Aristotle on Meaning and Essence

427 Pages·2001·1.86 MB·English

by  David Charles

Aristotle on Meaning and Essence
Oxford Aristotle Studies
General Editors
Julia Annas and Lindsay Judson
Aristotle on Meaning and Essence
David Charles
CLARENDON PRESS · OXFORD
2000
GreatClarendonStreet,OxfordOX26DP
OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford
ItfurtherstheUniversity'sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship,
andeducationbypublishingworldwidein
OxfordNewYork
AucklandBangkokBuenosAiresCapeTownChennai
Dar esSalaamDelhiHongKongIstanbulKarachiKolkata
KualaLumpurMadridMelbourneMexicoCityMumbaiNairobi
SãoPauloShanghaiTaipeiTokyoToronto
Oxfordisaregisteredtrademark ofOxfordUniversityPress
intheUK andincertainothercountries
PublishedintheUnitedStatesby
OxfordUniversityPressInc., NewYork
©DavidCharles2000
Themoralrightsoftheauthorshavebeenasserted
DatabaserightOxfordUniversityPress(maker)
Firstpublished2000
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,
storedinaretrievalsystem,or transmitted,inanyform orbyanymeans,
withoutthepriorpermissioninwriting ofOxfordUniversityPress,
oras expresslypermittedbylaw, or under termsagreedwiththeappropriate
reprographcsrightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproduction
outsidethescopeoftheaboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,
OxfordUniversityPress,attheaddressabove
Youmustnotcirculatethisbookinanyotherbindingorcover
andyoumustimposethissameconditiononanyacquirer
BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData
Dataavailable
LibraryofCongressCataloginginPublicationData
Charles,David(DavidOwainMaurice)
Aristotleonmeaningandessence/ DavidCharles.
p.cm.—(OxfordAristotlestudies)
Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.
1. Aristotle.2. Meaning(Philosophy)3. Essence(Philosophy)4.Necessity
(Philosophy)I.Series.
B485 .C4652000185—dc2100-037464
ISBN0-19-825070-3(alk.paper)
To my family
This page intentionally left blank
Preface
The study of meaning, essence, and necessity is a central part of the philosophical tradition we have inherited from
classical Greece. Aristotle initiated the discussion of many of the topics in this area, and advanced debate on others
beyondthelevelachievedbyhis predecessors. Myprimaryaimistogainaphilosophicalunderstanding ofhisworkon
these subjects.
How are we to achieve this type of understanding? Its acquisition requires us to focus on the arguments and
motivations which led Aristotle to his views, to state then as precisely as possible, to see them as forming (where
appropriate) a coherent overall theory, and (finally) to examine how far they withstand reasonable criticism. In these
ways, we can assess the truth and importance of the views themselves.
If one aims to understand earlier writers in this way, one will place their work in some wider philosophical context.
Onemaydefinethatcontexthistoricallyintermsofthosewhoinfluencedorwereinfluencedbythewriterinquestion.
Alternatively, one may characterize it in terms of a broader conceptual framework shared with others who have, at
varying times, engaged with similar issues. In this book I have followed the latter path, seeking to compare and
contrastAristotle'sviewswiththoseofsubsequentphilosophers,includingsuchpresent-daywritersasSaulKripkeand
HilaryPutnam. Inthisway, IhopetoshowthatthestudyofAristotle's workcandeepencontemporaryunderstanding
of these topics.
If one attempts the latter project, one must avoid anachronism: the mistaken assimilation of Aristotle's views and
concerns to those of our own day. The most important safeguard against thiserror is the careful reading of the range
of relevant texts, which aims to place his views on particular topics in the context of his own arguments and basic
interests. In this, much can be gained from a study of themany commentaries, writtenfrom a varietyof philosophical
standpoints, which have been dedicated to Aristotle's work over the centuries. A second defence is the requirement
constantly to search for the conceptual resources whichwill enable us to see where past and present writers converge
and where they diverge. For there can be no general presumption that ancient writers employed either precisely the
same concepts as we do or, for that matter, radically different ones.
In writing on these themes, I am following an Oriel College tradition. My three most recent predecessors, Jonathan
Barnes, Richard Robinson, and David Ross, have all written on these issues, combining high-grade philological skills
and philosophical acumen. Before them, there was a line
viii PREFACE
of Aristotelian philosophical scholars, working on similar questions, beginning with Richard Kilvington in 1326, and
including (amongst others) Richard Whately, Edward Poste, and John Cook Wilson. They represent one part of the
outstanding Oxford tradition in the study of ancient philosophy, to which I am deeply indebted.
My own interest in these topics stems from a reading group I organized on Posterior Analytics Β.8–10 in 1983–5. We
read these chapters slowly, oftenspendingtwoor threehours ononeor twolines. Such discussions havegreat merits:
detailedattentiontothetext,therequirementfor high standards ofprecision(both philosophicaland philological),the
opportunityfora freeexchangeofviewsbetweenfacultyandgraduatestudents, andthesheerfunofsharedworkand
enthusiasm. I owe a particular debt to the 1983–5Analytics group, which included (at various times) Kei Chiba, Paula
Gottlieb, Tomomasa Imai, Vassilis Karasmanis, Gavin Lawrence, Penelope Mackie, Christopher Megone, Michael
Morris,DoryScaltsas,PantazisTselemanis,JenniferWhiting,andMichaelWoods.Iamsurethattheyallinfluencedmy
thinking on these topics.
Since then, I have given seminars on the Analytics with Jonathan Barnes and with Robert Bolton (at Rutgers
University), on the Metaphysics with Michael Frede and with Montgomery Furth (at UCLA), on Aristotle's biological
works with Allan Gotthelf and James Lennox, on the Physics with Lindsay Judson, and on De Anima with Shigeru
Kanzaki and Kei Chiba (at Tokyo Metropolitan University). I have gained greatly from all of these and also from a
long-liveddiscussion group on De Anima, whichbegan in 1988 and continues to this day. Indeed, it was only through
the latter's work that I came to see points of connection between Aristotle's account of thought and of colour
perception and his analysis of definition and explanation in the Analytics. In this, I am indebted to (amongst others)
Stephen Everson and, particularly, Michael Frede.
IbegantowritethisbookasaFellowattheidyllicCenterforHellenicStudiesinWashingtonDCin1985/6,under the
kindly and supportive Directorship of Zeph Stewart. I benefited then, as in 1994 and in 1998, from sabbatical leave
granted by the Provost and Fellows of Oriel. Earlier versions of the following Chapters have appeared elsewhere:
Chapter4:‘Aristotleonnamesandtheirsignification’,inStephenEverson(ed),CompanionstoAncientThought3:Language
(Cambridge,1994).Chapter11:‘MatterandForm:Unity,Persistence,andIdentity’ inT.Scaltsas,D.CharlesandM. L.
Gill (eds), Unity, Identity, and Explanation in Aristotle's Metaphysics (Oxford 1994).
Chapter 12: ‘Natural Kinds and Natural History’, in D. Devereuxand P. Pellegrin (eds), Biologie,Logique et Metaphysique
(Paris, 1990). ‘Aristotle and the Unity and Essence of Biological Kinds’, in W. Kullmann and S. Follinger (eds),
Aristotelische Biologie (Stuttgart, 1997).
PREFACE ix
These papers, together with ones representing the basis of Chapters 2, 3, 5, 8, and 9 and Appendix 2, have been
presented at conferences or seminars in a variety of places in Europe, the USA, and Japan. I am grateful to many
audiences for interesting criticisms and difficult questions. I have also gained from detailed comments on specific
topics from Justin Broackes, Victor Caston, Alan Code, Andrea Falcon, Mary Louise Gill, Terry Irwin, Yoshihiko
Kaneko,VassilisKarasmanis,AtsushiKawatanai,FrankLewis,GeoffreyLloyd,ChristopherMegone,MarioMignucci,
Pierre Pellegrin, Gerhard Seel, Richard Sorabji, Michael Wedin, and Audrius Zakarauskas.
I have learned from the discussion of related issues in contemporary philosophy. In this I am particularly indebted to
Bill Brewer, John Campbell, Bill Child, Dorothy Edgington, Lizzie Fricker, Jennifer Hornsby, Ian Rumfitt, Paul
Snowdon, Helen Steward, Tom Stoneham, Rowland Stout, and Timothy Williamson. Our weekly discussions, on a
wide variety of topics, have been a constant source of illumination and encouragement.
Incompletingthebook,Ihavebeengreatlyassistedbyhelpfulandsearchingcommentsonthepenultimatedraftfrom
JohnCampbell, Lindsay Judson, and TimothyWilliamson. Adam Beresford, Kei Chiba, and GrevilleHealeyprovided
constructiveand stimulating philosophical and philological advice on severalversions. Without theirsupport, I would
not even now have finished the book.