[ExI] Is anyone an expert on Aristotle and Life?

[Natasha Vita-More]

Bill wrote:

2011/12/30  natasha wrote:
> If the psyche* perishes with bodily death but the transhumanist
> perspective proposes the transmutation of matter toward a  posthuman state
> of existence, then body could be assumed to be nonbiological and therefore
> the psyche could continue on in the posthuman or upload state. Right?
>
> *I don't subscribe to psyche being "soul". That is a Western world
> interpretation and I am not convinced it is what Aristotle intended.

"I don't think you can force an ancient philosopher like Aristotle into
the transhumanist frame. He didn't know about evolution, for example.
For him, 'psyche' was a feature of living creatures. That is why the
article commented that it could possibly be similar to the Hebrew (Old
Testament) tradition where 'soul' is the breath of life.
For Aristotle all living creatures have degrees of 'psyche', including
plants and animals. But a dead animal has no 'psyche'.
What he thought might be eternal was 'nous' (mind, or intellectual
soul) that humans have. But he is a bit unclear on how this could be."

I am not sure it is necessary to know about evolution to form a link between
Aristotle's concept of psyche and "life" and the "living" and transhumanism.
Yes, you are correct that psyche is a feature of all living matter. Yes, you
are correct that psyche is largely the breath of life, but Aristotle
considered it more than a breath, it was also the process of life and the
living. I think you are spot on about nous, and it is very unclear.  Eugene
Thacker tackles this in _After Life_.  

I am looking for a link, however small and seemingly inconsequential. I am
confident there is one and I appreciate your insights.

Natasha