Aristotle Aristotle

• Lived 384-323 BC. • He was a student of Plato. • Was the tutor of Alexander the Great. • Founded his own school: The Lyceum. • He wrote treatises on physics, cosmology, biology, psychology, politics, ethics, language, and logic to name just a few. • Was influential well into the 1600s. • Was as much a natural scientist has he was a philosopher—made detailed observations of plant and animal life and devised detailed theories of change and motion in the physical world.

Background Aristotle and Plato

Strategy for understanding ancient views about the mind. 1. Metaphysics: their view about the nature of the world. 2. Their understanding of the mind as it is informed by that worldview. 3. Importance to the history of psychology.

Aristotle and Plato Aristotle and Plato

• Recall, Plato thought the universe was • Aristotle inherited the problem of divided into two realms: the material world universals from Plato. of the senses and the eternal immutable • Recall, universals are merely the various world of the Forms. Forms, which explain the nature of the • This was shaped by his study of sensible world. mathematics and had an impact on his view of the soul (mind). • But there is an enormous difficulty with • The body belonged to the material world, Plato’s theory. while the soul belonged to the forms. • What do you think it is?

1 Aristotle and Plato Aristotle and Plato

• The problem is to explain the relationship • Aristotle’s excursions into botany led him between the realm of the Forms and to believe that change and growth in the material objects. natural world result from a force in the • Plato became aware of these difficulties material objects themselves. later in his life (the population problem; • Aristotle rejected Plato’s theory of the and the third man argument). Forms. • Aristotle was also aware of this difficulty • Instead, he believed universals to be part and attempted solutions. of the natural world.

Aristotle and Plato Aristotle and Plato

• Aristotle’s solution was to replace the idea of two distinct realms with the idea that material things have dual aspects: all objects are a composite of matter and form. • In this way universals (Forms) become part of the material objects that make up the material world. • In order to better understand this view we need to have an account of Aristotle’s notion of substance.

Aristotle on Substance Aristotle on Substance

• ‘Substance’ refers to the basic elements of the There are three different concepts that fall world—it is the thing that remains constant under this term: throughout the change we see (e.g. the growth of plants and animals; the movement of the stars). 1. Substance as matter. 2. Substance as form (or essence). 3. Substance as the combination of 1 & 2. • The distinction between matter and form Æ is, roughly, what something is made of and what makes it the kind of thing it is.

2 Matter and Form Matter and Form

• Insofar as they are the same kind of thing, they have the same form. • What makes these statues the kind of thing they are is that they portray the same subject—the thinker. • This is given by the shape of the objects. • So the shape is the form. • But they are composed of different Marble Bronze material (marble and bronze). Same form different matter.

Matter and Form Matter and Form

• In this case, both these statues are the same kind of thing—they have the same form. • But although they both come from bronze, they are different pieces of bronze. • The matter is what individuates them—its what makes them two distinct objects.

Same form different matter.

Matter and Form Aristotle on Change

• The same holds true of the natural world. • For Aristotle change was a • Plants and animals of the same species have transformation from potentiality to the same form (or essence)—it is what different members of the group have in common. actuality governed by the laws of • The matter is what differentiates them from one causation. another. • For example, an acorn is potentially an • But (confusingly) form is also responsible for the oak tree. uniqueness of each object (e.g. its particular shape). • If the right conditions are met the • E.g. Your form (or essence) is what makes you a potential oak tree (found in the acorn) human being but also the unique person you becomes an actual oak tree. are.

3 Aristotle on Change Aristotle on Change

4 Causes • In living things the principle of change is within Potentiality the object itself. 1. Material cause: the material that makes up the object (e.g. marble). • For example, an acorn ‘wants to become an oak 2. Efficient cause: the agent of change or the means by tree.’ which change is induced (e.g. the sculptor). 3. Formal cause: the expression of what an object is (e.g. the shape of the statue). 4. Final cause: the end or purpose for a thing—why it is done (the idea of the statue in the sculptor’s mind; as a tribute to thinking). Æ Actuality

Aristotle on the Soul Aristotle on the Soul

The Definition of the Soul • E.g. the difference between a living body 1. Natural bodies (e.g. rocks, trees, water, and a dead one is that one possesses a animals…) are substances in the sense soul. of composites of form and matter. • Thus, the body (tissue, bone etc.) cannot 2. Some natural bodies are living, and be the soul. some are not. • The body is merely what makes life 3. Because a living body is a body of a particular kind (living!), the body cannot possible. be the soul.

Aristotle on the Soul Aristotle on the Soul

• The soul is a substance—a fundamental • Soul must be a substance in the sense of element of the world. the form of a natural body having life • Thus, it must be either matter, form or a potentially within it. combination. • The difference between a body that is • All living things are composites of matter potentially alive and one that is actually and form. alive is the presence of a soul. • So the soul must be one or the other. • But it can’t be matter because matter is only potentially a living thing.

4 Aristotle on the Soul

Soul as the Form of Living Things • In living things the form is what makes a plant or animal a member of one species or another. • An acorn becomes an oak tree because it has the form or soul of an oak. • Same species = same soul. • Since soul can only enliven matter with a particular kind of organization (having the right parts for living), the soul is the actuality of a “natural organized body.”

Aristotle on the Soul Aristotle on the Soul

• But the soul is more than just a principle of life. • Things belong to a species in virtue of • It is also responsible for the naturally organized what they do rather than how they look. body functioning in the way that it does. • E.g. there are certain activities that are • In the natural world, what makes something the natural for dogs. kind of thing it is (its form) is a principle of growth and movement within the thing itself. • It is the capacity for this kind of activity that • Life is growth and movement. makes something a dog. • It is the specific nature of this power that • Physical organization of the dog make this determines the species to which something activity possible, but the soul is what belongs. makes this possibility actual.

Aristotle on the Soul Aristotle on the Soul

• Consider an axe (Aristotle’s example). • Consider an eye. • If it were a natural thing, its soul would be what • If an eye were a living thing, sight would be its makes it an axe. soul, since that’s what makes it what it is. • This would be its ability to cut wood. • Eyes of living creatures see, in contrast to the eyes of statues. • But an axe is not a natural thing, for if it were, it would be able to cut wood by itself. • Similarly, the power of sense (sensibility) is what gives form to the sensible organs of the body. • Living things have the power in themselves to do • Thus, the soul of a living thing is like a hierarchy the kind of things that make them the thing they of forms, each contributing to the are (e.g. growth, reproduction, perception…) powers/abilities that constitute life for that species.

5 Aristotle on the Soul Faculties of the Soul

• What we get here is functional account of • For Aristotle the various species form a the mind. hierarchy according to the nature of their • The mind (or soul) is understood in part by activities. how it makes actual the functioning of a • All grow and reproduce. living thing. • But not all forms of life possess sensory organs • Unlike Plato, Aristotle believed the soul to perceive the world around them. was inseparable from the body—it would • This led him to propose different faculties of the be like asking “whether the wax and its soul whereby a species is categorized in shape are one.” accordance with the faculties they possess.

Faculties of the Soul Aristotle on Perception

1. Nutritive Soul: all living things have the Vision power to feed and reproduce. • For Aristotle colour is what lies on the surface of visible objects. 2. Sensitive Soul: some also have the • We see other things through a powers of locomotion and perception. transparent medium/substance that exists between our eyes and 3. Rational Soul: only human beings have the surface of coloured objects. the power reason and reflection. • It is not visible, but is to be found • All three are present in humans. in, e.g., air and water.

Aristotle on Perception Aristotle on Perception

• For Aristotle, colour is, by definition something • Fire excites the activity of this substance (efficient that changes this transparent substance. cause), which is why we can see in the presence • And as a result of this change things are made of candle-light, sunlight etc. visible to the eye. • Fire produces light (in Aristotle’s terms). • This transparent substance is either active or • This now active substance in water or air (and inactive—only when it is active is colour visible the eye) can then transmit the colour from the through it. surface of the object to the soul through the eye. • Light is the active state of this substance and • The soul literally takes on the colours of the darkness is the inactive state. things we see around us.

6 The Passive Intellect The Passive Intellect

Thinking • Thinking then is the process by which the soul • Aristotle considers thinking to be in part a passive acted upon by those things which are capable enterprise, somewhat like sense perception. of being thought. • The difference between it and sense perception • In thinking the soul takes on the nature of what lies simply in what is perceived. it is thinking about. • Each sense is responsible for our awareness of • What is capable of being thought about? the particular qualities for which it is designed to sense (the proper sensibles). • The form (or essence) of the object. • Each quality acts on the sense organ in a way to reproduce that quality (literally) in the soul.

The Passive Intellect The Passive Intellect

• The soul literally takes • Recall form is what makes an object the kind of on the form of the thing it is (essence). objects it is thinking • Imagine perceiving a galloping horse. about…passively. • We perceive it with our five senses… • But how do we know it’s a horse (i.e. its horseness)? • We seem to take this for granted. • There must be a faculty by which we perceive the essences of things.

The Passive Intellect The Active Intellect

• Its like the way in which warm wax receives a • Aristotle also though there was more to the mind seal. merely passively taking on forms. • Just as the warm wax can receive any • Recall the statue. impression the mind can think about any • For it to exist there must be material and essence—take on any form. something that causes the material to become a • As a result, Aristotle thought the mind statue. did not have any essence of its own. • In vision the analogue of matter is the faculty of • E.g. eyes have there own nature—to become sight in the soul, which is potentially coloured. coloured—this is why they can only perceive • The cause of vision (taking on colour by the colours. soul) is fire.

7 The Active Intellect Aristotle on Memory

• The soul is the matter of thought—its potential to take on • Memory for Aristotle was the recall of different forms. events that have passed—perception is of • But there must be an active cause to bring that about (like fire in vision). the present. • But in this case there is no external cause—the mind is • He presented the first associationist theory its own cause of thinking. of memory. • Thus, there must be an active mind that is the cause of thinking. • Associationism: the doctrine that ideas • This accounts for the sense in which thought is a kind of follow from one another in memory if they activity. were experienced in relation to one • The active intellect appears to be immortal since it is another. separate from the body…controversial.

Aristotle on Memory Aristotle on Memory

• Remembering for Aristotle, was the process of The laws of association following a chain of associated ideas to arrive at 1. Similarity: we tend to be reminded of the thing we want to recall. something to the extent that it resembles what we are currently experiencing (e.g. • For Aristotle, associations are produced by AristotleÆPlato). means of the law of association: similarity, 2. Contrast: sometimes we are reminded of contrast, and contiguity. something to the extent that it means the opposite of what we are currently experiencing • This idea still has force in modern psychology (e.g. blackÆwhite). (e.g. in behaviourism; protype theory…). 3. Contiguity: we will tend to be reminded of things that were previously experienced with what we are currently experiencing (e.g. salt Æpepper).

Aristotle on Memory Aristotle Summary

• Memory vs. recollection. • Aristotle continues a line of thinking that begins • Other animals have memory—which is a kind of with Pythagoras and is developed and changed in Plato. elementary matching of current sensations to previous experiences (episodic memory?). • The problem of universals motivated Aristotle’s own view. • It’s a kind of simple recall. • The soul was (i) the source of life; and (ii) the • Only humans have recollection—which is an of seat of the intellect. inferential process. We don’t simply recall the • For Plato the soul is part of the Forms, but for past we have to infer it on the basis of our Aristotle the soul is part of the natural world of current experience (reconstructive). material objects and living things.

8 Aristotle Summary Aristotle Summary

• According to this new view, the principles by • In making the mind part of the natural which the soul operates are, in general, the world, Aristotle offers us the first great same as those that govern the change and naturalist theory—almost all modern movement in other natural objects (e.g. rocks, psychologists are naturalists. trees…). • Even though there is some mention of the • The natural world (as opposed to the eternal nature of the active intellect—the Forms) is the true object of study. operation of the intellect follows the same • His theory of sensory perception suggests pattern as that of sensory perception and that perception gives us a direct and organic activity in general. reliable link to the world.

Aristotle Summary Aristotle Summary

• Thus, our senses (observation!) provides the As in Plato we get… best means of trying to understand the world. • A theory of learning. • In this way, Aristotle is also the first great • A theory of memory. empiricist/scientist—giving rise to what would become the cornerstone of modern science. • A theory of cognition. • This is the first big move away from rationalism. • Anticipation of the nature/nurture debate— movement towards the nurture side. • His laws of causation provide the foundation for later scientific thinking—influential well into • Teleological explanation—is the beginning medieval times. of a kind of psychological explanation— things done for reasons/purposes.

Thomas Aquinas Thomas Aquinas

• Lived 1225-1274AD. • The Catholic church came to prominence around 500AD—1500AD. • Christianity was the dominant religion. • Aquinas was one of the greatest interpreters of Aristotle’s work. • He showed that Aristotle’s views could be reconciled with Christianity.

9 Thomas Aquinas Thomas Aquinas

• For example, Aquinas’s 5 ways (arguments for the • The Scala Natura—The Great Chain of existence of God) were developed on the basis of Aristotle’s model of causation. Being. • In Aristotle we see a division amongst the E.g. The argument from Motion. 1) Nothing can move itself. animals by way of the kind of soul they 2) If every object in motion had a mover, then the first possess—nutritive, sensitive, rational. object in motion needed a mover. 3) This first mover is the Unmoved Mover, called God. • This is a hierarchical ordering. • This also made use of Aristotle’s cosmology and it’s dependence on the Prime Mover.

The Scala Natura—The Great The Scala Natura—The Great Chain of Being Chain of Being • Pure Actuality (Prime Mover) • For Aquinas, things were ordered in the world according to their perfection and reflecting God’s – Humans (Rational) plan. – Animals (Sensitive) • Humans are close to the top of the chain of – Plants (Nutritive) being, with God at the very top. – Non-living natural objects (e.g. rocks, bone..) • Everything has a purpose (teleology)—God is the Final Cause of all in the world. – The elements (earth, air, fire, water) • The Great Chain of Being reflects God’s plan. • Pure substance/Pure Potentiality • Thus, the Aristotelian world-view is consistent with Christianity.

The Scala Natura—The Great Chain of Being • This had an important influence on Taxonomy in biology—e.g. the Three Kingdoms (animal, vegetable and mineral) that made up Linnaeus’s taxonomic system). • The idea was still influential on Shakespeare and up to 1667—Milton’s Paradise Lost. • In fact, it is still present in some versions of Christianity today—that God has a purpose for all things—a master plan.

10 The Nicolas Copernicus (1473-1543) Scientific Revolution

Nicolas Copernicus Nicolas Copernicus

• Up until Copernicus’ publication of On the • Copernicus revolutionized the way we Revolutions of the Heavenly Bodies, the viewed the planetary system by proposing Ptolemaic (90-168AD) model of the that the sun was the center of the (known) universe was dominant theory. universe—heliocentric model of the • Ptolemy’s model was a detailed universe. mathematical account of the orbits of the • This upset a great deal of traditional planets that was geocentric (earth at the thinking. center). • Cosmology was tied to the notion of the • Aristotle also had a geocentric cosmology. Great Chain of Being.

Nicolas Copernicus Francis Bacon (1561-1626)

• The Earth was the focus of God’s creation an as such was held to be the center universe—God’s plan. • As such his view was rejected by the Church. • But it inaugurated an enormous shift in our thinking about the world.

11 Francis Bacon Francis Bacon

• Bacon ushered in a new way of thinking about how we • In the place of deduction, he argued for an ought to go about understanding the world. inductive method of inquiry. • It was the first articulation of the scientific method—in his Novum Organon—a play on Aristotle’s Organon. • Scientific reasoning is still held to be a form of inductive reasoning. • Bacon was deeply critical of the ancients and challenged the fundamental form of reasoning they used in the • The goal was, through experience, to collect acquisition of knowledge—the deductive method. facts in an unbiased way. • He argued that there had been little progress to our • Then on the basis of an analysis of these facts understanding of the world and that a reform was we proceed to make modest generalizations required. about the nature of the world—inductive generalizations!

Francis Bacon Next Class

• In outline, this is an articulation of the • Galileo, Descartes, Newton and the British basic tenets of the scientific method— Empiricists. observation, experimentation and generalization.

12