The Trouble with 'Man'

Aristotle's common example 'man' can lead to a certain confusion in English, because the English word 'man' has some very peculiar properties. As in Greek, it is common in English to use 'the F' as a way of talking generally about F things, e.g.:

• The cockroach has existed for millions of years
• The elephant is a mammal
• The rat is omnivorous

However, the words 'man' and 'woman' are exceptions (and the only exceptions) to this pattern: in these cases, we drop the definite article:

• Man has existed for millions of years
• Man is a mammal
• Man is viviparous

It's important to realize that this is a peculiarity of English. Other modern European languages, for instance, treat the equivalent of 'man' just like any other name of a biological species:

• L'homme a existé il y a des millions d'années
• L'uomo è mammale
• Der Mensch ist lebendgebärig

All this makes 'man' a terrible example to use in discussing Aristotle. In fact, the word he uses, anthrôpos, is perhaps better translated 'human being' or just 'human' (as a noun). Though grammatically masculine, it applies equally well to women and to men (there is another word, anêr, for adult male humans). However, 'human' is more naturally taken as an adjective than as a substantive in English (though we can of course say 'a human').