Comparison (between) and Critique (to) Interpretations of Terence Irwin and ‎Robert Bolton about Aristotle’s Method in Science.‎

Baradaran Nikou, Mohammad Amin; Zakiany, Gholamreza; Hoseini, Malek; Miandari, Hasan

doi:10.30465/lsj.2019.5210

Comparison (between) and Critique (to) Interpretations of Terence Irwin and ‎Robert Bolton about Aristotle’s Method in Science.‎

Document Type : Research

Authors

mohammad amin baradaran nikou ¹

gholamreza zakiany ²

malek hoseini ³

hasan miandari ³

¹ teacher/ hakim sabzevari university

² University faculty

³ faculty member

https://doi.org/10.30465/lsj.2019.5210

Abstract

The structure of Aristotle’s Science is deductive. It needs the premises that cannot be ‎deduced. Therefore, knowledge of the premises of science is an important stage in ‎scientific research. Aristotle, in Analytics and Topics, suggests induction and ‎dialectic for this stage. Aristotle's commentators disagree about this. For example, ‎Bolton prefers induction and Irwin prefers dialectic. Aristotle, according to Bolton’s ‎interpretation, is an empiricist; he starts his researches from particular sense data ‎and then discovers the general ‎principles of science by induction. Irwin believes that ‎scientific researches of Aristotle, as a rationalist philosopher, begins from special ‎kind of reputable opinions (ενδοξα) and then the principles of science are known by ‎a specific dialectic. This paper shows the differences between two interpretation of ‎Bolton and Irwin; observing the issue of the methodology for recognizing the ‎principles of science. Then, we investigate some important difficulties of their ‎interpretations and, finally, suggest some ideas for a better interpretation.‎

Keywords

Aristotle’s Science

Aristotle’s Principles of Science

Aristotles’ Methodology

‎Aristotle’s Induction

Aristotle’s Dialectic.‎

ارسطو (1379)، دربارۀ آسمان، ترجمۀ اسماعیل سعادت، تهران: هرمس.

ارسطو (1389 الف)، فیزیک، ترجمۀ محمدحسن لطفی، تهران: طرح نو.

ارسطو (1389 ب)، اخلاق نیکوماخوس، ترجمۀ محمدحسن لطفی، تهران: طرح نو.

ارسطو (1389 ج)، متافیزیک، ترجمۀ محمدحسن لطفی، تهران: طرح نو.

ارسطو (1390)، ارغنون، ترجمۀ میرشمس‌الدین ادیب سلطانی، تهران: نگاه.

برادران نیکو، محمدامین و غلامرضا ذکیانی (1394)، «نقد و بررسی ارغنون ارسطو از منظر رابین اسمیت»، منطق پژوهی، س 6، ش 1.

ذوالحسنی، فرزانه و محمد سعیدی‌مهر (1390)، «مشهورات در اندیشۀ ابن‌سینا»، حکمت سینوی، دورۀ 15، ش 46.

ذکیانی، غلامرضا و محمدامین برادران نیکو (1397)، «انواع مبانی علم نزد ارسطو؛ پاسخ به دشورایی‌‌هایی در تحلیل ثانی، دفتر نخست 2 و 10»، منطق پژوهی (درحال چاپ).

Aristotle (1991), The Complete Works of Aristotle, by Jonathan Barnes, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Bolton, R. (1987), “Definition and scientific method in Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics and Generation of Animals”, in: Philosophical Issues in Aristotle's Biology, by A. Gotthelf and J. Lennox, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bolton, R. (1995), “Aristotle’s Method in natural science: Physics 1”, in: A Collection of Essays, Clarendon: Oxford.

Bolton, R. (2003), “Aristotle: Epistemology and Methodology”, in: The Blackwell Guide to Ancient Philosophy, London: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Hintikka, Jakko (1980), “Aristotelian Induction”, in: Analysis of Aristotle, Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Irwin, T. H. (1977), “Aristotle's Discovery of Metaphysics”, The Review of Metaphysics, vol. 31.

Irwin, T. H. (1987), “Ways to First Principles: Aristotle’s Methods of Discovery”, Philosophical Topics, vol. 15, no. 2.

Irwin, T. H. (1988), Aristotle's First Principles, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Owen, G (1963), “Tithenai ta Phainomena”, in: Articles on Aristotle, by J. Barnes, M. Schofield and R. Sorabji, London: Duckworth.

Smith, R. (2002), “None of the Arts that Gives Proofs about Some Nature Is Interrogative: Questions and Aristotle’s Concept of Science”, Department of Philosophy, Texas A&M University.

Smith, R. (2009), “Aristotle’s Account of Demonstrative Knowledge (Episteme)”, in: A Companion to Aristotle, by G. Anagnostopoulos, London: Blackwell.