Final answer:
The question about Aristotle naming his dog Legs is conceptual and relates to Aristotle's metaphysical understanding of essences and forms. There is no historical evidence of Aristotle owning a dog by that name, but the inquiry gives insight into how Aristotle might perceive the essence of a dog beyond its physical form.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question of why Aristotle would name his dog Legs does not refer to an actual historical event, as there is no record of Aristotle having a dog by that name. Instead, this question appears to be conceptual and related to the understanding of Aristotle's philosophical perspective on forms and essences. In the philosophical realm, particularly within Aristotelian metaphysics, the recognition of a 'dog' as a concept goes beyond the physical variations such as those between spaniels, poodles, and retrievers -- it involves an essence or a 'dog-ness' that is common to all dogs, regardless of their differences. This concept of 'dog-ness' is what allows us to categorize an animal as a dog. Aristotle's approach contrasts with Plato's theory of forms, which posits that a transcendent, perfect form of 'dog' exists, which all earthly dogs participate in and derive their 'dog-ness' from.
In the artistic context, the discussion about representation and abstraction, like the example of a figure missing a leg in a sculpture or a guardian figure with five legs, reflects the different ways artists grapple with the notion of representation and essence. Aristotle would likely be fascinated by the interpretations of forms and how they reflect the intrinsic qualities of a subject. His naming of a dog 'Legs' could symbolically represent a deeper essence of the animal as opposed to its physical manifestation, much like how statues or figures may be abstracted yet still present a coherent form or essence. However, this is purely hypothetical as Aristotle did not discuss such a personal anecdote in his extant works.