Hence, it could be inferred that the soul differs even more from the human being in terms of the nature of species than the donkey does. Inferring this, the question might follow: If a soul differs so completely from human being, how could it retain the same form as the corruptible body? Indeed, a donkey, being a different species, differs less completely from the human being, but nevertheless has a different form. The human being and soul, being even more different, are likely to also be different in form.
Another argument used for the probable form of the soul is the fact that it appears to reside in the intellect. A being that resides only in part of the human body cannot logically be said to retain the same form of the body, as it resides mainly in the mind and therefore occupies less space than the body. Furthermore, this argument also states that a soul residing in the entire body would also enable that body to think with its hands, feet, and other...
Clearly, this is not the case, and the soul can therefore not have the same form of the body, as inferred from its supposed functioning.
In conclusion, the soul and the body are more likely to have different forms than they are to be similar in form. One reason for this is that the soul is entirely different from the body in nature. It is not the same species as a corruptible human being, just like the donkey is not the same species as a human being. Even so, the donkey is closer in nature to the human being than the soul is. The second reason is that the soul's function as intellect resides in the mind rather than in the rest of the body, because human beings think with their minds and not with their other body parts. On the premise of these reasons, the best inference that can be made is that the soul and body must differ in form from each other. Logic suggests that it cannot be the same form as the body.
