Aristotle states that what matters most in literature is the very pleasure derived from the nature of imitation.

“First, people are naturally inclined to imitate from childhood. Second, everyone takes pleasure in imitations.” – Poetics

As seen here, he connects the creative act of poetry to the instinctive human impulse to imitate and the universal tendency to find enjoyment in observing others’ imitation. Since imitation is a natural act, almost like a human instinct, it provides pleasure. Moreover, imitation through careful depiction and observation leads to knowledge. In other words, Aristotle expands the meaning of imitation to include both emotional pleasure and the acquisition of knowledge. In contrast, Plato critiques imitation by analyzing it as a mere technical concept.

Aristotle extends the concept of imitation not only to emotional pleasure but also to emotional universality.

“The imitator copies people acting, and since people are either noble or base, the imitator represents them as better than usual, worse than usual, or as they usually are.” – Poetics

The phrase “people acting,” the object of the poet’s imitation, means that the poet must imitate not just isolated actions or feelings, but a person’s character, passions, deeds, and experiences. This implies that poetry can imitate human nature itself—not merely fragmented behaviors or emotions. This is because the poet (the artist) must deeply understand the essence of the protagonist’s suffering, feel their anxieties and anger, in order to properly imitate them. Therefore, the poetic imitation Aristotle describes concerns the imitation of inner human actions.

Secondly, the poet extends the scope of imitation beyond individual particularity to the universal character of all people. Aristotle’s definition of imitation as human actions means that the truth pursued in literature lies in the universal actions of people in the natural world. Thus, the poet imitates actions that may be fictional or factual but must carry universality.

He also divides poetry according to the poet’s disposition into two kinds: the serious and the lighthearted. This classification depends on the poet’s character and the nature of the imitation’s object. His attempt to evaluate the quality of poetry might seem to contradict his theory that pleasure is derived from imitation regardless of its subject. However, his distinction is motivated by his literary theory, which values tragedy over comedy. The universality Aristotle emphasizes comes from the depiction of inner human actions, highlighting the universal found in human nature. He sought to present universal archetypes to be emulated through everyday acts.

So, how does poetry achieve universality? Aristotle explains this through the dialectic between the particular and the universal. He clarifies this difference by comparing history and poetry:

“The poet’s task is not to tell what has actually happened, but what might happen according to probability or necessity. By contrast, the historian relates what has actually happened. Therefore, poetry is more philosophical and more serious than history, because poetry speaks of universals, whereas history speaks of particulars.” – Poetics

Through this, we see that Aristotle’s theory of imitation sets a standard where poetry transcends specificity to achieve universality. Poetry tells stories that could or should happen based on actual events, thus possessing universality, while history records specific events and remains grounded in particularity. Therefore, poetry is universal and more philosophical. However, saying poetry is more philosophical than history does not mean poetry stands on the same level as philosophy. Aristotle’s comment defends poetry against Plato’s critique by explaining that poetry conveys a kind of truth akin to Plato’s ideal forms, making it “philosophical.”

Aristotle especially emphasizes the importance of tragedy. At that time, tragedy’s heroes were morally upright, acted appropriately, resembled real humans, and possessed consistent characters — unique conditions that elevate the mimetic advantage of depicting universally admirable figures through storytelling. Thus, Aristotle’s imitation should not be interpreted as mere fiction, reproduction, or expression. Instead, it functions as a noble ideal added to fiction with the aim of inspiring belief or impact.

Aristotle believed that poetry can imitate human nature, such as actions and emotions. He argued that poets use their mimetic ability to depict beauty and noble universal forms of human behavior. This recognition of universality is what he considered philosophical knowledge.

Summary

All humans possess an instinct to imitate and derive pleasure from imitations. Thus, art as an act of imitation contributes to pleasure. Additionally, art, which imitates the real world, imparts knowledge. Because imitation expresses and understands universal human emotions, it represents human nature. Moreover, literature (art) portrays what is probable, making it more universal than history. Recognizing universality is philosophical knowledge. Therefore, art that expresses universality is philosophical.