144 JOURNAL AND PROCEEDINGS. 
members, he looked upon them as three attributes, which may, and 
in man -do exist together. These he named: st, the vegetative ; 
2nd, the sensitive ; 3rd, the intellectual. Like Plato, he gave to 
this third attribute an indwelling principle as the basis of knowledge, 
but further saw in these lower forms the necessary means for the 
development of the higher. Instead, then, of denying any real 
worth to the world of experience, Aristotle found a positive relation 
existing between the world of thought and the world of experience. 
While, then, Aristotle made use of dialectic, it ceased to be an 
end in itself. It now served the purpose of investigating the world 
of ideas as found in experience, where they alone exist. While 
Plato saw reality only in the idea, Aristotle denied existence to the 
idea except in the particular. Instead, then, of finding the soul to 
be degraded by its contact with the world of sense, Aristotle saw in 
this contact the only possible means of developing the potential 
excellence which it possesses. The results of this physical turn 
given to philosophy by Aristotle, in the incorporation of Natural 
Science with the doctrine of pure ideas, may be summed up as follows: 
1. From being, in itself, the royal science, dialectic became but 
a method for the discovery of the universal in the particular, for 
passing from expertence to knowledge. It thus became separated 
from both Ethics and Natural Science, and was formulated into a 
science of method. 
2. Since knowledge was seen to be really dependent on the 
activity of the mind in experience, and since nature is an ascending 
scale of life, the Natural Sciences became both a worthy and a 
necessary department of research. 
3. In Ethics, since virtue is the chief good, and since the chief 
good is the development of the soul by a life of activity, Aristotle 
made happiness depend, to a certain degree, upon external circum- 
stances. Virtue, likewise, will depend, not on true knowledge alone, 
but upon the development of the will by a life of activity. Thus 
virtue becomes subject to external circumstances and _ habit. 
The result was the separation of Ethics from knowledge proper. 
Thus we see that the peculiar work of Aristotle lay in his 
uniting and unifying all previous systems of philosophy, in placing 
upon a scientific and well-defined basis the various departments of 
thought as portrayed in the manifold character of Socrates. 
