Preview

Aristotle's Hylomorphism: What Makes Us Real?

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1466 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Aristotle's Hylomorphism: What Makes Us Real?
The question of what is real and what makes us real has been a philosophical question with many different answers. Aristotle’s theory of Hylomorphism explains the reality of the universe, objects, and people in a materialistic way. Hylomorphism is the depiction that every physical thing is composed of two things: Matter and Form. Matter is the potency, or the potential of the physical object or being and the Form is its essence. Aristotle describes substance or Form as the truest and primary sense of the word. It is not predicable or present of a subject. In Aristotle’s work Organon I, he describes substance in the terms of the individual ‘man’ which is also included in the species ‘man’ but of the genus ‘animal’. So that the species ‘man’ is primary and the genus ‘animal’ is the secondary substance (Organon, 2012). Aristotle explains that the color of ‘man’s’ body which may be white could only exist in the individual’s body. However, if the individual did not exist then the color white could not be present in the body. Substance and the Primary Sense of Being in Aristotle, a scholarly journal by Angus Brook, includes the theory of Hylomorphism and gives insight to the idea that substance is …show more content…
The essence is the substantial realty, as Aristotle writes, and that the Form is the source of mobility. This is in reference to his Motion Theory in which the Earth changed and evolved by the ‘Prime Mover’ which is Form without Matter. Though, Matter must have Form in order to exist. He goes on to state that the essence is the cause of anything but some things may be produced from one another such as the four elements: Earth, air, fire, and water. They may be created by combination or separation and this makes a difference in the “posteriority”. This means that combining the elements, or destroying these elements can create a new

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    Aristotle had viewed the self/psyche as inseparable from the body, as the form and the…

    • 335 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Aristotle’s Forms were found within this world. An object, x, could be defined as a being of a type X, because objects of the type X are the only thing in the universe which have four particular causes.…

    • 1179 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Hup 102 Short Paper #2

    • 940 Words
    • 4 Pages

    In this paper I will be discussing the view on the forms, of both Plato and Aristotle. For starts, Plato’s views on the Forms are basically describing the true meaning about material objects in the world. Like for example viewing a desk in a class room, should be looked at as more than just what we see, but thousands of atoms put together to make it look like a desk or something like that. His idea of an object was defined by what we might think something is it’s basically a form of something else. He said that we could be sitting on a chair but its quality is of an object which form is that of a chair. This idea of the form by Plato exists in a heavenly realm that could be understood by the mind. Plato’s views on the forms were aspects of everyday life, anything from a table to a bench As well as ideas and emotions. The essence of Plato's theory of Ideas Forms lay in the conscious recognition of the fact that there is a class of entities, in which the best name is probably universal, that are entirely different from sensible things, which is interesting. Plato's theory of Forms assumed that Forms are universal and exist as substances. On the other hand, Aristotle firmly disagrees with the idea of Forms being universal.…

    • 940 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Substance dualism is a never ending argument in the Philosophy world as it’s been going on for decades. It is the view that the universe contains two important types of entity which is mental and material. The structure of this paper is that four main argument leads to one conclusion. Firstly, I’ll argue about Descartes’s ‘separability argument’ which stands as the definition of Substance Dualism. Secondly, I’ll argue that mental and physical have different and perhaps irreconcilable properties. An argument is not complete without a counter argument which in this case the “pairing” problem that exists in Descartes theory is highlighted and where is the interaction of material and immaterial takes place in our body is argued. Finally, the reply for the counter argument comes in a form of defense and positive argument in favors substance dualism and the weakness with the objection.…

    • 1927 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    However philosophers such as Aristotle (a pupil of Plato’s) argue that the body and soul are dependant of each other and that one cannot survive without the other. Aristotle believed the soul is the form, like the characteristics of a sculpture. He talks about how the soul is merely description of the essence or properties of the body. It is our human personality and abilities. Aristotle believed that the soul was inseparable to the body and that it cannot be divided. The soul is said to be essential to us, we are body and soul. Aristotle used the example of…

    • 698 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Plato uses the Forms to try to show that the soul is eternal. He says that the soul and the body are different things, and the body is just a container for the soul. He even goes further by saying that the soul is trying to get back to its pure state. By these statements Plato is saying that the body is physical, which means that it is only temporary, it changes, and imperfect. On the other hand, the soul is non-physical and therefore is eternal, unchanging, perfect and universal. However, this is insufficient information to base his argument that all souls are the same on. All souls are different because every person is different. If the soul and makes a person and every person is different that means that every soul has its own personality or characteristics. This is shown everyday because know two people are exactly alike, not even twins. Aristotle talks about a similar reason for not following the Forms. Aristotle states that if the Forms are supposed to be perfect and unchanging, how is it possible for one thing to be better than the other. For example, it is like saying that beauty is an eternal Form that doesn’t change. However, in fact it does change because has the ability to be more beautiful than…

    • 844 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Aristotle vs Platonist

    • 605 Words
    • 3 Pages

    As mentioned before, Aristotle has different theories than Plato. He suggests that the forms can be discovered through a examination of the world being natural. Now, Plato believes that forms are farther than what humans can understand, it is way beyond.…

    • 605 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Take Home Test Sample

    • 290 Words
    • 2 Pages

    4. Aquinas’ concept of abstraction is a development of Aristotle’s, that external objects are substances and substances are composite realities. He agreed that in reality, matter and form are never separated. One never finds form with matter and vise versa, in the human mind however the two can be separated. Humans come to know particular substances and the mind then abstracts from.…

    • 290 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Plato’s thoughts tended to believe in two levels of reality. Plato held that metaphysics is dualistic: he proposed that there are two different kinds of things - physical and mental. There is what appears real and what is real. Plato believed that everything real takes on a form but doesn't embody that form. on the other hand, Aristotle’s beliefs lead to him seeing only one level of reality. He felt there was only one imminent world and that forms existed within particular things. Aristotle held that form had no separate existence and existed in matter. in nature, we never find matter without form or form without matter. substance is always a composition of form and matter.…

    • 962 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Aristotle's Final Cause

    • 1569 Words
    • 7 Pages

    In this essay I will begin by extracting the arguments from the extract, outlining Aristotle’s explanation of the four ‘causes’ and arguing why Aristotle has reasons for believing this. In order to achieve a considered and…

    • 1569 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Aristotle

    • 901 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The statement argues that Aristotle’s theory of the four causes is impossible to apply to everyday life and cannot be applied to the real world. Aristotle believed there are four causes that determine what things are and their purpose and claims this is how we differentiate one thing from another. These four causes are known as the material cause, the efficient cause, the formal cause and most importantly for Aristotle, the final cause, and these together describe how ‘things’ transform from the state of actuality to potentiality. To some extent the theory of the four causes could be accurate and plausible, however, some of the ideas behind it is flawed and unrealistic. In this essay I will cover the three main faults of Aristotle’s theory. Namely, its lack of clarity, that the theory is based on assumptions and that there is no evidence to support the existence of the prime mover.…

    • 901 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Cited: Aristotle. Aristotle: On the Soul, Parva Naturalla, On Breath. Ed. W. S. Hett. Harvard.: n.p., 1964. Print.…

    • 918 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Aristotle vs Plato

    • 905 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Aristotle’s and Plato’s views on forms were very different. Plato saw “forms” as descriptions and something like adjectives and it could be applied to more than one thing. If something was “delicious,” there was something else that was also “delicious” but they were not the same thing. These descriptions are real but are not physical matter. Aristotle, however, saw reality as having four causes: matter (what it is made up of), essence (what it is), producer…

    • 905 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    reality: “the body carries in it a representation of all the most glorious and perfect…

    • 3314 Words
    • 14 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Thales of Miletus

    • 1024 Words
    • 5 Pages

    To understand (2) we need to examine its source. Archê is Aristotle’s word: it means beginning or source or principle (cf. “archaic,” “archaeology,” “architect”). Aristotle is here talking about what he called the material archê, which can be either the stuff from which something originated or the stuff of which it is composed. Thus, Thales thought (Aristotle tells us) that everything either originated in water (cosmogony) or is actually (now!) made of water (constituent analysis).…

    • 1024 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays