Meh. Dullsville, man. Dullsville. I would like to see the evidence for the oft-declared notion "Aristotle's works are just his students' notes compiled." I don't believe that idea. It's too verbose to be students' notes. If this is students' notes, it's mostly editorial additions, I say. I admit freely toward the end there was more professional skimming than reading, and perhaps you may say that mars if not outright disqualifies my commentary on Aristotle, but the vast majority of the works in here are sheer pre-scientific mumbo-jumbos. Surely none of this is considered true or right or helpful today, surely. And I'm a classicist. I suppose you would read this for historical interest, like "what did people believe about the souls of animals before microwaves existed?" A non sequitur, sure, but this was not a life-helping experience.