Plato and Aristotle
The “life” of Aristotle’s work is also significant. The most obvious difference between his works and Plato’s dialogues is his writing style. Aristotle’s work was an austere, strict, and acrimonious language that was difficult to grasp. Therefore the present-day reader is often surprised by Cicero’s comparison of Aristotle’s style to the river of gold (Shields). The reason for the difficulty of comprehension is that Aristotle’s work was not completely preserved. Aristotle’s works are divided into exoteric, i.e. meant for the public, and esoteric, compiled from his lectures, notes, papers, etc. The systematisation of the work of Aristotle by Andronicus of Rhodes is an important milestone and the reason why some texts survived. The reason for the difficulty of comprehension is that Andronicus excluded from the set of Aristotle’s works his writings meant for the public, and that was why they were not preserved ← 73 | 74 →
Andronicus also played a significant role in another aspect. He organised Aristotle’s work into more areas, giving the indirect impression of Aristotle’s thoughts being systematic, coherent, and whole (Ricken, 86). As a matter of fact, until the 20th century there had been an approach to Aristotle’s thinking as a unified and comprehensive concept, so the inconsistencies in his work were either overlooked or referred to as moments in which the author had no time to think “to the end.“9 Naturally, this makes interpretation even more difficult.
The first section of Aristotle’s work is called Organon (meaning instrument, tool) and Andronicos...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.