The Nature of Form and Matter and Descartes' Methods on "Meditations on First Philosophy"

Student Name
Course
Professor Name
Date
Chapter 5 Discussion
Nature of Form and Matter
Plato and Aristotle differ significantly on the nature of form and matter. For Plato, forms can be described as abstract objects that exist completely outside space and tome. One usage of the theory of forms appears in his book 'The Republic'. Plato states that "the highest theoretical meaning is a precondition of learning because that highest sense is only a distillation of what is implied in the causal use of the word" (Plato 446). Therefore, forms are only knowable through the mind of an individual as opposed to sense experience.
On the contrary, Aristotle rejects Plato's theory but agrees with the notion of forms itself. In other words, Aristotle believes that forms do not exist independently of things since every form is the form of something else. In his book 'Physics,' Aristotle is concerned with nature, which comprises things that change. Therefore, the form can be defined as something acquired during the process of change. Aristotle states that "the form indeed is 'nature' rather the matter; for a thing is more properly said to be what it is when it has attained to the fulfillment…" (Aristotle 23) Aristotle reconciles platonic dualism in his view of the unification of essence within material reality by expressing that when a formation is complete, it is called by the name of the material. In essence, if form and matter are the results of change where one form is the form of something else, the material of these forms is what outlines their relationship. In this case, Aristotle may believe in the abstractness of objects, but no...