Question

I've been reading an old logic text (Deductive Logic. George Stock. 1888) and he describes something very like Aristotle's notion of a definition, but in his description, it is clearly a matter of intensions, of concepts alone. His notion of a definition is entirely analytical; you analyze the content of a concept, and come up with no new knowledge of the thing being defined, only a clearer understanding of your own judgment. This contrasts with my understanding of Aristotle's notion of definitions in which the point of a definition is to understand the form of a thing in order to reveal, new, non-analytical knowledge of the thing.

So I have two questions.

Is my understanding of Aristotle wrong, or is this account of definition different from Aristotle's?

I associate Aristotle's definitions with essentialism, which I understand as being an ontological position about things. Is my understanding of essentialism wrong? Is it really just a case (as the book I'm reading seems to imply) that an essential property is simply one that is analyzed from the concept of the thing? Is it purely a matter of intensions and not extensions?

Answer 1

Aristotle's definitions aim to reveal new knowledge about the essence of a thing, intertwining intensions with observations of the natural world. His concept of essentialism encompasses necessary attributes fundamental to an entity's identity, thus going beyond mere concept analysis.

Step-by-step explanation:

Your understanding of Aristotle's notion of definition is generally correct, but let's clarify. Aristotle's approach to defining things does indeed include gaining new knowledge about the form of a thing, which contrasts with the analytical view focused solely on concept clarification. Furthermore, essentialism in Aristotle's context is not merely about the analysis of a concept; it is an ontological position stating that entities have certain attributes that are necessary to their identity and function.

Aristotle's definitions aim to understand the essence of a thing, which is more than just a matter of intensions; it involves observing particulars in the natural world to deduce forms. This practical approach of distinguishing species and genera through observation delineates how Aristotle considered both the abstract and tangible aspects of entities to derive definitions and understand the material, formal, efficient, and final.

Overall, while Aristotle does value the analytical process, his philosophy is a robust system that seeks to define things based on their intrinsic nature and real-world examples, guiding us towards a deeper understanding of their essence.

four causes: