Aristoteles'in eserinde canlı varlıkların ilkesi olarak ruhun eleştirel değerlendirimesi

In this dissertation, we tried to expose the key importance of problem of psykhê in the thought of Aristotle, by referring to the book of Peri Psykhês. According to Aristotle, psykhê is the principle [arkhê] of the living beings. As for living beings, they are characterized by the acts of self-sustenance, growth and decay under the name of life. In nature, we observe three kinds of things which conform to this criterion: plants, animals and human beings. The problem is to determine whether psykhê has a common definition for these three things, or not. The intelligence [nous] in human beings is a paradigmatic example for this problem. How is it possible to consider the intelligence facing movements of the self-sustenance, growth and decay? If these three movements or acts are sufficient to determine life, will the intelligence [nous] also be accepted as the characteristics of life? what is natural is defined as what has the capacity to move itself. Natural things [living beings or not] are composed of elements [fire, air, water, earth]. Natural things have the movement [kinêsis] of transport [phora]. Unless there is an obstacle, elements go to their natural places by moving upward and downward. If this is the case, the three fundamental movements of the living beings contradict with the movements of elements. Because, neither self-sustenance, nor growth and nor decay resemble the linear movements of the elements. In that case, psykhê seems that it changes these movements of the natural bodies composed of elements having linear natural movements. Aristotle defines psykhê as the eidos of the natural thing having life potentially. Aristotle defines psykhê as the first entelekheia of a natural organized thing having life potentially. And psykhê, in this sense, is affirmed as the quiddity [to ti en einai] of a natural thing having life potentially. Nevertheless, Aristotle cannot give an adequate explanation why there is a distinction as living and non-living beings on the basis of four elements, since living natural beings or not are made up of four elements. On the other hand, it seems that these three acts signify adequately the movements of plants. And if it is the case, how is it necessary to explain some other acts as transport [phora], sensation [aisthêsis] and intelligence [nous] apart from these three acts which are identical to life?