Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T20:26:33.676Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Marjorle Grene, Aristotle's Philosophy of Science and Aristotle's Biology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2022

James G Lennox
James G Lennox*
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

During a period stretching from the publication of the Phoenix Books edition A Portrait of Aristotle In the early 1960's through the appearance of a number of papers in the mid-197O's, Marjorie Grene turned her attention to the relevance of Aristotle's biological interests to his overall philosophy, and to the relevance of that philosophy to contemporary philosophy of biology.

A Portrait of Aristotle was one among the influences which, turned me, as an undergraduate, toward Aristotle and his biology. As I re-read Professor Grene's work on Aristotle in the summer of 1981, a number of key themes emerged which are relevant to her own views about the nature of biological science.

Type
Part IX. Marjorie Grene's Contributions to Philosophy of Science
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1984 , Issue 2: Volume Two: Symposia and Invited Papers 1984 , 1984 , pp. 365 - 377
Copyright
Copyright © 1985 by the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ayala, F (1970). “Teleological Explanation in Evolutionary Biology.” Philosophy of Science 37: 1-15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balme, David (1962). “Genes and Eidos In Aristotle ‘ s Biology,” Classical Quarterly N.S. 12: 81-98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balme, David (1972). Aristotle's “De Partibus Aimalium I” and “De Generatione Animalium I”. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Balme, David (1975). “Artistotle's Use of Differentia In Zoology.” In Articles on Aristotle: Volume 1 Science. Edited by Barnes, J, Sohofleld, H and Sorabji, R. London: Gerald Duckworth and Company. Pages 183-193.Google Scholar
Balme, David (1980). “Aristotle's biology was not essentialist.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 62: 1-12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balme, David (1986). “Telelogy and Necessity.” In PhilosoPhical Issues In Aristotle's Biology. Edited by Gotthelf, A and Lennox, J.C. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Brandon, Robert N (1981). “Biological Teleology: Questions and Explanations.” Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 12: 91-105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, John (1982). “Aristotle on Natural Teleology.” In Language and Logos. Edited by Sohofleld, M and Nussbaum, M. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pages 197-222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwin, Charles (1874). “Letter to Asa Gray.” (As printed in The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin. Vol. 2 . (ed.) Francis Darwin. New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1896. Page. 367.Google Scholar
Evans, J.D.G (1977). Aristotle's Concept of Dialeotic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Furth, M (1986). “Aristotle's Biological Universe: An Overview.” In Philosophical Issues In Aristotle ‘ s Biology. Edited by Gotthelf, A and Lennox, J.G. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, (forthcoming.)Google Scholar
Gotthelf, Allan (1976). “Aristotles Conception of Final Causality.” Review of Metaphysics 30: 226-254 .Google Scholar
Gray, As (1874). “Charles Robert Darwin.” Nature 10(June 4): 79-81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grene, Harjorie (1963). A Portrait of Aristotle. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Grene, Harjorie (1964). “Biology and Teleology.” Cambridge Review 87: 269-273. (As reprinted in Grene (1974a). Pages 172-179.)Google Scholar
Grene, Harjorie(1972). “Aristotle and Modern Biology.” Journal of the History of Ideas 33: 395-424. (As reprinted in Grene (1974a). Pages 74-107.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grene, Harjorie (1974a). The Understanding of Nature. (Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Volume XXIII.) (eds.) Cohen, Robert S and Wartofsky, Marx H. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grene, Harjorie (1974b). “Is Genus to Species as Matter to Form? Aristotle and Taxonomy.” In Grene (1974a). Pages 108-126.Google Scholar
Grene, Harjori (]974c). “On the Nature of Natural Necessity.” In Grene (1974a). Pages 228-242.Google Scholar
Lennox, J.G (1980). “Aristotle on Genera, Species and ‘the more and the less’”. Journal of the History of Biology 13: 321-346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lloyd, A.C (1962). “Genus Species and Ordered Series.” Phronesis 7: 67-90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayr, E (1983). “How to Carry Out the Adaptationist Program.” The American Naturalist 121: 324-334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pellegrin, Pierr (1982). La Classification des Animaux ohez Aristote. Paris: Societe d'Edition “des Belles Lettres”.Google Scholar
Pellegrin, Pierre (1986). “Logical Difference and Biological Difference.” In Philosophical Issues in Aristotle's Biology. Edited by Gotthelf, A and Lennox, J. Cambridge: Cambridge university Press, (forthcoming.)Google Scholar
Horty, R (1973) “Genus as Matter.” In Exegesis and Argument. (Phronesis Supplementary Volume 1.) Edited by E.N. Lee, A.P.D. Mourelatos, and R. Rorty. New York: Humanities Press. Pages 393-420.Google Scholar
Winsatt, H.C (1972). “Teleology and the Logical Structure of Function Statements.” Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 3: 1-80.Google Scholar
Wright, Larry (1976). Teleologioal Explanation. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar