Ancient Philosophical Influences

Question 1

Who were Plato and Aristotle?

Answer 1

-Plato and Aristotle are different in a number of key respects. Plato relied on reason and believed that the most important aspect of reality lay beyond this world. Aristotle relied on empirical knowledge and believed that the most important thing to do was gain understanding of this world. They can be categorised as rationalist and empiricist, respectively
-What they agree on is the importance of philosophical thought and reason as a means of gaining truth. This separates them from Christian thinkers who believe that truth comes through revelation
-Both thinkers have been influential in shaping the views of Christian’s and others on various topics

Question 2

What is Plato’s story of the cave?

Answer 2

-The analogy of the cave plays a key role in Plato’s philosophy. He uses it to sum up his key philosophical ideas. In the story he asks us to imagine that a group of prisoners are chained in an underground cave.
-They have been there since birth and are chained by their neck and ankles. They can only see shadows projected on the wall by a fire.
-They believe that the shadows are all that exists. If one day a prisoner were released and were to venture outside the cave, once his sight adjusted he would realise that it was the outside world that was real and that the cave itself was just a shadow world.
-If the prisoner were to return and attempt to pass on his new knowledge, Plato argues that he would not be believed and the other prisoners might even threaten to kill him

Question 3

What is the meaning of the prisoners?

Answer 3

Ordinary people in our world

Question 4

What is the meaning of the cave?

Answer 4

The empirical world that we see and hear around us

Question 5

What is the meaning of the chains?

Answer 5

The senses that restrict the way we experience things

Question 6

What is the meaning of the shadows?

Answer 6

Our everyday sense experiences

Question 7

What is the meaning of the escapee?

Answer 7

The philosopher who is able to access knowledge

Question 8

What is the meaning of the difficult ascent?

Answer 8

An illustration that the road to philosophical knowledge is hard

Question 9

What is the meaning of the outside world?

Answer 9

The real world, the world of the forms

Question 10

What is the meaning of the sun?

Answer 10

The highest of all forms, the form of the good

Question 11

What is the meaning of the return to the cave?

Answer 11

The philosopher once enlightened feels it is his duty to free and educate others

Question 12

What is the meaning of the difficulty in adjusting to the darkness?

Answer 12

Once a philosopher knows the truth, it is difficult to experience things as the ordinary person does

Question 13

What is the meaning of the persecution given by the other prisoners?

Answer 13

Like Socrates, who was executed by the leaders in Athens, the philosopher will be ridiculed and threatened

Question 14

What are the key messages of the cave?

Answer 14

-Metaphysics. What is real? Plato’s view on metaphysics is that thus world is not real and that the real world is an unchanging world of Forms
-Epistemology. How do we gain knowledge? Plato’s view is that knowledge is through the mind (a priori) not the senses (a posteriori). The senses only provide opinions and shadows
-Politics. Who should rule? The philosopher is the only one who has knowledge and, thus, philosophers should rule. Democracy puts power into the hands of the majority who lack knowledge, the cave dwellers in the story
-Ethics. What is good? It is the philosopher who is able to see and understand the good; they know what goodness is

Question 15

What issues does Plato’s analogy of the cave raise?

Answer 15

-It is not clear why it is important for the philosophers to rule if this is only a shadow world
-Plato may be right to suggest that our senses are not always reliable; however, the information we get through our senses is not unimportant; we need this to survive
-Plato does not offer proof of the existence of another realm and he is unclear how the two worlds relate to each other
-He is guilty of elitism. The philosopher is not completely different to the ordinary person. While he may be correct to say there are differences in knowledge, these are differences in degree of knowledge. Having 2 groups of people- those who know and those who are ignorants is too simplistic

Question 16

What are Plato’s forms?

Answer 16

-To understand why Plato believes that there are forms, consider the difference between our world and the mathematical world. In our world, everything is in a process of change: people grow old and die, trees grow and shed leaves, water continually flows.
-Yet mathematical truths do not change: triangles always have 3 sides, 2 +2 will always be 4. Plato believes that there is a similar unchanging truth about every type of object or quality
-For example, if we were to examine lots of different chairs, we would see that despite their differences, there is something that they have in common
-Likewise, to use of of Plato’s own examples, there may be many beautiful things, and there is one thing that they have in common, this is the form of the idea of beauty

Question 17

What are Plato’s forms and their particulars?

Answer 17

-In contrast to the form, there are many different objects in our world which may to some extent participate in the form. These objects, which are imperfect imitations of the form, are called particulars; they may to a greater or lesser extent have the quality of beauty, to use Plato’s example, but none of them is beauty itself

Question 18

What is the form of the good?

Answer 18

-The form of the good is the ultimate form according to Plato. Just as a form is what all the particulars have in common (all cats share in the form of the cat) so too in a sense the ‘good’ is what the forms have in common
-The perfection of the forms comes from the form of the good. In the allegory of the cave, the good is represented by the sun in the outside world. Just as the sun gives light to the real world, so the form of the good illuminates the other forms:
-It is the reason why the forms are good
-It enables us to ‘see’ the forms
-It is the ultimate end in itself

Question 19

Why are Plato’s arguments for the forms?

Answer 19

-The one over many argument.
-The ideal standard

Question 20

What is the one over many argument?

Answer 20

When we observe different particulars, for example, chairs, cats or beautiful things, we are able to recognise that they are the same sort of thing even if we cannot explain exactly why that is. Even a small child can correctly identify that the new thing in front of her is a cat even though she has never seen one quite like this before. Plato argues that we have an innate ability to recognise the forms that our souls knew before we were born. Without the form, it is not possible to explain the sameness. We are able to recognise the ‘one’ that is over the ‘many’

Question 21

What is the ideal standard?

Answer 21

The idea of forms can be used to support a belief in absolute unchanging moral rules. The form is the ideal standard of a property. While it may not seem important to judge which is the best dog or who is more beautiful (although judges at crufts and beauty pageants do often agree), some of the higher forms, such as goodness and justice, seem too important to be a matter of opinion. The form of the good gives us an absolute idea of what goodness really is, it is not a matter of opinion

Question 22

What are the arguments against the forms?

Answer 22

-Wittgenstein rejected the one over many argument with his family resemblance theory. He suggested that there is no ‘one over many’ but merely a series of overlapping characteristics. Just as members of a family may each resemble other members of the family, but there is no one thing that is specific to the family
-The third man argument also responds to the theory’s claim to explain reality. If, as Plato argues, we need the idea of the forms to explain what objects have in common then what is to stop us once we have arrived at the form asking what the form and the particulars have in common and thus requiring a third thing (third man) to explain this. This process could proceed infinitely ans we would never get an explanation of anything
-Plato’s claim that there must be forms for everything can be carried to absurdity. Must there really be the ideal form of dirt, hair or even, as Stephen Law argues, ‘the form of the bogey’?
-There is also the problem of new inventions and things that become extinct. Plato’s belief in the unchanging nature of the world of the forms seems to require that the form of the IPad has always existed and the form of the t-Rex still exists
-The forms do not seem to have a practical value; study of them takes us away from useful scientific study of the world

Question 23

What are Aritstotle’s four causes?

Answer 23

1. Material cause. This is the thing that it is made from, for example, the bronze of a statue. This is the thing that the process of change begins with
2. Formal cause. This is the structure or form of the finished thing. This is similar to Plato’s understanding of the word ‘form’ but for Aristotle the form is in the object itself. It is not an idea in another world
3. Efficient cause. This is the ‘primary source of the change’. It is the maker of the object, it is the parents of a child. It is this that makes the material transform into it’s final form
4. The last and most important of the causes for Aristotle is the final cause. It is the purpose for which something is done or made. In one of Aristotle’s own examples, the final cause or tells of walking about is to be healthy

Question 24

Why do the 4 causes matter?

Answer 24

For Aristotle, the 4 causes illustrate several of his key ideas
-The world is the real world and the task of philosophers is to explain it
-The key to knowledge is the empirical method
-The world and all that is in it has purpose or telos

Question 25

What are the characteristics of the prime mover?

Answer 25

-The key to understanding the prime mover is perhaps the ideas of immutability. Everything in the world is constantly changing; however, the prime mover is unchanging. As the prime mover is immutable, several other things logically follow
-It is eternal- beginning to exist or ceasing to exist would both constitute a change,therefore the prime mover must be eternal.
-The prime mover must be perfect. To be perfect means to have complete actuality. Objects in the world have potential, they could become something else. As the prime mover does not change, it must be perfect already. Becoming perfect or losing or losing perfection is a change
-The prime mover is also impassive it does not experience emotion. To experience emotion wojld bring about a change in one’s inner state
-The reason why things change in this world is because they are material substances. Aristotle believed that physical substances- all objects made of matter- are subject to change. In order to be immutable, the prime mover must be non physical, an immaterial substance

Question 26

What is the prime mover in relation to the world?

Answer 26

-The prime mover causes all the changes that occur. However, the prime mover cannot be aware of the world, this would produce changes. The prime mover in order to be perfect and unchanging can only think about perfect things. So, logically, it must think about itself and thought
-The prime mover’s perfection moves other things towards him. All things desire the good/perfect and the process of change is a move in the direction of the prime mover
-One way of thinking about this is the analogous of a cat drawn to a saucer of milk. The milk is unmoved, but attracts the cat. In a sense, the prime mover is the final cause of all things

Question 27

What is the prime mover’s relation to God?

Answer 27

Aristotle refers to the prime mover as God yet we need to be careful not to confuse what is essentially a deistic view of God with the theistic view of God offered in Judaism, Christianity and Islam

Question 28

How would we assess Aristotle on causation?

Answer 28

-There is an element of common sense in the 4 causes. Most objects conform to the idea
-The four causes focus on purpose and this gives us a way of determining whether something is any good or not. We intuitively know that if things don’t do the job they were meant to do, then they are not really being the object they were meant to be
-Aristotle’s claim that everything has a purpose is subjective. What the purpose of an object is may depend upon our point of view. A religious studies textbook may not have been intended to balance wonky tables but if it does the job who is to say that it couldn’t have other purposes?
-Twentieth century philosophers, known as existentialists, claim that human beings have no purpose. As atheists, they argue that our existence is a matter of chance and that there is no purpose until we freely choose to give ourselves a purpose. However, this purpose is entirely a matter of our choice
The causes are essentially empirical and as such have the strengths and weaknesses of the empirical method. It is the scientific empirical method that has enabled us to make discoveries about the world, yet, as anyone knows who has attempted to place a pencil in water, our senses do not always give us accurate information. This can be linked to Plato’s criticism of the senses in the analogy of the cave

Question 29

What are the criticisms of Aristotle’s prime mover?

Answer 29

There are elements of the idea of the prime mover that are more logical than the religious idea of God
-It is more difficult to believe in a God who is perfect if that being is liable to changing emotions. An impressive prime mover seems more logical
-The idea of a prime mover avoids the traditional problem of evil. There is no issue about evil and suffering in the world because the obvious question of why doesn’t the prime mover prevent evil is avoided

Question 30

What are the advantages of the prime mover?

Answer 30

-It is difficult to understand how a being can be described as perfect yet have no knowledge of the world
-If the prime mover is pure thought but is in some way responsible for everything, then where did matter come from?
-The idea of a ‘God’ who is not involved is unsatisfactory for religious believers. The prime mover is not worthy of worship nor would there be any point in prayer. Although Aristotle sees the prime mover as being ultimately good, it is a static and logical goodness rather than the goodness one might experience in a relationship

Question 31

Compare the use of reason (rationalism) versus use of senses (empiricism)

Answer 31

-Plato favours the use of reason rather than empirical method. Philosophical truths are known a priori without any reliance on the senses. Plato also believes that there are innate ideas; our souls already contain knowledge of the forms prior to being United to our bodies. The analogy of the cave and the theory of the forms can be used to illustrate these ideas
-Aristotle favours the use of the senses over reason. Philosophical truths are acquired via the empirical method using our senses; they are a posteriori truths. Empiricists do not believe in innate ideas; our mind is a tabula rasa (blank slate) at birth and it is via experiences that the mind gradually fills with ideas. Aristotle’s theory of the 4 causes helps to illustrate this empirical method

Question 32

How would we assess Plato’s rational method?

Answer 32

-A priori knowledge gives us certainty but it only seems to give certainty with regard maths and logic. It does not bring certainty to the things that we experience
-There are a number of things, such as colour, that are very difficult to know without experience
-The arguments for and against the Forms are also relevant when assessing Plato’s rational method

Question 33

How would we assess Aristotle’s empirical method?

Answer 33

-A posteriori knowledge is knowledge of the world around us and is thus more useful than a priori knowledge
-It seems right to say that we could not have thoughts about most things without the senses
-The senses can be in error, so empirical method offers probability but not certainty
-It is hard to understand how we get ideas, such as God or morality, which do no obviously link to the senses

Question 34

What are the similaires and differences with the prime mover and form of the good?

Answer 34

-Neither the good nor the prime mover is directly or personally involved with the world
-Both are perfect and necessary beings; they are eternal
-Both are to some extent responsible for the existence of things in the world, albeit indirectly. They are explanations; the prime mover explains change. The good as a form is a refuge against the uncertainties of change. It is an attempt to find permanence in a world of change
-The prime mover has consciousness- it thinks about thought and it’s own nature. The good is not conscious. It is an idea
-Both have been influential to the Christian idea of God, though it may or may not be a helpful influence. The prime mover has been adapted by Aquinas and others and used as an argument for the existence of God. The good and the idea of the forms as perfect and unchanging have also influence the idea of God

Question 35

How would you compare Descartes versus Hume?

Answer 35

In the 17th and 18th centuries, modern philosophers Rene Descartes and David Hume continued the discussion on philosophical method that began with Plato and Aristotle
-Descartes’ wax example supports rationalism. He asks us to imagine a piece of beeswax removed from a hive. We could imagine it’s properties: it has shape, colour, is hard and makes a sound when struck. If we left it by the fire and returned to the room later, all those properties would have gone, we would find a puddle. Descartes claims that we would know it is the same wax despite our senses giving us different information
-Hume claims that all our contents of our mind are impressions (things we experience) and ideas. Our minds are able to manipulate ideas and add these together-we have never seen a unicorn but we have seen horses and horns. If we have no experience of something, we are unable to think of it. People who are blind and deaf from birth can form no idea of colour or sound respectively