reading Aristotle (meta ta phusika)

[elis]

hello.

Recently I've started reading Aristotle's ontology. But , although I've put some amount of work into it, it still doesn't feel like clinging together. His thought seems to be at so many levels at once, it gets rather confusing. I mean, his Meta ta Phusika is like a construction site, full with haul and debris, scaffolds , openings here and there, blueprints taken by the wind etc. At places foundations are already laid, promising and massive.

Has someone here went through his ontology? Do you think it' be better if I first become accustomed with his logic? - so far I have read only Categories, On Interpretation, Topics A and partially the Analytica priora.

thank you

ps. I guess here's the correct subforum to post this; if not feel free to place this elsewhere-

[chad]

hi, yep i've worked through the whole metaphysics, not all in greek though. that's my big goal in greek to get through all of aristotle.

remember that it was assembled by his later editors, that's why it's so jumbled, different books represent different stages in his thinking. i remember i had to check the physics a lot when writing an essay on the metaphysics; it's prob. more important to read that first than the organon i think.

[elis]

that's my big goal in greek to get through all of aristotle

that's a noble goal, i hope you make it.


My plan is first to go through physics, then metaphysics. I found the physics - i read the first 4 books - much more ordered than metaphysics.
But sometimes in Metaphysics, especially in books Zeta or Eta, I had this feeling that everything was coming together, only to see it fall right back into pieces. I dont know if I make myself clear enough. Perhaps this difficulty stems not only from the fact you mentioned, that the metaphysic books are assembled later, but also from the very matter at issue. It feels as if the thinker (or Thinker) was constantly battling with the object of his thought, like going circles around something unapproachable (non existent a sophist would say), namely the ousia.


Also, what you said about checking the physics while reading metaphysics is very true. There's a lot of crossing boundaries between these two works. I think that ideally, physics, metaphysics, Analytics and "On the Soul" have to be studied together.

[chad]

hi, you are perfectly clear and yes i agree with you again. the way it's been ordered, aristotle (from memory) first examines then knocks out at least 2 other candidates before he gets to to\ ti/ h)=n ei)=nai.