In Metaphysics A, Aristotle explains that there are two forms of knowledge: ἡ μὲν ἐμπειρία τῶν καθ’ ἕκαστόν ἐστι γνῶσις ἡ δὲ τέχνη τῶν καθόλου, “experience is knowledge of individuals, art of universals”. Although he does state that experience is a form of knowledge, he goes on to argue that art, τέχνη, consists of a higher form of knowledge, as men of art have knowledge of the causes, and therefore the theory behind why something is the way it is. Moreover, he presents his theory that this higher form of knowledge can only be achieved through experience: γίγνεται δὲ τέχνη ὅταν ἐκ πολλῶν τῆς ἐμπειρίας ἐννοημάτων μία καθόλου γένηται περὶ τῶν ὁμοίων ὑπόληψις. τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἔχειν ὑπόληψιν ὅτι Καλλίᾳ κάμνοντι τηνδὶ τὴν νόσον τοδὶ συνήνεγκε καὶ
…show more content…
Although what the Atomist epistemology entailed, or whether they had an epistemology at all , has been a matter of controversy in modern scholarship, Aristotle’s Metaphysics seems to give only one unambiguous account of especially Democritus’ thoughts on sensation and knowledge. In this paper, I will argue that Aristotle approaches Democritus’ doctrine on sensation in an unambiguous manner, which results in a misrepresentation that is preferable for his argumentation in the Metaphysics. To do so, part I of this paper will discuss why the theory of perception and knowledge according to Democritus posits a problem for Aristotle’s Metaphysics; and part II will examine Aristotle’s attempt to discount the Atomists’ theory as to give his own more …show more content…
An explanation for this is that Aristotle is as such more free to disregard Democritus’ theory of sense-perception and knowledge, and will by and of itself make his own thesis, posited in the beginning of Metaphysics A, stand out as more truthful when he is able to argue against Democritus’ line of reasoning. This is plausible as there are two further curiosities which indicate that Aristotle has manipulated Democritus’ theory in the Metaphysics into something less complex than it
Although what the Atomist epistemology entailed, or whether they had an epistemology at all , has been a matter of controversy in modern scholarship, Aristotle’s Metaphysics seems to give only one unambiguous account of especially Democritus’ thoughts on sensation and knowledge. In this paper, I will argue that Aristotle approaches Democritus’ doctrine on sensation in an unambiguous manner, which results in a misrepresentation that is preferable for his argumentation in the Metaphysics. To do so, part I of this paper will discuss why the theory of perception and knowledge according to Democritus posits a problem for Aristotle’s Metaphysics; and part II will examine Aristotle’s attempt to discount the Atomists’ theory as to give his own more …show more content…
An explanation for this is that Aristotle is as such more free to disregard Democritus’ theory of sense-perception and knowledge, and will by and of itself make his own thesis, posited in the beginning of Metaphysics A, stand out as more truthful when he is able to argue against Democritus’ line of reasoning. This is plausible as there are two further curiosities which indicate that Aristotle has manipulated Democritus’ theory in the Metaphysics into something less complex than it