Absolute Realism Vs. Hylemorphism - 1309 Words

Absolute Realism vs. Hylemorphism Even though both Plato and his student Aristotle’s works are considered theoretically less valuable in modern times, as two of the most eminent ancient thinkers in the history of philosophy, their works continue to have great historical value. In the realm of metaphysics, Plato and Aristotle are both regarded as realists, and their philosophical ideas hold some similarities, but Aristotle is more considered as â€Å"moderate realist,† compared to Plato as an â€Å"absolute realist.† Generally speaking, Plato’s interpretation of â€Å"what is real,† reflected in his absolute realism, differs from that of Aristotle’s, reflected in his hylemorphism, to a large extent; besides, Aristotle’s theory of matter and form, is the more convincing one because of the soundness of his arguments and in-depth analysis of the nature of being. Given that Plato and Aristotle are both realists, they are explicitly distinguished from the nominalists or the conceptualists. The idea of realism was first set forth by Plato in his doctrine of the ideas and developed by Aristotle in his hylemorphism. In regard to the problem of universals, Plato and Aristotle both affirm the existence of universals. The nominalists claim that there is no such thing called universal, which can be possessed by many concrete particulars at the same time; only the concrete, or group of concrete particulars we perceive through our senses, are â€Å"real.† Unlike these nominalists, Plato and Aristotle