Technically, in terms of matter, the dead tiger has the features of a feline and mammal, yet if it is unable to move, or eat, or hunt, or mate, then it cannot be a tiger. It does not have action, therefore it does not have essence. And without essence, it does not have a definition. On the subject of matter and cognition, Aquinas says: "But matter is not a principle of cognition" (Aquinas, p. 2). Since the principle of cognition states that what you are thinking about must be a being, or it must be "knowable," then matter alone, without form, cannot be a principle of cognition, since matter has no being. You may think that you are thinking about matter alone, particularly when you concentrate on thinking only about matter without form or function, yet I would argue that your human brain cannot even conceptualize matter without any form or function. That would be like imagining what the world would be like if there was no world,...

1) Okay, since categorizing depends upon essence, then a being must have essence, and since essence depends upon matter and form, a being is essence, matter, form, and what else? Otherwise it's just essence. Moreover, how do we differentiate soul from essence, since essence could be defined as "the actuality of matter." In my opinion, any creature that can sense and feel has a soul, or actuality of body, and anything else can only have an essence because it can only actualize matter and not a sensing body.
References

Aquinas, Thomas. "On Being and Essence."…