5.4.09
Aristotle Part 6 - Aristotle and Plato's World of Forms
Aristotle's conclusions concerning change and identity, may lead someone to ask, "Was Aristotle simply advocating for Plato's World or Theory of Forms in a different fashion?"
However, important distinctions exist between Aristotle's conclusions concerning identity and change, and Plato's theory of Forms.
First, Aristotle made the form immanent to the particular while Plato made the form completely separate from the particular. For example, Aristotle still argued that the essence of "dogness" is in the dog whereas Plato argued that the essence of "dogness" is removed from the individual or particular dog and is located in the world of forms or ideas. This is a major distinction between Aristotle's conclusions and those of Plato.
Second, Aristotelian forms describe particulars and not universals as with Plato. The form for Aristotle was related to the particular dog or the individual dog. In other words, "dogness" is found in the individual dog rather than dogs in general, whereas in Plato "dogness" transcends the particular or individual dog and represents "dogness" for all dogs. For Aristotle the form is in the particular, but for Plato the form is a universal form.