Knowledge and Reasoning
Aristotle: Man and Knowledge
Four claims about knowledge
- Knowledge is always about an object.
- Knowledge is an intellectual virtue.
- Knowledge starts with the sense of perception.
- Knowledge is built by a process of inductive reasoning.
Syllogistic reasoning
A form of reasoning in which a conclusion is drawn from two given or assumed propositions.
Aristotle’s famous syllogism
- Major premise: All men are mortal.
- Minor premise: Socrates is a man.
- Conclusion: Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
Human potential and limitations
- Man is a rational animal.
- Education delivered in a rational manner is what allows humans to push past the limits of the known world.
A bird recognises seed. A dog recognises its owner. Neither has knowledge in Aristotle’s sense. Knowledge is the trained ability of the human mind to start with sense perception and reason its way to general truth. The animal can perceive but cannot generalise. The human can do both, and the second is what education is for.
Four things to know about knowledge
Aristotle’s account of knowledge can be compressed into four claims. The four claims work as a unit and should be read in order.
Knowledge is always about an object. When someone knows something, they know something. There is an object the knowledge is about. The knower and the known are different. This sounds obvious but is doing real work: it rules out the idealist position that knowledge is the mind contemplating itself. For Aristotle, even self-knowledge is the mind taking itself as an object outside the immediate act of thinking.
Knowledge is an intellectual virtue. Virtue, for Aristotle, is a settled disposition to act or to think well. Courage is a virtue of the will; one is disposed to act bravely. Knowledge is a virtue of the intellect; one is disposed to know rightly. Virtues are developed by repeated practice. So is knowledge. A child does not become knowledgeable by being told things. A child becomes knowledgeable by repeatedly performing the acts that build the disposition.
Knowledge starts with the sense of perception. Aristotle disagrees with Plato sharply here. For Plato, real knowledge starts with the mind’s recollection of the eternal forms. For Aristotle, knowledge starts at the bottom: with eyes seeing and ears hearing and hands touching. The senses gather material; the mind works on the material; knowledge results. The bottom of the ladder is the senses. Without the bottom, the rest of the ladder has nothing to rest on.
Knowledge is built by inductive reasoning. Aristotle treats inductive reasoning (moving from many particular observations to a general rule) as the primary engine of knowledge-building. A child sees one dog, then another, then a hundred. The child generalises: dogs bark, dogs have four legs, dogs are different from cats. The general rule is built from the particular observations. Deductive reasoning is then used to apply the rule back to new cases. But the building begins with induction.
Object, virtue, perception, induction
Knowledge is always about an object outside the act of knowing.
Knowledge is an intellectual virtue, a settled disposition built by practice.
Knowledge starts with the senses, not with innate ideas.
Knowledge is built by inductive reasoning, moving from particular observations to general rules.
Syllogistic reasoning
Aristotle’s most famous tool is the syllogism. The word is Greek for “calculation” or “inference,” and Aristotle gave it a precise technical meaning. A syllogism is a form of reasoning where a conclusion is drawn from two given or assumed propositions, which he called the premises.
The classical example, given in every introduction to logic, is Aristotle’s own:
Major premise: All men are mortal.
Minor premise: Socrates is a man.
Conclusion: Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
Three pieces are doing work. The major premise states a general rule about a large class (all men are mortal). The minor premise places a particular case inside that class (Socrates is a man). The conclusion applies the rule to the case (so Socrates is mortal).
The form is more important than the content. If the premises are true and the form is valid, the conclusion is guaranteed. This is what makes the syllogism powerful. Given two pieces of knowledge in the right form, a third piece falls out automatically. The mind has moved from what is known to what was previously unknown, and the move is reliable.
A student should be able to recognise the parts of a syllogism on sight: major premise, minor premise, conclusion. They should also be able to spot when a chain of everyday argument has the form of a syllogism, even if it is hidden. Most reasoning, when laid out carefully, turns out to be a chain of syllogisms with some of the premises left silent.
A form of reasoning where a conclusion is drawn from two premises
The classical example: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal. The major premise gives a general rule, the minor premise places a particular case inside the rule, and the conclusion applies the rule to the case. If the premises are true and the form is valid, the conclusion is guaranteed.
Man as a rational animal
The famous one-line definition is Aristotle’s, even though it is sometimes attributed loosely to “the Greeks” in general. Man is a rational animal.
The phrase is doing real work as a definition, not as a slogan. Aristotle is locating the human being on the map of living things. Plants live, but do not sense. Animals live and sense, but do not reason. Humans live, sense, and reason. The capacity to reason is what marks the human off from the other animals, while the animal nature is what marks the human off from anything that does not breathe.
The word animal is important. Aristotle is not saying that humans are pure minds trapped in bodies. He rejects that dualism. The human is a single living thing whose distinctive function is reasoning. The body is not a prison; it is the substrate that allows the reasoning to happen at all.
The educational implications follow directly. Education should be delivered in a rational manner, because the student is a rational animal and reasoning is what develops their distinctive capacity. A school that treats students as creatures to be filled with facts misses the point. A school that treats students as pure intellects detached from their bodily and social lives misses it from the other side. The rational animal must be educated in a way that addresses both halves of the description.
The conclusion Aristotle draws from this is striking. Education delivered in a rational manner is what allows humans to push past the limits of the known world. Each generation that is educated rationally extends what humanity collectively understands. The animals do not extend their knowledge across generations. Humans do, because reason is teachable and accumulable. A rational education is therefore not only an individual benefit but a benefit to the species.
A precise definition placing the human on the map of living things
Plants live but do not sense. Animals live and sense but do not reason. Humans live, sense, and reason. The animal half matters: humans are not pure minds in bodies. The rational half matters: reasoning is the distinctive human function. Education must address both halves.
How was this article?