Aristotle Writing

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

Date
1A. Discuss the Theory of Hylomorphism of Aristotle [NOTE: State first what this theory is

claiming about the essence of natural bodies, and then discuss all the key concepts that are

implied in the theory of hylomorphism (such as natural body, prime matter, substantial form,

soul, immanent and transient motions, 3 kinds of soul, accidental form, etc.)] (20 points)

The theory of Hylomorphism is one of the key contributions of Aristotle to the field of

metaphysics. It posits that natural bodies are comprised of two distinct entities, namely matter

and form. Matter, the basic material substance that constitutes a natural body, is indeterminate

and formless, and can only exist in combination with form, which imparts organization and

functionality to the body. Crucially, the combination of matter and form is essential to the

identity and essence of a natural body. The form of a natural body determines its characteristic

properties, behavior, and functional capacities, while the matter serves as the ultimate substrate

for the body's existence.

Aristotle further developed the theory of Hylomorphism by introducing the concept of

prime matter, which is the ultimate potentiality of all natural bodies. Prime matter has no form of

its own and is completely indeterminate, but can take on any form to produce a natural body.

Thus, all natural bodies are composed of prime matter and substantial form, which determines

their essential properties and functions. In addition to matter and form, Aristotle also introduced

the concept of soul as the principle of life and activity in natural bodies. According to Aristotle,

there are three types of soul: vegetative soul, responsible for growth and nutrition; sensitive soul,

responsible for sensation and perception; and rational soul, responsible for reasoning and

thought. The soul is not a separate entity but is intimately connected to the natural body and its

functions.
 Aristotle also distinguished between immanent and transient motions. Immanent motions

are internal motions that arise from the nature of a natural body, such as growth, digestion, and

reproduction, while transient motions are external motions that act upon a natural body, such as

motion through space. The distinction between these types of motion is crucial for understanding

the nature of natural bodies and their behavior.

Finally, Aristotle introduced the concept of accidental form, which is a form that is not

essential to the identity of a natural body. Accidental forms can change without altering the

essence of the natural body. For example, the color of a tree's leaves can change without altering

its essential properties.

1B. Based on his theory of hylomorphism, what does it mean to be human for Aristotle? (5

points)

For Aristotle, being human means having a rational soul that is distinct from the

vegetative and sensitive souls. This rational soul allows humans to engage in activities such as

reasoning, thought, and contemplation, which are unique to humans and not found in other

natural bodies. Furthermore, Aristotle believed that human beings are social animals, and that

social life is essential to human flourishing. Humans are capable of forming communities and

engaging in political life, which allows them to pursue the common good and achieve happiness.

Aristotle also emphasized the importance of virtue in human life, which involves developing

good habits and acting in accordance with reason. Virtue is crucial for achieving eudaimonia, or

a state of flourishing and happiness, which is the ultimate goal of human life according to

Aristotle.
2. NOTE: Before you do this number, be sure that you have carefully studied E-LECTURE 6.3

Compare and contrast Aristotle and Plato regarding their view of human nature. In the

comparison, point out at least two similarities and explain how exactly they are similar on those

points. In the contrast, point out at least three differences and explain how exactly they are

different on those points. In discussing their claims about human nature focus here ONLY on

what they say about the human soul and the human body, and the purpose of the existence of

human beings in this world). DO NOT INCLUDE here what they say about reality in general

and about knowledge. (15 points)

Aristotle and Plato, two of the most prominent philosophers in Western thought, share a

number of similarities in their ideas about human nature. One key similarity is their agreement

that the soul is the fundamental element in defining human essence. According to Plato, the soul

is the form in the other world that determines our essence as human beings, while Aristotle sees

the rational soul as the determining factor. Both also take a dualist perspective, with Aristotle

believing humans are a substantial union of body and rational soul, while Plato sees humans as

consisting of both body and soul, with the latter being the true essence.

Another similarity is their belief that human beings have a purpose in this world, with

Plato holding that we are here to make up for the soul's error in the other world, and Aristotle

asserting that we are here to be happy and achieve excellence through the acquisition of

intellectual and moral virtues. They also both recognize the unique rationality of humans, as well

as our social nature. Finally, they both define death as the separation of the soul from the body,

with the soul being immortal and surviving death.

However, there are notable differences between their conceptions of human nature. Plato

sees the soul alone as the true human essence, while for Aristotle, the substantial union of body
and rational soul is what constitutes the really real human being. This leads to a different view of

the human body, with Plato regarding it more negatively as a punishment and distraction, while

Aristotle sees both body and soul as equally important.

One of the most significant differences is in their conception of the "really real" human

being. Plato believes that the soul alone is the really real human being because it is the form in

the other world that gives us our essence as human beings. In contrast, Aristotle maintains that

neither the soul alone nor the body alone is human; instead, the really real human being is the

substantial union of body and rational soul.

This difference in their views of the really real human being leads to other differences in

how they view the human body. For Plato, the human body is viewed more negatively because it

is seen as a punishment for the error the soul committed in the other world, and it can distract the

soul from living a good life. In contrast, Aristotle has a more positive view of the human body

because he views it as equally important as the soul in defining human nature.

Another difference between Plato and Aristotle's views on human nature is the pre-

existence of the soul. Plato holds that the soul pre-exists the body, while Aristotle maintains that

our soul does not pre-exist our body. Additionally, Plato believes in the possibility of the soul

being re-born in this world if we have not lived a good enough life, while Aristotle completely

rejects this concept of reincarnation or rebirth of the soul. Finally, Plato believes that there is

only one soul - the human soul - while Aristotle identifies three kinds of soul: the vegetative

soul, the sentient soul, and the rational soul. This difference reflects their divergent views on the

different capacities of the soul and the hierarchical structure of the soul.
3. NOTE: Before you do this number, be sure that you have carefully studied E-LECTURE 6.3

Compare and contrast Aristotle and Plato regarding their theory of reality in general. In the

comparison, point out at least two similarities and explain how exactly they are similar in those 2

points. In the contrast point out at least three differences and explain exactly how they are

different on those points. NOTE: In discussing their claims about reality in general DO NOT

INCLUDE HERE what they say about knowledge and human nature. (20 points)

To begin with, both philosophers share the belief that the form of a thing determines its

essence. Plato posits that the forms in the other world give essence to the things in this world,

while Aristotle contends that the substantial form, combined with prime matter, determines the

essence of natural bodies in this world. Despite their differing explanations, they concur that

form is crucial in determining essence.

Moreover, both philosophers acknowledge the reality of this world. Plato, however,

contends that there is another world where the forms exist, and this world is merely a copy of the

other world. On the other hand, Aristotle maintains that this world is the only world that exists.

Nonetheless, both agree that this world is real, which sets them apart from other philosophical

schools that view this world as an illusion or a mere appearance. Thus, they share a common

understanding that reality is grounded in a fundamental structure that shapes the essence of

things and that this structure is accessible to human comprehension.

Despite these similarities, there are significant differences between Aristotle and Plato's

theories of reality. One notable difference is that Plato posits the existence of two worlds, the

other world and this world, while Aristotle maintains that only one world exists. This distinction

reflects their contrasting views of reality, with Plato placing the other world as the real world,

whereas Aristotle posits that this world is the true reality.

 Additionally, Plato holds that the other world is the only genuinely real world, and this

world is merely a copy of it, while Aristotle argues that this world is the only truly real world,

and there is no other world. This divergence in views reflects their distinct perspectives on the

nature of reality, with Plato positing that the world of forms is the ultimate reality, while

Aristotle contends that the natural world is the ultimate reality.

Lastly, Plato views the things in this world as copies of the forms in the other world, with

the truly real being the form in the other world. In contrast, Aristotle believes that the truly real is

each individual thing that exists in this world. This distinction highlights Plato's more abstract

view of reality, whereas Aristotle has a more concrete perspective.

4A. Discuss Aristotle’s theory of Ideogenesis. NOTE: Include in your discussion here ALL the

key concepts (the object being sensed, external senses, sensible qualities, central sense, percept,

imagination, memory, instinct, phantasm, agent intellect, abstraction, passive intellect, idea) (20

points)

Aristotle's theory of Ideogenesis, also known as his theory of knowledge, is a complex

and intricate system that attempts to explain how humans acquire knowledge of the world around

them. At the core of this theory is the concept of perception, which is the process of acquiring

knowledge through the senses. According to Aristotle, the process of perception involves several

key concepts, including the object being sensed, the external senses, sensible qualities, the

central sense, percept, imagination, memory, instinct, phantasm, agent intellect, abstraction,

passive intellect, and idea.

The object being sensed is the external object that exists in the world and that we

perceive through our senses. This object is made up of sensible qualities, which are the
properties or characteristics of the object that are perceptible to our senses. For example, the

color, texture, shape, and smell of an apple are all sensible qualities that we can perceive through

our senses.

The external senses are the five senses of sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell that allow

us to perceive the sensible qualities of the object being sensed. These senses are passive,

meaning they are affected by the external object and receive information from it. The central

sense, also known as the common sense, is the part of the soul that integrates the information

received by the external senses and creates a unified perceptual experience. This allows us to

perceive objects as whole entities rather than as a collection of disparate sensory inputs. The

percept is the initial impression or sensation created by the object being sensed and received by

the external senses. This percept is then processed by the central sense and transformed into an

image or phantasm.

The imagination is the part of the soul that stores and manipulates these phantasms,

allowing us to mentally represent and manipulate objects even when they are not present.

Memory is the ability to recall these phantasms and past experiences. Instinct is a natural

tendency or disposition that is innate to an individual and is not learned through experience. This

instinctual knowledge is based on phantasms and is not subject to error or doubt. The phantasm

is the mental representation of an object created by the imagination. These phantasms can be

manipulated and combined to form more complex concepts and ideas.

The agent intellect is the part of the soul that abstracts universal concepts from these

phantasms. This abstraction allows us to form ideas that are not tied to specific objects or

instances but are applicable to a wide range of objects or instances. The passive intellect is the

part of the soul that receives these abstract ideas and integrates them into our overall knowledge
and understanding of the world. Finally, the idea is the ultimate product of this process,

representing the abstract concept or knowledge that has been acquired through perception and

abstraction.

4B. NOTE: Before you do this number, be sure that you have carefully studied E-LECTURE 6.3

Compare and contrast Plato and Aristotle regarding their theory of knowledge. In the

comparison, point out at least three similarities and explain how exactly they are similar in

those points. In the contrast, point out at least four differences and explain how exactly they

are different in those points. NOTE. DO NOT INCLUDE here what they say about human

nature and about reality in general. (20 points)

To begin with, both Plato and Aristotle believed that real knowledge is attainable. They

were both anti-sceptics in that they affirmed the possibility of acquiring knowledge. Plato

believed that knowledge is not just a matter of opinion, but rather knowledge involves knowing

the true essence of a thing. Aristotle, on the other hand, believed that knowledge involves

knowing the universal truths of the natural world.

Moreover, both philosophers agreed that knowledge consists of knowing the essence of a

thing. For Plato, this involved knowing the Forms, which are the perfect, abstract entities that

exist in the realm of the Forms. In contrast, Aristotle believed that knowledge involved

abstracting the essence of a thing from its phantasm or perceptual representation. Both

philosophers emphasized the importance of understanding the essential nature of a thing to attain

knowledge.

Lastly, both Plato and Aristotle believed that to know the true essence of a thing, one

must depend on the mind rather than the senses. Plato held that the senses are deceptive and
unreliable, and that true knowledge is attained through recollection of knowledge acquired in a

previous existence in the realm of the Forms. Aristotle, on the other hand, believed that

knowledge was acquired through the senses but required the mind to abstract the essence of the

thing from its sensory data.

Plato and Aristotle, two of the most influential philosophers in the Western tradition, had

different approaches to the theory of knowledge. While they shared some similarities, they also

had significant differences. This essay will discuss four of the differences between Plato and

Aristotle regarding their theory of knowledge.

The first difference is the question of innate ideas. Plato believed that we have innate

ideas because of the previous existence of the soul in the other world where it had perfect

knowledge of all the forms in the other world. In contrast, Aristotle rejected the notion of innate

ideas, arguing that the mind at birth is like a tabula rasa, a blank slate without any innate

knowledge. For Aristotle, all knowledge must be acquired through experience.

The second difference is the concept of recollection. For Plato, to know is merely to

remember. He believed that the soul had knowledge of the Forms in a previous existence and

that this knowledge was brought back through recollection. In contrast, Aristotle rejected the

idea of recollection and argued that all ideas must be acquired through experience. He believed

that knowledge comes from the senses and that the mind abstracts the essence of the thing from

its phantasm.

The third difference is the role of the senses in the acquisition of knowledge. Plato

believed that the senses do not give us knowledge. They only provide the occasion or condition

for recollection. For Plato, knowledge begins in the mind and ends in the mind. In contrast,
Aristotle believed that the senses provide the beginning of knowledge. He argued that there is

nothing in the mind that did not come from the senses. However, Aristotle also believed that the

mind plays an active role in the process of acquiring knowledge by abstracting the essence of

things from sensory experience.

The fourth difference is their philosophical approach to knowledge. Plato was a

rationalist, believing that reason and the mind were the keys to unlocking knowledge. He

believed that the Forms were the only objects of true knowledge and that they could only be

grasped by the rational mind. In contrast, Aristotle was neither a rationalist nor an empiricist. He

recognized the importance of sensory experience in the acquisition of knowledge, but he also

believed that the mind played an active role in abstracting the essence of things from sensory

experience.