Ancient Philosophical Influences Flashcards
philosophical language and thought
Plato’s understanding of reality
-believed that senses are unreliable and ‘optical illusions’
-opinions = transient, mutable and imperfect
-truth = immutable, perfect, eternal – there is a clear distinction between knowledge and opinion
-Plato believed that the physical, empirical world is full of change, decay, illusions and appearances
-realm of forms = world of truth and unchanging reality
-argued for innate rationalism - all truths are innate
-knowledge is “that which is” – epstimological claim
analogy of the cave
-passage in Plato’s republic - illustrates theory of forms, cave = allegorical, story = symbollic
-asks us to imagine prisoners (us) in a cave (our reality) who cannot move due to being chained (state of ignorance), only look at a wall with shadows (objects) - all the prisoners know. one day prisoner escapes (philosopher), blinded by the sun (form of good), finally sees real world (world of forms), returns to cave but prisoners can’t understand him
-shows that society is unwilling to questions things
-demonstrates importance of questioning everything - distinguish between material and real world
-a priori reasoning can give us an understanding of the forms
Plato’s theory of forms
-plato understands reality by creating another realm – realm of forms
-heirarchy of forms - FoG is top
-cannot gain true knowledge, mind = trapped in state of ignorance - world of appearances
-true reality, world of forms, is perfect, non-physical, eternal – true knowledge
-world of appearances experience ‘particulars’ - imperfect, mutable, physical, contingent –physical world = imperfect copies of forms
-illustrated though analogy of the cave
-“in the knowledgeable realm, the form of good is the last thing to be seen, and it is reached with difficulty” - plato
Plato’s form of good
-cave analogy - form of good = sun
-all particulars are dependent on the form of good
-is the highest form
-form of good = intrinsically good, unchangeable, in-corruptable, eternal, non-physical, can’t be perceived by senses and transcendent
-described as the cause for all that is good, correct and beautiful
-understanding form of good makes it impossible to do wrong –> plato says that a philosopher with that understanding should rule as “philosopher king”
-“as the good is in the intelligible region to reason and objects of reason, so is (the sun) in the visible world to vision and the objects of vision”
-illuminates our soul - can access truths
defences for Plato
-Bryan Magee, theory of forms/analogy encourages people to seek enlightenment - “ the theory that there is another world than this … gives value to present world”
-Brian Davies, analogy of cave helps illustrate Plato’s theory of forms - powerful analogy, can help understand relationships
-Stephen Evans, offers rational argument for existence of alternative reality - look towards something more perfect
-Kant, acknowledged existence of absolutes - offers logical theory due to being appealing
-Plato offers effective argument as to why evil and suffering occurs/exists –> material world isn’t perfect, actions of material beings cause evil
criticisms of Plato
-Hume + Dawkins, his ideas are counterintuitive, files in face of common sense (illusions), physical realm had empirical evidence to back up its existence
-Locke + Russell, not logical to say that there is a world we cannot see
-infinite regress, forever backwards - have a form of a form of a form etc. what is stopping from having ideal form of that form
-plato said senses = inferior, shouldn’t rely on them, however we always rely on them
-lacks empirical evidence - Plato responds –> theory has no evidence, they cannot be trusted, they are ‘shadows’ of real world —> criticism = knowledge can successfully be derived from experience. therefore, it lacks empirical validity
-Aristotle = unnecessary hypothesis
Aristotle’s understanding od reality
-was an empiricist, knowledge can be achieved through observation –> rejected rationalism
-everything had a purpose/ telos/ end goal
-more effectively it fulfils telos, the better it is
-the physical world could be object of knowledge
-uses process of induction - move from one observation to generalising it, observed As = B so all As = B
-people have an innate capacity to perceive – a posteriori
-if we want to know something, we must understand its purpose and essence
Aristotle’s four causes
-everything has four cause, cause them to be what they are, essence
-constantly moving potentiality to actuality
-understand all four causes of object, grasps nature of it
-‘that for the sake of which a thing is done’
1. material cause - what it is made of?
2. formal cause - how is it arranged?
3. efficient cause - what or who made it?
4. final cause - what is its telos/purpose?
Aristotle’s prime mover
-must be a mover that moves them without being moved – prime mover
-Aristotle believed that if there is no first cause, there is no cause at all
-prime mover, can’t move, is immutable, unchangeable, perfect, attracts things, has a necessary existence (eternal, impersonal), transcendent and not susceptible to corruption
-uniquely produces motions by being loved
p1 - everything that moves has a final cause
p2 - infinite regress, not an option
p3 - ‘nothing’ NOT an option
c - final cause of all —> must be uncaused/unmoved
defences of Aristotle
-four causes seem effective due to belief in prime mover, provides clear reason as to why change happens
-supported by Christian community, his theory is adopted by the christian faith, helps them to understand the nature of God
-adopts an a posteriori approach, focuses on observation, Plato argues that we can’t trust our senses, but much of what we learn comes through senses, Aristotle considers this
-supported by Aquinas - the prime mover is necessary to account for the chain of motion and causation in the world
-Swinburne, emphasises the explanatory power of purpose (final cause) in his arguments for the existence of God
-MacIntyre, draws on Aristotelian ethics, shows how the concept of telos is central to human flourishing
criticisms of Aristotle
-no clear evidence that everything has a final cause, no empirical evidence to support existence of unmoved mover
-concept of prime mover depends upon argument that everything must have a cause, makes a logical contradiction, claims that unmoved mover does exactly what it claims is impossible, unmoved mover doesn’t have a cause
-Aristotle makes an assumption that matter is eternal, but doesn’t explain where it comes from, is an unfinished argument
-Russel + Hume, universe is just brute fact “I would say that the universe is just there, and that’s all”, whereas, Aristotle argued that there is a purpose behind universe as a whole, God or Prime Mover
-Plato + Descartes, senses are unreliable, can deceive us, rationalists would argue for a ‘a priori’ approach to knowledge
