NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
In De Anima, Aristotle makes extensive use of technical terminology introduced and explained elsewhere in his writings. He claims, for example, using vocabulary derived from his physical and metaphysical theories, that the soul is a "first actuality of a natural organic body" (De Anima ii 1, 412 b 5 - 6), that it is a "substance as form of a natural body which has life in potentiality" (De Anima ii 1, 412 a 20 - 1) and, similarly, that it "is a first actuality of a natural body which has life in potentiality" (De Anima ii 1, 412 a 27 - 8), all claims which apply to plants, animals In characterizing the soul and body in these ways, Aristotle applies concepts drawn from his broader hylomorphism, a conceptual framework which underlies virtually all of his mature theorizing. It is accordingly necessary to begin with a brief overview of that framework. Thereafter it will be possible to recount Aristotle's general approach to soul-body relations, and then, finally, to consider his analyses of the individual faculties of 'Hylomorphism' is simply a compound word composed of the Greek terms for matter (hul) and form or shape (morph); thus one could equally describe Aristotle's view of soul and body as an instance of his "matter-forms." That is, when he introduces the soul as the form of the body, which in turn is said to be the matter of the soul, Aristotle treats soul-body relations as a special case of a more general relationship which obtains between the components of all generated compounds, natural or artifactual.
The notions of form and matter are themselves, however, developed within the context of a general theory of causation and explanation which appears in one guise or another in all of Aristotle's mature works. According to this theory, when we wish to explain what there is to know, for example, about a bronze statue, a complete account necessarily alludes to at least the following four factors: the statue's matter, its form or structure, the agent responsible for that matter's manifesting its form or structure, and the purpose for which the matter was made to realize that form or structure. These four factors he terms the four causes (altai): The material cause: that from which something is generated and out of which it is made, e. g. the bronze of a The formal cause: the structure which the matter realizes and in terms of which the matter comes to be something determinate, e.
g. the Hermes shape in virtue of which this quantity of bronze is said to be a statue of Hermes. The efficient cause: the agent responsible for a quantity of matter's coming to be informed, e. g. the sculptor who shaped the quantity of bronze into its current Hermes shape. The final cause: the purpose or goal of the compound of form and matter, e.
g. the statue was created for the For a broad range of cases, Aristotle implicitly makes twin claims about these four causes: (i) a complete explanation requires reference to all four; and (ii) once such reference is made, no further explanation is required. Thus, when appropriate, appeal to the four causes is both necessary and sufficient for complete and adequate explanation. Although not all things which admit of explanation have all four causes, e. g.
geometrical figures are not efficiently caused, even a brief overview of his psychological writings reveals that Aristotle regards all four causes as in play in the explanation of living beings. A monkey, for example, has matter, its body; form, its soul; an efficient cause, its parent; and a final cause, its function. Moreover, he holds that the form is the actuality of the body which is its matter: an indeterminate lump of bronze becomes a statue only when it realizes some particular statue-shape. So, Aristotle suggests, that matter is potentially some F until it acquires an actualizing form, when it becomes actually F. Given his overarching explanatory schema, it is hardly surprising that Aristotle should advance a holomorphic account of soul and body; this is, for him, standard explanatory procedure. Still, it is noteworthy that this four-causal framework of explanation is developed initially in response to some puzzles about change and generation.
Aristotle argues with some justification that all change and generation require the existence of something complex: when a statue comes to be from a lump of bronze, there is some continuing subject, the bronze, and something it comes to acquire, its new form. Thus the statue is, and must be, a certain kind of compound, one of form and matter. Without this type of complexity, generation would be impossible; since generation in fact occurs, form and matter must be genuine features of generated compounds. Similarly, but less obviously, qualitative change requires much the same apparatus: when a statue is painted, there is some continuing subject, the statue, and a new feature acquired, its new color. Here too there is complexity, and complexity which is readily articulated in terms of form and matter, but now of form which is evidently inessential to the continued existence of the entity whose form it is. The statue continues to exist, but receives a form which is accidental to it; it might lose that form without going out of existence.
By contrast, should the statue lose its essential form, as would happen for example if the bronze which constitutes it were melted, divided, and recast as twelve dozen letter openers, it would cease to exist altogether. For the purposes of understanding Aristotle's psychology, the origin of Aristotle's hylomorphism is significant for two reasons. First, from its inception, Aristotle's hylomorphism exploits two distinct but related notions of form, one of which is essential to the compound whose form it is, and the other of which is accidental to its subject. In advancing his view of the soul and its capacities, Aristotle employs both of these notions: the soul is an essential form, whereas perception involves the acquisition of accidental forms.
Second, because Aristotle's hylomorphism was initially developed to handle puzzles of change and generation, its deployment in philosophical psychology is sometimes strained, insofar as Aristotle is not immediately willing to treat every instance of perception and thought as a straightforward instance of chan...
Free research essays on topics related to: final cause, four factors, soul and body, efficient cause, e g
Research essay sample on Soul And Body Efficient Cause
