Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Humans either have several souls, or one substantially composite soul whose parts are 'incomplete' substances that combine to form one 'perfected' soul.
Aggregate Confidence:
0%
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Aquinas argued that a single substantial form (anima intellectiva) suffices to account for all vital operations in a human being.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Positing multiple souls or composite soul-parts violates Ockham's razor by multiplying entities beyond explanatory necessity.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If the intellective soul can perform vegetative and sensitive functions, no additional soul-forms are required to explain human unity.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Aristotle's De Anima establishes that the soul is the form of the body, making it ontologically simple and indivisible as a unitary actuality.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
An 'incomplete substance' that combines with others to form a perfected substance is not a substance at all, but a part—contradicting hylomorphic categories.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
A human being has at least one substantial form rooted in matter and another substantial form that comes from an external source.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.