Specifically regarding Aristotelian/Thomistic philosophy of the soul.
Link to the relevant paragraphs start here.
And I’d like to say that I already know that the following issues regarding the soul have been doctrinally defined and are infallible: Every spiritual soul is directly created by God. The spiritual soul is immortal. And that man, though made of body and soul, is a unity.
I also agree with all of the following statements (originally listed here):
The present Catechism of the Catholic Church defines the soul as "the innermost aspect of man, that which is of greatest value in him, that by which he is most especially in God’s image: ‘soul’ signifies the spiritual principle in man."
The soul is the center of the human will, intellect (or mind), and imagination (or memory), and the source of all free human acts, although good acts are aided by God’s grace.
Every human being receives a soul at the moment of conception, and has rights and dignity equal to persons of further development, including the right to life.
At the moment of death, the soul goes either to Purgatory, Heaven, or Hell. Purgatory is a place of atonement for sins that one goes through to pay the temporal punishment for post-baptismal sins that have not been atoned for by sufferings during one’s earthly life. This is distinct from the atonement for the eternal punishment due to sin which was affected by Christ’s suffering and death.
The Catholic Church teaches the creationist view of the origin of the soul: “The doctrine of the faith affirms that the spiritual and immortal soul is created immediately by God.” -Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 382.
However, I’m having some serious issues right now with referring to the soul as a sort of “animating principle”, because I don’t see a good reason as to why the “animation” of living things could not simply be a purely material (physical/chemical) phenomenon, while still the spiritual soul remains the seat of the human intellect and will (and everything else listed above).
I’m specifically thinking of statements like the following:
"…it is a human body precisely because it is animated by a spiritual soul."
"…one has to consider the soul to be the “form” of the body… i.e., it is because of its spiritual soul that the body made of matter becomes a living, human body."
Is absolutely everything in the CCC 100% infallible? Or does it, in addition to doctrinal teaching, contain statements and explanations that are (while not contradictory to the faith in any way, and possibly even very helpful guides) not necessarily infallible, such that an educated person could respectfully disagree with minor points while not rejecting infallible Church teaching?