more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
My current use of the Aristotelian term 'definition' is intended to correspond to what is typically accessible to a scientist only at the end of a successful investigation into the nature of a particular phenomenon.
Gist of Idea
A successful Aristotelian 'definition' is what sciences produces after an investigation
Source
Kathrin Koslicki (Essence, Necessity and Explanation [2012], 13.3.1)
Book Ref
'Contemporary Aristotelian Metaphysics', ed/tr. Tahko,Tuomas [CUP 2012], p.200
A Reaction
It is crucial to understand that Aristotle's definitions could be several hundred pages long. It has nothing to do with dictionary definitions. He proposes 'nominal' and 'real' definitions.
| 15110 | An essence and what merely follow from it are distinct [Koslicki] |
| 15111 | In demonstration, the explanatory order must mirror the causal order of the phenomena [Koslicki] |
| 15112 | If an object exists, then its essential properties are necessary [Koslicki] |
| 15115 | In a demonstration the middle term explains, by being part of the definition [Koslicki] |
| 15113 | Individuals are perceived, but demonstration and definition require universals [Koslicki] |
| 15118 | A successful Aristotelian 'definition' is what sciences produces after an investigation [Koslicki] |
| 15116 | Essences cause necessary features, and definitions describe those necessary features [Koslicki] |
| 15114 | Discovering the Aristotelian essence of thunder will tell us why thunder occurs [Koslicki] |
| 15117 | Greek uses the same word for 'cause' and 'explanation' [Koslicki] |