To Plato’s idea, Aristotle essentially asks what would happen if we got rid of all the horses. He is questioning the basic element of forms, which is their existence regardless of the objects that emulate them.
	Aristotle suggests that Forms are not the basis for objects, but are rather the consequence of objects. The Form of a horse, then, would cease to exist the moment the last horse died. Additionally, the form of the horse never existed until the first perceivable horse did. This notion seems to view forms as much more theoretical than Plato’s incarnation of the concept. Aristotle looked to the Earth, not the heavens, for truth. Let us use a bronze statue of Apollo as an example of Aristotle’s thinking. He would say that the bronze, by itself, has no form. It is only when molded into the shape of Apollo that it takes on the form of Apollo. This room for change is an element unique to his Form theory.
	Essential then to understanding Aristotle’s own view regarding the existence of objects is a comprehension of his views on change. Aristotle suggested that all change stems from four basic causes: material, formal, efficient, and final. Material cause addresses the matter or stuff of which an object is composed. Formal cause is the arrangement of that matter, the definition or form of a thing. Efficient cause is the main source of change, such as an elephant sitting on a peanut, changing it into peanut butter. The final cause is the end goal or purpose of an object. This is the broadest and most holistic change. This concept, though complex, is significant, because change occurs every time an object comes into being. This theory then is a valid refutation of elements central to Platonic Form theory.
	While these two men may have had some disagreements regarding the topic of Forms, each of their contributions on the subject were significant. While Plato’s concepts may seem laughable to us now, his thoughts were a great stride in philosophy, and moved human thought in a positive direction. Even Aristotle’s views on the subject may be bizarre to us. Many misconceptions were in fact present in Aristotle’s philosophies in general. But even in acknowledging the errors present in Aristotle’s work, Bertand Russell notes that “errors make it difficult to do historical justice to Aristotle, until one remembers how large of an advance he made upon all of his predecessors.”

Immanuel Kant doesn’t think I should kill myself. Neither does John Stuart Mill. Don’t get me wrong; I certainly don’t disagree with the guys. But they have some interesting reasons for why I shouldn’t call it quits. I, for instance, don’t want to kill myself out of purely selfish reasons. I just got a new set of DVDs in the mail from Netflix, and I’ve got a date tomorrow night with a hot red head named Wendy. 