Plato - ToF Criticisms Flashcards
Plato and Language
Hare argued the ToF is not entirely a sound theory but rather ‘succeeds’ due to the peculiarities of the Greek language.
“Greek formed abstract nouns through adding the definite article to the neuter adjective, but is not natural in English”
Wittgenstein: we must be wary of the “bewitchment of language”
Russell
Plato was vague as to what objects had Forms. Are forms universal (the Form of a Plant) or are there ideal Forms for each individual plant of every species? Russell termed the idea of the forms as a “bottomless pit of nonsense”.
Aristotle’s 3rd Man
Any form is an ideal instance of the object of its ‘formness’. In becoming a form, it is inherently a Form of itself; the ideal form of something is the ideal form of itself. BUT in doing so, it becomes a particular as much as the original concept to which the form was.
A 2nd form is required to act as a form for the previous form but then falls into the same problem repeated ad infinitum.
Ad absurdum
Similar to Russell.
Explained in the book Parmenides, presents problems but not a destruction of the ToF.
If there are Forms, there must be Forms for any general term; as much as there’s a Form for abstract values - Goodness/Beauty, there must be Forms for Man/Mud/Water. There is the implication there exists a Form for every general term in the language [if a lang doesn’t have a word for something does the Form exist?]
If we’ve a Form for a Man, perhaps exists the Form for a blonde hair, blue eyed, right handed man. Continued to logical conclusion we end with a form of every person; a ‘reductio ad absurdum’.
Problem of Participation
Parmenides.
If the Form of Man participates in lots of different men, the Form exists separately from itself, amongst each individual man; Forms are divisible and thus not eternal/perfect/archetypal.
If only part of the Form is in one man and another part in another man, absurd consequences follow: Forms are reduced to a small fragment in each.
Defence of Participation; Plato’s Answer.
The Form of Man is totally present in many men but yet remains perfect and whole, just as the Day is present in many places but is yet the day wholly. When it is morning in both London and Manchester, it is not the case that one part of the morning is in here and another part there.
Imitation not participation
Another defence against the problem of participation.
Particulars do not participate in the Forms, they imitate the Forms [coherent with idea of the Demiurge [public worker]].
Counter criticism of ‘Imitation not Participation’.
If the Forms are totally separate from our world, we can have no knowledge of them. If the transcendent RoF exists separate to our sensible world, the ‘path of ascent’ [the Cave] is not merely difficult, it is impossible by nature and doesn’t exist.
Plato may have said the only way we may come to know of them is through the recollection of the reasoning part of the Soul, however many reject this as unsatisfactory.
