Mariska Leunissen

Aristotle on Natural Character and Its Implications for Moral Development

This paper analyzes two components of Aristotle’s physiological discussion of natural character in the biological works: its close causal connection to a living being’s material nature and its changeability due to external environmental factors. As I shall argue, both components are important for our understanding of Aristotle’s views about the moral development of human beings in his ethical treatises. Starting with Aristotle’s ethnographical passage in the Politics (Pol VII 7, 1327b18–38), according to which differences among the natural character traits of the various nations of human beings—and hence of the ease with which lawgivers can lead them to virtue—are related to the different climates in which they live, this paper fleshes out some of Aristotle’s most prominent views about natural character and its implications for who can and who cannot become virtuous and happy.

Man from man but not bed from bed: Nature, art and chance in Physics II

The first argument in Physics ii .8 serves as the foundational text for understanding the domain, extent, and character of Aristotle’s natural teleology. On the basis of this text, most scholars think that Aristotle’s natural teleology applies exclusively to biological things (plants and animals) and that the elements (earth, air, fire, and water) either are not teleological or are teleological only in so far as they play a role in biological processes. In addition, some scholars think this text shows natural teleology to operate not only within an individual living thing, but also to extend throughout the scala naturae, with lower things (like elements) existing for the sake of higher things (like animals and plants, and ultimately humans). With what they take to be the domain and extent of natural teleology confirmed by this text, scholars look outside the Physics to deepen their understanding of the character of natural teleology (as well as related concepts such as cause, end, nature, chance, and necessity) through careful consideration of its application in particular explanatory contexts. Those convinced of the restriction of natural teleology to individual biological things seek clarification predominantly in the biological works, such as Generation of Animals and Parts of Animals, while those seeking, in addition, better understanding of a supposed commitment to an overarching teleology across the scala naturae turn also to such works asMetaphysics xii and even the Politics. In a previous paper I argued that the role of nature in Physics ii .8’s first argument for natural teleology has been widely misunderstood, and as a