Aristotle associates the form of the human body with the soul and often De Anima iii 5 is interpreted so that Aristotle believed the human soul to be a subsistent form, which means the soul can exist as itself not just as a “something” that “makes” a bulk of matter a human.
Now the question is: How can this interpretation be reconciled with standard strong realism?
What makes a human soul human? It should seem we need to recourse to universals here too, if we need to recourse to universals at all. Somewhat like the third man argument (though without the infinite regress), we need to posit another universal which makes two human souls humans. So how do we get away from this inconsistency, that suddenly forms seem to be exactly similar to particulars?