Humanitext Reader

Aristotle · Parts of Animals §1.5.1-1.5.5

Value of Studying Animals and Priority of Form

Passage 10 of 84 · Greek

Summary

Aristotle contrasts the study of eternal divine substances with that of perishable natural ones, defending the value, accessibility, and inherent beauty of biological research while emphasizing that natural science must focus on whole form rather than mere matter.

§1.5.1Τῶν οὐσιῶν ὅσαι φύσει συνεστᾶσι, τὰς μὲν ἀγενήτους 5 καὶ ἀφθάρτους εἶναι τὸν ἅπαντα αἰῶνα, τὰς δὲ μετέχειν γενέσεως καὶ φθορᾶς.
Of the substances that are constituted by nature, some are ungenerated 5 and incorruptible for all eternity, while others participate in generation and corruption.
συμβέβηκε δὲ περὶ μὲν ἐκείνας τιμίας οὔσας καὶ θείας ἐλάττους ἡμῖν ὑπάρχειν θεωρίας (καὶ γὰρ ἐξ ὧν ἄν τις σκέψαιτο περὶ αὐτῶν, καὶ περὶ ὧν εἰδέναι ποθοῦμεν, παντελῶς ἐστὶν ὀλίγα τὰ φανερὰ κατὰ τὴν αἴσθησιν), περὶ δὲ τῶν φθαρτῶν φυτῶν τε καὶ ζῴων εὐποροῦμεν μᾶλλον πρὸς τὴν γνῶσιν διὰ τὸ σύντροφον·
But it has happened that concerning the former, though they are excellent and divine, fewer investigations are available to us (for both the starting points from which one might study them, and the things we desire to know about them, are altogether few in terms of what is manifest to perception); whereas concerning corruptible plants and animals we are better provided with a view to knowledge because of our living with them.
πολλὰ γὰρ περὶ ἕκαστον γένος λάβοι τις ἂν τῶν ὑπαρχόντων, §1.5.22 βουλόμενος διαπονεῖν ἱκανῶς.
For one could grasp many of the existing attributes concerning each genus, 2 if one is willing to take sufficient pains.
ἔχει δʼ ἑκάτερα χάριν.
And each of the two studies has its own charm.
τῶν μὲν γὰρ εἰ καὶ κατὰ μικρὸν ἐφαπτόμεθα, ὅμως διὰ τὴν τιμιότητα τοῦ γνωρίζειν ἥδιον ἢ τὰ παῤ ἡμῖν ἅπαντα, ὧσπερ καὶ τῶν ἐρωμένων τὸ τυχὸν καὶ μικρὸν μόριον κατιδεῖν ἥδιόν ἐστιν ἢ πολλὰ ἕτερα καὶ μεγάλα διʼ ἀκριβείας ἰδεῖν·
For even if we grasp the former only to a small degree, nevertheless, because of the excellence of knowing them, it is more pleasant than all the things within our reach, just as it is more pleasant to catch a glimpse of even a chance and small part of those we love than to see many other and large things with precision.
τὰ δὲ διὰ τὸν μᾶλλον καὶ πλείω γνωρίζειν αὐτῶν λαμβάνει τὴν τῆς ἐπιστήμης ὑπεροχήν, ἔτι δὲ διὰ τὸ πλησιαίτερα ἡμῶν εἶναι καὶ τῆς φύσεως οἰκειότερα ἀντικαταλλάττεταί τι πρὸς τὴν περὶ τὰ θεῖα φιλοσοφίαν.
The latter, however, because of our knowing more and more of them, take the lead in terms of the superiority of science; and furthermore, because they are closer to us and more akin to our nature, they offer a kind of compensation in relation to the philosophy concerning divine things.
§1.5.33 ἐπεὶ δὲ περὶ ἐκείνων διήλθομεν λέγοντες τὸ φαινόμενον ἡμῖν, λοιπὸν περὶ τῆς ζωικῆς φύσεως εἰπεῖν, μηδὲν παραλιπόντας εἰς δύναμιν μήτε ἀτιμότερον μήτε τιμιώτερον.
3 Since we have completed our discussion concerning those things, stating what appears to us, it remains to speak of the animal nature, leaving out nothing to the best of our power, whether it be of lower or higher value.
καὶ γὰρ ἐν τοῖς μὴ κεχαρισμένοις αὐτῶν πρὸς τὴν αἴσθησιν κατὰ τὴν θεωρίαν ὅμως ἡ δημιουργήσασα φύσις ἀμηχάνους ἡδονὰς παρέχει τοῖς δυναμένοις τὰς αἰτίας γνωρίζειν καὶ φύσει φιλοσόφοις.
For even in those of them that are not pleasing to the senses, yet in their contemplation, the nature that fashioned them provides immeasurable pleasures to those who are able to know the causes and are by nature philosophers.
καὶ γὰρ ἂν εἴη παράλογον καὶ ἄτοπον, εἰ τὰς μὲν εἰκόνας αὐτῶν θεωροῦντες χαίρομεν ὅτι τὴν δημιουργήσασαν τέχνην συνθεωροῦμεν, οἷον τὴν γραφικὴν ἢ τὴν πλαστικήν, αὐτῶν δὲ τῶν φύσει συνεστώτων μὴ μᾶλλον ἀγαπῷμεν τὴν θεωρίαν, δυνάμενοί γε τὰς αἰτίας καθορᾶν.
For indeed it would be irrational and absurd if, while we enjoy contemplating their likenesses because we contemplate at the same time the art that fashioned them, such as painting or sculpture, we should not rather love the contemplation of the things constituted by nature themselves, at least when we are able to discern their causes.
§1.5.44 διὸ δεῖ μὴ δυσχεραίνειν παιδικῶς τὴν περὶ τῶν ἀτιμοτέρων ζῴων ἐπίσκεψιν.
4 Therefore we must not object childishly to the examination of the meaner animals.
ἐν πᾶσι γὰρ τοῖς φυσικοῖς ἔνεστί τι θαυμαστόν·
For in all natural things there is something wonderful.
καὶ καθάπερ Ἡράκλειτος λέγεται πρὸς τοὺς ξένους εἰπεῖν τοὺς βουλεμένους ἐντυχεῖν αὐτῷ, οἳ ἐπειδὴ προσιόντες εἶδον αὐτὸν θερόμενον πρὸς τῷ ἴπνῳ ἔστησαν (ἐκέλευε γὰρ αὐτούς εἰσιέναι θαρροῦντας· εἶναι γὰρ καὶ ἐνταῦθα θεούς), οὕτω καὶ πρὸς τὴν ζήτησιν περὶ ἑκάστου τῶν ξῴων προσιέναι δεῖ μὴ δυσωπούμενον ὡς ἐν ἅπασιν ὄντος τινὸς φυσικοῦ καὶ καλοῦ.
And just as Heraclitus is said to have spoken to the strangers who wanted to meet him, who, when they approached and saw him warming himself by the stove, stood still (for he kept telling them to enter with confidence, saying that there were gods even here), so also we must approach the inquiry concerning each of the animals without any aversion, since in all of them there is something natural and beautiful.
τὸ γὰρ μὴ τυχόντως ἀλλʼ ἕνεκά τινος ἐν τοῖς τῆς φύσεως ἔργοις ἐστὶ καὶ μάλιστα οὗ δʼ ἕνεκα συνέστηκεν ἢ γέγονε τέλους, τὴν τοῦ καλοῦ χώραν εἴληφεν.
For the absence of chance and the presence of purpose are found in the works of nature in the highest degree; and the end for the sake of which they have been constituted or generated has taken the place of the beautiful.
§1.5.5εἰ δέ τις τὴν περὶ τῶν ἄλλων 5 ζῴων θεωρίαν ἄτιμον εἶναι νενόμικε, τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον οἴεσθαι χρὴ καὶ περὶ αὐτοῦ·
If anyone has considered 5 the contemplation of the other animals to be of no value, he ought to think in the same way about himself too.
οὐκ ἔστι γὰρ ἄνευ πολλῆς δυσχερείας ἰδεῖν ἐξ ὧν συνέστηκε τὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων γένος, οἷον αἷμα, σάρκες, ὀστᾶ, φλέβες καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα μόρια.
For it is not possible without much disgust to look at the things from which the human genus is constituted, such as blood, flesh, bones, veins, and such parts.
ὁμοίως τε δεῖ νομίζειν τὸν περὶ οὑτινοσοῦν τῶν μορίων ἢ τῶν σκευῶν διαλεγόμενον μὴ περὶ τῆς ὕλης ποιεῖσθαι τὴν μνήμην, μηδὲ ταύτης χάριν, ἀλλὰ τῆς ὅλης μορφῆς, σἷον καὶ περὶ οἰκίας, ἀλλὰ μὴ πλίνθων καὶ πηλοῦ καὶ ξύλων· καὶ τὸν περὶ φύσεως περὶ τῆς συνθέσεως καὶ τῆς ὅλης οὐσίας, ἀλλὰ μὴ περὶ τούτων ἃ μὴ συμβαίνει χωριζόμενά ποτε τῆς οὐσίας αὑτῶν.
Likewise, one must believe that he who discusses any of the parts or vessels makes mention not of the matter, nor for the sake of this, but of the whole form, just as one does about a house, and not about bricks, mortar, and timber; and the one who speaks of nature speaks of the synthesis and the whole substance, and not of those things which never happen to exist when separated from their substance.

Notes

  1. 1.5.1Τῶν οὐσιῶν ὅσαι φύσει συνεστᾶσι, τὰς μὲν ἀγενήτους καὶ ἀφθάρτους εἶναι τὸν ἅπαντα αἰῶνα, τὰς δὲ μετέχειν γενέσεως καὶ φθορᾶς. — The genitive noun phrase at the beginning of the sentence, τῶν οὐσιῶν ὅσαι φύσει συνεστᾶσι, is a partitive genitive indicating the whole range to which the subjects of the subsequent infinitive clauses (tās men, tās de) belong. Additionally, the main verb is omitted, and the infinitives (einai, metechein) function as independent infinitives in an accusative-with-infinitive construction.
  2. 1.5.1περὶ μὲν ἐκείνας τιμίας οὔσας καὶ θείας ἐλάττους ἡμῖν ὑπάρχειν θεωρίας — The word ἐλάττους is an accusative plural (feminine accusative plural of the adjective ἐλάττων), not a nominative plural. This clause forms an accusative-and-infinitive construction (subject accusative: ἐλάττους θεωρίας, infinitive: ὑπάρχειν) acting as the subject of the impersonal verb συμβέβηκε. ἡμῖν is a dative of possession or reference ('exist for us').
  3. 1.5.2τῶν μὲν γὰρ εἰ καὶ κατὰ μικρὸν ἐφαπτόμεθα, ὅμως διὰ τὴν τιμιότητα τοῦ γνωρίζειν ἥδιον ἢ τὰ παῤ ἡμῖν ἅπαντα — The phrase τῶν μὲν at the beginning is a demonstrative genitive ('of the former'), serving as the object of the verb ἐφαπτόμεθα ('we touch/grasp', which governs the genitive). The subject of the comparative ἥδιον ('is more pleasant') is the implicit act of knowing or grasping them, which is contrasted with the object of comparison introduced by ἤ, namely τὰ παῤ ἡμῖν ἅπαντα ('all the things within our reach').
  4. 1.5.4οὗ δʼ ἕνεκα συνέστηκεν ἢ γέγονε τέλους — This is a structure of attraction/incorporation where the antecedent noun τέλους (genitive) has been drawn inside the relative clause οὗ δʼ ἕνεκα..., equivalent in syntax to τοῦ τέλους οὗ ἕνεκα... ('the end for the sake of which...'). This noun τέλους acts as the subject of the main verb εἴληφεν ('has taken/occupied').
  5. 1.5.5τὸν περὶ φύσεως περὶ τῆς συνθέσεως καὶ τῆς ὅλης οὐσίας, ἀλλὰ μὴ περὶ τούτων ἃ μὴ συμβαίνει χωριζόμενά ποτε τῆς οὐσίας αὑτῶν — The structure of the preceding sentence ὁμοίως τε δεῖ νομίζειν... ('and likewise one must believe...') continues here. τὸν περὶ φύσεως [διαλεγόμενον] ('the one who speaks of nature') acts as the subject accusative, with the expression ποιεῖσθαι τὴν μνήμην ('to make mention') being understood from the previous context. In the relative clause ἃ μὴ συμβαίνει..., the participle χωριζόμενα functions conditionally ('if/when separated [from their substance]').

Cite this passage

Aristotle, Parts of Animals §1.5.1-1.5.5. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0086.tlg030.humanitext-grc1:1.5.1-1.5.5

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.