Aristotle Misinterpreted Plato's Forms

    There are two issues with Plato's Forms that Aristotle wrote about which directly impacted the rise of natural philosophy, or science. One is that they compound questions rather than answer them. The Form of love does not explain its purpose, how it came to be, or how it can change. Which leads to his second criticism; the Forms do not explain how things in nature change. Forms seemingly transform into others at random degrees like the way weather systems dissipate into divergent wind and air masses. Aristotle sees nothing as permanent in Plato's cosmos.

    It sounds to me like he misses the point. The Forms are ideals that all things aspire towards, and rarely is it only one Form that a particular object possesses. The same weather system above could have myriad Forms vying for its essence, which transform it through reductions of probability. Plato's argument is that nothing is permanent but the Forms, which are like the nodes between voids of change that everything goes through. Aristotle was a pioneer who unwittingly sought to examine the processes that lead from one Form to another.