26. Aristotle's Method: Becoming Strong in Common Truth

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

Aristotle’s Response to Philosophical Disagreement #

• Aristotle follows Heraclitus’s advice to find what is common to all philosophers despite their disagreements
• All pre-Socratic philosophers agree that change involves contraries, though they disagree about which pair is fundamental
• This demonstrates that what is general and common is more known to us than what is particular
• Example: we agree more about drinking dry red wine than about drinking a specific Cabernet Sauvignon from Napa Valley in 1971

The Two-Step Method for Becoming Strong #

Step One: Giving Reason for What Everyone Says Without Reason

• Aristotle defines “first beginnings” (or “first causes”) by three conditions:
  • Not from anything else
  • Not reducible to each other (if one could be reduced to the other, it wouldn’t be first)
  • Everything else comes from them
• He then shows these conditions belong to the first pair of contraries
• Uses Socratic induction (following Heraclitus and Plato’s Phaedo) to demonstrate all change occurs between contraries:
  • Sick becomes healthy; healthy becomes sick
  • Hard becomes soft; soft becomes hard
  • Dry becomes wet; wet becomes dry
  • Dark becomes light; light becomes dark
  • This exhaustive induction proves change universally occurs between contraries

Step Two: Understanding the Nature of This Common Thought

• Contrasts Einstein’s phrase “the hypothesis is freely imagined” with Aristotle’s observation that the principle of contraries is “forced by truth itself”
• Hypotheses (freely imagined) can vary: the imagination gives rise to diversity; freedom gives rise to diversity
• But universal agreement across cultures and centuries (East and West, ancient and modern) indicates the principle is not freely imagined
• Evidence of universal recognition: Chinese I Ching (yin-yang), modern physics (matter-energy, attraction-repulsion, centripetal-centrifugal forces), all natural philosophers
• This resembles other necessary truths that everyone recognizes: “a whole is more than a part”
• To deny such a principle is to contradict oneself (denying it while implicitly affirming it)

Three Kinds of Beginnings #

In Experimental Science:

• Beginning (ἀρχή) is a hypothesis that is freely imagined
• Has no justification in itself
• Must be tested by deducing consequences and comparing to observation/experiment
• If consequences agree with observation, hypothesis is retained; if contradicted, hypothesis is rejected or modified
• Never achieves certitude
• Example: Einstein’s three major hypotheses in 1905 (Brownian motion, photoelectric effect, relativity)

In Philosophy:

• Beginning is forced on the mind by truth itself
• Is a foundation that justifies what can be deduced from it with necessity
• Examples: “a whole is more than a part,” “nothing is before or after itself,” principle of non-contradiction
• Achieves certitude
• Cannot be tested as a hypothesis because testing would require assuming what one is testing
• The principle of contradiction presupposes all testing of hypotheses; it cannot itself be tested without absurdity

In Theology:

• Beginning is known by faith
• Involves freely assenting to the word of God
• Shares certitude with philosophical principles (the truth of God’s word)
• Shares freedom with hypotheses (belief is meritorious because it is free, not forced)
• Augustine: “no one believes unless he wills to believe”
• Understanding here is “belief seeking understanding,” not testing; it aims at consolation within our limited capacity, not proof

The Modern and Ancient Mistakes #

The Pythagorean Mistake (Ancient):

• Coming from geometry, the Pythagoreans were accustomed to beginnings that are forced on the mind by truth itself (like geometric axioms)
• When entering experimental science, they incorrectly sought the same kind of beginning
• This was a mistake because experimental science requires freely imagined hypotheses to be tested by consequences

The Modern Mistake:

• We are accustomed to experimental science, where all beginnings are hypotheses to be tested
• We incorrectly try to apply this model everywhere: to geometry and first philosophy
• We treat necessary truths (whole > part, non-contradiction) as if they were hypotheses
• This obscures the distinction between kinds of inquiry and leads to philosophical error
• Example: Claude Bernard, eminent physiologist, dismisses philosophy and theology as inferior because they don’t follow the experimental method

The Role of Custom #

• Custom is stronger than argument in shaping human thought
• People from different ages and cultures share common thinking explained by custom, not by reason alone
• Example: 14th-century Paston letters—parents beating daughter to force marriage to wealthy man was customary, not considered cruel
• Max Planck: older generation physicists won’t accept new ideas contrary to their training; they die out and new generation accepts them
• Shakespeare’s edits: modern editions omit lines deemed too bawdy for high school, yet Shakespeare seems tame compared to modern media
• Socrates’ concern in Apology: more concerned with the custom-influenced minds of the jury than with prosecutorial arguments

Key Arguments #

The Induction on Contraries #

• From Heraclitus and Plato’s Phaedo
• Structure: Observe particular cases of change; in each case, change occurs between contraries; therefore, change universally occurs between contraries
• Force: Cannot reject the conclusion without denying obvious facts of observation

The Detective Work Argument (Aristotle’s Addition) #

• Scenario 1: We’re told X is cold at 10am and soft at 11am. Can we say change occurred? No—ice cream is both cold and soft simultaneously.
• Scenario 2: We’re told X is hard at 10am and hot at 11am. Can we say change occurred? No—a hot stone is both hard and hot.
• Scenario 3: We’re told X is cold at 10am and hot at 11am. Can we say change occurred? Yes—because these are contraries that cannot coexist in the same subject at the same time.
• Conclusion: Real change cannot be recognized without perceiving opposites/contraries

The Definition Argument #

• Change means “becoming different” or “becoming other”
• Difference or otherness implies opposition or contrariety
• Therefore, by definition, change involves contraries

The Reduction Argument #

• If one contrary could be reduced to the other, it would not be a true first principle
• If fire were the first principle of all things, how could you derive water (its contrary)?
• If sugar were the first principle, how could you derive bitterness?
• Therefore, true first principles must be contraries that cannot be reduced to each other

The Universality Argument #

• All thinkers who consider change (Greek, Chinese, modern) arrive at contraries
• This universal agreement across cultures and centuries indicates the principle is not freely imagined but forced on the mind
• A freely imagined idea would show diversity; freedom gives rise to diversity (e.g., multiple colored toilet paper in free societies)
• Yet everyone independently recognizes contraries in change—this points to truth, not imagination

Important Definitions #

First Beginnings/First Causes (ἀρχαί, ἀρχή)

• Not from anything else
• Not reducible to each other
• Everything else derives from them

Contraries

• Opposites that cannot simultaneously inhere in the same subject in the same respect
• One cannot be reduced to the other
• Examples: hot/cold, wet/dry, hard/soft, sick/healthy, dark/light

Forced by Truth Itself

• A principle the mind necessarily recognizes through observation and reason
• Has certitude
• Justifies what follows from it with necessity
• Cannot be tested as a hypothesis without contradiction

Freely Imagined

• A hypothesis in experimental science
• Not justified by itself
• Tested by deducing consequences and comparing to observation
• Never achieves certitude; always provisional

The Three Kinds of Inquiry

• Experimental Science: uses freely imagined hypotheses (conclusions justify principles)
• Philosophy: uses necessary truths forced on mind (principles justify conclusions)
• Theology: uses divinely revealed truth freely assented to (faith seeking understanding)

Examples & Illustrations #

Contraries in Modern Science #

• Centrifugal and centripetal forces balance in planetary orbits
• Einstein’s E=mc²: matter as condensed energy; energy as rarefied matter
• Nuclear forces (short-range) overcome proton repulsion (electromagnetic force)
• Matter and anti-matter as fundamental contraries in modern physics

Contraries in Modern Life #

• Dry red wine vs. specific Cabernet Sauvignon from Napa Valley, 1971 (proportional agreement decreases with specificity)
• Colored toilet paper and choice in free societies (freedom produces diversity)
• Russian diplomat at cocktail party: “We don’t have six colors of toilet paper like you, but we have other priorities”

Custom Shaping Perception #

• Paston Letters (14th century): Parents beat daughter daily to force marriage to wealthy man; historian notes this was customary, not considered cruelty
• Shakespeare editions: Modern high school editions omit “bawdy” lines; yet Shakespeare’s content is tame compared to current media standards
• Movie scene: Young couple watching film with sexual content—one shocked, one accustomed to it as normal (custom determines perception)

Method Confusion #

• Claude Bernard (eminent physiologist) dismisses philosophers and theologians because they don’t follow experimental method
• Albert the Great resists the Aristotelian “author worship” tradition that treats Aristotle as infallible source (like Bible in theology)
• Huygens (near-contemporary of Newton) explicitly distinguishes experimental method from geometry: “In geometry, principles justify conclusions; here, conclusions justify principles”

Questions Addressed #

Q: How should philosophers respond when all disagree about fundamentals? A: Follow Heraclitus’s advice: find what is common to all despite disagreement. Become strong in that common basis, because what is general/common is more known to us than what is particular. All philosophers recognize change involves contraries—this is the common ground.

Q: Is the principle of contraries a hypothesis or a necessary truth? A: It is forced on the mind by truth itself, not freely imagined. Evidence: universal recognition across all cultures and centuries. A freely imagined idea would produce diversity; yet everyone independently arrives at contraries.

Q: How do experimental science, philosophy, and theology differ in their beginnings? A: Experimental science uses freely imagined hypotheses tested by consequences (no certitude). Philosophy uses necessary truths forced on mind by truth (certitude, justify consequences). Theology uses freely assented faith in God’s word (certitude + freedom = meritorious).

Q: Why can’t we treat all inquiry the same way? A: Confusing these types produces error. Pythagoreans wrongly applied geometric method to natural science. Moderns wrongly apply experimental method to philosophy. We must recognize different beginnings for different kinds of inquiry.

Q: Can we test philosophical principles as hypotheses? A: No. Testing a hypothesis presupposes the principle of non-contradiction. To test whether contradiction is true would require assuming contradiction doesn’t hold while trying to discover whether it holds—absurd. Such principles must be recognized as forced on mind, not tested.

Q: Why does custom overcome argument in human thinking? A: People from different ages/cultures share common thinking explained by custom, not reason. Custom shapes perception itself. Even brilliant scientists (Max Planck’s observation) resist ideas contrary to their training. Augustine notes our entire way of living by custom seems normal to us but shameful to other peoples.

Notable Quotes #

“Those who speak with understanding must be strong in what is common to all, as much as the city is strong in its law, and even more so, because the law of the city is nourished by one divine law.” — Heraclitus (cited by Aristotle)

“The hypothesis is freely imagined. There’s no logical pattern [that determines it].” — Albert Einstein

“Forced by the truth itself.” — Aristotle (on why all philosophers recognize contraries in change)

“In geometry, the principles justify the conclusion. But here in the book on the universe, the conclusion has to justify the principles.” — Aristotle (distinguishing experimental from necessary science)

“No one believes unless he wills to believe.” — Augustine (on the meritorious freedom of faith)

“We never convince the older generation of physicists of the new ideas… they get old and die out. And then the new physicists come in.” — Max Planck

“The force of custom is stronger than argument with these people.” — Berquist (summarizing Aristotle’s insight in the Apology)