apparently barren subject. The reader cannot fail to mark the exactness of his rules for the con- version of one proposition into another ; and to ad- mit the special claim he has to the invention of To- pics, or general heads of eveiy species of question or argument, together with the most pertinent and ad- vantageous methods of treating them. By way of generalizing this science, he has arranged all the ob- jects of human thought that can be expressed by single words, under ten Categories or Predicaments ; and in explaining the nature and properties of each, he has opened up to the inquisitive mind a wide field of syllogistic information. The preceding trea- tises, including one book of Interpretation, one of Sophisms, and eight of Topics, form collectively what is now called Aristotle’s Organum, or Logic ; a work admirably calculated for sharpening the un- derstanding and expanding the intellectual faculties ; but a work which has been often as grossly misrepre- sented, as it was long most wofully misapplied du- ring those ages when scholastic jargon had usurped the name and the seats of philosophy. In his three books on Rhetoric, Aristotle has dis- played the same extent and variety of learning as in his Ethics. He treats it not merely as the science of eloquence and composition, but as the art of per MEMOIR OP ARISTOTLE. 89 suasion; and although he lays dotvn excellent rules for the structure of sentences, and the skilful use of ornaments in Btyle, he cautions the orator to consi- der them as subordinate to the proper business of his profession. He dissuades him from imitating the practice, then too common, of appealing to the passions of the hearers, rather than to their judg- ment and understanding ; but he recommends him to study every variety of human character, and to avail himself of the moral feelings, and even of the natural prejudices, of his auditory. His division of the art is threefold, according to the different occa- sions on which it was employed among the Greeks : 1. The deliberative; or its use in political debates. 2. The judicial; or its nse in popular assemblies, as those of Athens, in which the people collectively exercised the judicial functions. 3. The demonstra- tive; or its use in panegyric and invective, where the orator had only to gratify his hearers by a dis- play of eloquence. In these several heads of in- quiry, he has given an admirable analysis of the mo- tives by which mankind at large are commonly ac- tuated in their conduct and opinions. All the wind- ings and recesses of the human heart he has ex- plored ; all its caprices and affections ; whatever tends to excite, to irritate, to amuse, or to gratify it, have been carefully examined ; the reason of these pheno- mena is demonstrated, and the method of creating them is explained. Nothing, in short, has been left untouched, on which Rhetoric, in all its branches, 9n MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. has any bearing. The whole treatise is a text-book of human feeling, — a storehouse of taste and intel- lectual gratification. The Poetics of Aristotle is a mere fragment, one book only remaining out of three of which the trea- tise originally consisted ; but, imperfect as it is, it has been uniformly regarded as the great authority of the laws of criticism in poetry. The portion extant is almost exclusively confined to the consideration of the drama. The remarks on Tragedy, Comedy, and the Epos, are singularly applicable to the prin- ciples of modern criticism ; making allowance for the difference of manners and opinions, and the dissimi- larity of taste which the advancement of society has created between the dramatic models of Athens, and those of the nineteenth century. The loss of this part of the work is the more to be regretted, as it most likely contained much valuable information concerning Greek writers, whose works, perhaps whose names, are now unknown. The Theoretic branch of Aristotle’s philosophy, comprehending Physics, Mathematics, and Meta- physics, is the most entertaining, but at the same time the most defective part of his works. The term Physics appears to have been understood in the Peripatetic School in a very extensive sense, com- prising the science of beings corporeal and incor- poreal, and also that of substance in general, with its attributes and properties, abstractly considered. What is now called Metaphysics, did not receive MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. 91 that appellation from the Stagirite himself, who has not treated the three subdivisions of this branch as separate sciences, hut often blends their different principles in the same discussion. The name is un- known in his original works, and arose from the cir- cumstance of certain treatises on what he denomi- nates the First Philosophy or Theology , being placed in the edition of Andronicus the Rhodian, after the Physics.* This arrangement was adopted by other commentators, and as the subjects were of an ab- struse and speculative nature, the term was applied by the schoolmen to what in modem writers is de- signated by the Philosophy of Human Mind. In his Physical disquisitions, the genius of Aristotle plunged into an abyss, which it could not fathom ; and in at- tempting definitions of the terms, act, power, pro- perty, accidence, substance, energy, potentiality, &c. he shewed the futility of endeavouring to explain what is indefinable, merely by substituting words instead of ideas. In considering Being in union with matter, and investigating those universal prin- ciples under which he conceived all existing things to be arranged, he fell into the absurdity of con- founding mental impressions with the facts which nature presented to his observation. Instead of look- * Andronicus is said to have prefixed to the twelve or fourteen books, which had no title, the epithet yirx, tk funxa. ( metaphysica ), the things after the physics, to signify that he found these books so placed in the original collec- tion, or to intimate that he judged this to be their proper position. 92 MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. ing to the phenomena of the material universe, he employed himself in deducing consequences from metaphysical and mathematical data ; — arguing from the mere abstract notions of the mind, to the reali- ties of the external world. The first portion of his physical philosophy, contained in the treatise en- titled Natural Auscultations , is devoted to inquiries into the principles of the science, in order to ascer- tain those fundamental conceptions of its several ob- jects, from which all conclusions concerning them are deduced. These principles he reduces, to three : 1. Matter ; 2. Form ; 3. Privation ; so well known and so much perverted in the jargon of the schools. The design of his inquiry being to obtain, by physical analysis, an ultimate point to which all the various notions involved in the speculation of nature might be inferred, he proceeds to explain these natural ob- jects to be such as have in themselves a principle of motion and rest, as contrasted with works of art, the principle of which is in the artist. From examining this inherent principle, and shewing how it operates in producing the ordinary appearances observed in the world around us, he is led to account for the processes of generation and corruption, and the changes which occur in bodies by alteration, mix- ture, locomotion, increase and decrease, &c. The great doctrine of the ancient physics, “ that nothing could be produced out of nothing,” according to his theory, required no distinct consideration. In- quiring into nature simply as a principle of motion, MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. 93 or a self-working power, he was not called upon to show how those changes which took place in the material world might lie satisfactorily accounted for. It was no part of his philosophy to demonstrate that any particular material, or combination of materials, was employed in these processes of nature for ef- fecting her productions and transmutations. All he assumes is, that some material or other is used in every instance of a physical object, to effect that con- stitution of it in which its “ form” consists. From considering this question, he proceeds to examine what principles reject and exclude one another in the various changes of the material world ; these be- ing the causes of the transition of one nature into another : — the presence of one involving the priva- tion of all those forms of matter dependent on the other. What these mutually excluding principles are, he decides by a reference to the sense of touch; that being the proper evidence to us of the existence of body, as may be inferred from its resistance to that faculty. According to this theory, the contra- rieties ascertained by touch, and which account for all the different forms of matter, are hot and cold, dry and moist ; the first two as active principles, the last two as passive. These four principles admit only of four combinations ; it being impossible that the contraries of heat and cold, or moist and dry, can co-exist. The effect of each combination is a different element ; thus, fire is a coalition of hot and dry ; air, of hot and moist ; earth, of cold and dry ; water, of cold 94 MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. and moist. Any of those elements may pass into another by the privation of one of the combined principles ; for instance, water into air by the priva- tion of cold, and the consequent union of hot with the moist that remains. When the change is simply in the affections or attributes of some existing body, the process is that of alteration ; but when the change involves an entire transmutation of the original ma- terial, the process is that of generation and corrup- tion. Upon these complex principles did Aristotle account for all the phenomena, sensible and tangible, that take place in the material universe around us. The heavenly luminaries, as constituting a branch of physics, demanded his attention from their neces- sary connexion with the full development of his theory of motion, and in order to trace up that prin- ciple through its successive impulses from this lower world to the First Cause or Prime Mover. His whole astronomy is dependent on those speculative notions which he had adopted of lightness and heavi- ness as intrinsic and absolute properties of bodies, by which the exact position of each of the material elements was regulated in the mundane system. Fire he placed in the extreme point upwards ; earth lowest ; and in the intermediate space, air and wa- ter. On some points, his notions were tolerably cor- rect. He admits the spherical form of the earth, from the evidence of lunar eclipses, in which he had remarked that it always exhibited a curved outline and he inferred its magnitude to be not very great, MEMOIR OF ARISTOTLE. 95 (about 37,000 miles) from the variation of horizon consequent on a slight change of our position on its surface.* But in most other respects, his views partook of the current errors of antiquity. The earth, he concluded, must be at rest, and therefore formed the centre of the universe. That the whole hea- vens were spherical, he supposed to be a necessary consequence of the perfection belonging to them : — a solid being the most perfect mathematical dimen- sion, since angular bodies would necessarily imply vacuities in space. The revolutions of the celestial bodies he con- ceived to be performed, not in consequence of a ten- dency to the centre, but of the absence of any Buch tendency ; — a principle directly opposite to that of modern astronomy. That they do not revolve in themselves, he considered to be evident from the fact, that the moon always presents the same side to the earth. Their motion, therefore, resulted from being carried round by revolving spheres ; the first in order being that in which the fixed stars are placed, next the five planets, then the sun, and lastly the moon nearest to the earth. This idea of the stars revolving in solemn silence, was contrary to the * It is curious how nearly Aristotle approached, but on a different principle, to Columbus’s notion of a western passage to India. In his book De C