Key Arguments

• He states the structural analogy: 'It would seem, indeed, that while smell is analogous to taste, and similarly the kinds (eidos) of flavor to those of odor.'
• He asserts that human taste is 'more exact' specifically because it is a form of touch, and touch is the sense in which humans excel: 'human taste is more exact because it is a sort of touch, and this perceptual capacity is most exact in a human being.'
• He contrasts human touch with other senses, where humans are inferior to many animals: 'For in the others | 421 a 20 | he is inferior to many animals, but in touch he is much more exceedingly exact than the rest.'
• He infers a cognitive consequence: 'That is why he is also the wisest of the animals.'
• He offers an anthropological indication tying bodily softness (a tactile condition) to intellectual disposition: 'members of the human race (genos) are naturally well-disposed or naturally ill-disposed depending on this perceptual organ and on no other, since the hard-fleshed ones are naturally ill-disposed for thought, | 421 a 25 | whereas the soft-fleshed ones are naturally well-disposed.'

Source Quotes

And this is the way | 421 a 15 | the human race (genos) is with regard to odors. It would seem, indeed, that while smell is analogous to taste, and similarly the kinds (eidos) of flavor to those of odor, human taste is more exact because it is a sort of touch, and this perceptual capacity is most exact in a human being. 267 For in the others | 421 a 20 | he is inferior to many animals, but in touch he is much more exceedingly exact than the rest. That is why he is also the wisest of the animals.

It would seem, indeed, that while smell is analogous to taste, and similarly the kinds (eidos) of flavor to those of odor, human taste is more exact because it is a sort of touch, and this perceptual capacity is most exact in a human being. 267 For in the others | 421 a 20 | he is inferior to many animals, but in touch he is much more exceedingly exact than the rest. That is why he is also the wisest of the animals.

267 For in the others | 421 a 20 | he is inferior to many animals, but in touch he is much more exceedingly exact than the rest. That is why he is also the wisest of the animals. 268 An indication of this is that members of the human race (genos) are naturally well-disposed or naturally ill-disposed depending on this perceptual organ and on no other, since the hard-fleshed ones are naturally ill-disposed for thought, | 421 a 25 | whereas the soft-fleshed ones are naturally well-disposed. 269 And just as flavors are sweet or bitter, so too are odors.

That is why he is also the wisest of the animals. 268 An indication of this is that members of the human race (genos) are naturally well-disposed or naturally ill-disposed depending on this perceptual organ and on no other, since the hard-fleshed ones are naturally ill-disposed for thought, | 421 a 25 | whereas the soft-fleshed ones are naturally well-disposed. 269 And just as flavors are sweet or bitter, so too are odors. But some things have an odor and flavor that are analogous, I mean, for example, a sweet odor and a sweet taste, whereas others have ones that are contrary.

Key Concepts

• It would seem, indeed, that while smell is analogous to taste, and similarly the kinds (eidos) of flavor to those of odor, human taste is more exact because it is a sort of touch, and this perceptual capacity is most exact in a human being. 267
• For in the others | 421 a 20 | he is inferior to many animals, but in touch he is much more exceedingly exact than the rest.
• That is why he is also the wisest of the animals. 268
• An indication of this is that members of the human race (genos) are naturally well-disposed or naturally ill-disposed depending on this perceptual organ and on no other, since the hard-fleshed ones are naturally ill-disposed for thought, | 421 a 25 | whereas the soft-fleshed ones are naturally well-disposed. 269

Context

II.9 (421a15–25), where Aristotle links the analogy between smell and taste to his broader thesis that touch is the most exact human sense and grounds humans’ intellectual superiority, using bodily softness vs. hardness as a sign of better or worse natural aptitude for thinking.