Poetry, history and dialectics Twice in Poetics Aristotle contrasts poetry with history. Whatever its didactic value, the contrast did not strike readers as of particular philosophical interest. The purpose of this article is to show that this contrast is philosophically significant not only for our understanding of tragedy but also for the light it sheds on Aristotle's overall methodology. I will show how he uses the method sketched in Mice to define tragedy and explain why the same method will not define history. In particular, tragedy admits of definition because its parts constitute a unity, and much of the Poetics aims to show how, despite being defined through six distinct parts, tragedy can be one. On the contrary, history, despite being properly preparatory to poetics and also concerning human action, does not allow scientific treatment because it does not contain essential units. Aristotle's concept of "science" is used here to explain why any attempt to create a scientific story would turn the story into poetry. Aristotle claims that the art of dialectics outlined in the Topics contributes to philosophical knowledge because it can be used to find unprovable first principles. from common opinions: «for, being capable of examining, dialectics has a way to the principles of all disciplines» (õB¤ £œŸæ›à¤) (I.2.101b3-4). Scientific knowledge of a subject consists in grasping its principles and demonstrating its essential attributes. How do you come to know first principles? Obviously, they cannot be demonstrated from previous principles; they are first principles. As such, they are somehow determined by dialectics. Thus, dialectics transforms what we can call, for lack of a better term, a "subject" into a science. What is the state of this matter before dialectics discovers its principles? It is clear from the text of our Topics that this examination will seek common opinions, and it is well recognized that Aristotle's real investigations often begin with common opinions.(1) So the pre-scientific argument must contain common opinions about its facts. Aristotle gives a name to this exposition of facts: in the First Analytics he speaks of deriving the principles of each field from experience and refers to the description of the phenomena of a field as a "history" (Èóõ¦òå˜ ) (46a17- 27). Evidently “history” precedes “science” and the transition occurs through dialectics. Aristotle has a lot to say about how knowledge arises from sensation and experience, but he never explains how (or if!) his many observations fit into a single process..