Aristotle was a great philosopher at first. Although he was a student of Plato, he abandoned the idealistic view held by his teacher. Plato believes that idea is the prototype of physical objects, and it exists independently of physical objects. Aristotle thinks that the world is made up of all kinds of things whose forms and materials are in harmony. "Material" is the material of things, and "form" is the individual characteristics of everything. Just like there is a chicken flying about with wings, the "form" of this chicken is that it can flap its wings, coo and lay eggs. When the chicken dies, the "form" no longer exists, and the only thing left is the material of the chicken. Plato asserted that feeling cannot be the source of true knowledge. Aristotle thought that knowledge originated from feeling. These thoughts already contain some materialistic factors. Aristotle, like Plato, thinks that rational scheme and purpose are the guiding principles of all natural processes. However, Aristotle's view on causality is richer than Plato's, because he accepted some views on this issue in ancient Greece. He pointed out that there are four main causes. The first one is the material cause, that is, the main substance that forms an object. The second is the form factor, that is, the design pattern and shape given to the main substance. The third is the dynamic cause, that is, the mechanism and function provided to realize this kind of design. The fourth is the purpose, that is, the purpose of designing objects. For example, the Potter's clay provides the material cause for pottery, while the design style of pottery is its form cause, the Potter's wheels and hands are the motive cause, and the intended use of pottery is the purpose cause. Aristotle himself took a fancy to the form cause and purpose cause of objects, and he believed that form cause was contained in all natural objects and functions. At first, these formal reasons were latent, but once an object or creature developed, these formal reasons were revealed. Finally, when an object or organism reaches the completion stage, its finished products are used to achieve the original design purpose, that is, to serve the purpose. He also believes that in concrete things, there is no form without material, and there is no material without form. The process of combining material with form is the movement of transforming potential into reality. This theory shows the idea of spontaneous dialectics. Aristotle's greatest contribution to philosophy lies in the establishment of formal logic, an important branch discipline. Logical thinking is the pillar of Aristotle's outstanding achievements in many fields, and this way of thinking runs through his research, statistics and thinking from beginning to end. Of course, he also made mistakes, but few times.

Four Causes Theory-Aristotle believes that there is a "cause" relationship in nature. This concept of "cause" is different from the concept of "cause and effect" in modern times. "Cause" corresponds to "why" and does not correspond to "result". That is, objective cause, material cause, dynamic cause and formal cause. "Material Cause" represents the existing form of a thing consisting of a pile of parts, components, foundations or raw materials, and traces the composition of matter to the parts (elements, components) and then forms a whole (system, architecture, mixing, synthesis, compounding or combination). For example, raw materials such as marble that form a marble statue are material factors. "Formal Cause" can tell us what kind of definition, form, shape, essence, synthesis, or prototype a thing is made of, and explain the basic principles or laws that make up a thing, which is only one part of the whole thing (a whole set of causal relationships) (macro structure). For example, the draft or design of a marble statue is its formal reason. "Efficient Cause" refers to the motive force and cause of changing things, and studies "what changed what and what caused this change", which includes all media between things, including living or inanimate, the origin of motive force or changed things. For example, the artist who carves marble into statues is the driving force. "Final Cause" refers to the reason why a thing exists or changes, including purposeful actions and activities. The purpose of a thing is the reason why it exists, or the reason why it changes. This also explains the so-called psychological motivation in modern times, including will, demand, motivation, rationality, irrationality and ethics, all of which are the sources of creative behavior. For example, a finished marble statue is the artist's teleology.

astronomy

Aristotle believes that the moving celestial bodies are physical entities, and the earth is spherical and the center of the universe; The earth and celestial bodies are composed of different substances. The substances on the earth are composed of four elements: water, gas, fire and soil, and the celestial bodies are composed of the fifth element "ether".

physics

Aristotle opposed atomism; Do not admit that there is a vacuum; He also believes that objects only move under the impetus of external force, and when the external force stops, the movement stops; It is also believed that an object in free fall falls faster than a light one (this conclusion was later overturned by Galileo)! 1. The above-ground world consists of four elements: earth, water, air and fire. Each element represents a combination of two of the four basic characteristics (dry, wet, cold and hot). Soil = dry+cold; Water = wet+cold; Gas = wet+heat; Fire = dry+hot. 2. In the mechanics of physics, Aristotle has made many achievements, but what is most often mentioned is his mistakes. Aristotle's hypothesis is that "every moving object must be pushed by a promoter-it is based on daily experience." If you see something moving, you will look for something to push it (such as our hands and bodies). When nothing pushes it, it will stop moving, pushing one by one, and it cannot be traced back indefinitely. "There must be a first promoter". Medieval Christianity said that "the first promoter" refers to God and combined Aristotle's theory with Christian teachings. This combination made Aristotle's theory an authoritative theory, and it was not until Newton's hand that the correct mechanical theory was established. In addition, Aristotle thought that heavy objects would fall faster than light objects. This erroneous view was not overthrown until the 16th century when Italian scientist Galileo dropped two balls with different weights from the Pisa Tower. There is Aristotle's view that white is a pure light, and all the colors we usually see are changed for some reason, which is impure. This conclusion was firmly believed by everyone until the 17th century. In order to verify one view, Newton put a prism in the sun, and the sunlight passed through the prism to form a light band composed of seven colors: red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and purple, which shone on the screen.

Biology

He classified more than 5 different kinds of plants and animals, made anatomical studies on at least 5 kinds of animals, pointed out that whales were viviparous, and also investigated the development process of chick embryos.

No one before Darwin made more contributions to our understanding of the biological world than Aristotle (384-322 BC). His knowledge of biology is extensive and his sources of knowledge are extensive. He was an apprentice to a doctor in his youth, and later lived in the island of Lesbos for three years, spending a lot of time studying marine life. Almost all aspects of the history of biology have to start with Aristotle. He was the first person to classify biology, and wrote special works for it (such as animal classification, animal reproduction, etc.). He first discovered the enlightening significance of comparative law and was naturally regarded as the founder of comparative law. He was also the first person to describe the life history of many kinds of animals in detail. He wrote his first book on reproductive biology and life history. He paid special attention to the phenomenon of biodiversity and the significance of the differences between animals and plants. Although he did not put forward a formal classification, he classified animals according to certain standards, and his classification of invertebrates was more reasonable than that of Linnaeus after 2. In physiology, he mostly adopted traditional views, so he was not excellent. Compared with his predecessors, he is a firm empiricist. His inferences are always rooted in his past observations. In his article De generatione animalium 76b28, he clearly stated that the information (knowledge) obtained from the senses is the first, which exceeds the information that can be provided by rational thinking. In this respect, he is completely different from the Aristotelian school of scholasticism, who thinks that all problems can be inferred by inference alone. Aristotle's remarkable feature is to investigate the reasons. He is not satisfied with just asking the question of "how", but also asking the question of "why", which was very remarkable at that time. Why does an organism develop from a fertilized egg to a complete adult? Why are there so many purpose-oriented activities and behaviors in the biological world? He clearly understands that the raw materials that only constitute the body do not have the ability to develop into complex organisms. There must be something extra, which he called eidos. Completely different from Plato's definition, Aristotle's eidos is the principle of procedural purpose. In his mind, the meaning expressed by this word is exactly the same as that expressed by the genetic program of modern biologists. Contrary to Plato, Plato believes that there is an external force to explain the order of nature, especially its tendency to be complicated and achieve goals, while Aristotle believes that natural things act according to their own nature, and all natural phenomena are the performance of the action process or process. Because any process has a purpose, he believes that the study of purpose is the main part of the study of nature. Therefore, for Aristotle, all structures and biological activities have their biological significance, or as we say now, they have their adaptive significance. One of Aristotle's main purposes is to explain these meanings. Aristotle's question of "why" has an important enlightenment in the history of biology. "Why?" It is the most important question put forward by evolutionary biologists in their research. There are four ideas about the origin and nature of the world: (1) a short-lasting still world (a world created by Judaism and Christianity); (2) the still world with infinite duration (Aristotle's world view); (3) The cycle changing world, the peak period and the decline period alternate; (4) The evolving world (Lamarck, Darwin's point of view). Aristotle's belief that the world is basically perfect ruled out the view of evolution. Aristotle's advanced thought has only been fully affirmed in recent decades. There are several reasons why he has become infamous in the past few centuries. One reason is that Thomas regarded him as their authoritative philosopher. Later, when scholasticism was discredited, Aristotle naturally followed suit. Another more important reason is that during the scientific revolution in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, almost all the emphasis was placed on physical science. Because Aristotle developed a famous philosophy of biology, and unfortunately thought that the macro world and the micro world could be treated equally, people quoted his biological thought to physics and cosmology. This has had tragic consequences, as Bacon, Descartes and many other scholars repeatedly accused in the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries. Considering that most of Aristotle's research is so excellent and creative, it is hard to understand that these scholars criticize and ridicule him in all kinds of ways. With the liberation of biological science from physical science, the re-evaluation of Aristotle's importance in modern times has also increased. Only when we fully understand the duality of biological organisms now do we realize that the design blueprint of growth, development and function-genetic program is equivalent to the formative－principle assumed by Aristotle. For hundreds of years, philosophers and physicists have turned a deaf ear to the opinions of some naturalists like Aristotle, who think that in order to form frogs from frog eggs and chickens from eggs, there must be something more than the laws of physics (Mayr, 1976). This does not require any elves and demons, all it needs is to admit that complex biological systems are the products of genetic programs with a history of more than three billion years. In general, there is nothing more than the absurd saying that the macro-world and the micro-world obey the same law, which can cause arguments that consume unnecessary energy. There is no sign that this knowledge has spread to most philosophers, but biologists have begun to realize it. Three biological traditions in Greece continued to be popular after Aristotle. Natural history, especially the description and classification of plants, reached a new height in the works of TheophrastusS and Dioscorides, while Pliny (AD 23-79) was interested in zoology and was an encyclopedic editor. Biomedical tradition reached its peak in Galen (131-2 AD), and its influence continued until the 19th century. In the philosophical circles after Aristotle, there was a division between epicureanism and Stoicism. Epicurus (342-271 BC) and his school, based on democritus's viewpoint, believed that everything was composed of unchanging atoms, which kept rotating and randomly collided with each other. Epicurus made a thoughtful materialistic explanation of the biological and abiotic worlds, and believed that everything happened through natural causes. On the spot, life is the result of the movement of inanimate matter. How life behaves depends on how properly configured atoms are assembled. His explanation is very modern. Lucretius (99-55 BC) is one of his followers and an uncompromising atomistic materialist. Both of them opposed Aristotle's teleological thought. Lucretius put forward a well-reasoned argument against the concept of design. In addition, he also published some arguments, which were repeatedly mentioned in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. However, when he criticized some atomists, he tried his best to defend Aristotle. These atomists believed that lions and oaks could be produced through the accidental interaction between water and fire. Galen agrees with him in this respect. Epicureanism's argument is mainly aimed at the Stoic school, which supports pantheism (polytheism) and believes that the world was designed and created for the benefit of mankind. According to their opinion, the purpose of philosophy is to know and understand the order of the world, and later natural theology originated from the Stoic school. The stoic school does not admit that opportunity is one of the factors of the world; Think that everything is purposeful and deterministic. They are strict anthropocentrists, emphasizing the difference between intelligent humans and animals driven by instinct (Pohlenz, 1948). After Lucretius and Galen until the Renaissance, there was no really meaningful state of affairs in biology. As far as I know, Arabs have not made important contributions to biology, even though there are two famous Arab scholars who are extremely interested in biology, Avicenna (98-137) and Aberrho.