There’s no way “Aristotle” was just one guy

[Anonymous No.15608187]

He is literally brought up in every single field in some foundational sense, it’s unreal that one man could be this lucid and accomplish all that he did in one lifetime.

He’s STILL mentioned in just about every field of science covering physics, chemistry, biology, zoology, astronomy, he’s mentioned in discussions of religion, ethics, music, literature, and philosophy.

Keep in mind he lived thousands of years ago. There’s literally no one else who compares to him that I can think of. Is it really possible Aristotle was a singular person, or was Aristotle the name the Greeks used for their collective wisdom and the consensus of all their best thinkers over a couple hundred year time period?

[Anonymous No.15608245]

>>15608187
Aristotle's school was very popular for centuries and Alexandria was where his school went after the third leader died they contradicted him later in a lot of things but not for that intentional purpose, they just went farther than him.

As far as those other fields he's not mentioned as a literal descendant of the craft but an inspiration for it. He mostly did just zoology, logic, his metaphysics and what his metaphysics implied. Smart man but if you define him as mythological it's in a very human sense. He died alone and his school went forward without him due to politics. It was just a very fruitful time and place and a smart man

[Anonymous No.15608249]

>>15608187
>There’s literally no one else who compares to him that I can think of.
Leibniz was top of his field in math, philosophy, physics, biology, medicine, technology, geology, linguistics, and laid the foundations for what would become modern computer science.

[Anonymous No.15608256]

Why not?
He could have just been the biggest big brain that has ever existed.
A once-an-eternity freak of nature in terms of cognitive ability

[Anonymous No.15608276]

>>15608187
Read the cave and the light

[Anonymous No.15608283]

>>15608187
Aristotle here. Trust me I'm just one guy, not a hivemind secret society that exists to this day.

[Anonymous No.15608302]

The medieval scholastics were too low IQ and thought dozens of pseudographia were actually by Aristotle.
Then we have the commentaries of Alexander of Aphrodisias, Porphyry, and Simplicius of Cilicia.
Liber de Causis was very influential but not until the last few years of Aquinas did he realize is was a abridged version of Proclus' Elements of Theology.
Then we have the fact that Plato prefigures or supersedes almost everything Aristotle said (it is also a myth that they disagreed with each other).

[Anonymous No.15608333]

>>15608276
ignore that and read these

[Anonymous No.15608412]

>>15608256

Bro he is literally credited with discovering and documenting the inner workings of the reproductive system of the squid. There is no way the foremost philosopher and tutor to the emperor wasted 2 years of his life studying squid balls.

[Anonymous No.15608444]

>>15608412
It followed his metaphysics perfectly plus plato died and he either was given a new school in bumfuck nowhere or he left to there on his own. Either way he had a lot of free time alone. And as the son of a physician it might've been really edgy for him to equate man w animals

[Anonymous No.15608477]

>>15608187

Low hanging fruit and he was objectively wrong about several things (concrete(ly false) claims in natural science as opposed to philosophical claims which are more amenable to debate). Also no tv, no internet, he had plenty of time to think and write, and a large body of his work survived through an accident of history. It was bound to happen sooner or later.

I agree that he's very important and his body of work is impressive, I just think it needs a bit of qualification, that's all. And there were "pseudo-Aristotles", but their minority productions were generally inferior. Every master has disciples who produce work attributed to the master.

[Anonymous No.15608488]

>>15608333

what faggy covers lol

[Anonymous No.15608662]

>>15608477
>he was objectively wrong about several things
So? Newton was also wrong.

[Anonymous No.15608715]

>>15608477
>Every master has disciples who produce work attributed to the master.
>>15608302
>Then we have the fact that Plato prefigures or supersedes almost everything Aristotle said (it is also a myth that they disagreed with each other).

There's something that has always bothered me about this. There's this comparison between Plato and Aristotle, with Plato the more mystical and Aristotle the logical, but they must have agreed on many things even if Arisotle did depart from the academy eventually.
Plato credited some of his work to Socrates, and Plato founded the academy, which assembled students in an elite formal setting in a way no one had done before.
Aristotle was a student of Plato.
How much of Aristotles knowledge was basic Academy curriculum, or tutored to him personally by Plato?
How much of Aristotles work was actually Socrates work, passed on through Plato on to him in turn?
Weren't there other philosophers teaching at the academy alongside Plato?
Plato had his famous writings, but surely there was other material being taught at the academy? Google says -
>The subjects focused upon were mathematics, natural science, astronomy, dialectics, philosophy, and politics. Plato was joined by other well known philosophers at the academy, including Aristotle before he founded his own Academy after he had a falling out with Plato's philosophies.
But then there surely must have been a lot of valuable and sound knowledge he took with him?

[Anonymous No.15608733]

>>15608412
There really wasn’t as much to do back then though was there. Seems like a fun side project

[Anonymous No.15608746]

>>15608187
>Keep in mind he lived thousands of years ago.
exactly. its not like he had to do a lot of research. everything was in its infancy. he was basically just sayin a lot of stuff about a lot of stuff that happend to be true (for some part) or/and in some way interesting

[Anonymous No.15608760]

>>15608187
>Keep in mind he lived thousands of years
this is how he did it

[Anonymous No.15608765]

>>15608746
People lived thousands of years before Aristotle, too, though and we don't talk about any of them, academically speaking, like we do Aristotle.

[Anonymous No.15608783]

>>15608249
Go up to any normie on the street and ask them who Leibniz was. Fucking moron

[Anonymous No.15608784]

>>15608187
OP is right and people don't point this out often enough. Have any of you ever read the transmission history of the manuscripts of Aristotle's works? It is very fucking shady. According to the traditional telling, after his death Aristotle's works were "lots" and "rediscovered' centuries later by a reprobate book merchant by the name of Apellicon of Teos who found them bug-bitten in a wine cellar they had been consigned to for the past two hundred years. Apellicon's library was then seized by Pompey when he invaded Athens and Aristotle's works were brought back to Rome where Cicero and his circle popularized them.

It is a clear historical fabrication. Aristotle was invented by Cicero's circle at the beginning of the second sophistic to link the Great Plato with the military hero Alexander the Great. All of his works were forgeries, something that is stylistically obvious if you read the Greek. "Fragmented lecture notes" like the metaphysics and categories are just cover for the inevitable late hellenistic stylisms intellectuals of the second sophistic knew would slip in. It's possibly the greatest cover up in world history, maybe with the exception of the so-called gospels. Stop being duped.

[Anonymous No.15608795]

>>15608783
Are you implying they would know who Aristotle was?

[Anonymous No.15608806]

>>15608784
This is very interesting. Where can I read more about it?

[Anonymous No.15608807]

>>15608795
Yes? They would at least recognize the name dumbass

[Anonymous No.15608851]

>>15608783
Leibniz is talked about in every calculus class. Any person who graduated high school knows who Leibniz is.

[Anonymous No.15608871]

>>15608806
the story is from Pliny I think. Apellicon has a wiki entry so you can go there for more information. I was wrong, it was actually Sulla who brought them back to Rome. But what is extra hilarious is that the works of Theophrastus, the ostensive inheritor of the Lyceum, were also "recovered" by Apellicon.

Now other nails in the coffin of the Aristotle myth have surfaced over the years. For example, the observation from Aristotle's Animalum, that Sea Urchins grow and shrink in size in accordance with the phases of the moon (which is not true) is present also in the Spring and Autumn Annals of Lu Buwei from the early Han Dynasty, written within 80 or so years of Aristotle's supposed death, on the other side of Eurasia, in classical Chinese.

Other observations, also from the Animalum, show up in identical fashion in Sanskrit in Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakoshasabhasyam. Much more likely these were from some other eastern source that made its way into Roman science in the first century and got woven into pseudepigraphia attributed to this newly minted Aristotle character.

[Anonymous No.15608881]

>>15608871
You should write an essay on this theory. It has a very Borgsean quality

[Anonymous No.15608892]

>>15608784
During this time Aristotle's school was in Alexandria w a library they set up by the grace of ptolemy.

[Anonymous No.15608897]

>>15608784
>>15608871
Getting deja vu from that Shakespeare thread Pynchon posted in. This one is a lot more coherent though.

[Anonymous No.15608902]

>>15608881
Bold of you to assume I haven't already.

[Anonymous No.15608903]

>>15608783
A fucking cookie

[Anonymous No.15608913]

>>15608881
The motive is clear. As part of Sulla's war spoils, the "discovery of Aristotle" was part of Rome's symbolic adoption of the oriental intellectual splendor of Hellenic civilization. Aristotle is just a perfect tether binding the military (alexander) and intellectual (plato) facets of Greek culture, now possessed by the next in line - Sulla and the emerging Roman empire.

[Anonymous No.15608982]

>>15608913
>>15608871
>>15608784
Can’t wait to alienate my peers by insisting Aristotle was an inside job

[Anonymous No.15608995]

>>15608851
Most people don’t study calculus. Moreover, tons of obscure figures come up in math class that nobody remembers like Euler.

Aristotle comes up in almost every class in every year of school. Everyone knows him, Leibniz is not mentioned outside of calculus.

[Anonymous No.15609017]

>>15608892
the Lyceum was never Aristotle's school, really. It pre-dated him and post-dated him. It had a library before him and a library after him, and part of the story is that Theophrastus actually put it in his will that his cousin Neleus of Scepsis take all of his and Aristotle's writings away from the Lyceum and catalog them. He ended up hiding them away because he didn't want the billionaire princes of Pergamon, who so the story goes wanted Aristotle's works, to get their paws on the scrolls. Convenient isn't it?

[Anonymous No.15609359]

>>15608913
>>15608871
>>15608784

Based Aristotle conspiracist

[Anonymous No.15609370]

>>15608783
That's more to do with the state of education these days than anything else. Aristotle is a god, though, no argument there.

[Anonymous No.15609405]

>>15608851

Only conceivably true in Europe. Most of the rest of the world doesn't even study calculus in high school. And even if the information was put in front of them at some point, there is still a large pleb population, even in Europe, that neither knows nor cares about old historical mathematician/thinker X.

This poster >>15608995 gets it right in his first paragraph (which contradicts you) but unfortunately he screws it all up and goes sideways in his second graph. Although a general awareness of the name "Aristotle" goes along with a western university education, it doesn't necessarily happen that he's assigned reading, depending on what sort of institution or program you're in. And the second claim is plainly false, Leibniz is taken up in philosohpy courses. But again these are minority considerations: just as it's plainly true that most people don't study calculus, it's also true that most people don't study the classics.

[Anonymous No.15609412]

>>15608783
OP was about intellectual achievement, not notoriety among plebs. You fucking moron.

[Anonymous No.15609497]

>>15608488
the texture is fascinating tho, real mystery how it is made, feels real nice

[Anonymous No.15609552]

>>15608715
Plato taught that the Good=the One and that there's an Indefinite Dyad. There were plenty of other people in the academy, it is argued by some that a few dialogues were co-written by Plato and one or more of his students, like Alcibiades I or Rival Lovers.
Lloyd Gerson argued that the only reason why Aristotle didn't become the Scholarch of the Academy was due to his age and that he was a foreigner and thus couldn't really own property.

[Anonymous No.15609990]

>>15608412
Aritstotle had a system he applied to everything and had an incredible ability to see patterns and deduce conclusions from that. It's really not that crazy. Impressive, sure, he was probably one of the smartest men to ever live, but not impossible.

Also back then philosophy encompassed everything, and as time progressed each field became more specialized so you don't have mathematicians doing zoology or ethicst. It was in a way the wild west of knowledge and philosophy.

[Anonymous No.15610044]

>>15608765
That specific time in Greek civilization was what made possible for the Greeks to start thinking the way they did and discovering the things they did. Context is important, so you have to analyze why the Greek people or civilizations before Aristotle didn't make the same advancements. Maybe the conditions just weren't suitable.
And also you have to take into consideration that the works of Aristotle are the ones that happened to make it all the way to the present, there were thousands of works that have been lost to time.

[Anonymous No.15610067]

>>15608783
And those same people would have no idea what Aristotle did or why he is important.

[Anonymous No.15610104]

>>15608871
None of these facts prove anything. You literally just mention certain historical events and immediately jump to the conclusion that Aristotle is fake.

[Anonymous No.15610112]

>>15608995
What point are you even trying to prove?

[Anonymous No.15610211]

>>15610104
proof only exists in mathematics. My point is that the transmission history of the corpus aristotelicum is highly suspect and that there is a good case for it being Roman pseudepigraphia.

[Anonymous No.15610514]

>>15608783
>caring about what normies think
You're probably the sort of person that complains about literature not being popular anymore

[Anonymous No.15610534]

Aristotle stood on the shoulders of giants just like anyone else did.

[Anonymous No.15610572]

>>15608765
There was no writing for most of this time. And for a long time serious writing was mostly about religion. It's only when philosophical discourse evolved from religious discourse (which happened at around the time of the presocratics) that philosophy the way Aritotles does it was possible. There's also the issue of lost writings, the work of many very productice writers of antiquity are almost completely lost (see for instance Chrysippus). Aristotle (and ancient greece in general) lies in that sweet point where writing starts being relatively abundant and preserved for later commentaries while also touching on subjects in way that interests us.

[Anonymous No.15610577]

>>15608187
name me one great idea of Aristotle

[Anonymous No.15610580]

>>15608784
This is my favorite conspiracy theory now.

[Anonymous No.15610605]

>>15610577
We have five senses: hearing, touch, taste, sight and smell.

[Anonymous No.15610612]

>>15610605

[Anonymous No.15610645]

>>15610612
Objects that you throw stop moving once you stop applying a throwing force to them.

[Anonymous No.15610661]

>>15610577
syllogism

[Anonymous No.15610730]

>>15610645
>>15610661

[Anonymous No.15610901]

>>15610730

Not him, but for real, now: women are inferior to men. The ideal domestic partnership involves a man who is about 15 to 20 years older than the woman. This ensures both that the woman is of prime breeding age, and also that the man is in his prime of life and remains able to instruct the woman and household. This one is actually correct.