The Human Person as an Embodied Spirit

One of the dominant themes in the course Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person is
the idea that the human person is an embodied spirit. But first of all, we need to define terms here. So, what
do we exactly mean by “embodied spirit”? The most direct connotation that comes to mind when we say
something is “embodied” is that it is being materialized or incarnated. Hence, when we say “embodied
spirit”, we normally thought of a spirit being incarnated. However, the idea of the human person as an
“embodied spirit” does not necessarily refer to the incarnation or materialization of spirit as an immaterial
entity.

The embodiment of the spirit in the context of Christian philosophy, specifically refers to the
inseparable union of body and soul. Thus, when we say “embodied spirit” we mean that the body is not
separate from the soul, just as the soul is not separate from the body. So, when we say that the human
person is an embodied spirit, we specifically mean that the human person is the point of convergence
between the material and spiritual entities, that is, between the body and soul. We cannot talk, therefore, of
the human person without the union of body and soul, just as we cannot talk of anything without the union
of matter and form as Aristotle would have us believe.

Now, to understand the specificity of the human person as an embodied spirit is important because
aside from the fact that it enables us to know our potentialities and limitations, it also exposes us to a
thorough and deeper understanding of ourselves as a unique creature united by body and soul. With this
caveat in mind, let us now proceed to an engagement with one of the most famous philosophers in this
particular scholarship, namely, Aristotle.

Plato on the Human Person

Before we engage Aristotle’s account on the human person as an embodied spirit, that is, again, as a
union of body and soul, it is important at this point to provide the theoretical context of this issue. As we may
already know, Aristotle’s account of the human person as an embodied spirit is in large part a reaction against
Plato’s take on the nature of the human person.

For Plato, the nature of the human person is seen in the metaphysical dichotomy between body and
soul. This dichotomy implies that there is an inherent contradiction between the body and the soul. On the
one hand, the body, according to Plato, is material; hence, it is mutable and destructible. On the other hand,
the soul is immaterial; hence, it is immutable and indestructible.

Inasmuch as the body is material, mutable, and destructible, while the soul is immaterial, immutable,
and indestructible, Plato contends that in the context of the nature of the human person, the body’s existence
is dependent on the soul while the soul’s existence is independent of the body. In fact, in the Timaeus, Plato
argues that the soul existed prior to the body. Plato writes: “…the gods made the soul prior to the body and
more venerable in birth and excellence to the body’s mistress and governor”. Interestingly then, as Eddie
Babor claims, the contention above made Plato conclude that the human person is just a soul using a body.

According to Plato, there are three parts of the soul, namely, the rational, the spiritual, and the
appetitive. The rational soul is located in the head, the spiritual soul in the chest, and the appetitive in the
abdomen. According to Plato, the spiritual and appetitive souls contribute to the motion and activity of the
whole person, while the rational soul’s function is to guide the spiritual and appetitive souls.

According to Plato, the appetitive part of the soul drives the human person to experience thirst,
hunger, and other physical wants, while the spiritual soul drives the human person to experience
abomination, anger, and other emotional feelings. Lastly, it is the rational part of the soul that enables the
human person to think, reflect, analyze, comprehend, draw conclusions, and the like.

As we can see, the rational soul, which is the highest of all parts of the soul, guides the other two
parts, namely, the appetitive and the spiritual.

“What else could perform this guiding function, from Plato’s point of view, than the rational
part of the soul? Think of a desperately thirsty man in the desert. He sees a pool of water
and approaches it with all the eagerness that deprivation is able to create. But when he
reaches the pool, he sees a sign: ‘Danger. Do not drink. Polluted.’ He experiences conflict
within. His desire urges him to drink. But reason tells him that such signs usually indicate the
truth, that polluted water will make him very ill or may kill him, and that if he drinks he will
probably be worse off than he doesn’t. He decides not to drink. In this case, it is the rational
part of the soul that opposes his desire. His reason guides him away from the water.”

The principle then that drives the person to drink is called “appetite”, while the principle that forbids
the person to drink the water because it is polluted is called “reason”.

“Another example could be that of a man who is angry with another person who insulted
him. Out of anger, he may desire to kill his mocker but does not actually kill the culprit
because he knows that if he does he will be imprisoned. With the same thread of reasoning,
Plato argues that it is the spirit in man that makes the person angry with his derider, yet his
anger is curbed by reason, that is, by the rational soul.”

Hence, again, for Plato, desire, spirit, and reason make up the soul. Desire motivates, spirit animates,
and reason guides. And for Plato, if reason can successfully guide desire and spirit, then the human person
will attain a well‐balanced personality.

If we recall, for Plato, the soul exists prior to the body; hence, the soul is an entity distinct from the
body. Now, it is important to note that if we talk about the human person, we talk about the body and soul
and that they are inseparable. But this is not the case for Plato. Plato believes that the body and soul are
separable. In fact, for Plato, as already mentioned, the human person is just a soul using a body. And Plato
believes that the soul is imprisoned in the body and that the soul survives the death of the body because it is
immaterial, immutable, and indestructible. This means that for Plato, when the person dies, the body
decomposes (because it is material, mutable, and destructible) while the soul leaves the body and goes back
to the World of Forms.

It must be noted that in Plato’s doctrine of form, there are two kinds of worlds, namely, the World
of Forms and the World of Matter. And for Plato, everything comes from the World of Forms and everything
that exists (World of Matter) will go back to the World of Forms after it perishes. Again, when the human
person dies, the body decomposes, and the soul will go back to the World of Forms and lives there eternally.
It is here where Aristotle’s notion of the human person as an embodied spirit comes in.

Aristotle on the Human Person as an Embodied Spirit

Indeed, Aristotle disagrees with Plato’s dualism which implies the concept of “otherworldliness”.
Aristotle believes that there is no dichotomy between the person’s body and soul. The body and soul for
Aristotle are in a state of unity. They are inseparable. Hence, unlike Plato, Aristotle believes that we cannot
talk about the soul apart from the body and vice versa. Now, how does Aristotle view the human person as
an embodied spirit?
 First, we need to understand that the term soul is the English translation of the Greek word psyche.
And for Aristotle, the general definition of the soul involves the concept of life. Thus, the soul for Aristotle is
the principle of life. This suggests, therefore, that anything that has life has a soul.

As the principle of life, the soul causes the body to live; indeed, it is the soul that animates the body.
If the soul is the animator of the body, the body acts as the matter to the soul. Hence, Aristotle believes that
the soul is the form to the body, while the body is the matter to the soul. For Aristotle, everything that exists
is composed of matter and form, and matter and form are indeed inseparable. Hence, we cannot talk about
any object if either of these entities is not present. In the context of the human person, Aristotle believes
that body and soul are inseparable. Body and soul, therefore, constitute the human person as a whole.

Because for Aristotle anything that has life has a soul, then it follows that plants and animals (in
addition to humans) have souls. Thus, Aristotle distinguishes three levels of soul, namely, that of plants, that
of animals, and that of humans. The kind of soul that is found in plants, according to Aristotle, is called
vegetative, while those found in animals and humans are called sensitive and rational souls, respectively.

According to Aristotle, plants have souls because they possess the three basic requirements for
something to be called a “living being”, that is, the capacity to grow, reproduce, and feed itself. However,
plants do not share the higher levels of soul; although they grow, reproduce, and feed themselves, plants are
not capable of feeling and thinking.

Sensitive souls also grow, reproduce, and feed themselves; but unlike vegetative souls, sensitive souls
are capable of sensation. As Aristotle writes:

“Plants possess only the nutritive faculty, but other beings possess both it and the sensitive
faculty; and if they possess the sensitive faculty, they must also possess the appetitive; for
appetite consists of desire, anger, and will. All animals possess at least one sense, that of
touch; anything that has a sense is acquainted with pleasure and pain, with what is pleasant
and what is painful; and anything that is acquainted with these has desire, since desire is an
appetite for pleasant.”

Finally, rational souls grow, reproduce, feed themselves, and feel; but unlike the sensitive souls,
rational souls are capable of thinking. According to Aristotle, this highest level of soul is present only in
humans.

Now, since humans possess all the characteristics of animals, that is, the capacity to grow, reproduce,
feed itself, and feel, in addition to being rational, Aristotle concludes that the human person is just an animal
that thinks. As Aristotle’s famous dictum on the human person goes, “Man is a rational animal.”

Reference

STEPH. (2018, December 1). The Human Person as an Embodied Spirit. Retrieved November 2020, from
PHILO‐notes: https://philonotes.com/index.php/2018/12/01/the‐human‐person‐as‐an‐embodied‐
spirit/