Conclusion

This book pursues two primary objectives. First, I demonstrate—for both philosophers and Aristotelian scholars—that conceiving of forms as essentially matter-involving makes it difficult to avoid the familiar concern that hylomorphism collapses into a refined materialism. Second, I offer a purist interpretation of neo-Aristotelian hylomorphism, mainly based on Aristotle’s own theory, according to which the form is conceptualized as the holistic actualization of natural living beings. This purist approach, however, has its limitations, notably regarding the proper understanding of concrete affections and emotions that involve bodily interactions and the question of whether the staunch distinction between technē and physis can be consistently maintained. Consequently, a purist hylomorphism must remain open to the results of empirical research and further philosophical debate.