La biologia aristotelica nella prospettiva delle opere De partibus animalium e Historia Animalium / Aristotle’s biology in the perspective of the works De partibus animalium e Historia Animalium

Michał Oleksowicz

Resumen


Sommario / Resumen

 

Il magistero aristotelico nella zoologia comparata rimane saldo fino a tempi di scienza moderna, perché non muta in sostanza nei secoli il metodo aristotelico costituito dalla combinazione dei dati anatomici con quelli fisiologici. Pertanto la straordinaria stabilità assunta dalla biologia aristotelica richiede una riflessione sulle fonti storiche di essa e sui fondamenti del metodo scientifico impiegato da Aristotele nel quadro del suo pensiero biologico presentato in maniera complessiva nelle opere De partibus animalium e Historia Animalium. La riflessione su alcuni aspetti del suo pensiero biologico, ovvero sulla questione della causalità, della sostanza, del metodo dicotomico e comparativo, possa spiegare anche come esse abbiano a un certo punto svolto un ruolo di stimolo e di verifica anche per i temi più generali del suo pensiero filosofico. In effetti, con Aristotele il sapere teoretico della biologia ha conquistato per la prima volta in modo sistematico il grande terreno della natura vivente. Un grande merito di Aristotele filosofo e biologo è quello di aver fondato la scienza della biologia e la filosofia della biologia.

Parole chiave / Palabras clave: Aristotele, biologia, filosofia della biologia, metodo scientifico, storia della scienza.

 

Abstract

 

The Aristotelian explanations of comparative zoology remained valid until the time of modern science, because during the centuries it had not been changed. The Aristotelian method was characterized by the combination of anatomical and physiological data. The extraordinary stability of Aristotelian biology requires an inquiry into its historical sources and on the foundations of the scientific method employed by Aristotle, in the framework of his biological thought, presented in a comprehensive manner in the works De partibus animalium and Historia Animalium. The inquiry into some aspects of his biological thought, that is on the question of causality, substance, and the dichotomous and comparative method, can also explain how they had, at some point played an inspiring and verifying role in the context of more general topics of his philosophical thought. In fact, with Aristotle’s work, the theoretical knowledge of biology had for the first time in a systematic way achieved a coherent structure. A great merit of Aristotle the philosopher and biologist is to have founded the science of biology and the philosophy of biology.

 

Keywords: Aristotle, biology, history of science, philosophy of biology, scientific method.

 

Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5591-0579


Referencias


Aristotele. 2011. Fisica, edited by Roberto Radice. Milano: Biompiani.

―. 2013. Metafisica, edited by Giovanni Reale. Milano: Biompiani.

―. 2015. L’anima, edited by Giancarlo Movia. Milano: Biompiani.

―. 1924. Aristotle’s Metaphysics, edited by William D. Ross. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

―. Gli Analitici Primi, edited by Mario Mignucci. Napoli: Loffredo Editore, 1969.

―. 2007. Analitici secondi, edited by Mario Mignucci. Roma-Bari: Laterza.

Basti, Gianfranco. 2008. Filosofia dell’uomo. Bologna: ESD.

Balme, David M. 1987a. “The place of biology in Aristotle’s philosophy”. In Philosophical issues in Aristotle’s biology, edited by Allan Gotthelf, James G. Lennox, 9-20. Cambridge: CUP.

―. 1987b. “Teleology and necessity”. In Philosophical issues in Aristotle’s biology, edited by Allan Gotthelf, James G. Lennox, 275-285. Cambridge: CUP.

―. 1987c. “Aristotle’s biology was not essentialist”. In Philosophical issues in Aristotle’s biology, edited by Allan Gotthelf, James G. Lennox, 291-312. Cambridge, CUP.

Balme. David M. ed. 2002. Historia animalium, volume I, Books I-X: text, edited by Cambridge: CUP.

Barnes, Jonathan, ed. The Complete Works of Aristotle. Princeton-New York, 1991.

Berti, Enrico. 2004. Guida ad Aristotele. Roma-Bari: Laterza.

Bonitz, Hermann. Index Aristotelicus. Graz: Akademische Druck-V.Verlagsanstalt, 1955.

Cherniss, Harold. 1944. Aristotle’s Criticism of Plato and the Academy. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press.

Cooper, John M. 1987. “Hypothetical necessity and natural teleology”. In Philosophical issues in Aristotle’s biology, edited by Allan Gotthelf, James G. Lennox, 243-274. Cambridge: CUP.

De Haan, Daniel. “Hylomorphic Animalism, Emergentism, and the Challenge of the New Mechanist Philosophy of Neuroscience”. Scientia et Fides 5/2/ (2017): 9-38.

Gotthelf, Allan. 1987. “First principles in Aristotle’s Parts of Animals”. In Philosophical issues in Aristotle’s biology, edited by Allan Gotthelf, James G. Lennox, 167-198. Cambridge: CUP.

Gotthlef, Allan, ed. 1992. De partibus animalium I and De generatione Animalium I (with passages from II. 1-3). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Lanza, Diego e Mario Vegetti, eds. Opere biologiche di Aristotele. Torino: UTET, 1971.

Lennox, James G. 2001a. Aristotle’s philosophy of biology. Studies in the origins of life science. Cambridge: CUP.

―. 2001b. On the parts of animals, translated with a commentary by J.G. Lennox. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Lloyd, Geoffrey E.R. 1987. “Empirical research in Aristotle’s biology”. In Philosophical issues in Aristotle’s biology, edited by Allan Gotthelf, James G.

Lennox, 53-63. Cambridge: CUP.

Marcacci, Flavia. 2009. Alle origini dell’assiomatica: gli Eleati, Aristotele, Euclide. Roma: Aracne.

Pellegrin, Pierre. 1987. “Logical difference and biological difference: the unity of Aristotle’s thought”. In Philosophical issues in Aristotle’s biology, edited by Allan Gotthelf, James G. Lennox, 313-338. Cambridge: CUP.

Rossetti, Livio. 2004. “Empedocle scienziato”. In ed. Livio Rossetti, Carlo Santaniello, Studi sul pensiero e sulla lingua di Empedocle, 95-110. Coll. di Studi e Testi 37: Bari.

Tabaczek, Mariusz. “Emergence and Downward Causation Reconsidered in Terms of the Aristotelian-Thomistic View of Causation and Divine Action”. Scientia et Fides 4/1 (2016): 115-134.

Vegetti, Mario. 1971a. “Introduzione”. In Opere biologiche di Aristotele, edited by Diego Lanza, Mario Vegetti, 9-43. Torino: UTET.

―. 1971b. “Origini e metodi della zoologia aristotelica nella Historia Animalium”. In Opere biologiche di Aristotele, edited by Diego Lanza, Mario

Vegetti, 77-128. Torino: UTET.

―. 1971c. “I fondamenti teorici della biologia aristotelica nel De partibus animalium”. In Opere biologiche di Aristotele, edited by Diego Lanza, Mario Vegetti, 489-553. Torino: UTET.


Enlaces refback

  • No hay ningún enlace refback.


Edita:

Instituto de Teología “San Pedro de Alcántara”

Coedita:

Servicio de Publicaciones de la UNIVERSIDAD DE EXTREMADURA

Editorial Sindéresis

Derechos de autor:

Reconocimiento CC BY

© 2016, del Instituto Teológico “San Pedro de Alcántara” de Cáceres, la Universidad de Extremadura y Editorial Sindéresis

Dirección:

Instituto Teológico de Cáceres

Servicio de Publicaciones
Casa de la Iglesia
C/ General Ezponda, 14
E-10003 – Cáceres (España)

E-mail: publicaciones@diocesiscoriacaceres.es