.
The thinking and life work of Aristotle is at odds with the modern mind mostly because he thought deeply whereas moderns are generally superficial in their thinking. The vast majority of people alive today are superficial people.
.
Aristotle securely holds the place of the most profound thinker in the history of the world, which is no small achievement. He not only laid the foundation for sound thinking, he defined what it means to think. His modern enemies like Friedrich Nietzsche would reduced to attacking him and his system by saying that thinking has no meaning!
.
Aristotle's categories apply to our world today just as well as they did in his time, and over the intervening millennia no one has come up with any improvement, which says a lot. It has become a tradition that has stood the test of time. Even things that are commonplace today that were unheard of in his day can find their respective places in his system of categories.
.
Aristotle's principle of non-contradiction spans the ages like a great umbrella covering everything that is. In his day, when thinking people were not burdened with Modernism like the vast majority of people today are, they recognized that for anyone to think that something can be and at the same time not be constitutes the END of logical reasoning. In the ancient world, the principle of non-contradiction as Aristotle formulated it was UNIVERSALLY ACCEPTED as the starting point of all sound thinking, and the denial of it was the END of same! Applied to current computer programming, for example, the corollary principle is GIGO ("GUY-go" -- Garbage In, Garbage Out).
.
In our time, the tragedy of Vatican II was an agenda pushed by Modernists like Joseph Ratzinger and his co-conspirators, whose principal obstacle to acceptance was the fact that what they were advocating (Vat.II, Newchurch, Newsacraments, Ecuмenism, Freedom of Religion, Rehab Judaism, etc.) was a contradiction of everything the Church had taught before it. He even admitted as much with his statement that "Vat.II is "the French Revolution in the Church." So after practically a lifetime of fighting against this abiding obstacle, once he became pope (as it were), he took the opportunity afforded him by his prominent stature of authority to emerge with his very controversial "hermeneutic of continuity" which boils down to a denial of Aristotle's principle of non-contradiction.
.
What would the philosophers of the ancient world have had to say about that? Why, they would rightly proclaim, cuм una voce, That is the end of sound thinking and logical reasoning. Nothing of intellectual value can proceed henceforth; and their modern compatriots would say, "GIGO."
.
So Aristotle is significant today, in a big way, but since most people (like PG for example) are superficial, they won't be able to put A and B together, and they won't want to bother to take the time necessary to think deeply about these things. They'll leap to a conclusion, make false conclusions without sound basis, render sweeping statements, shooting from the hip, with a knee-jerk reaction to hot button issues, that is, narrow-mindedness is all that comes to mind to the narrow-minded. Smedley Butler's only interest in the subject is that Aristotle was not a flat-earther, and flat-earthism is all that matters to Smedley Butler, which is obviously a very superficial basis for any contribution to any discussion.