Document Type : The Quarterly Jornal
Authors
1
PhD Candidate, Department of Islamic Philosophy and Wisdom, Faculty of Islamic Studies and Research, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran (Corresponding Author).
2
Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy and Wisdom, Faculty of Islamic Studies and Research, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran.
3
Associate Professor, Department of Islamic Philosophy and Wisdom, Faculty of Islamic Sciences and Research, Imam Khomeini International University (IKIU), Qazvin, Iran
4
Assistant Professor, Department of Islamic Philosophy and Wisdom, Faculty of Islamic Sciences and Research, Imam Khomeini International University (IKIU), Qazvin, Iran
Abstract
Aristotle's methodology in physics has always been a subject of debate among commentators. On one hand, commentators like Owen, by emphasizing Topics, consider his approach to be dialectical, based on the analysis of accepted beliefs (endoxa). In contrast, commentators like Bolton, by focusing on the consistency between Physics and Posterior Analytics, view his method as scientific-empirical, stressing the role of sensory observation and induction in discovering general laws. This article, using an analytical-comparative method and a close, comparative reading of key Aristotelian texts, including Physics, Posterior Analytics, and Topics, as well as a conceptual analysis of key terms, examines the apparent differences in the use of concepts like "universals" and "particulars." The analysis reveals that these contradictions do not stem from methodological inconsistency but from a difference in the levels of knowledge. In Physics, "universal" refers to vague concepts close to sensory perception, whereas in Posterior Analytics, universals are related to abstract principles. Despite challenges such as ambiguity in the role of dialectic and an incorrect comparison with modern science, Aristotle's method is ultimately a synthesis of dialectic and empiricism. This approach cannot be reduced to a single method; rather, it reflects an interaction between philosophy and observation, aiming for a deeper understanding of nature through conceptual analysis and empirical data.
Keywords
Main Subjects
)