So Aristotle rejects Plato's forms, and replaces it with another kind of form which is solely in the particular.
eg: The red table has a form of redness which is particular to the table. The red apple has a form of redness which is particular to the apple.
But if this is the case, how are we able to say the apple and table have the same or similar colors?
The way I understand it, one purpose of Plato's forms was to allow us to perform this kind of comparison. ie: There is something in common between the apple and table. They are 'interacting' with the same form of 'red'. Without Plato's 'independent form' how is this comparison done (or should it just not be done)?
Aristotle's form rests in the particular, so according to Aristotle, are we mistaken when we think that there's a common redness between the red apple and red table? ie: even using the same term 'red' is misleading?