On Physics Review

Aristotle’s On Physics is perhaps the ancient text addressing the nature of the universe in a rational fashion.  It is cited as the evolutionary common ancestor of classical, Newtonian, Einsteinian, and quantum physics, not to mention exotic modern theories of physics like string theory.  If you take an introductory class on basic physics, orbital mechanics, particle physics, or numerous other topics, you’ll probably see it referenced, which is no small part of why it appeared on my reading list.  Plus, as we’ve well established, the Greeks consistently demonstrated an ability to interface with and understand their reality in a strikingly incisive way.  On Physics is no exception to that tradition…but it is referenced so extensively that it struggles to provide fresh insight when finally reading it through.

When approaching On Physics, it is vital to recall that the Greek philosophers, Aristotle included, approached their topics in primarily a rational fashion, not an empirical one; it is from them that the scholars of the Middle Ages adopted and sharpened the practice.  While Aristotle paid more attention to the influence of the natural world than some of his associates, On Physics is still a book of rational conclusions.  This rationalism is a powerful tool, but one that sometimes leads Aristotle to surprising conclusions.  It is not uncommon to find in On Physics conclusions which are startlingly prescient of modern understandings of reality alongside conclusions which are spectacularly far astray.

It’s also worth remembering that On Physics was not originally written to be a physics text as we might think of it today.  Rather, it was written in conversation with other thinkers of the time, including Plato, Zeno, and Democritus, amongst others, who were thinking along similar lines as Aristotle and all attempting to come to conclusions about what they viewed as key questions regarding the nature of the physical reality they inhabited.  Many of the topics are presented not as independent notions, but as responses to the positions of other thinkers, especially Zeno.  Indeed, a familiarity with Zeno’s paradoxes will add significant depth to a reading of On Physics.  Good thing we have a post on the subject.

The kind of thinking involved in Zeno’s paradoxes, aside from the actual references to them, is similar to the kind of thinking in which Aristotle engages in On Physics, albeit to different conclusions.  In approaching the text, it’s best to think of it not in terms of providing particular physical insights, but in terms of deepening your understanding of a certain way of thinking, an opportunity to stretch your brain with the ways of rationalism which are often neglected in our focus on empirical methods.  With our hydrogen masers, particle accelerators, astronomical observatories, mass spectrometers, laser interferometers, and gravitational wave detectors, we have never had better tools with which to seek a superior understanding of the cosmos.  On Physics is a reminder to use our original tool: our minds.