PLS1501
Assignment 2 Semester 1 2025
Unique #:
Due Date: April 2025
Detailed solutions, explanations, workings
and references.
+27 81 278 3372
, OPTION A (2 ESSAYS PROVIDED)
ARISTOTLE’S APPROACH TO UNDERSTANDING THE WORLD:
PARTICULARS AND UNIVERSALS
1. INTRODUCTION
Aristotle (384–322 BCE), a student of Plato, significantly diverged from his
teacher’s theory of knowledge and reality. While Plato argued for the independent
existence of eternal Forms (universals) and maintained that knowledge is gained
through recollection of these Forms, Aristotle grounded knowledge acquisition in
empirical observation and the classification of particulars. For Aristotle, universals
do not exist apart from particulars; rather, they are instantiated within individual
objects. This essay critically discusses Aristotle’s approach to understanding the
world, focusing on his concepts of particulars and universals, his empirical
methodology of knowledge acquisition, his view of form in relation to particulars
and universals, and the strengths and weaknesses of his empiricism.
2. PARTICULARS AND UNIVERSALS IN ARISTOTLE’S EPISTEMOLOGY
A fundamental disagreement between Plato and Aristotle centers on the
ontological status of universals and their relationship to particulars. Whereas
Plato viewed universals or Forms as existing in a separate, transcendent realm,
Aristotle (1953:13) contends that universals cannot exist independently of the
concrete particulars that instantiate them. In his Metaphysics and Posterior
Analytics, Aristotle explains that Forms (universals) and particulars are
interdependent: there is no such thing as a Form ―horse‖ without at least one
particular horse that exemplifies it.
For Aristotle, the particular (for example, a single horse or a single oak tree) is the
starting point of knowledge. He observes that sense experience can acquaint us
with the attributes of these individual things. Over time, through repeated
observation and systematic reasoning, we recognize patterns and general
characteristics they share—thereby arriving at what Aristotle calls universals or
genera (Aristotle 1953:75a). Thus, the relationship between particulars and
universals for Aristotle forms the basis of an empirical epistemology: knowledge
Varsity Cube 2025 +27 81 278 3372
, arises from our encounters with individual things, from which we abstract and
identify common features and definitions.
3. SENSE PERCEPTION AND ABSTRACTION
3.1 Role of the Senses
Unlike Plato, who depreciates sense perception as ever-changing and thus
unreliable for true knowledge, Aristotle argues that sensory experience, though
imperfect, is essential (Aristotle 1953:93a). We perceive countless particulars
through sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell. While these perceptions are not
themselves knowledge, they provide the raw data from which the intellect (or
mind) can begin its processes of classification and abstract thought (University of
South Africa 2023:48).
For Aristotle, an important step in knowledge acquisition is recognizing that we
can only interpret the particular if we already have some grasp of the relevant
universal (Aristotle 1953:13). For example, one can only recognize a specific
individual, such as Winnie Mandela, as a woman if one understands what the
universal ―woman‖ entails. Yet, we only come to fully understand the universal by
first experiencing multiple instances of the particulars that embody it. Thus,
Aristotle sees knowledge as an iterative process where sense perception and
reason work together.
3.2 Abstraction and Induction
Aristotle’s method for arriving at universals from particulars is often referred to as
induction (Stumpf & Abel 2002:6–19). We gather numerous observations, noting
consistent attributes shared by all members of a species, until we are justified in
positing a universal definition. This inductive process moves from ―plain fact‖ (that
is, a pattern we observe) toward ―reasoned fact,‖ which involves comprehending
the cause or explanation for that pattern (Aristotle 1953:93a).
However, Aristotle acknowledges that induction alone does not guarantee
certainty. Although observation might show that all humans are featherless
bipeds, he would deny that this attribute (being featherless and bipedal) is
Varsity Cube 2025 +27 81 278 3372
Assignment 2 Semester 1 2025
Unique #:
Due Date: April 2025
Detailed solutions, explanations, workings
and references.
+27 81 278 3372
, OPTION A (2 ESSAYS PROVIDED)
ARISTOTLE’S APPROACH TO UNDERSTANDING THE WORLD:
PARTICULARS AND UNIVERSALS
1. INTRODUCTION
Aristotle (384–322 BCE), a student of Plato, significantly diverged from his
teacher’s theory of knowledge and reality. While Plato argued for the independent
existence of eternal Forms (universals) and maintained that knowledge is gained
through recollection of these Forms, Aristotle grounded knowledge acquisition in
empirical observation and the classification of particulars. For Aristotle, universals
do not exist apart from particulars; rather, they are instantiated within individual
objects. This essay critically discusses Aristotle’s approach to understanding the
world, focusing on his concepts of particulars and universals, his empirical
methodology of knowledge acquisition, his view of form in relation to particulars
and universals, and the strengths and weaknesses of his empiricism.
2. PARTICULARS AND UNIVERSALS IN ARISTOTLE’S EPISTEMOLOGY
A fundamental disagreement between Plato and Aristotle centers on the
ontological status of universals and their relationship to particulars. Whereas
Plato viewed universals or Forms as existing in a separate, transcendent realm,
Aristotle (1953:13) contends that universals cannot exist independently of the
concrete particulars that instantiate them. In his Metaphysics and Posterior
Analytics, Aristotle explains that Forms (universals) and particulars are
interdependent: there is no such thing as a Form ―horse‖ without at least one
particular horse that exemplifies it.
For Aristotle, the particular (for example, a single horse or a single oak tree) is the
starting point of knowledge. He observes that sense experience can acquaint us
with the attributes of these individual things. Over time, through repeated
observation and systematic reasoning, we recognize patterns and general
characteristics they share—thereby arriving at what Aristotle calls universals or
genera (Aristotle 1953:75a). Thus, the relationship between particulars and
universals for Aristotle forms the basis of an empirical epistemology: knowledge
Varsity Cube 2025 +27 81 278 3372
, arises from our encounters with individual things, from which we abstract and
identify common features and definitions.
3. SENSE PERCEPTION AND ABSTRACTION
3.1 Role of the Senses
Unlike Plato, who depreciates sense perception as ever-changing and thus
unreliable for true knowledge, Aristotle argues that sensory experience, though
imperfect, is essential (Aristotle 1953:93a). We perceive countless particulars
through sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell. While these perceptions are not
themselves knowledge, they provide the raw data from which the intellect (or
mind) can begin its processes of classification and abstract thought (University of
South Africa 2023:48).
For Aristotle, an important step in knowledge acquisition is recognizing that we
can only interpret the particular if we already have some grasp of the relevant
universal (Aristotle 1953:13). For example, one can only recognize a specific
individual, such as Winnie Mandela, as a woman if one understands what the
universal ―woman‖ entails. Yet, we only come to fully understand the universal by
first experiencing multiple instances of the particulars that embody it. Thus,
Aristotle sees knowledge as an iterative process where sense perception and
reason work together.
3.2 Abstraction and Induction
Aristotle’s method for arriving at universals from particulars is often referred to as
induction (Stumpf & Abel 2002:6–19). We gather numerous observations, noting
consistent attributes shared by all members of a species, until we are justified in
positing a universal definition. This inductive process moves from ―plain fact‖ (that
is, a pattern we observe) toward ―reasoned fact,‖ which involves comprehending
the cause or explanation for that pattern (Aristotle 1953:93a).
However, Aristotle acknowledges that induction alone does not guarantee
certainty. Although observation might show that all humans are featherless
bipeds, he would deny that this attribute (being featherless and bipedal) is
Varsity Cube 2025 +27 81 278 3372
