King explores the reflection in both Plato and Aristotle on styles of causal explanation in the explanation of nature, and examines several texts in which they react to theories of natural necessity in this context. He also reviews the influence of Werner Jaeger’s scholarship on the question of Aristotle’s relation to authors in the Hippocratic Corpus.

Roreitner scrutinizes Aristotle’s physiological description of perceptual processes, for which two alternative interpretations have been advocated in the past: it is either pneuma or blood which secures the communication between the peripheral organs of distal senses and the central organ. Roreitner assesses both these traditional interpretations and provides a third alternative according to which it is the body of blood-vessels rather than their content which provides this communication.

Lennox explores the role of cooling in the regulation of natural heat and the preservation of life with special interest in methodological questions about how Aristotle arrived at his views about the critical role of cooling in the lives of blooded animals and why he insists that both the brain and the lungs are involved in moderating the animal’s heat. Lennox concludes that Aristotle was somewhat perplexed by the brain, and that his changing views about its presence in the cephalopods may be an indication of that perplexity.

Tor argues that Parmenides conceives of the soul as a hot, fiery, aethereal and divine thing, and that this notion plays an important role in his epistemology.

Lewis suggests an interpretation of the text which aims to identify the author’s views on the role of heat in animals and to answer question such as (i) What are the roles of heat in the composition and functions of the animal body? (ii) By what means and with the aid of which substances or structures does heat perform its roles? (iii) What is the relation between heat and the soul and heat and pneuma? (iv) Is there an “innate heat” in the body?

This chapter is addressed to those who wish to read the original sources of Greco-Roman mathematics, either in the original languages or in modern translations. Hence, it focuses on the kinds of mathematics that was disseminated in treatises written by scholars who were members of a relatively small literary elite. This theoretical style of mathematics was not the only kind of mathematics practised in Greco-Roman antiquity, and, indeed, the total number authors of philosophical mathematics must have been dwarfed by the number of individuals who used practical mathematics in their daily work, and who passed on such mathematical skills to their sons, disciples, and apprentices. Nevertheless, the literary works produced by this self-selected group of individuals have elicited the admiration and study of mathematical scholars through the centuries, and have justly been regarded as one of the most important products of ancient scholarship.

There is some uncertainty among historians of science as to when the history of science first appeared. Unlike the old historical debate over the origin of mathematics or astronomy, the origin of the history of science has never been widely discussed or properly considered, and the interested reader will find a variety of starting points which reflect the professional preoccupations of historians. One is in the twentieth century with George Sarton, another in the nineteenth century with William Whewell, and yet another in the eighteenth century with Joseph Priestley. Thus, Helge Kragh regards Priestley’s The History and the Present State of Electricity (1767) as the best example of the history of science in the age of the Enlightenment, which ‘saw history as an instrument for progress in the battle against the old feudal order.

Ask yourself: what is a plant? You will probably answer that it is an organism able to photosynthesise chlorophyll. Depending on your level of knowledge in biology, your answer will be more or less elaborate. Now, ask a young child what a plant is, and their answer is likely to be very different. Their definition may centre on the notion of plant rootedness: a plant is something that is rooted to the ground and cannot move as a result.

Where does musical beauty come from? Can it be comprehended into rules or formulae? Since music was ubiquitous in the life of the ancient Greeks, it is no surprise that they posed these questions, thus triggering one of the most fascinating debates in their intellectual history.