Allan Gotthelf | Researchain

Archive Network Publication Hotspot Collaboration

Network

Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Explore More

Hotspot

Dive into the research topics where Allan Gotthelf is active.

Explore More

Publication

Featured researches published by Allan Gotthelf.

Phoenix | 1987

Philosophical Issues in Aristotle's Biology

Allan Gotthelf; James G. Lennox

Preface Introduction Part I. Biology and Philosophy: An Overview: Introduction 1. The place of biology in Aristotles philosophy D. M. Balme 2. Aristotles biological universe: an overview Montgomery Furth 3. Empirical research in Aristotles biology G. E. R. Lloyd Part II. Definition and Demonstration: Theory and Practice: Introduction 4. Aristotles use of division and differentiae D. M. Balme 5. Divide and explain: the Posterior Analytics in practice James G. Lennox 6. Definition and scientific method in Aristotles Posterior Analytics and Generation of Animals Robert Bolton 7. First principles in Aristotles Parts of Animals Allan Gotthelf Part III. Teleology and Necessity in Nature: Introduction 8. Aristotles conception of final causality Allan Gotthelf 9. Hypothetical necessity and natural teleology John M. Cooper 10. Teleology and necessity D. M. Balme Part IV. Metaphysical Themes: Introduction 11. Aristotles biology was not essentialist D. M. Balme 12. Logical difference and biological difference: the unity of Aristotles thought Pierre Pellegrin 13. Kinds, forms of kinds, and the more and the less in Aristotles biology James G. Lennox 14. Animals and other beings in Aristotle L. A. Kosman 15. Aristotle on bodies, matter, and potentiality Cynthia A. Freeland 16. Aristotle on the place of mind in nature William Charlton Index locorum General index.

Journal of the History of Biology | 1999

Darwin on Aristotle

Allan Gotthelf

Charles Darwins famous 1882 letter, in response to a gift by his friend, William Ogle of Ogles recent translation of Aristotles Parts of Animals, in which Darwin remarks that his “two gods,” Linnaeus and Cuvier, were “mere school-boys to old Aristotle,” has been thought to be only an extravagantly worded gesture of politeness. However, a close examination of this and other Darwin letters, and of references to Aristotle in Darwins earlier work, shows that the famous letter was written several weeks after a first, polite letter of thanks, and was carefully formulated and literally meant. Indeed, it reflected an authentic, and substantial, increase in Darwins already high respect for Aristotle, as a result of a careful reading both of Ogles Introduction and of more or less the portion of Ogles translation which Darwin says he has read. Aristotles promotion to the pantheon, as an examination of the basis for Darwins admiration of Linnaeus and Cuvier suggests, was most likely the result specifically of Darwins late discovery that the man he already knew as “one of the greatest ... observers that ever lived” (1879) was also the ancient equivalent both of the great modern systematist and of the great modern advocate of comparative functional explanation. It may also have reflected some real insight on Darwins part into the teleological aspect of Aristotles thought, indeed more insight than Ogle himself had achieved, as a portion of their correspondence reveals.

Phronesis | 2010

‘What’s Teleology Got To Do With It?’ A Reinterpretation of Aristotle’s Generation of Animals V

Mariska Leunissen; Allan Gotthelf

Despite the renewed interest in Aristotle’s Generation of Animals in recent years, the subject matter of GA V, its preferred mode(s) of explanation, and its place in the treatise as a whole remain misunderstood. Scholars focus on GA I-IV, which explain animal generation in terms of efficient-final causation, but dismiss GA V as a mere appendix, thinking it to concern (a) individual, accidental differences among animals, which are (b) purely materially necessitated, and (c) are only tangentially related to the topics discussed in the earlier books. In this paper, we defend an alternative and more integrated account of GA V by closely examining Aristotle’s methodological introduction in GA V.1 778a16-b19 and his teleological explanation of the differences of teeth in GA V.8. We argue for the unity of both GA V and of GA as a whole and present a more nuanced theory of teleological explanation in Aristotle’s biology.

Apeiron | 2010

Comments on Leunissen, 'Aristotle's Syllogistic Model of Knowledge and the Biological Sciences: Demonstrating Natural Processes'

Allan Gotthelf

In Parts of Animals (PA) I 1 (and elsewhere) Aristotle makes it clear that his goal in the study of nature is a body of demonstrative science, an epistêmê. It has been a longstanding question to what extent either the PA I 1 account, or the actual explanatory practice in the biological treatises, accords with the general theory of demonstrative science that Aristotle offers in the Posterior Analytics (APo). In my two papers on this topic, ‘First Principles in Aristotle’s Parts of Animals’ and ‘The Elephant’s Nose: Further Refl ections on the Axiomatic Structure of Biological Explanation in Aristotle’, I have argued that the accord is much greater than had been recently thought. My focus in those papers, though, was largely on the structure in and across the actual explanations in the PA. I said little in either paper about the precise content of the APo theory, approaching as I did the problem of

Archive | 1987