Abstract
On three occasions Aristotle judges explanations by earlier thinkers to be simply ‘beyond us’ (ὑðὲñ ἡìᾶò), namely, at Meta. iii 4, GA i 18, and GA ii 8. What failure is Aristotle charging earlier scientists with when he says this? I argue that the phrase ‘beyond us’ introduces a carefully considered charge (as opposed to an empty dismissal): an explanation of fact p is ‘beyond us’ when and only when it posits an explainer q that is (i) empirically unverifiable and (ii) will explain only this one fact p and no other facts.