Hello all,

In (especially) my ancient philosophy readings and courses over the years, it has never been entirely clear to me whether Plato and/or Aristotle are committed to some sort of substantial essentialism about artifacts. By that I mean, roughly, that there is some actualizing, quasi-materially independent form of chairs, lamps, spoons, paintings, etc., or whether the "form" in such a case is merely the shape which matter has happened to take.

I am aware of the famous bronze statue story, but I am not certain if that is meant to be an easy analogy or illustration, or an actual case of truly enformed matter. As I recall, Aristotle is explicit in the De Anima that the ax is not as the eye is with respect to being enformed — i.e., the ax is merely an analogy.

My understanding is that, on Aristotle's view, living natural objects such as humans, animals, and plants all have forms which are in principle independent of, and biologically distinguishable from, if yet "inextricably" bound up with (as, IIRC, David Charles likes to say) the matter of the being.

And for Plato (who I am somewhat less familiar with) it seems to me that the position of artifact essentialism would mean that all artifacts, even before creation, have an eternal, transcendental form.

So, my two questions are: (1) is Aristotle (and/or) Plato committed to essentialism about artifacts, and (2) how common is the view in the history of philosophy (and/or in contemporary work) that living beings have some sort of essence which artifacts do not share? Or is this taken to entail or express some sort of (inviable) vitalism?

Thanks!