ARISTOTLE

But Aristotle eventually surmised that these Forms were merely abstractions in our mind which we use to categorize the immense information that comes to us about the surrounding world. The Forms, though useful to human logic, were themselves only mental constructs. They had no separate existence like gods or defining spirits (as Plato had asserted).

However, when it came to discussion of things beyond this earthly realm – the heavenly realm of the the sun, moon and stars--Ariostotle evidenced a religious awe. Though the earth might be marked with physical imperfections, these heavenly bodies were the essence of the divine, for they were perfect – perfect in their circular shape and circular movement.  Thus for Aristotle the perfect-imperfect dualism in life occured not between things seen and unseen (as it had for Plato), but between the imperfect things seen on earth and the perfect things seen in the heavens.

Thus even in his religion, Aristotle remained focused on the visible universe around him.

Aristotle’s Logic

Aristotle's "Categories"

Like his teacher, Plato, Aristotle distinguished between Universals and Particulars. But unlike Plato, Aristotle believed that only Particulars have actual existence. Only the Particulars (in the heavens and on earth) are truly real.

Aristotle first began by looking for Plato's Ideon or Forms actually contained within this visible world.  But Aristotle eventually surmised that these Ideon or Forms were merely abstractions in our mind which we use to organize into useful forms or kategoriai ("categories") the immense information that comes to us about the surrounding world. Inother words, the Universals or Ideas and Forms of his teacher Plato exist not of their own (as distinct entities in heaven!) but rather are contained within a group of particular things nominally common to each other, thus "categories."  "Red," for instance, is a category.  Red exists within particular things and gives those things part of their defining quality – as for instance in red roosters.  But "red" has no meaningful existence in itself apart from its place within particulars. There is no such thing within existence (even in the heavens) we can identify as a "Red" Ideon.

Aristotle's Empiricism

Also unlike his teacher, Aristotle was very focused on the things of the earth, its "Particulars." He had what we would call a very strong empirical mindset – which delighted in discovering new shapes and forms in the world around him.  He busily observed at every opportunity all physical reality around him. His goal was to develop categorical knowledge of all the world (grouping all reality into different scientific categories) – then employ inductive reasoning from such categorical observations to develop universal observations about life.

Consequently, he was a great organizer of the world's "particulars," (the ones disdained by his teacher Plato), setting up categories and rules for orderly thinking – not only in biology and geology, but also in logic, ethics, and politics.

Indeed, Aristotle followed closely the conquest of his own pupil, Alexander (the Great) – receiving from Alexander biological and geological specimens, samples of things that Aristotle had never seen before back in Greece (or his native Thrace).  Thus he added new Categories to his ever growing field of biology.

The realm of the divine

Indeed, when it came to discussing things beyond this earthly realm – the heavenly realm of the sun, moon and stars – Aristotle evidenced a typically Greek religious awe.  Though the earth might be marked with physical imperfections, these heavenly bodies were the essence of the divine, for they were perfect – perfect in their circular shape and circular movement.  Thus for Aristotle the perfect-imperfect dualism in life occurred not between things seen and unseen (as it had for Plato, including the visible starry realm ... which Plato also viewed as somewhat imperfect), but between the imperfect things seen on earth and the perfect things seen in the starry heavens.

Indeed, Aristotle had a very strong sense of the existence of some kind of higher Form located in the heavens, some kind of ultimate reality that transcended all life here on earth.  This is to say that Aristotle did have a well-formed belief of the existence of God.  

To Aristotle, God was the Supreme Form or Idea that his teacher Plato was so focused on.  This God or Supreme Form was not some person wandering about on the top of Mount Olympus (the view of the Greek commoner) – but rather was pure intellect (Greek: Nous) – perfectly and fully realized potential.  This God was uncreated, eternal and unchangeable: that is, perfect in his being (the opposite of those things that were created, mortal and changeable – and thus imperfect).  This is one key point in which Aristotle continued to hold a view much like his teacher Plato. 

God put creation into motion through desiring or thinking things into being and then drawing all things toward himself as an object of existential desire.  In other words, God placed within all created things the instinctive or natural desire to be drawn – in their doings, in their sense of purpose, in their sense of self-worth – to God.  They instinctively are drawn to the divine design for their particular lives that God himself holds for them within his own divine thoughts. 

The human intellect (nous) is mysteriously connected with the divine intellect (Nous). This is what gives man his powers of inspiration, insight, imagination – his abilities to understand or to grasp the realities (actualities/potentialities) around him. 

In sum, man's noblest impulse is to be drawn to God – to be joined to him: human nous to the divine Nous.

Cosmology

The Cosmos (universe) is eternal in its being – and thus uncreated (though the earth we live on is created and thus not eternal). Time itself is uncreated – it has always existed.  Likewise, the heavens above (the sky, stars, sun and moon) are distinctly of a different nature from the things of earth [a view held by Plato, and most other philosophers of the time]. Things on the earth are subject to decay – as elements decay (fire, air, water, earth). But things above the earth are perfect (even in their shape) and of a higher order – divine (like gods).

The planets rank close to the heavens in nature, being perfect in nature and motion. Each planet is governed by a divine mover of its own along its perfect heavenly course. 

The heavenlies are moved in their perfect courses by the Will of the Unmoved Mover. The Unmoved Mover or Divine First Cause is, however, not the same as God. The Unmoved
Mover is a creation of God (thus a lesser order than pure God) who or which also seeks God! 

The earth is the center of the universe.  Here on earth heavier matter has fallen and intermixed to form the common elements of our world. But this mixture includes not only the ‘things’ of our world but also their "doings."  The heavens regulate the intermix and thus the events of the earth. 

In his ten-book Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle ventured empirically (naturally!) into the realm of personal ethics by stressing the fact that ethics was not some theoretical ideal to be applied univerally to all mankind ... but was very closely related to the way particular life-circustances (which vary widely from individual to individual) required humans to make ethical decisions.

To Aristotle all things had each a unique ‘Form’ which gave it its distinct existence as a particular entity.  Further, its Form also defined for something its unique and all-important purpose in existence.   Thus a Human Form (or soul) gave human potential its existence as a particular person: that what forms such a person as an individual.  It also produced the particular instincts of a person to move forward toward some sense of his or her personal ‘potential,’ or not-yet-realized existence.  To Aristotle, all life was a process of moving toward one's potential – a life-giving struggle to realize one's full potential. 

Thus the value of something and its ethical obligation to behave in a particular way was ‘relative’ (as we would see it today).  Something's or someone's ‘moral obligation’ related to its particular purpose in existence.  To Aristotle, there were no universal moral prescriptions!  The ‘goodness’ or morality of someone or something could be measured only in terms of its progress toward its – and only its –  particular potential (its virtue). 

To apply the standards used in measuring the performance of a horse to that of a man made no sense.  But by the same token, it also made no sense to Aristotle to apply the standards of ‘moral’ performance of a soldier to the performance of a peasant farmer. They each possessed quite different ‘potential’ in life and thus required being measured by quite different moral standards.