Research
Τὸ δ᾽ ὅτι διαφέρει καὶ τὸ διότι ἐπίστασθαι
Aristotle
Posterior Analytics I.13, 78a22
My research encompasses two distinct yet interconnected areas: Aristotle’s foundational concepts in the natural world (motion, place, and time) as outlined in the Physics, and his overarching framework for scientific inquiry, notably his theory of definition and proof in the Posterior Analytics. From a contemporary perspective, it may appear that Aristotle, in the Physics, does not consistently adhere to his own methodological guidelines.
However, on the basis of my current findings about the ancient Greek commentators on Aristotle, they took it for granted that Aristotle, in the Physics, presents a model for what a science should look like when it is ready, and that he provides various kinds of instructions for how to argue for demonstrations and conclusions—including statements about the natural world.
Doctoral Thesis Outline
My dissertation sets to reconstruct Aristotle's account of time and his discussion on the role of the present moment (τὸ νῦν, the "Now") in Physics IV.10-14. Rather than aligning with conventional modern interpretations, I undertake a fresh approach by scrutinizing the commentaries of Simplicius and John Philoponus, aiming to extract their potential contributions to the contemporary debate.
Contemporary scholars predominantly subscribe to an anti-Platonic interpretation of Physics IV.10-14. However, the ancient commentators offer an intriguing perspective wherein Plato's and Aristotle's accounts of time are viewed to exhibit conceptual alignment while maintaining distinct methodological foundations. For the commentators, Aristotle's natural science is fundamentally a demonstrative science.
My dissertation is divided into two main parts. The first part scrutinizes Aristotle's definition of time as expounded in Simplicius and John Philoponus' commentaries. In contrast to modern readings, this definition is naturally seen as aligning with Aristotle's scientific framework outlined in Posterior Analytics II. Through my investigation, I reveal how the commentators argue for a robust demonstration of the definition of time using the syllogistic model.
In the second part, I discuss pivotal passages elucidating the commentators' perspective on Aristotle's "Now." I assert that the "Now" has been profoundly misconstrued in modern literature, with its significance for the existence of time being overly emphasized. By emphasizing the syllogistic demonstrability of time's existence, my analysis prompts a reconsideration of the role of the "Now" within Aristotle's discourse on time. I strive to present a fresh interpretation of Aristotle's well-discussed text and propose an alternative methodology for modern readers.
Yves Tanguy, Demain, 1938