Development of Biology in Aristotle and Theophrastus: Theory of Spontaneous Generation

Abstract

IN THE Metaphysics Aristotle quite often uses biological examples, but they seem to be taken from general knowledge rather than from his own biological works as we now have them. This is shown by the numerous small discrepancies, and especially by the difference in his views of generation and of spontaneity. The difference is such as to suggest that the views expressed in the Metaphysics are earlier than those in de Generatione Animalium, which in turn are earlier than those in Hist. An. V and VI. Theophrastus' views seem to belong to an intermediate phase between A's Metaphysics and the relevant sections of G.A. and H.A. To take the small discrepancies first: Met. A. i introduces the study of metaphysics from a decidedly biological point of view, but in doing so it makes statements that have no relation with the psychological and biological works. At 980a26 he says that sight {ucWrLTo 7oLSL yVwpl[?LV, but at de Sensu 437a g he says that hearing is 7rpo voi;v xpe?T&(wv because we hear words, and hence the congenitally blind are less handicapped than the congenitally deaf. The Met. A view is like that of Plato Phaedrus 2 S D, and may account for the order in which the senses are described in de An. B. 7I I: there sight is given a prominence that does not fit the theory of de An., and Ilicks I suggested that it derived from an earlier view. At 980b23 bees are said to be ppovtu'repa because they have memory. That bees are cpp6vLLcx is stated also at P.A. 648a5, 650b25, but it is an ancient comnmonplace ;2 to attribute memory to them, however, is unique in Aristotle, and conflicts with de An. 428a IO unless Torstrik's emendation is accepted there. Also at 980b 2 3 bees are said to have no hearing: but this point is not mentioned in H.A. IV. 8 where it ought to be, and at H.A. IX. 627a17 it is said to be &8jXov. At 98ob27 he says that animals e'u trpEocq Iuerex .Lltxpov, again a unique statement in A., so that Alexander ad loc. suggested that by tLxp6v he must have meant cuaev. At Z. I033b 30, arguing that the parent has the same form