ARISTOTLE AND THE EARLIER PERIPATETICS vol.I by Eduard Zeller, B.F.C.Costelloe 1897

178 ARISTOTLE
THE PHILOSOPHY 6F ARISTOTLE 177
observation and to connect them as well as he then
could with the dialectical treatment of ideas. 1
That Aristotle's dialectic had to do with a far
more
extensive range of empirical data than Plato had to deal
with is the reason why Aristotle's methods of exposition
are distinguishable at a glance from Plato's by that air
of formal logic which they wear.
Aristotle does not limit
himself to that unfolding of pure ideas which Plato expected
of the philosopher, 2 though his own attempts at it
were in truth but rare and partial. The ideal processes
are for ever interrupted, in Aristotle, by references to
experience, by examinations of ambiguous terms, by
criticism of other views. The more extensive is the
matter which he has to bring under the yoke of science,
the more eager is he to see that every step in his farreaching
investigations should be assured on the one
hand by a copious induction, and on the other by a
careful observance of the rules of logic. His manner
of presenting his work seems often dry and tedious as
compared with Plato's; for the texts we now possess
yield us but rare examples of that richness and charm
for which his writings were praised no less than his
master's. We miss wholly the dramatic life, the
artistic finish, the fine mythical presentment which
make us love the Dialogues. 3 But the Corpus Aristotelicum
exhibits the peculiar qualities of a philosophic
style in so high a degree that we ought not only
1
For fuller information on (1872); of. especially pp. 29
the methodological principles of sqq. 122 sqq. 152 sqq.
Aristotle and their applieation.see 2 See Zeller's Plato, passim.
the next chapter ; and Euckbn, 3 Cf. p. 106 sq.
Die Methode d. Arist. ForscTitmg
VOL. I.
N
not to call him a ' bad writer,' ' but ought rather to set
him in this respect far above his great forerunner.
He
is accused of ' formalism,' though where the discussion
grows more concrete, as in his physics or ethics, this
falls away ; but it will not be regarded as a blemish by
those who remember how needful
even in Plato's view
this strict logical
among ideas must have been cured by keen distinctions
effort was—how much bewilderment
in the meanings of words—how many fallacies will have
been avoided by the exact analysis of the syllogism.
Rather has Aristotle done the world immortal service
in that he established a fixed basis for all scientific
procedure, and won for thought thereby a security
whose value to us we only overlook because we have
grown too used to it to remember that it is great.
If, again, we endeavour to appreciate, so far as at
this point we can, the standpoint and general view of
the universe which we can call Aristotelian, we shall
find two things.
On the one hand, no one can overlook
the basis he inherited from Socrates and Plato. Yet,
on the other hand, there is an element of originality
so notable and so sustained as to make us stigmatise
the notion that Aristotle was a kind of dependent
follower of Plato who did nothing but formally work
up and complete his master's thought, as an error
utterly unjust. 2
Aristotle adheres not only to the Socratic proposition
that Science has to do with the idea of things, but
also to the further consequence which takes us into the
heart of Plato's system, that .that which is
1
Eitteb, iii. 28.
truly actual
2
Beaniss, ffesch. d. Phil. ; see Kant, i. 179 sqq. 207 sq.