On Aristotle’s “Hylomorphism” he explains how this theory, or idea, teaches how every physical thing in the universe is made up of two key composites, matter and form. In other words, everything has matter and form. Which matter is potency and form is the actuality. So for example, form without matter would be the Prime Mover. With that being said then that means the Prime Mover is pure actuality. Since humans are made up of matter then that means we are in potency. Potency shows that matter is always changing and we can observe this with everything that is made up of matter. There isn’t anything you can find anywhere in this planet, galaxy, or even the universe that is made up of matter that doesn’t have potency.
In this theory, Aristotle says that the form is the essence. In humans we find that DNA is just a part of the essence because that is what gives us form. Aristotle argues that in order for there to be change, or potency, there has to be two principles involved. One of the principles would be the one that changes and the other one is the one that …show more content…
Aristotle argues and rejects this view and his argument would be that if particles making up one entity were replaced with particles making up another entity then that would be the destruction of it rather than the change of it. While he disagreed with that view, he agreed more with the Empedocles doctrine which consists of four elements or “roots”, these would be water, earth, air and fire. Aristotle agrees with this since the elements are both physical and spiritual which leads him to explain his relationship between body and soul. Although these four elements might make up the physical part of our body, he says matter and form exists and acts only within these elements or composites since they are not an individual body or physical
In this theory, Aristotle says that the form is the essence. In humans we find that DNA is just a part of the essence because that is what gives us form. Aristotle argues that in order for there to be change, or potency, there has to be two principles involved. One of the principles would be the one that changes and the other one is the one that …show more content…
Aristotle argues and rejects this view and his argument would be that if particles making up one entity were replaced with particles making up another entity then that would be the destruction of it rather than the change of it. While he disagreed with that view, he agreed more with the Empedocles doctrine which consists of four elements or “roots”, these would be water, earth, air and fire. Aristotle agrees with this since the elements are both physical and spiritual which leads him to explain his relationship between body and soul. Although these four elements might make up the physical part of our body, he says matter and form exists and acts only within these elements or composites since they are not an individual body or physical