Abstract

The relation between Aristotle’s own views and inquiries and later Aristotelians, observes Sharples, is a problematic one. Right from the outset one may ask whether Aristotle’s immediate followers should be judged as “Aristotelians,” if they are to be so judged at all, in terms of their loyalty to his doctrines or in terms of their readiness to continue his inquiries in a self-critical spirit. This in turn leads to the following three questions. First, “how far was Aristotle himself sufficiently critical of his own opinions?” Answer: “with hindsight, not sufficiently.” Second, “does loyalty demand that the pupils should be less critical of basic doctrines than their originator?” Answer: “ancient attitudes were perhaps more influenced by loyalty than our own.” Third, “why should the question whether Aristotle’s followers were Aristotelians interest us anyway?” Answer: “Aristotle has meant many different things to different people at different times, and … this has not surprisingly led them to challenge the claims of those who adopt different interpretations to be Aristotelians at all.” Consequently, concludes Sharples, “the question whether a particular position is Aristotelian or not cannot be separated from—and so may contribute to the debate concerning—the interpretation of Aristotle himself”.