On another discussion board someone posted a question on the historicity of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. But before I could participate in that discussion I was banned from the forum, so I submit their question here.
Question:
"Why is Plato completely silent on Aristotle, if Aristotle was his best student?
In the Platonic dialogues, while in one dialogue Plato briefly has an interlocotur named “Ariston” it is unclear Ariston is Aristotle, and there does not appear to be any mention or any dialogues involving Plato (or Socrates) and Aristotle. It is hard to believe that the 20 or so years of contact between Plato and Aristotle produced no discernible impact on his Socratic dialogues.
Perhaps the story of Aristotle being Plato’s student is a myth, perhaps Socrates was a myth and Plato himself was a myth, and Aristotle is a myth, all those writings attributed to them are the work of many people in a “school” The idea of Aristotle studying under Plato, or Alexander studying under Aristotle sounds like the archetype of the Greek myth of the wiseman-soldier myth, etc.
The near complete silence of Plato on Aristotle is something I wonder if it has been addressed by Platonic scholars."
I am a big ‘end user’ of Greek philosophy to guide my own life, so this subject is of interest to me. Although the historicity ‘pro or con’ does not diminish any truth in the ‘application of the tools’ but I would just like to know.
Thank You,
V (Male)
For free access to my earlier posts on voluntary simplicity, compulsive spending, debting, compulsive overeating and clutter write: vfr44@aol.com. Any opinion expressed here is that of my own and is not the opinion, recommendation or belief of any group or organization.
The Republic: a fiction designed to explain a concept.
Atlantis: a fiction designed to explain a concept.
Socrates: a fiction designed to explain a concept.
Potent
Distance through “time” makes truth uncertain. Also, the foolish take the bright literally all too often, and meaning is lost.
Aristotle came to Athens at the age of 18. This makes the year of his arrival 366 or 367 BC. By this time, Plato was 61. The number of his years on earth is 80. It is probable that he had written a considerable number of his dialogues by the time Aristotle joined the ranks of the Academy.
It is also almost certain to say that by the age of 60 Plato had reached the philosophical maturity of his later dialogues. He was long past the age when his thought was vassal to the teachings of Socrates. By this time, his philosophy was fully independent and cohesive, a unitary sustem of interlinking ideas. Even if Arsitotle proved a prodigious student, it is a safe bet to assume that, at least in his twenties, he was too small a stone to produce much of a wave in Plato’s thinking. One needs a certain amount of time to fully grasp the intricacies of a philosophical system before setting out to criticise it.
Also, the hype around the relation between Plato and Aristotle puts the latter in not such a favourable light. Even if Aristotle was one of Plato’s best students, this didn’t require for Plato to actually like him.
Also, most of the dialogues focus around Socrates, the lesser urchins that carried his train plus the regular marionettes he called adversaries. So it is part of the work ethics to include contemporaries of Socrates in the dialogues, although I don’t see why anachronisms wouldn’t be allowed.
This is, of course, based on the information we have. I don’t really know a lot more than you do, I just looked through the wikipedia articles a minute ago for dates. History is what we find in documents and the rest or, in our case, what is featured on wikipedia. It’s the best shot we get.