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
Aristotle and the Soul In order to understand Aristotle's soul I want to organize this essay in following way: What meaning Aristotle entailed in the word soul? Is soul capable to motion? How soul and body are related? What parts of soul are distinguished by Aristotle? What soul is capable of and what is entelecheia?
What meaning Aristotle entailed in the word soul? In his works Aristotle first of all tries to define to what kind of existing soul belongs to and what is this? He tries to define whether or not soul can be defined as Something. Does it belongs to something already known or is this some kind of entelecheia (Thing which has its own meaning. With this word Aristotle defines purposefulness, driving force) It is necessary to understand whether soul consists of some parts or not, are all existed souls homogeneous or not. If not then define how do they differ and is it possible to explore all of them at once or just step by step?
These questions are essential for those who are going to explore human soul because each tiny detail in this exploration is valuable. Aristotle in his exploration of the meaning that is entailed in the word soul doesnt aspire to the familiar dichotomies or some popular theories of his time. While making a meticulous exploration of the subject he explains his every step and comments his thoughts. As more you read his works the more you understand that the Pythagorean and Ionian concepts of souls being independent essences that can float around in the air at will (winner float higher! ) or even change bodies according to their mood but they are just beyond comparison. All questions that he puts (and Ive mentioned just few of them) are not always answered completely and many of them such as the preconditions of the existence of a soul he limits to categories of sensory perception (touch). But we must consider that Aristotle ascertains the building blocks or definitive terms of the soul and they direct future explorations in this field.
Commonly the investigations of the task start from the question: What it is? Contrary to this common believe, Aristotle starts his exploration on knowing what the soul is gaining a definite feel for what it isnt. Past in his days it was considered that soul was tightly connected to defining factors: movement and sensation. These factors were used as qualifying agents of the soul. Things, which lacked movement or sensation considered soulless. If the soul is, for instance, the efficient cause of motion (De Anima i 1, 403 a 24 -b 9; ii 4, 415 b 8, Parties Animalium i 1, 641 a 17 -b 10), then it seems responsible for the motion of an individual body in a specific place and time.
Aristotle understands as moving onset but states that the soul itself isnt able to move. He distinguished four kinds of movement (change): occurrence and destruction; qualitative changes, i. e. change of properties; quantitative changes, i. e. increase and reduction (growth, diminution); moving, changing of a place.
Actually, the ability to move is more likely just measurement consisting in transition of one thing in another. For soul there is no movement as anything existing does not resist to it. As there are four kinds of movements the soul should have one of these movements, few of them, or all at once. If the soul moves is not infusing than it should it be inherent from nature. Aristotle could not explain precisely how soul moves under the action of extraneous force. We speak, that the soul grieves, feels fear, that it can be angry, can think.
All this seems to be movements. And consequently it is possible to state that soul moves but the things are not that easy. In fact if ability to grieve, to think, to be happy are movements. But it doesnt confirm that soul moves, more likely to say that soul causes these movements. Aristotle states clearly that the soul cannot move. And if it does not move at all clearly, that it cannot move itself.
Lets observe the following argument: the soul is a form; the soul is something particular; therefore, there are particular forms, namely souls. Aristotle states It is necessary, then, that the soul must be a substance as the form of a natural body having life in potentiality (De Anima ii 1, 412 a 19 - 21). So the next essential question is how soul is related to body? Aristotle states that soul is a substance he also states. the soul does not exist without a body and yet is not itself a kind of body. For it is not a body, but something which belongs to a body, and for this reason exists in a body, and in a body of such-and-such a kind (414 a 20 ff).
The question whether the soul can exist independently of the body was a hot one for the ancient Greeks and still is for many people today. Those who believes in personal immortality believe in the independent existence of the soul (Plato was sure that soul is able to exist separately) So, Aristotle states that as well as the soul is not a material object, it is not separable from the body. According to his work soul is not a separately existing substance. He explains how it is related to the body soul is the form of the body (not independent substance inside body). It has no capacity because itself is a capacity.
That is why it cannot exist separately from the body. Soul has nothing to do with personal identity and individuality. As well as there are different human beings there are different souls but the form is one for all. As well as bodies are different the soul differs too. We are different compounds of form and matter that is why we differ from each other.
Our bodies have same set of capacities, are animated by the same kind of soul Aristotle defines soul as first entelecheia of organic body in other words as vital force of body. According to this he creates a hierarchy of soul functions or activities (413 a 23): growth, nutrition, (reproduction); locomotion, perception; intellect (thought). The degrees of the soul are the following: nutritive soul (plants), sensitive soul (all animals), rational soul (human beings). Whether or not each of those degrees are part of soul and if they are, are they separable only mentally or spatially, it is easy to answer one of these questions, others cause difficulties. As well as some plants continue to exist after dividing, that parts also continue to live separately from each.
Namely: each part possesses sensation and ability to move in space; if there is a sensation there is also an aspiration. All living things in order on Earth things grow, nourish themselves, and reproduce. Animals have more abilities they also move and perceive. Humans are the next degree because they do all of the above and reason, as well. Soul as well as other things has higher and lower degrees. It can be nutritive, sensitive and rational.
Other subdivisions are unknown. Entelecheia is the thing, which owns its own aim. Aristotle uses this word for describing purposefulness, driving force. Each thing has its own inner reason and it is a driving force, which moves things from lower degrees to higher. It is tool, the one that turns possibility in reality. Aristotle states that each thing the possibility to change, and the entelecheia is that force hidden in the object.
In other words, we can consider entelecheia as a program of change. Each object, accordingly, is programmed for some specific changes. Aristotle exploration of the soul is a remarkable step in philosophical development. His theories lead us to reinvestigation of the preconceived notions and beliefs in regard to what the soul is, what it is capable of, what it seems to be separate from, and what it is.
It is not necessary for soul to be immortal (as he attributes this to the mind) and in general it may seems inconclusive. But despite this, Aristotle's deductions and insights in De Anima seem advanced beyond their years and they are worth of reading. Bibliography: Aristotle (ca. 350 BC), De Anima (On the soul). Translated by J. A.
Smith. web
Free research essays on topics related to: moves, aristotle, driving force, aristotle states, human beings
Research essay sample on Driving Force Aristotle States
