Abstract

The paper examines Daniel Furlanus’ critique of Michael of Ephesus’ commentary on Aristotle’s Parts of Animals I. Furlanus was a Greco-Venetian of the 16th Century from Crete who studied in Padua and wrote in Latin a commentary on PA I. His main critical position is that the Byzantine commentator of the 11th/12th Centuries Michael of Ephesus is making a Platonic interpretation of the Aristotelian text. On the question of the relation between biological science and pleasure, the two commentators give radically different answers. Pleasure for Michael of Ephesus is not worth of philosophical consideration except as a possible hindrance to scientific knowledge; for Furlanus, the pleasure of biological science is quite similar to the pleasure provided by the works of art. Consequently, the two authors have a diverging opinion as to the status of the cognizing individual’s position as to pleasure.