aristotle + modified monism

monism

• Monism is the belief that human beings are a single substance, not two 

• Advocates of this position can still talk of a person’s soul, but by this they do not mean a ‘separate something’ mysteriously added onto their physical body and in some obscure way interacting with it 

• A person’s individuality is formed by interactions and relationships with others 

aristotle’s modified monism

• argued that a thing’s form, or formal cause, is its essence 

• This led Aristotle to reject Plato’s mind-body dualism, arguing that the form of a human (rational thought) cannot be separated from their body 

• suggesting that the soul is the Form of the body, Aristotle implied that the ‘psyche’ gives shape to the matter which is the body, and the psyche is the principle of life or activity of the body 

• Aristotle isn’t technically a monist, he rejects Platonic-Cartesian dualism, criticising the idea that the soul is distinct from the body 

• Aristotle’s idea of the soul is nearer to modern science, especially Dawkins’ ideas. This is because the psyche (or form in potentiality) is comparable to the principle of organization of DNA. 

3 aristotelian substances

• Hule -> matter (potentiality) 

• Morphe -> form or shape (actuality) 

• The compound of matter and form 

• Only compounds that are alive have souls -> therefore, souls are what make them living things 

psyche/ soul

• Aristotle viewed the ‘psyche’ (principle of life/ non-religious soul) as united with the living body, and therefore unable to exist without a host. 

• The soul is the form of a natural body which has life in actuality 

• Uses the example of an axe: 

• If the axe was a living thing, the body would be made from wood and metal (potentiality/ matter), whilst the form would be what makes it an axe (for example why it is suitable for chopping) 

• The form is the actuality of the axe -> the lump of metal and wood only becomes an axe when it realises some particular axe- shape 

• In summary: 

• The soul gives shape to the matter which is the body 

• The soul is the principle of life or activity of the body 

different tupes of soul

• or aristotle, a living thing’s soul is the capacity to engage in activities such as nourishment, growth, decay, movement and rest, perception and intellect 

• Not all things have a soul with the same faculties: 

• Hierarchy of faculties of soul: 

• Growth, nutrition, reproduction 

• Locomotion, perception 

• Intellect, thought 

• Degrees of the soul: 

• Nutritive soul (plants) 

• Sensitive soul (all animals) 

• Rational soul (all humans) 

dualist or monist?

• Yes. 

• Not platonic (dualistic) because the soul is not separable from the body, they are intrinsic to one another 

• Not cartesian (dualistic) because there is no inner/outer contrast + as little to do with personal identity 

• BUT also not materialistic -> maintains that there are two distinct substances. 

• The question, therefore is arbitrary. 

WEAKNESS: bacon 

• Argued that formal causation is a metaphysical matter that was beyond empirical study 

• e.g. ‘whiteness’ of snow ->  science could investigate how snow results from air and water, but this only tells us about its efficient cause, not the form of ‘whiteness’, which is beyond scientific investigation.  

• So Bacon thought that form existed, but Aristotle was wrong to think science could study it it. 

• l. The idea that colour is a ‘formal cause’ of an object is now much better understood to be a matter of the activity of particles like atoms and photons, which can be fully explained through efficient and material causation. So what Aristotle thought of as ‘form’ actually reduces to material and efficient causation. 

• For Aristotle, the form of a human is a rational soul, but most neuroscientists would claim that rationality reduces to material brain structure and its physical processes. 

•  So again, what Aristotle thought of as ‘form’, actually reduces to material structure. There appears to be no room left in modern science for formal or final causation. 

COUNTER to bacon

• Science cannot currently explain how consciousness or reason reduces to material brain processes, however. 

• The brain is so complicated and while some of it is understood a bit, processes like reason and consciousness have not even begun to be understood. 

•  So modern science cannot yet justifiably dismiss Aristotelian soul & form as the explanation of reason. 

WEAKNESS: contradicts JC resurrection from the tomb

• Aristotle famously denies personal immortality for most of the soul’s faculties, with a vague exception for the “active intellect” (nous poietikos), which is “eternal and separable” (De Anima, III.5). 

• Leaves ambiguity regarding the afterlife. While Plato’s theory assures personal immortality, Aristotle’s conception denies the persistence of personal identity after death. 

• Roger Scruton suggests Aristotle’s refusal to embrace personal immortality weakens the existential appeal of his theory, especially in religious or moral contexts. 

• Becomes impossible to explain the cases which suggest existence of LAD 

COUNTER to JC

• Sarah Broadie contends that Aristotle’s strength lies it its realism  

• Broadie argues that Aristotle's refusal to posit a soul as an immaterial, detachable substance makes his account deeply connected to biological and psychological realities. Unlike Plato, who sees the soul as a separate and eternal entity temporarily imprisoned in the body, Aristotle views the soul as that which gives life to the body—a view aligning more closely with modern scientific and biological understandings. 

• Broadie commends Aristotle for steering clear of metaphysical speculation about life after death. She suggests that this lends credibility to his views, particularly in an age increasingly sceptical of unverifiable metaphysical claims.