Plato And Aristotle Flashcards
What was Plato
He was a rationalist as opposed to an empiricist in that he believed that certain truths about the universe were knowable by mind alone something the empiricist denies
What did he think about philosophers
He believed enlightened individuals (philosophers) could see beyond the world or senses to the real nature of things. For him to know so,etching like true goodness or beauty you had to go beyond anything sensed
What did he believe the best part of humanity was and why
The power of reason, something animals lack. For him if we reason properly then we will always know the right way to live our lives and he thinks people do bad things when they do not use their reason and allow themselves to be carried away by their emotions
What’s his logic for the realm of forms
If I want to bake a cake I therefore have a picture of a cake in my head. He argues this idea of a cake I hold doesn’t decay with time like the material cake does. This leads him to reason that there must exist an ideal cake and my attempt at baking a cake is an imperfect copy. This ideal cake cannot exist in this world as material things are forever changing due to things like age. So he suggests the real of forms
How do things exist in the realm of forms
In this realm there is a form for everything that exists and these forms are spiritual by the fact they are permanent and non material
According to Plato what do we think of the realm of forms compared to our current world
We long for the permanence of the forms and are always dissatisfied with the transience of this world
How are our souls related to the realm of forms
For Plato our should belong naturally in the realm of forms and for unclear reasons we are trapped in bodies and born into this word
What is the consequence of being born into this world
Forgetfulness. Because we are born into this world we forgot the world of forms but we remember glimpses of it as when I think of the cake I wish to bake I remember the ideal cake. The more I reflect on the concept of the cake the clearer my memories become
For Plato what is learning
All learning is actually recollection of the forms experienced in a previous life, education does not put something into ones but rather draws out what is already there hidden by forgetfulness
What example can be given in terms of learning and forgetfulness
When an inventor invents something he is not creating something new but is just the first to remember the perfect form of it and any improvement made it an invention is the result of people focusing their minds even more clearly on the original idea
What is at the top of the hierarchy in the world of forms
The form of good
What example can be used to show the relationship between the visible and intelligible realms
Pythagorean’s states that if we have two numbers they are in ratio with each other. 2 and 6 are in a ratio 1 to 3. So if there was a model plane in ratio 1:72 then from this scale we can gauge what the actual plane looks like and in this way everything in the realm of appearances allows us to gauge what the actual thing looks like
How do our eyes and the sun relevant when talking about the realm of forms
In this world we need eyes to see objects and we need light to illuminate objects so our eyes can see them well in the intelligible realm we need the ‘mind’s eye’ or the force of intellect to appreciate the forms. We also need the sun to illuminate our understanding and this sun is equivalent to the form of good
What is the hierarchy in the intelligible realm
The form of good at the top, then the other higher forms like beauty and goodness and then individual forms like a chair or table
How does eternity tie in with forms
He believes the form muds be eternal just as our souls are eternal because the forms are meant to be perfect and one of the elements of perfection for him is something that can’t be destroyed
What does Plato say about most people and what example does he give
He thinks most people don’t look beyond trivial things like earthly pleasures. He uses the examples of people who call themselves lovers of beauty, they may attend all the art exhibitions in the world but never ask what true beauty is rather distract themselves with things that appear beautiful but as they are material things they are imperfect. A famous painting may be very beautiful but if we turn it over it’s just rough wood and canvas
What does Plato consider as knowledge
He thinks people who look for the meaning of things in themselves are philosophers as they ask what true beauty is and they are capable of knowledge not just opinion
What did Plato think of good and peoples wrongdoings
Plato adopted the view that if we intellectually knew the good thing to do we would always do the right thing and he explained wrongdoing as the result of ignorance or incomplete knowledge. If I pursue material things it is because I am ignorant of the true good but if I know the form of good I will be good
How does Plato draw the divided line and how does he allocate its sections
He asks us to think of a vertical line divided into two parts where the upper part is twice as long as the lower part and those two halves are then subdivided the same way (2:1). The upper half of the whole line represents the realm of forms while the lower half represents the realm of appearances. He notes how observation works in two ways one where we look at the thing but the second where we look at shadows or images. This is the lowest quarter of the whole line, the second quarter from the bottom is just things we straight up see in this world, the 3rd upper quarter is things like memories of the forms and imagination and then the upper half is the actual forms.
Why were painters at the bottom of his social hierarchy
Because for Plato thinks like paintings and images were as far away from true reality of that object, pointed out in his book Republic
What conclusion did he make about shadows and images
That there must be an equivalent in the intelligible realm which we can see on the divided line as memory and intellect
What assumption does he make about truth and knowledge
That truth and knowledge only apply to what truly exists. So he restricts the term knowledge simply to our awareness of the Forms. In this way he thinks the things we see around us we only have opinions or beliefs about not knowledge because they are not real in the full sense
What does define ignorance as
Awareness of what does not exist
What is the problem with Plato’s take on awareness
He seems to be confusing awareness itself with the objects of awareness for example if I say there are no vampires in my room at present I could call my awareness knowledge but Plato would count it as ignorance because I am referring to something that doesn’t exist.
What is the Simile of cave
Plato asks us to imagine an underground cave connected to the surface by a steep tunnel. Prisoners are chained to a rock with a road behind them that is on the other side of the rock. They have been there their whole lives and are chained in a way they can only see the wall in front of them and they have never seen anything behind them. There is a fire in the cave which they can’t see which is projecting shadows onto the wall of objects they can’t see and all they ever see are shadows and the result is that the only reality they ever know is the shadow world. Imagine one is released and he stands up and turns around and sees real objects carried by men on the road. He then sees the fire which takes his eyes time to adjust to. This prisoner is then forced to make the ascent out the cave and into the world and at first the brightness of the outside world would be painful and dazzling and he wouldn’t initially be able to look at objects directly so would look away at their shadows. Last he would see the sun which gives light to these objects Plato then asks us to imagine if the prisoner returned to the cave how the prisoners wouldn’t believe him and would deny a more real world because they’ll see him as arrogant they would mock him and maybe kill him.
What does the simile of cave resemble
The prisoners tied up resembles normal people looking at the shadows which are the objects around use which we think are real. The fire is meant to resemble the sun which is giving light to these objects we think are real. The hard journey out the cave is meant to resemble philosophical enlightenment. The outside objects are meant to resemble the forms and finally the sun outside is meant to resemble the form of good which gives light to everything. The return of the prisoner is meant to resemble philosophers trying to convince other people of their beliefs. The death of the prisoner is meant to resemble the death of Socrates
Karl Poppers objection in volume I of his ‘the open society and its enemies’
He argues Plato is determined to find certainty in a world of continual change in the way Plato assumes something exist somewhere else. Many people run from the difficulties of an uncertain world but wanting something to be certain does not make it so
Taedeusz Kotarbinski’s objection to Plato
He argues that certain nouns are onomatoids which means they are more abstract objects for example if I say there is nothing in my cupboard the noun nothing is not the name of a thing but the absence of something in the same way terms like ‘love’ and ‘good’ are not names of oartfiukad things but stand for qualities of other things
What was Aristotle and what did this mean
He can be described as the first empiricist. He did not look to another realm for an understanding of our existence but he explored the world around us and found understanding through a detailed examination of all we find around us
What method did Aristotle use
His method is known as ‘per genus et per differentia’ meaning by type and by difference for example if I noticed a Guinea pig I would first learn by seeing what type of animal it is, a rodent. Then I would see how it differs from other rodents and by examining these things closer and closer I gain more knowledge of this guinea pig and indirectly my knowledge of other creatures would increase
What would this ‘per genus et per differentia’ lead to
This process of reflective categorisation would for Aristotle lead me to a closer understanding of thing itself
What is Aristotle’s take on knowledge and how is it different to Plato
His take on knowledge is that we are taught things such as maths and learn through practice the difference here to Plato is that for Aristotle knowledge is based on careful observations and reflection and our knowledge is not innate
What does he point out about infant prodigies
That they only come about from certain disciplines like maths or music not history or politics which require a different type of knowledge and in this way he recognises that somethings are learned better through a book or taught
What example can be given about knowledge which couldn’t be achieved through platonic means
The example of how he observed and eclipse of the Moon and observed the shadows go across the Moon and through his observation he concluded that the Earth was a sphere because the shadow cast could only be one of a spherical object and this type of knowledge couldn’t be achieved through platonic means
How does Aristotle attempt to answer cause and effect
He attempts to answer it by not how x = y but why x and y are in themselves
What is the first cause
The material cause: this is simply what something is made of ie a table of wood. Without material a thing could not be and he says
What quote does he give about cause
‘That out of which a thing comes to exist and which continued is called ‘cause’
What is the second cause
The formal cause which is essentially the shape of a thing, a bowl is a bowl because of how it is shaped, it’s form. If it were not shaped in that way it wouldn’t be a bowl
What is the third cause
The efficient cause: something does not just happen, it has an external thing which brings about the effect like a sculptor makes a statue. He also thinks natural things have efficient causes like a rose’s efficient cause are the natural processes that bring it to be a rose
What is the fourth cause
The final cause: generally we thing a cause only can happen with an effect because cause follows effect but for Aristotle the purpose for which something exists is a cause, the final cause. The maker of a bowl creates it for a purpose like holding food so the bowl is made for the sake of its use. For Aristotle this is true of everything
What does he assume of nature
That it is purposive (has a goal and reason for being)
How does he implement purpose in his Nicomachean Ethics (human body)
He believes everything in the world has purpose and if we examine the human body we would find a purpose for each of the parts and from this he gauges that each person must then also have a purpose
To him what is a good person
A good person to him is one that fulfils her purpose like a good horse is good at being a horse good people are good at being people
How did Aristotle apply his logic to the universe
He followed his logic of the final cause by assuming that the universe has a final cause (purpose) and for him this purpose was god
What did he believe of god and how did that differ to Abraham if religions
He believed god was everlasting and perfect and the difference between the Abrahamic immanent god is that his god was transcendent and is not listening because he is not interested in the world
What does Aristotle mean by perfection when referring to the prime mover
Perfection in this context means that the only things worthy of contemplation by a perfect being is a perfect object of thought so this prime mover only contemplates himself
What is the final cause of the universe
It is to seek this god but without any conscious attraction from this god himself. For Aristotle the universe has no efficient cause and has always just been there so the effect of the prime mover is not as creator but rather something which creates movement and change by exercising a pull on things because the final cause of things is to seek their own perfection
Objection 1 to Aristotle (fallacy)
The fallacy of composition: it is an error in reasoning where the assumption is what is true of the part is true of the whole. Even if it were true that parts of the body have a purpose doesn’t mean it’s true the person has a purpose and modern anatomy can support this. What is the purpose of the nipple on a man
Objection 2 to Aristotle and quote
In the universe there are many rocky lumps and expanses that serve no end. Evolution on earth has been described by scientists as blind. Famously Bertrand Russell said ‘I should say the universe is just there and that’s all’ suggesting Aristotle is finding purpose where it is not
Objection 3 to Aristotle (prime mover)
He uses the idea of the prime mover to explain motion and change in the world but this assumes that motion and change have a single reason to occur. However we can see around us this is not the case and there are many reasons. Then it is difficult to see how one prime mover can be assumed to be the cause of all and if there are many causes of change it seems illogical to jump from that to a single explanation
Objection 4 to Aristotle (efficient cause)
His assumptions about efficient cause can be questioned, he gives the name of efficient cause to that which brings about a change in things but it is a mistake to think that because you have named something you have then explained it. Something bring about change known as efficient cause but that doesn’t tell us what has happened only that something has happened and the term is used to cover such a broad range of changed that it seems to not be that informative
