Nearly all the major philosophers in the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries felt impelled to address Aristotle's works. The French philosopher Descartes cast his philosophy (in the Meditations of 1641) in terms of moving away from the senses as a basis for a scientific understanding of the world. The great Jewish philosopher Spinoza argued in his Ethics directly against the Aristotlean method of understanding the operations of nature in terms of final causes. Leibniz often described his own philosophy as an attempt to bring together the insights of Plato and Aristotle. Kant adopted Aristotle's use of the form/matter distinction in describing the nature of representations—for instance, in describing space and time as "forms" of intuition.
By the early thirteenth century, the remaining works of Aristotle's Organon (including the Prior Analytics , Posterior Analytics , and the Sophistical Refutations ) had been recovered in the West.  Logical work until then was mostly paraphrasis or commentary on the work of Aristotle.  The period from the middle of the thirteenth to the middle of the fourteenth century was one of significant developments in logic, particularly in three areas which were original, with little foundation in the Aristotelian tradition that came before. These were: 
According to M. Warnock (1978) Ayer’s is a negative theory of ethics because it lacks of meaning and scientific basis. The last word in ethics is rather ideological, that is to state the superiority of a moral system over another. Ayer’s skeptical conclusion is a consequence of the linguistic model he adopted (that is basically Wittgenstein’s Tractatus picture-theory, 1922). In fact, Ayer is not able (at least in Language Truth and Logic ) to distinguish in normative sentences between an emotive (perlocutionary) part and a descriptive (meaning) part. The distinction is necessary to give ethics its full significance back.