Aristotle's Hylomorphism On The Relation Of Soul-Body

First of all, I try to put the some problems of Aristotle’s account of hylomorphism on the relation of soul-body. Then as a solution for the problem of hylomorphism, I examine functionalism; however, when we apply functionalism in living things, then we have to face with inconsistencies of Aristotle on substantial changes and the problem homonoymy. In this part, I compare functionalist approach with Burnyeat argumentation. However, against the problem and contradictions which are result of the functionalism, I will propose emergentism of mental causation which is proposed by Victor Caston. I support the emergentism, because it helps us to solve the problem of substantial change and the homonoymy problem. What is the relation of the soul to
The parts and material that constitute being is called as matter, so matter is body, whereas the power which organizes and combines all these parts and materials is called as form, so form is soul. There is a contradiction in Aristotle’s hylomorphism account. For example, there is a bronze, and this bronze is shaped to become the statue of Hermes, so a statue of Hermes starts to exist. Then, the same bronze is melted and sculpture reshapes this bronze to make the statue of Zeus. When Hermes loses its shape, Zeus acquires its own shape. Its shows that bronze itself has no any essential shape, so it is not essentially Hermes or Zeus. It shows that matter is contingently enformed by the form. However, it becomes problematic when we apply hylomorphic account into the soul and body relation. I can say that human body is enformed by the soul. Unlike bronze, human body cannot lose is form or its soul and remains in existence unless body die. According to this, a body which lost its soul means a death body. It becomes a body of a statue without any soul. It looks like a body, but this body is not a body which is potentially alive. However, the difference between the bronze and body, when body changes because of growing, it