Google to make the world's books discoverable online.
It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.
Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the publisher to a library and finally to you.
Usage guidelines Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we liave taken steps to prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. We also ask that you: personal, non-commercial purposes.
+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.
+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find + Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 185.1.M502M C.2 Tha malaphyBicB ol Art Stantont UnfvsrsAy UbrertBB iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii BOflFS CLASSICAL LrBRART.
AKISTOTLE'S METAPHYSICS.
GEORGE BELL & SONS LONDON: YORK ST., COVENT GARDEN NEW YORK: 66 FIFTH AVENUE, AND BOMBAY: 53 ESPLANADE ROAD CAMBRIDGE: DEIGHTON BELL & CO.
THE METAPHYSICS OP ARISTOTLE.
ITiteraUg Sranslateb from l^e (SxttK WITH NOTES, ANALYSIS, QUESTIONS, AND INDEX.
BT THE LONDON GEORGE BELL AND SONS LIBRARY OF THE LELAND STANFORD JR. UNIVERSITf.
Beprinted from Stereotfpe.plalet.
TRANSLATOK'S PREFACE.
The Metaphysics of Aristotle (if we except Kant's Critique^ and certain portions of the works of the Scholastics) embody, perhaps, the only formal Treatise on the Science yet in the possession of mankind. They, therefore, must be considered as one of the most precious remnants of antiquity; but their intrinsic worth can only be appreciated by those who have read them through with care. And this the student will discover, when, after climbing up the rugged mountain- side of abstract speculation, he finds himself standing on one of its summits, beholding £eir and wide the vales of thought spread before him in expanded glory. In evidence of this, he may at the outset be reminded that the subjects treated of are those which have exercised the highest Acuities of the human reason; and that he will there find an able Beview of the Greek Philosophy; a Refutation, most complete and elaborate, of Scepticism; a Demonstration, H priori and d posteriori, of God*s existence; an Examinaticn into the relation of Metaphysics to the other Sciences; an Overthrow of the Ideal Hypothesis of Plato, as well as of the Theory of Pythagoras; an Elucidation of the nature of the Infinite; and an Investigation into Truth, in relation to man's Acuities for the attainment of it.
The present Translation was written before I had an opportunity of consulting the labours of my only predecessor ri translator's prefaoe.
in the same field, Thomas Taylor. Though by no meikns intending to disclaim the obligations subsequently incurred by his translation being placed in my hands, and most sincerely inclined to award Mr. Taylor considerable merit, I cannot help qualifying it with some censure; but hope I shall not be deemed ungenerous towards one whose inde&tigable exertions contributed so much in his day to the extension of Greek literature.
The great imperfection of Taylor's Version consists in obscurity — consequent, principally, upon little or no care being taken, by a proper arrangement of the text, to notify transitions to new subjects of inquiry. This is a grave omis- sion in the Metaphysics, above all other of Aristotle's works, because the several clauses of this Treatise, it is by many thought with good reason, have been somewhat arbitrarily grouped together. But, independent of this, I cannot but impute to Taylor the want of sufficient accuracy in the verbal niceties of his author, evinced by his too frequent suppression of the force of the smaller particles; a defect probably arising from having allowed his attention to wander too much from the Greek original to the Latin Version. Now, in a translator — ^whose province it is not to slur over any words contained in his text^ — such an absence of precision must be acknowledged as at least injudicious; but it becomes a very serious error, fraught with hurtfrd consequences, to the student of such an author as Aristotle, who seldom uses a word devoid of emphasis, and who seems designedly to have sacrificed all exuberance to the stem demands of scientific brevity. A style so terse and idiomatic, and at the same time so perfect a model of the inherent capabilities of the Greek language, will, therefore, be deprived of much of its peculiar excellence^ if its entire power, as an engine of abstract thought, be not preserved unimpaired imder the new forms in which the translator arrays it. Now in the pages of Taylor we search in *vain for a realization of the philosophio spirit, and the bold, argamentatiTe, deoisiTe. almost abrupt tone, which pervade the original.
Practically speaking, then, Taylor is almost useless to the student who, with a desire to construe the original with proper accuracy, is at the same time anxious to acquire a knowledge of the several doctrines established, and the mode of arriving at them. These imperfections I have attempted to remedy in the present Translation, by a close scrutiny of the Greek, and the assignment to each word of its proper force; by adopting the scholastic renderings of the technical words (in opposition to Taylor, who often discards them for others not so good); by a scrupulous attention to secure for each para- graph an intelligible opening; and, lastly, by Notes and Marginal References. In the Marginal References I have endeavoured to string together the various links of Aristotle*s argument, so as to form one unbroken chain; and thus sought to unravel for the student the perplexities in which he is likely to become entangled. As to the Notes, I trust I may not be accused of presumption in laying claim to some small originality in them. I can, at any rate, disown being indebted for them to Taylor, whose labours in this department are quite unavailable for any useful purpose. Keeping in view, however, the great length to which the text itself runs, the notes have not been needlessly multiplied, and I have only introduced them where some doctrine or allusion abso- lutely required elucidation.
I may add, that in the execution of my task, I have fol- lowed the text of Bekker; occasionally deviating in favour of Didot, more particularly in the matter of punctuation; and have derived much assistance from the works of Thomas Aquinas, Brandis, Tennemann, Archbishop Whately,the Rev. F. D. Maurice, and others mentioned more at large at the end of the Analysi& But I might have despaired at ever overcoming the obstacles lying across my path, were it not for the access which I enjoyed to the many scarce exegetical Ttll TRANSLATORS FBEFAOB.
works bearing on Aristotle found in the magnificent librarj of Trinity College, Dublin.
In conclusion, I have to tender my thanks to William S. Bohn, Esq., for his unwearied vigilance in watching the pro- gress of this work through the press, and for the many improvements suggested by him from time to time; the adoption of which has enhanced the value of the Translation to the Classical as well as English reader, JOHN H. M'MAHON S5, Uppsb Qloucestbb Street, Dcbun, CONTENTS.
BOOK I.
Mak'i natural desire of Knowledge— Sense, inemory» foresif ht— Art compared witk Experience— The sutject-matter of Metaphysics — Ontologv a speciUatire Science —Ontology a Divine Science— The Ancients pure Materialists— To wit, Tbales, Anaximenes, frc— The efficient Cause— Considered as Twofold— Its treatment by Anaxagoras— The System of the Pythagbreans- Eleatic Philosophy— Plato's Theory of Ideas— Plato compared with Pythagoras— Summary of the foregoing —Faults of the early Atiologists — Bmpedocles and Anaxagoras— Attack on Pytbaforas— Refutation of the Ideal Theory— Plato's System of Form»— Plato on First 'rinciples— Aristotle's Appeal to Antiquity Pp. 1 — 16.
BOOK I. THE LESS.
'^The Pursuit of Truth— Infinite progression of Causes^Degfees of scientifio Accuracy Pp. 47— 68.
BOOK II.
Doubt in relation to Truth— Questions preliminary to Ontology— Apodeiktic Prin- ciples— Doubts in regard of Substances— Mathematical Media— An Genera First Principles! — Anything separable from Singulars t— Mortal and Immortal natures —Are the Causes of these the same f— Entity and Unitv Tiewed aa Principles — Are Numbers First Principles t— Questions respecting nnt Principles..
BOOK III.
BOOK III.
Unity of Ontology as a Science — The subjects of inquiry in OntolMy-— Ontology and Apodeiktic Principles — The first prineiple of Demonstration— Contradictions not Argument— Absolute existence thereby ignored — This denial amounts to Pan- theism— ^And subverts tiie nature of truth — Its practical Absurdities — Sensational origin of Scepticism— Attack on Heraclitus— Theory of the Apparent as True- Arguments against this Theory— No mean between Contradictitm- Recapitulation BOOK IV.
Principal Cause defined— The term Element explained— Nature defined— The term^ Necessary— Unity defined— Essential Unity— Logical Unity— Entity defined— Identity and Diversity— Opposition defined— Priority and Subsequence— Poten- tiality defined— Quantity explained— Quality defined— Relation defined— Perfec- tion and Termination— Essence, Disposition, Habit— Passion, Privation, Posses- sion — Procession, Part— Entirety — Mutilation— Geniu, Falsehood — Accident Pp. HI— IM. BOOK v.
Physics and Metaphysics— Speculative Science Threefold— No Science of Aoeident— To deny Accident is Fatalism— Entity in relation to Truth...Pp. 156—166.
BOOK VI.
{y 'Bnbdivisions of Entity — Opinions about Substance — Substance as the formal Cause- Questions about the Essence— Certain doubts expressed — ^A question about Essence •^Distitictions about Genen^tn — ^Pre-existence involved in Generation — No Gene> ration of Form— A question about Generation — A question as regards Defini- tion—Discussion cf this question— Solution of it— A question about Form- Recapitulation— Question about Definition — Are universals substances?— This question discussed — ^Its bearing on Idcaalism-^Ideas indefinable— Capacity not BoiMtance—Mrhat Substance is le-eomsideredt Pp. 166— Si 6 a X €X)NTENTR BOOK VII.
Substance cognised by sense— Energy in Substance— Import of the name of a thinft — Substances and their component matter— Relation between these two — The gene* ration of Contraries— This subject further discussed. •...Pp. 211— 225 ^' BOOK vin.
Ontology treats about Potentiality— Rational and Irrational Capacities — The Mega- rian Theory of Capacity— The Converse of this llieory— Transition of Capacity into Action — The nature of Energy — When hare we a Substance in Capacity t— Energy prior to Capacity — ^In definition, time, and substance — Eternal existences prove this— Energy superior to Capacity— Relation of Actuality to Capacity- Akin to that of Truth to Falsehood.., Pp. 226— 251.
BOOK IX.
Nature of Unity— Unity viewed as a Measure— Is Unity Substance f— Unity as op> BNied to Plurality — Concomitants of Unity and Plurality — Contrariety the greatest ifference— Opposition of Greatness to Smallness— Opposition of Unity to Plurality — This Opposition examined — Relation between Media and Contraries— Specific Difierence and Contrariety — Contraries belong to Uie same Species— Generic Dif- ference and Contrariety Pp. 252—277.
BOOK X.
BOOK X.
What is the Subject Matter of Ontology? — Anything separable firom Singulars f — Are Entity and Unity First Principles? — Unity of Ontology as a Science— Mathematics, Physics, and Metaphysics — ^Those who deny Fundamental Axioms — Man viewed as a Measure of Tmngs — Refutation of this Notion — Ontology a distinct Science — Hie very Nature of Ontology proves this — No Science of the Accident— Chance as a Cause of Generation — Motion, Energy, and Actuality— The Infinite defined — The Infinite subsists not in Sensibles— Corporeity not Infinity — Motion and Change — No Motion in Action and Passion — Local Contrariety and Succession ^ BOOK XI.
Classification of Substances— Under Change lies the subject of it— Diversity in First Principles — Principles, Causes, and Elements— Sameness in First Prmciples — God an Immaterial Eneigy— God's mode of Operation illustrated — The perfection of God's existence— The Divine Essence denned — ^Transcendental Substances- Astronomy in relation to Theology — ^Traditional and Fabulous Theology— Certain Psychological Questions — The Good in the Universe — False solutions of this phenomeuon-Valueof Aristotle's account of it Pp. 316— M7.
*^BOOK XII.
*^BOOK XII.
Inquiries pursued in Book XII. — Mathematical entitles not in sensibles— This subject discussed — Relation between these two — ^Analogy confirms the foregoing- Socrates no patron of Idealism — Inconsistencies of the Ideal Theory — Irrelevancy of this Hypothesis — Pythagoric system of Numbers — Questions respecting Numbers — The Incommensurability of Monads— Absurdities of this Dogma«* Do Monads mutually differ? — Numbers do not exclude Ideas — DifBculties peculiar to the Pythagorics— Is Number Finite or Infinite?— Doubts arising ftom the fore- going Discussions — What does Number consist firom t — Discord in the Pythagoric Schools— Idealism noticed once more— First Principles as Universals Pp. 847 — 989.
BOOK XIII.
Contraries as First Principles— Unity, Inequality, Plurality— Are Things Eternal discerptible?— Relation and Plurality — Different Pythagorean Theories — Numbers and Mathematical Entities— Mathematical Entities and Ideas— The Good • para- mount Principle — No System can rest on a denial of this — The Causality of Numbers— Is this Theory supported by Facts?— >ltt Practical Absurdity confirmed /LNALTSIS OF ARISTOTLE'S METAPHYSICa INTEODUCnON, " The Metaphysics of Aristotle," says Mr. Maurice,* i. importanM ** are troablesome reading, partly from the frequent re- oi^the M6t»- petitions which occur in wem, partly from the oifficolty P'^J^**"- of discovering a sequence in tne books. Nevertheless, they should be read by anv student who wishes to investigate the questions which bave occupied men in later times."
Notwithstanding, however, their bearing on modem 2. study of mtems of Ontologpr, and their being occu{)ied in the them neglect tV mscussion of questions of vast importance, in specida- ^ tion, at least, the Metaphysics have abnost since the Middle Ages been buried in obscurity, and, with a few brilliant exceptions in Germany,' have been quite foreotten. This neglect has been c;rowing greater and greater from the §me of Cudworth and More, but has been quite confirmed in the present century; and in Ex4fland, at least, the Metaphysics of Aristotle have been consigned to utter oblivion. One cause, amongst others, that undoubtedly s. partial has contributed to bring tois odium upon the Meta- cause of this physics, and thus to contract their droulation within ^^8^^- a narrow sphere in our countrv, is the absence of any work that would assist the student in tne entire labour of mastering the difficulties, which confessedly he must make up his mind to en- counter in such a task. No English translation, for instance, that can be said really to have answered such an end as this, has as vet appeared;' and thus, whilst other portions of Aristotle's works have oeen illustrated in this way, the Metaphysics have been left to moulder in the dust of our pubuc Libraries, and have encountered contempt disproportionate to their literaiy value — disproportionate when oompu^ with the attention, and scholarship that nave been hvished upon the rest ci the Stagyrite's FhilosopLy.
(1) In liit incomparable Analygis of Aristotle's Metaphysics, to be found in his "History of Moral and Metaphysical Philosophy/' published originally in the Cyclopsedia Metropolitana.
(S) Bnhle, for example, in his treatise on the " Authenticity of Aristotle's Meta- physics.''
(8) In fiset, the only translation extant of tne Metaphysics is that by Thomas Taylor, but— for the reasons already stated in my PreCsce— there is not much to be found then to assist the student beyond an English version not entirely out of the leach of eensure. Further, the scarcity of tUs not ytry commodious yolnm^ giacet it beyond the hands of ordinary purehaseft.
6 X ANALYSIS OF ARI8T0TLI!*B METAFHTSICS. [BOOK 1» Attcm ted ''^ deficiency it has been attempted to supply by remedyfor u the present Translation; and the hope of the Translator in the present ig that it may be fonnd nsefal in this way, if not to very iranBiation, profound Greek scholars and Aristotelians, who do not require such, yet, at least, to those students of ordinary attainments, who, however willing to become acquainted with the Metaphysics, are deterred from the undertaking by as well the actual magmtude of the Treatise as the difficulties of the text. A^d, as tlie Analyst. fittest accompaniment to this Translation, the student is supplied with the following Analysis of the work itself, in which the connexion of thought that runs through the entire is traced, as well as its bearing on Modem Philosophy illustrated. The contents, moreover, of the several books and chapters are succinctly fiven in the order in which they occur in the arrangement adopted y Bekker.
BOOK I.
1. The Preface The Metaphysics open with a short Preface, inwliich Chap. I. Aristotle secKS to introduce his readers to the plulo- ®°°^ ^- sophy that he is now about to develop for them, and which he implies is quite distinct ^ in its aim from that found in the other portions of his works; though at the same time inseparably connected with them, as pieces of that vast edifice of knowledge, practical as well as speculative, which it was his ambition to build up and leave behind him for the service of mankind.
2. Aristotle's ^0^ this purposc he endeavours to exalt* as much as object in this possible the nature of the inquiry undertaken in this Preface. Treatise, and he thereby calculated on enlisting the sympathy of his readers in its behal£ Moreover, by thus arraying Metaphysics in an attractive garb, he was enabled to answer mdi- rectl^ tne objections that were afloat in the popular mind against the practicability of their study. Now both of tiiese ends assuredly were answered in this Preface; for whatever would have a tendency to promote the dignity of Metaphysics as a science, would necessarily exercise a reflex influence in giving a decided answer to all the sneers that might be levelled against it by the ignorant and presuming Sophists.
8. Positive and "^^^^ Aristotle defends Ontology jpositively and nega- negative de- tivcly: positively, by a bold analysis of the nature and *iSgy! °^ ^^^^' objects of the science; and negatively, by maMng this aaalysis subserve as a plain answer to all the cavils of the Sceptics.
(1) This is apparent from his imposition of the term Sophia, or Wiadom, to desif Ute the science under investigation in this Treatise.
(2) Towards the end of chapter i.
In this Preface, therefore, to the Metaphysics, we 4. Aristotie't naay lay it down that the chief aim of Anstotle is to ''W* p*'?i° invest Ontology with its peculiar attributes as a science, "e»<^e- and this, too, for the p irpose that thereby it shoidd be elevated to its proper position amongst the other sciences; and this he conceived to be tne most effectual rdutation against dl misconceptions as to its expediency, or scope, or general utiuty.
The course, then, whidi Aristotle pursues to accom- 6. How this T^ish all this is as follows: he aims to establish that "™ *• *''**n«d- Ontology, or, as he calls it. Wisdom, was the science properly so called. Viewed in relation to the other sciences, it conudned their most absolute eeneralization& The science of Metaphysics might be said to bear tne same relation to ph;^sical or natural science which logic has to psychology. As l^c exhibits the reasoning process* of the mind, and thus iUustrates ite capabilities for the attainment of knowledge, so Metaphysics, as a science, is conversant about the highest and purest aeauctions from ^Lperimental philosophy, and its province is to exemplify those abstract notions and fondamental ' principles which establisn the certainty of knowledge itself. Sense and experience merely' deal with individual instances, but Ontoloey lays hold on what is ue universal element therein, and thus graduafiy mounts up to be, what it is, a science about causes and fb*st princit)le8.
And this vei^ fact, thai Metaphysics is a science of eauses, it is that invests it with its dignity and import- that invelti' ance, and draws the line of demarcation between it and Metaphysics all other sources of information. The senses merely ^p j^^**"*'^' bear their testimony to the particular fact of a particular sensation, but say nothing about the cause. The practical or expe- rienoed-^the common workman, for instance, — understand the domg of a thing, but they have no perception as to the principle or cause of it; and for this reason we estimate the architect above the handi- craftsman, inasmuch as the one is, whereas the other is not, conversant with the principle or cause of what is being constructed. To attri- bute, indeed, an acquaintance with the cause to an handicraftsman, would be as absurd as if we were to do so in the case of one of the brute creation; for both fulfil their fonctions, whilst acting, wholly irrespective of a knowledge of causes, and what the latter does from blind instinct, the former accomplishes from the mere impulse of habit; so thai, ^ short, what sheds such lustre on Metaphysics as a scienoe, what imparts such elevation to it, is its being a science con- versant with causes and first principles.
(1) For • most lucid explanation of this point the student is referred to Arch> bishop Whately's " Elements ct Logic," Analytiral outline, where the nature and DTorince of the science are placed beyond the possibii*^ of misapprehension for tht future.
(2) This counexion between apodeiktic principles and the seienee 9t metaphysia bads Aristotle, in the third Book, into a refutation of soeptieiam.
(.t) This is shown In chap. i.
62 / iii ANALYSIS OF ARISTOTLE^S HBTAPHYSICS. [bOOK I.
I 7. Confirmation ^^^> indeed, it may be also said that the origin of the of this from tha sciences kindred to aJetaphysics bears the completest kindred testimony to its dignity and value as a science, that sciences, ^^^ ^^ pj^^ ^^ loftiest faculties of the human mind, and elevates them above thmgs sensual and grovelling. The sciences kindred to Metaphvsics, from their very earSest dawn, were pursued not for the sake or any extrinsic advantages; for they sprang up in places where increasing civilisation had supplied the necessary and even superfluous wants of the inhabitants. Thus it was niatics."* *" that the mathematical sciences took their rise in Egypt * amongst the priests; for the sacerdotal caste, naving their worldly expenses defrayed for them out of the pubKc purse, were permitted to enjoy leisure, and thus were induced to cultivate the abstract sciences, not from their mere utility, but from the pure love of knowledge itself, as such.
And this fact it is which, in the most eminent degree, j.whyOntoiogy evinccs the claim which Metaphysics, as a science, has upon us. ™* yxpoD. our sympathies, because it is a purely speculative science; that is, a science cultivated for the sake of the knowledge it furnishes its votaries with. And, indeed, beside the particular instance in the case of the Egyptians just mentioned, that Metaphvsics, or any hi^h order of science, is pursued for the sake of knowledge, as such, is in general proved from the origin of specula- tion its^. Eor mimkind, from wonder,' first forms systems of philo- sophy; and wonder is attended with a feeling of i^orance, as well as a desire to remove that ignorance. Now this desire to remove ignorance, wherever it exists, at the same time manifests the most unmistakeable love of knowledge for its own sake. In short, what is the love of knowledge, but, in other words, the desire to be liberated from the bondage of ignorance P 10. Chap. iL In this way Aristotle strives to place Ontology in its Detailed proof true position of importance amonsst the other sciences.
a science, com- sake and not for the sake of another; so Ontology is ^the^s^ie** *^* puTSued for its own sak^ — ^for the sake, as such, of the glorious knowledge which it unfolds. And, indeed, ^ter all, such is its dignity, uiat we can hardly consider it as of human origin; for allowing it this characteristic of freedom just awarded to it, we can with very little probability on our side attribute it to such a source as that of the mvention of man, seeing that human nature is in itself so generally servile; and, besides this, being a science of causes, and God being the chief amongst causes ' — ^now this is the view of the Divine nature that has ever prevailed amongst mankind, — it would accordingly seem thai (1) Towards the end of chap. i. (2) Fiiie chap. ii.
aOOK l] ANALT8IS OF ABISTOTLE'S MBTAFHTBIOB. XI il such a Bcienoe as this is should be what God would be in pos* lession of, as a sort of prerogative of His Almighty power and perfection.
And, f'irther, Aristotle shows how worthy of onr n. ontology u attention and study metaphysical science in reality was, a niier amongst biasmudi as this Wisdom, or Ontology, was, in its own **** »"«»«». nature, fitted to be a regulator — so to speak — ^to all other systems of knowledge. As in the external world, mind rules rightfully oyer matter; and, as in ourselves, intellect — ^if its sway be not usurped by passion— exercises dominion over the body;* so, according to this constitution of things, should the science investigated in this present Treatise be honoured as the oueen of the other sciences,— as that science to whidi the rest should do homa^^ because it is coi>- yersant about those subjects that are most mtellectual in their essence. And, therefore, on the principle just enunciated, of the subordination of the immaterial to the corporeal, decidedly the most qualified to stand at the top of the material and moral, and, in snort, the whole order of mental sciences, is the science of the Ontologist or Metaphysician.