1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………3
2. “On parts of animals”….……………………….……………………… ………….4
3. “The History of Animals”……………………………………………………… ……...6
4. Conclusion……………………………………………………………………8
5. References……………………………………………………… ….………..9

1. Introduction.

Aristotle was especially fascinated by the biological world as an object of study. Mammals, birds, fish, and insects - all this aroused in Aristotle a lively, genuine interest, genuine inspiration and even aesthetic admiration. He wrote: “...We must approach the study of animals without any disgust, since they all contain something natural and beautiful. For it is not chance, but purposefulness that is present in all works of nature, and to the highest degree, and for what purpose they exist or arose belongs to the realm of beauty.” It is the purposiveness of organic nature that makes it beautiful and worthy of study.

The name of Aristotle is well known to every biologist. Already on the first pages of zoology textbooks, the classification of animals given by Aristotle is given; in the chapter on echinoderms, you can find out that the chewing apparatus of sea urchins is called Aristotle’s lantern, since Aristotle first described it. The embryology textbook reports that the beating of the heart of a chicken embryo on the 3rd day of incubation (the so-called punctum saliens) was first noticed by Aristotle, and he also described the placenta of selachians. In addition, in countless zoological articles, historical overviews begin with a mention of Aristotle, who expressed his opinions on a variety of issues concerning the structure and life of animals. From this point of view, the translation of Aristotle's main zoological work does not require any special recommendation. But, on the other hand, it is unlikely that anyone will dispute that most biologists have extremely limited information about Aristotle: what he actually did for science and what gives him the right to be called the “father of biology” is few people know. In order to expand knowledge about the grandiose works of Aristotle, this abstract was written.

1. "On the parts of animals."

The huge variety of living beings, their amazing adaptability to the environment, the functional and structural expediency of their structure, birth, methods of reproduction, death - all these and other features of the biological world interested Aristotle the biologist and required, in his opinion, a detailed description and theoretical and philosophical justification . As such a justification, he uses the doctrine of matter and form.

Any plant or animal organism is a complete whole, representing the realization of a certain form. Such an organism consists of many heterogeneous parts, or organs, each of which performs its own very specific function necessary to maintain the vital functions of the entire organism. Performing this function is the purpose for which this body exists. The performance of functions by an organ requires, as a rule, not one, but several abilities (to move, contract and expand, perceive sensation, etc.). Therefore, an organ must consist not of one, but of many homogeneous parts. Thus, the hand and other similar parts of the body consist of bones, nerves, muscles, etc. Among such homogeneous parts, Aristotle also includes hair, claws, blood, fat, brain, bile, milk and other similar substances in animals, and in plants - wood, juice, bark, fruit pulp, etc. These homogeneous substances represent the matter from which organs and the body as a whole are formed. He considered ontogenesis from the standpoint of the categories of possibility and reality. Organic growth is the actualization of the possibilities hidden in the original matter. This interpretation is close to modern ideas that all the structural features of an adult organism are encrypted in the genetic code.

This work consists of 4 books in which Aristotle discusses not only the above issues, but also issues of taxonomy, and the species diversity of animals and plants.

And so, summarizing the material from Aristotle’s book “On the Parts of Animals,” we can conclude that Aristotle laid down the tradition of systematizing animal species. He was the first to put the classification of animals on a scientific basis, grouping species not only by similarity, but also by kinship.

Taxonomy of animals according to Aristotle.

Aristotle was undoubtedly the greatest biologist of his time. If in the field of astronomy, physics, and mechanics Aristotle largely remained a speculative thinker, then he treated living nature with exceptional observation and insight, and strived to comprehend the smallest details. He dissected the corpses of animals, while drawing conclusions about the anatomical structure of man; he studied about 500 species of animals, described their appearance and, where he could, their structure; spoke about their way of life, morals and instincts, and made many more private discoveries. Albums of drawings of the results of anatomical dissection of animals and their organs, called “Anatomy,” served as appendices to the “History of Animals”; unfortunately, these albums were later lost.

1. "Animal History".

Speaking about Aristotle’s work “History of Animals”, first of all, it should be noted that “History of Animals” is the largest in volume of works that have come down to us

Aristotle.

The general sequence of the books of “Animal Stories” reflects a conceptual movement from the most general generic properties to specific ones, lying in different aspects, but at approximately the same level of specificity. Accordingly, there is a transition from genus to species (taxon), from the “genus” of certain organs to their “species”, from general forms of behavior of organisms to specific forms.

The first book describes the parts that all animals have, such as digestive and excretory organs, as well as others that almost all have. Right here

methods are given for dividing animals according to a variety of characteristics (as opposed to Plato’s dichotomism): according to an aquatic or land way of life; by voice, food consumed, habitat; on gregarious and non-social; on walking, floating, flying, attached; finally, according to the characteristics that are decisive for the entire peripatetic classification of animals - into animals with blood and bloodless (invertebrates are not a mistake, rather the result of a different understanding of the term “blood” than now), as well as viviparous, oviparous and worm-bearing.

The review of the organs of the human body given here is, as it were, an introduction to a similar review of other animals, placed already in the second book, and, probably, originally formed a single whole with it, especially since the presentation in it begins precisely with a comparison of the organs of four-legged animals with the corresponding human.

The third book complements the previous one as far as “homogeneous parts” are concerned, i.e. tissues and genital organs. Book four expands the possibilities of the same approach in relation to the body parts of invertebrates ("bloodless") and in relation to the abilities of animals: their voice, sleep, feelings. Book five is devoted to a variety of modes and aspects of reproduction, including methods and seasons of mating in all groups known to Aristotle - from mammals ("viviparous quadrupeds") to insects, as well as special issues: spontaneous generation, metamorphosis in butterflies, viviparity in vipers, etc. P. The last, XXXIII and XXXIV, chapters of the fifth book

certain species of "viviparous quadrupeds", birds, fish. The seventh book deals with human reproduction, in this sense it is quite appropriate after the fifth and sixth, but falls out of context due to a purely medical approach to the presentation of the material. In different manuscripts it is placed in different places, sometimes completely absent. It appears to have originally existed separately from the History of Animals corpus.

Book eight traces a series of gradual complication of the psyche from “bloodless” and fish to birds and “viviparous quadrupeds”; Particular emphasis is placed on describing the morals and behavior of domestic animals. From Chapter XII begins a presentation of ecological and ethological material and a gradual transition to book nine: bird flights, migrations in general (as well as some other seasonal phenomena, especially seasonal diseases) of animals - fish and others; hibernation, habitats, individual issues of animal behavior. Book nine, so beloved in the late antique period and

in the Middle Ages, it is a real treasure trove of folk observations and beliefs, sometimes fantastic, often of exclusively ancient origin, having parallels in the folklore of various countries. The authenticity of this book is sometimes disputed. Thus, in one of the best comments to the “History of Animals” we read that the ninth book is “a very uneven, in some places relatively successful, in others a very rough compilation from various sources, compiled, in general, for the purpose of collecting and comparing various physiological phenomena in the animal world, in which you can notice

manifestations of intelligence and skill; and also, perhaps, to serve as an introduction to the material presented only fragmentarily in what is now considered book eight" (Aubert, Wimmer, Bd. 1, S. 15). The mentioned roughness of the compilation is, at least in part, the result of later layers. In any case, there is no doubt that the ninth book is closely related in content to the eighth, but the latter is more “scientific”

although there are inconsistencies in it that indicate it has not been edited. For example, in Chapter IX, dedicated to elephants, we suddenly find information about life expectancy

camels. However, isn’t there a trace here of a mixture that once took place between both of these equally exotic animals, or rather, stories about them? After all, the Slavic word “camel” comes through intermediate forms like “velbud” and “ulband” from the ancient Greek stem “elephant”. In this case, this passage is a remnant of a very archaic phase, which entered the text after Aristotle’s death. Book nine is present in all the main manuscripts from which the accepted text of the “History of Animals” is built, including the most ancient ones, but sometimes, in particular, in the translation of Michael Scotus (the turn of the 12th-13th centuries), it is combined with book eight. It can be assumed that Aristotle, having collected all available materials for the ninth book, including not very

reliable, did not have time to fully critically process it, or entrusted the processing to one of his students, and he (them) did not fully cope with the task. Antique

morals allowed such reassignment. Aristotle's students, for example, Theophrastus and Eudemus, apparently helped write other books of the "History of Animals" or, at least, bring them to their final form.

He assigned a place to man at the top of the blood vessels. In addition, Aristotle describes living creatures that, in his opinion, occupy an intermediate level between animals and plants (“zoophytes”): sponges, acalephs (jellyfish), titia (ascidians). In turn, he divided plants into higher and lower.

Aristotle was born on the Aegean coast, in Stagira. His year of birth is between 384-332 BC. The future philosopher and encyclopedist received a good education, because his father and mother served as doctors for the king, grandfather of Alexander the Great.

At the age of 17, the promising young man, possessing encyclopedic knowledge, entered the Academy of the Samo, which was located in Athens. He stayed there for 20 years, until the death of his teacher, whom he highly valued and at the same time allowed himself to get into arguments with him because of different views on significant things and ideas.

After leaving the Greek capital, Aristotle became a personal tutor and moved to Pella for 4 years. The relationship between the teacher and the student developed quite warmly, until the moment when Macedonian ascended the throne with inflated ambitions - to conquer the whole world. The great naturalist did not approve of this.

Aristotle opened his own philosophical school in Athens - the Lyceum, which was successful, but after the death of Macedon an uprising began: the scientist’s views were not understood, he was called a blasphemer and an atheist. The place of death of Aristotle, many of whose ideas are still alive, is called the island of Euboea.

Great naturalist

The meaning of the word "naturalist"

The word naturalist consists of two derivatives, so literally this concept can be taken as “to check nature.” Therefore, a natural scientist is called scientist who studies the laws of nature and its phenomena, and natural science is the science of nature.

What did Aristotle study and describe?

Aristotle loved the world in which he lived, longed to know it, to master the essence of all things, penetrate into the deep meaning of objects and phenomena and pass on their knowledge to subsequent generations, preferring the reporting of accurate facts. He was one of the first to found science in its broadest sense: for the first time created a system of nature - physics, defining its main concept – movement. In his work there was nothing more important than the study of living beings, and, therefore, biology: he revealed the essence of animal anatomy, described the mechanism of movement quadrupeds, studied fish and shellfish.

Achievements and discoveries

Aristotle made enormous contributions to ancient natural science - proposed his own world system. Thus, he believed that in the center there is a stationary Earth, around which celestial spheres with fixed planets and stars move. Moreover, the ninth sphere is a kind of engine of the Universe. Moreover, the greatest sage of antiquity predicted Darwin's theory of natural selection, he demonstrated a deep understanding of geology, in particular the origin of fossils in Asia Minor. Metaphysics was embodied in many works of the ancient Greek - “On Heaven”, “Meteorology”, “On Origin and Destruction” and others. Science as a whole was for Aristotle the highest level of knowledge, because the scientist created the so-called “ladder of knowledge.”

Contribution to philosophy

Philosophy occupied a fundamental place in the researcher’s activities, which he divided into three types - theoretical, practical and poetic. In his works on metaphysics, Aristotle develops the doctrine of the causes of all things, defining four basic ones: matter, form, productive cause and purpose.

The scientist was one of the first revealed the laws of logic and classified the properties of being according to certain criteria, philosophical categories. It was based on the scientist’s conviction in the materiality of the world. His theory is based on the fact that the essence is in the things themselves. Aristotle gave his own interpretation of Platonic philosophy and a precise definition of being, and also thoroughly studied the problems of matter and clearly defined its essence.

Views on politics

Aristotle took part in the development of the main fields of knowledge of the time - and politics was no exception. He emphasized the importance of observation and experience and was a supporter of moderate democracy, understanding justice as the common good. It is justice, according to the ancient Greek, that should become the main political goal.

He was convinced that the political system should have three branches: judicial, administrative and legislative. Aristotle's forms of government are monarchy, aristocracy and polity (republic). Moreover, he calls exclusively the latter correct, because it combines the best aspects of oligarchy and democracy. The scientist also spoke about the problem of slavery, drawing attention to the fact that all Hellenes should be slave owners, unique masters of the world, and other peoples should be their faithful servants.

Ethics and the doctrine of the soul

It is impossible to underestimate Aristotle’s contribution to psychological science, because his doctrine of the soul is the center of all worldviews. According to the ideas of the sage, the soul is connected on the one hand - with the material component, and on the other - with the spiritual, i.e. with God blessing. She represents only the natural body. In other words, all living things have a soul, of which, according to the scientist, there are only three types: plant, animal and human (intelligent). However, the ancient Greek philosopher categorically refuted the opinion about the transmigration of souls, considering the soul, although not the body, but an inseparable part of it, and assuring that the soul is not indifferent in whose shell it resides.

Aristotle's ethics is, first of all, the “correct norm” of human behavior. Moreover, the norm has no theoretical basis, but is determined by the characteristics of society. The central principle of his ethics is reasonable behavior and moderation. The scientist was convinced that only through thinking does a person make his choice, and creativity and actions are not the same thing.

The significance of Aristotle's works

Aristotle's views were disseminated by Arabs throughout medieval Europe and were only questioned during the technological revolution of the mid-16th century. All the scientist’s lectures were collected in books - 150 volumes, a tenth of which has survived to this day. These are biological treatises, philosophical works, works on art.

If this message was useful to you, I would be glad to see you

The main contribution to science of the ancient philosopher and scientist is presented in this article.

Aristotle: contribution to science

What is Aristotle's contribution to philosophy?

Before talking about Aristotle's contribution to the development of philosophy, the following should be noted. At the beginning of his journey, he was impressed by the teachings of Plato. But having gradually freed himself from his influence, Aristotle even criticized Plato’s teachings and created his own teaching in philosophy. His philosophy penetrated into all areas of science. The main philosophical works are “Categories”, “Physics”, “Analytics First and Second”, “On the Soul”, “On Celestial Phenomena”, “Politics”, “History of Animals”, “Metaphysics” and “On the Art of Poetry”.

Aristotle combines into being the relationship of the real, the logical and the individual. Aristotle was the first to develop the doctrine that philosophy should study being, abstracting from some of its properties. The difference between philosophy and other sciences is that it explores the very essence of being itself. The essence of existence is based on: matter, form and concept, as well as that which consists of form and matter.

Aristotle's contributions to biology

One of Aristotle's important contributions concerns the field of biology. Based on observations of the structure of living organisms, he created the doctrine of biological feasibility. Examples of expediency are the development of organisms from seed, the mutual adaptability of organs, the active instincts of animals, and so on.

For a long time, Aristotle's biological works served as a source for zoology. He created a classification and described many species of animals. The scientist was the first to describe the embryonic development of dolphins and whales, as well as the distinctive features of fish. Because of these achievements, some scientists believe that Aristotle is the father of biology.

What are Aristotle's contributions to psychology?

Aristotle is considered the founder of psychology. His treatise “On the Soul” has long been a guide to psychology. In general, this was the first psychological work. He believed that the soul is not a substance, as previously thought. Also, the scientist, unlike the idealist philosophers, argued that the soul is inseparable from matter or the living body. The soul, according to Aristotle, is the essence of living bodies.

What are Aristotle's contributions to medicine?

Aristotle was responsible for introducing the term “aorta” into scientific circulation. He also described the pulmonary aorta. He believed that the human heart has three chambers and is the most important organ in the body. Therefore, being so important for the body, it cannot become seriously ill. Aristotle introduced the concept of decay. He devoted a lot of time to observing temperature changes, seasons and the environment, characterizing them as the causes of certain diseases.

What are Aristotle's contributions to logic?

Aristotle is called the father of the science of logic, which studied the forms of thinking as cognitive activity. He introduced the concepts of contrarian, contradictory and cognitive opposites. The scientist was the first to describe some logical operations, formulate the laws of contradiction, exclusion of thirds and thinking.

What is Aristotle's contribution to educational science?

Aristotle's contribution to pedagogy is characterized by the fact that the ancient figure created an educational institution in Athens called the Lyceum. He headed the educational institution for 12 years. During this period, he wrote many essays, which were the basis for lectures and conversations between the teacher and his students. The main topic of pedagogical conversations was that a person has 3 souls - plant, animal and rational. Therefore, issues of education concerned equal concern for these 3 types of soul. His views on education and upbringing are most fully described in the treatise “Politics”.

What are Aristotle's contributions to natural science?

He outlined his knowledge in the field of natural science in the works “Physics”, “Meteorology”, “On Origin and Destruction”, “Description of Animals”, “On the Soul”, “On Heaven”. He systematized the enormous natural scientific material collected by Aristotle and his predecessors. The systematization was carried out on the basis of a critical analysis of hereditary information, our own observations and a philosophical approach.

What are Aristotle's contributions to rhetoric?

Aristotle is the author of the treatise “Rhetoric,” which he devoted to the art of persuasion. It was written in 355 BC. It is still used today by teachers, politicians and media personalities. The author of the treatise focuses on 5 important lessons that should be learned by anyone who wants to master the art of rhetoric and persuasion that they are right. So, the lessons of Aristotle:

• the proof is in the head
• train logic
• taking “passions” under control
• talking about “beautiful”
• preparation - speech - victory

Aristotle's contribution to history

Scientists rely on his work “The Athenian Polity” in studying the political system of the state of Athens and the system of government of its rulers.

Aristotle's contributions to physics

In the treatises “On Heaven”, “Physics”, “Meteorology” and “On Origin and Destruction”, the scientist gives answers to some physical questions that concern him. He was the first to recognize the fact that physics exists only thanks to a certain system of rules. With their help, knowledge about nature is obtained.

Aristotle is considered the founder of physics. After all, he was responsible for the development of many physical hypotheses and theories. And he also introduced the term “physics” into scientific circulation. The scientist combined and systematized knowledge about nature and created a physical and cosmological picture of the world.

What are Aristotle's contributions to geography?

Aristotle was the first to characterize the nature of the ocean and earth and explain the cycle of water whirlpool in nature. He also described the action and nature of earthquakes, winds, rays, thunder and rainbows, meteors and comets, and the Milky Way. The scientist argued that the formation of the Earth occurs gradually and is so extended in time and space that a person is not able to notice these changes.

Aristotle's contribution to ecology

He wrote the treatise “The History of Animals” and made a description of more than 500 species of animals known to him. Aristotle also spoke about the behavior of animals. Thus, Aristotle’s work characterized the first stage in the development of ecology - the stage of accumulation of factual material and the first attempts to systematize knowledge.

What is Aristotle's contribution to culture?

The cultural heritage of the scientist is represented by two types of works:

• “exoteric” writings – intended for the general public
• “esoteric” - lecture material for students who have spent more than one day at school

We hope that from this article you learned what contribution Aristotle made to the development of science.

1 of 9

Presentation on the topic: Aristotle. Merits in biology

Slide no. 1

Slide description:

Slide no. 2

Slide description:

Brief biography of Aristotle (384-322 BC), ancient Greek philosopher and scientist. Born in Stagira. In 367 he went to Athens and, becoming a student of Plato, for 20 years, until Plato’s death, was a member of the Platonic Academy. In 343 he was invited by the king of Macedonia to raise his son. In 335 he returned to Athens and created his own school there (Lyceum, or Peripatetic school). He died in Chalkis on Euboea, where he fled from persecution on charges of a crime against religion.

Slide no. 3

Slide description:

Aristotle became one of the founders of science, for the first time summarizing the biological knowledge accumulated by humanity before him. He developed a taxonomy of animals, defining a place in it for man, whom he called a social animal endowed with reason. Many of Aristotle's works were devoted to the origin of life. He formulated the theory of continuous and gradual development of living and nonliving matter.

Slide no. 4

Slide description:

Works of the scientist The works of Aristotle that have reached us are divided according to their content into 7 groups: Logical treatises; Biological treatises: “History of Animals”, “On the Parts of Animals”, “On the Origin of Animals”, “On the Movement of Animals”; Treatise “On the Soul”; Essay on “first philosophy”; considering existence as such and which later received the name “Metaphysics”; Ethical works - the so-called “Nicomachean Ethics” (dedicated to Nicomacheus, the son of Aristotle) ​​and “Eudemus Ethics” (dedicated to Eudemus, a student of Aristotle); Socio-political and historical works: “Politics”, “The Athenian Polity”.

Slide no. 5

Slide description:

Aristotle's Biology In the field of biology, one of Aristotle's merits is his doctrine of biological expediency, based on observations of the expedient structure of living organisms. Aristotle saw examples of purposefulness in nature in such facts as the development of organic structures from seeds, various manifestations of the purposefully acting instinct of animals, the mutual adaptability of their organs, etc. In Aristotle’s biological works, which served for a long time as the main source of information on zoology, a classification and description of numerous animal species. The matter of life is the body, the form is the soul, which Aristotle called “entelechy.” According to the three kinds of living beings (plants, animals, humans), Aristotle distinguished three souls, or three parts of the soul: plant, animal (sensing) and rational.

Slide no. 6

Slide description:

Animal taxonomy The animal system was first developed in the 4th century. BC e. Aristotle, who described more than 450 forms, dividing them into 2 large groups: - animals supplied with blood (vertebrates, according to modern ideas); -bloodless (invertebrates, in the modern sense). Animals with blood, in turn, were divided by him into groups roughly corresponding to modern classes. With regard to invertebrates, Aristotle's system was less perfect. Thus, among modern types, he more or less correctly identified only arthropods.

Slide no. 7

Slide description:

The theory of spontaneous generation of living beings In his writings, Aristotle cites countless “facts” of spontaneous generation of living beings - plants, insects, worms, frogs, mice, some sea animals - indicating the conditions necessary for this - the presence of decomposing organic remains, manure, spoiled meat, various garbage, dirt. Aristotle even provided a certain theoretical basis for these “facts” - he argued that the sudden birth of living beings was caused by nothing more than the influence of some spiritual principle on previously lifeless matter.

Slide no. 8

Slide description:

But at the same time, Aristotle also expresses quite sound thoughts, close in essence to evolutionary theory: “In addition, it is possible that some bodies from time to time transform into others, and those, in turn, decaying, undergo new transformations, and thus In this way, development and decay balance each other.”

Slide no. 9

Slide description:

Aristotle's ladder It is also certainly worth noting that Aristotle was the first scientist to express the idea of ​​a “ladder of creatures” (from the less developed and more primitive to the most developed, and in a broader sense, from inanimate nature to living nature). This is what Aristotle's “ladder” looked like: 1) Man; 2) Animals; 3) Zoophytes; 4) Plants; 5) Inorganic matter.

Aristotle is the founder of biology as a science. As an astronomer, Aristotle was a systematizer and popularizer, and not the best one at that. As a biologist he is a pioneer.

Since we are writing about Aristotle as a philosopher, it is important for us here to emphasize first of all the philosophical significance of Aristotle’s biological views.

After all, it was a living organism, and not just a person and his activities, as mentioned above, that was a model for Aristotle when constructing a general picture of the world. The doctrine of the final cause with its side companion - spontaneity - was modeled by the philosopher on a living organism in the same way as the same doctrine about the same cause with its side companion - chance - was modeled on the choosing, decision-making person. The world as a whole, with its self-thinking thinking - God, is likened by Aristotle to a thinking living organism. Apology of biology. Before Aristotle, biology was shunned. The stars were more respected objects, nobler material for observation and reflection, than living organisms filled with mucus and feces. Therefore, it is no coincidence that in the first book, “On the Parts of Animals,” Aristotle proves that plants and animals represent an object no less valuable for scientific research than celestial bodies, although the former are transitory, and the latter, as it seemed to the philosopher, are eternal. Speaking about both astronomy and biology, Aristotle proclaims that “both studies have their own charm” (On the parts of animals 1, 5) Moreover, the plant and animal world surrounding humans is given to us in direct sensation in a much greater degrees than celestial bodies, so studying it is a rewarding task, because “we have a greater opportunity to know about animals and plants, because we grow up with them” (ibid.) and are in a natural relationship with them.

Although Aristotle himself felt disgust and disgust for the entrails of animals, for otherwise he would not have said that “one cannot look without great disgust at what a person is made of, such as blood, veins and similar parts” (I , 5), he nevertheless contrasted this feeling, characteristic of many people and frightening them from studying biology, with the pleasure of knowledge, regardless of whether the object of knowledge is pleasant or not to the person’s immediate feeling, if, of course, this person is a true scientist and, especially, a philosopher. After all, “by observing even those of them that are unpleasant to the senses,” says Aristotle, “the nature that created them gives ... inexpressible pleasures to people capable of knowing reasons and philosophers by nature” (I, 5). In the knowledge of causes, as we have seen, Aristotle believed the essence of scientific knowledge and the highest manifestation of the human mind.

At the same time, Aristotle notes that he cannot understand why people prefer the contemplation of artificial images of works of nature than the observation of living originals, which can reveal the causal background of what is observed (which is impossible in the case of dead images).

This consideration also applies to Aristotle’s aesthetic position. Let us note here that Aristotle gives preference to the observation of life over the aesthetic pleasure of contemplating its dead reflection in art. Aristotle calls the widespread “perversion” “strange and contrary to reason.”

Consequently, we have before us an apology for the real observation of living nature. It contradicts the above-mentioned speculative method of Aristotle’s physics and, even more so, his entire metaphysics. This makes one wonder whether the German researcher Jaeger was right, who, trying to solve the Aristotelian question, proceeded from the assumption that the development of Aristotle’s views followed the main line of his elimination of Platonism, and therefore Aristotle’s biological works with their empirical method complete the philosopher’s work. This consideration is also confirmed by the fact that after Aristotle, concrete and even empirical research prevailed in his school - primarily the botany of Theophrastus and others. But the objection is that Aristotle described and mentioned mainly those animals that lived in the Eastern Mediterranean, where the philosopher was in the second period, and therefore Aristotle himself begins with biological works, which had a great influence on his doctrine of the essence of being (formulated on the basis of the model of a living species), and even more so on the teleological nature of his worldview, also, however, significantly.

The empiricism of Aristotle the biologist reaches its apotheosis in his advice not to neglect anything when studying nature: “One should not childishly neglect the study of insignificant animals, for in every work of nature there is something worthy of surprise” (I, 5). Aristotle recalls the words of Heraclitus, addressed by him to the strangers who had arrived to meet him, who hesitated on the threshold of his hut, seeing him warming himself by the weak fireplace and were embarrassed by such a pitiful situation with such a great philosopher. Noticing their confusion, Heraclitus calmly told them to enter boldly, “for the gods dwell here too.” Aristotle applies these legendary words of the great thinker to all natural phenomena, albeit, at first glance, the most insignificant due to their smallness. The worm is no less divine than Sirius.

Here Aristotle is deeply right. The point is not the divinity of the worm, but the fact that the smallest organisms are the most powerful, and the damage that some insignificant Koch stick still inflicts on people is incomparable in magnitude with the damage caused to people by the “kings of nature.” However, humanity, until the invention of the elementary microscope by Leeuwenhoek, knew nothing about the simplest organisms!

So, Aristotle convinces his listeners to abandon their prejudice before the study of living nature, as a low and unworthy task (and this is the same author who in “Politics” proves that virtuosity in art is the work of slaves, while a noble one just needs to play well, so how any virtuosity enslaves a person). Aristotle said in his lectures on biology: “We must approach the study of animals without any disgust, since they all contain something natural and beautiful” (I, 5).

Teleology. However, we should not close our eyes to the fact that our philosopher sees beauty in living nature not in the matter of which living beings are composed (it is this that causes disgust), but in the contemplation of expediency. Aristotle prefers nature to art because “in works of nature, “for the sake of” the beautiful is manifested to an even greater extent than in works of art” (I, 1), constituting a “reasonable basis” in nature (I, 1). Aristotle thus went along the line of an imaginary explanation of the phenomena of living nature, along the line of discovering imaginary causes. After all, the search for a rational basis, a goal, gives the illusion of knowledge. Not more. Of course, in a living organism, where everything is interconnected and where parts exist for the sake of the whole, where many things are subordinated to the whole, everything leads to the question: “For what?” This question in itself is appropriate. However, frozen in such a position, it is easy to slip into the appearance of an explanation. Subsequently, vulgarized Aristotelianism greatly hindered the development of biological science, more than once leading it astray in search of imaginary goals.

Definition of life. Although Aristotle extends his principle of expediency to the entire universe, he is not a hylozoist. Not all bodies are endowed with life. In his work “On the Soul,” Aristotle writes that “of natural bodies, some are endowed with life, others are not” (II, 1). Aristotle has the first definition of life: “We call life all the nourishment, growth and decay of the body that has its basis in itself” (ibid.).

Origin of life. This question must be divided into two aspects: philosophical (metaphysical) and biological (scientific). All types of living things, being forms, are eternal, and therefore in the metaphysical sense life did not begin, since nothing happens at all in the world at the level of “essences of being.” From a biological point of view, the origin of life is quite possible, if by this we mean the implementation (entelechy) of a species in nature. For this there must be favorable conditions. Once realized, the species continues to reproduce itself, a new individual arising from the seed of the older one. However, Aristotle allowed the spontaneous generation of lower species of living things from non-living things: worms, mollusks and even fish, which in terms of metaphysics means that the form of these creatures can become entelechy directly in marine or decaying matter. This false theory of spontaneous generation - the product of a lack of observation in relation to the small things accessible to the naked eye, the study of which Aristotle himself advocated - caused great harm to biology, taking root over time to such an extent that it was only with great difficulty that it was abandoned only in the last century, when experimentally it was possible to it has been proven that specific life is always transmitted through an egg (as for the origin of life in general, this question is still not resolved).

Classification of animals. In the field of biology, Aristotle is the father, first of all, of zoology (like Theophrastus of botany). In Aristotle's zoological works, more than five hundred species of animals were mentioned and described - a huge figure for that time. Aristotle's focus is on the species, not the individual or the genus. These are the “essences of being,” forms, the first essences (according to “Metaphysics”). A species is that minimally general thing that almost merges with the individual, spreading out in it thanks to random, unimportant features, but which still allows definition as a verbal expression of the autonomous “essence of being,” essence in its understanding by Aristotle.

A species is more real than its constituent individuals and than the genus into which the species is included along with other species, for the genus does not really exist; it is a hypostatization of essential characteristics inherent in all species of the genus. In biology, Aristotle is right. The individuals there are really not much different from the species; they are all approximately the same. It is possible that in the doctrine of form in his first philosophy, Aristotle was inspired at this point precisely by his biological observations and knowledge. Unfortunately, he equated people with animals, reducing them to a species, denying a certain Socrates any significant differences from a certain Callias.

However, Aristotle did not stop at species. He sought to include them in more general groups. Aristotle divided all animals into blood-bearing and bloodless, which approximately corresponds to the division of living beings by modern scientific biology into vertebrates and invertebrates. We omit here further details of Aristotle's classification of animals.

"Staircase of Creatures" Summarizing the fact of the presence of transitional forms between plants and animals, flora and fauna, Aristotle writes in his essay “On the Parts of Animals”: ​​“Nature passes continuously from inanimate bodies to animals, through those that live, but are not animals” (IV, 5 ). The History of Animals says that nature gradually passes from plants to animals, because regarding some creatures living in the sea, one can doubt whether they are plants or animals; nature also gradually moves from inanimate objects to animals, because plants, compared to animals, are almost inanimate, and compared to inanimate things, they are animate. Those who have more life and Movement are more animated, while some differ in this respect from others by a small amount.

B. XVIII century the Swiss naturalist Bonnet would call this ascent of species a “ladder of creatures.” It was understood evolutionistically: higher stages appeared later in time than lower ones, life ascended over time along these stages. There was nothing like this in Aristotle’s biological views. For him, all levels coexist from time to time, all forms of living nature are eternal and unchanging. Aristotle is far from evolutionism. And yet Charles Darwin claimed that Linnaeus and Cuvier were his gods, but these “gods” are only children compared to “old Aristotle.” Darwin highly valued Aristotle as the founder of biology and as a non-evolutionist who prepared evolutionism with his idea of ​​gradation, the hierarchization of life forms.

Biological discoveries. Specific biological scientific discoveries are also associated with the name of Aristotle. The chewing apparatus of sea urchins is called “Aristotle’s lantern.” The philosopher distinguished between an organ and a function, linking the first with a material cause, and the second with a formal and purposeful one. Aristotle discovered the principle of correlation in the formula: “What nature takes away in one place, she gives to other parts.” For example, having taken away the teeth in the upper jaw, nature rewards it with horns. Aristotle had other discoveries.