Aristotle is considered by many to be one of the most influential philosophers in history. As a student of Plato, he drew on his mentor's metaphysical teachings on such things as The Theory of Forms and his views on the soul. However, he also challenged them, introducing his metaphysical ideas such as act and potency, hylomorphism, and the four causes. He used these ideas to explain his explanation of the soul and the immateriality of the intellect. Before Aristotle, philosophers such as Parmenides and Heraclitus argued for the existence of change. Aristotle used the terms act and potency to respond to Parmenides' arguments about the non-existence of change and bridge the gap between the polar views of Parmenides and Heraclitus. Aristotle used act and potency to examine numerous things such as motion, causality, and metaphysics. He explained that the act or actuality of a thing is its truest way of being and that potency or potential is a thing's capacity to be, beyond its actual existence. For example, a soccer ball is actually on the field; but potentially it can be kicked and enter the goal. According to Aristotle's reasoning, the becoming or changing of the soccer ball occurs when a potential is actualized. Although these changes occur, the thing itself remains the same. When the ball is kicked it loses the actuality of being on the pitch and acquires the actuality of being in goal; in turn, the ball loses the potential of being in the goal and acquires the potential of being on the pitch. Aristotle later explains that the “full reality” of a thing is when the actuality and potentiality of a thing combine. He notes that while things may be “pure power,” i.e. not actual or real, there is… in the middle of the paper… a usable argument. I see understanding in both schools of thought. If I had to think logically I would say Aristotle, because he based his conclusions on science and evidence. However, it is from their views on the soul that I make my decision as to who (if I had to choose) I agree with. I personally believe that the soul, my soul, is something that exists separately from my body. I believe that my body is a temporary and imperfect thing, but that my soul is immortal. I can't say I've come to this conclusion because it's the most "plausible" answer, but rather a belief in my faith that this life is temporary and all souls are eternal. While I understand that this view is not completely in line with Plato's, I think Plato's is closer to mine than Aristotle's.Aristotle's. "De Anima." Fundamental works of Aristotle. Ed. Richard McKeon. New York: Random House, 1941.