Aristotle’s style

I’ve always been annoyed by the “Aristotle’s books are just his lecture notes” meme. Not because the theory is impossible, but because it’s a mere speculation presented as all-knowing fact. Like Ross, I tend not to believe it. I’m happy to hear arguments to the contrary, but the cocksure tone of classical erudition with which this statement is generally made predisposes me against it. (And though I’m also sick of the “cocktail party” metaphor for referring to superficial philosophical discussion, I believe I literally first heard the “lecture notes” claim at a cocktail party, which makes it all the more annoying.)

One supposed “proof” that the books are just lecture notes is what a beautiful writer of dialogues Aristotle supposedly was, compared with the supposedly stilted and disjointed tone of the books. But in the first place, I don’t think the tone of his books is so difficult, and Aristotle’s sense of humor is underrated. And in the second place, I see no contradiction between writing dry and difficult philosophical treatises at one moment and beautiful dialogues at other moments. Look at some of Kant’s gorgeous prose from his younger years, compared with the sometimes painful march of the Critiques. One and the same person is capable of writing beautifully and technically, sometimes even in the same book.

But on to a more important point… The sudden discovery of Aristotle’s lost dialogues would probably be one of the most momentous incidents in the history of philosophy. And perhaps it’s not impossible. Perhaps we will live to see it.