Archdiocese of Lingayen-Dagupan Catholic Schools

Saint Charles Academy

Malong St., San Carlos City, Pangasinan

Name: Kessilyn C. Garcia

Grade and Section: Grade 9 – Saint Ignatius

The Nature of the Human Person as an Embodied Spirit

The body is not of the essence of the soul; but the soul by the nature of its
essence can be united to the body, so that, properly speaking, not the soul alone, but
the “composite”, is the species. And the very fact that the soul in a certain way requires
the body for its operation proves that the soul is endowed with a grade of intellectuality
inferior to that of an angel, who is not united to a body. –St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa
Theologica

Human Nature as an Embodied Spirit

In the preceding module, you were introduced to the characterization of the
human person as a self with an immortal soul and as a composite of body and soul. You
were also presented with the mind-body problem and the human condition of freedom.
In this module, you will be introduced to the philosophy which believes that human
nature is an embodied spirit.

The Union of Body and Soul

The soul is the source of these phenomena and is characterized by them, viz. by
the power of self nutrition , sensation, thinking and movement; further, since it is the
soul by which primarily we live, perceive and think – it follows that the soul must be an
account and essence, not matter or subject . . . it is the soul which is the actuality of a
certain kind of body. – Aristotle, De Anima II

In De Anima II, Aristotle explains that the primary principle of what animates man
– from nourishment to understanding – is the soul, which is united with the body as its
form. The soul is said to be essentially the form of the body, but for Aristotle, it is not
because the soul is emerged with the body. The soul has the power of communicating
its existence to the body not just through movement (locomotion) but also through
understanding or thinking (knowledge). Hence, the existence of man is viewed as a
whole body and soul, not as different parts even if it was seen that the nature of both
body and soul are distinct from each other.

On the other hand, St. Thomas Aquinas addressed the mind-body problem by
characterizing human nature as body and soul: “Man is composed of spiritual and
corporeal substance.” In Summa Theologica, he also addressed the following concerns
about the nature of the soul as a body: (1) it is the body’s moving principle; (2)
knowledge of corporeal things is caused by likeness; hence, to know of the body is to be
like it in nature; and (3) the soul moves the body, and movement happens through
contact; hence, the soul must be a body because contact happens between bodies.

In his replies to the concerns, Aquinas stated the following:

To seek the nature of the soul, we must premise that the soul is defined as the first
principle of life of those things which live: for we call living things “animate”, and those
things which have no life, “inanimate”. Now life is shown principally by two actions,
knowledge and movement. The philosophers of old, not being able to rise above their
imagination, supposed that the principle of these actions was something corporeal: for
they asserted that only bodies were real things; and that what is not corporeal is
nothing: hence they maintained that the soul is something corporeal. – St. Thomas
Aquinas, Summa Theologica

As you may notice, the way St. Thomas Aquinas conceives the soul is an
affirmation and development of Aristotle’s ideas. It is both clear in their accounts that
the soul creates knowledge and movement in a body as first principle of life. Moreover,
to justify this claim, St. Thomas distinguished between the kinds of mover and moved.
The thing which is moved accidentally does not cause invariable movement - that is, the
soul – while what is moved essentially is the body. Thus, it is not right to believe that
the soul is a body in this distinction between relations of mover and moved.
For the second concern, St. Thomas explained that knowledge of a corporeal
body does not necessarily entail that there should be a necessary likeness to the thing
which needs to be known. Hence, the soul, to know the body, does not necessarily
mean that it has to be a body., or corporeal, as well.
Finally, on the concern about contact, St. Thomas distinguished between contact
of quality and contact of power. With power, a body is in contact with another body;
but under the contact of quality, a body can be touched by an incorporeal thing.
In the given characterizations, it is evident that St. Thomas is certain that the soul
is not a body. Consequently, after establishing that the soul is not a body, it has to be
explained whether it subsists because for a long time during the ancient age, it was
believed that all that exists are only corporeal or material substances.

The subsistence of the soul is undermined by the following objections: (1)

existence is attributed to body and soul and not to the soul alone; (2) the body which
subsists operate yet the soul does not; and (3) subsistent entities operate apart from the
body, while the soul, apparently, does not operate apart from the body. Further, St.
Thomas explained that:
It must necessarily be allowed that the principle of intellectual operation
which we call the soul, is a principle both incorporeal and subsistent. For it is clear that
by means of the intellect man can have knowledge of all corporeal things. Now
whatever knows certain things cannot have any of them in its own nature; because that
which is in it naturally would impede the knowledge of anything else. Therefore the
intellectual principle which we call the mind or the intellect has an operation “per se”.
For nothing can operate but what is actual: for which reason we do not say that heat
imparts heat, but that what is hot gives heat. We must conclude, therefore, that the
human soul, which is called the intellect or the mind, is something incorporeal and
subsistent. – St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica

The above account guaranteed the subsistence of the soul by attributing the
operation of knowing corporeal things by means of the intellect is the soul’s operation
apart from the body; hence, the human soul is subsistent. Moreover, St. Thomas claimed
that the soul is incorruptible for it is impossible for a substance like the soul which has
existence “per se” (as it is) to be generated or corrupted accidentally.

We must assert that the intellectual principle which we call the human soul is
incorruptible. For a thing may be incorrupted in two ways – “per se”, and accidentally
… Therefore, whatever has existence “per se” cannot be generated or corrupted
except “per se”, while things which do not subsist, such as accidents and material
forms, acquire existence or lost it through the generation or corruption of composite
things … while the human soul could not be corrupted unless it were corrupted “per
se”. For it is clear that what belongs to a thing by virtue of itself is inseparable from it,
but existence belongs to a form, which is an act, by virtue of itself; and therefore it is
impossible for a subsistent form to cease to exist. – St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa
Theologica

In the preceding discussion, it has bbeen revealed that man is composed of

material and spiritual substance – body and soul. Through each of St. Thomas’s
arguments, it was revealed that the soul makes man animate and yet it is not a body.
The soul is incorporeal; hence, nopart of it is material. The soul definitely subsistent; it is
the first principle which animates living things. The soul is also incorruptible because it
has existence “per se” and can neither be generated nor corrupted by accident.

What are the substances which comprise man?

What guarantees that the soul is subsistent?

The soul is the first principle of life of those things which live. Living things are
“animate”. The soul is the body’s moving principle, but the soul is not a body itself.