La historia de la filosofía como examen crítico de la filosofía precedente: las objeciones de Aristóteles a la causalidad de las Ideas

Abstract

Against those who hold an incompatibility between philosophy and history of philosophy, as long as they raise a dilemma between a descriptive practice and an argumentative one, in this paper we attempt to show, by examining the historical-philosophical work of Aristotle, that this dilemma is not exclusive. To prove this, first, we will examine some passages of his work in which he provides methodological guidelines useful to understand the double role played by critical reviews of previous philosophers in the very constitution of his philosophy. Second, we will illustrate Aristotelian argumentation by analyzing his criticisms to Platonic Ideas as causes. Against Plato, Aristotle states that in order to give an account of the ingenerability and incorruptibility of forms, it is not necessary to characterize them as separated from matter and motion. It is enough to secure the eternity of forms through their reproduction in other individuals of the same species. Finally, such analysis allows us to conclude that philosophy or history of philosophy constitute a false dilemma for Aristotle, because the dialectical review of previous doctrines is a suitable method of philosophical inquiry.