The great philosopher Plato (427-347 B.C.E) has undoubtedly been extremely influential to western philosophy. In this post I will discuss two ideas, in this post we look at The Theory of Forms, Part 2 will discuss the 'Demiurge', Plato's God.
 |
| Plato, holding the dialouge 'Timaeus'. This particular picture is representative of his views. For example, his hand points up, showing the Forms as the true reality. |
The Theory of Forms
Plato considered the world a dance of shadows, that true reality belonged to perfect ideas such as good, love, justice, beauty and so on. All these realities existed above the material world. Taking the example of beauty, we may all find different things beautiful: a young girl, a work of art, or even the birth of a child. All of this beauty we see is merely a reflection of the perfect Form of beauty. The same applies to the other Forms, such as those aforementioned. For Plato, true reality lies beyond the world of experience and our purpose in life is to see through the illusions of this world and to arrive, through philosophy, to a knowledge of the Forms.
The Story of the Cave
In 'Republic', Plato explains how humans ought to use Philosophy. In the cave analogy, we are asked to imagine that all human beings are in a cave, tied to chairs and facing the wall at the back of the cave. They have never changed from this position and had never left the cave. Behind them is a fire and between the fire and the backs of the people are figures moving backwards and forwards. The people on the seats would see the flickering shadows on the wall of the cave cast by the light of the fire and the movement of the figures between the fire and the wall. They would assume the shadows are real.
For Plato, the objective of Philosophy is to try and see the world as it really is and not as a dance of the shadows. Through reason, he believed we could be released from the limits imposed by our senses. This is done by a questioning everything. Once we were able to do so, we could turn around, walk past the fire and out of the cave into the light of the sun, which for him, represents the Form of Good.
Criticism of the Forms
Some of the weaknesses in the theory are present in Plato's dialogue 'Parmenides'. One problem raised is the exact relationship between the form and the particular. How exactly is a particular cat, for example, a resemblance of the Form of cats? How does the perfect ideal intermingle with its imperfect copy is essentially the question.
Furthermore, we have a problem of limits. How many things can we say actually have a Form? It may be that, as Socrates says in the dialogue, there are Forms for beauty, or truth, or virtue, but Parmenides does ask whether characteristics like hair and mud too have Forms? Do all things have a Form, or do only some specific things have a Form? Is it possible to make a distinction?
One problem is that if Forms do exist, they are beyond what we can experience, so how can we be sure that they really are there? The great Philosopher Aristotle, as I will show in a later post, argued that we must examine the world and draw conclusions based on evidence and sensory experience. If we want to know what makes a good tree, we must study trees, if we want to know what makes a human beautiful, we should study humans. Thus, an empiricist would argue with Plato's approach.
Aristotle in his 'Metaphysics' raised two objections to Forms. Firstly, he argues that we must accept that ultimate Forms exist even of things which are negative, for instance evil and suffering. The second problem he reveals is that if something has 'perished', for example a particular animal, since we still have an image of it, accepting the idea of Forms will mean we still perceive a form for it.
One problem is that if Forms do exist, they are beyond what we can experience, so how can we be sure that they really are there? The great Philosopher Aristotle, as I will show in a later post, argued that we must examine the world and draw conclusions based on evidence and sensory experience. If we want to know what makes a good tree, we must study trees, if we want to know what makes a human beautiful, we should study humans. Thus, an empiricist would argue with Plato's approach.
Aristotle in his 'Metaphysics' raised two objections to Forms. Firstly, he argues that we must accept that ultimate Forms exist even of things which are negative, for instance evil and suffering. The second problem he reveals is that if something has 'perished', for example a particular animal, since we still have an image of it, accepting the idea of Forms will mean we still perceive a form for it.
Sources: The Thinkers Guide to God by Peter Vardy and Julie Arliss
http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/320/thforms.htm
http://www.philosophicalsociety.com/archives/Theory%20of%20Forms%20Criticism.htm#III. A Critique In Bertrand Russell's The History of Western Philosophy (New York: Simon Schuster, 1972), pp.126-130.
No comments:
Post a Comment