Ancient Philosophical influences Flashcards
(19 cards)
Plato’s understanding of reality
-we=understanding the world incorrectly-> minds are trapped in a state of ignorance+bc of this we experience imperfect things in the realm of appearances
-True reality must be perfect, eternal and unchanging-> Plato-realm of forms
-‘particulars’- imperfect representations of the forms-> experienced in the realm of appearances
Plato’s allegory of the Cave
Uses this to explain human ignorance that prevents us from experiencing the true forms of objects
-in allegory humans are trapped in ignorance, mistaking shadows on a wall for reality
- cave- world of appearances, the shadows- false beliefs, the journey out of the cave- path of knowledge, the sun-> form of the Goods, the freed prisoner-> philosopher who seeks truth beyond the physical world
Counter of Plato’s view on reality
lacks empirical evidence-> altho Plato would say evidence can’t be trusted bc they r imperfect representation of world of forms-> Plato’s forms r unchanging so can’t explain the change we experience in the world
Aristotle- the forms are “nonsense, and even if they do exist, they are wholly irrelevant”.
->like an early version of Ockham’s razor- shouldn’t believe explanations that are unnecessarily complicated, e.g. a world of forms, when there’s a simpler theory that works.
The form of the good and hierarchy of the forms
Plato- philosopher with understanding of form of the goods (FOG) should rule as a ‘philosopher king’ as it is impossible for them to do wrong
Below fog r higher forms like justice and beauty-> aspects of goodness
↓ lower forms we experience e.g. treeless
↓ material objects that we experience images of e.g. particular trees
Criticism of form of the good
Aristotle- idea of one unified form of the good doesn’t fit with our experience. harder
classify goodness having 1 single essence as different instances of goodness r so radically different.
E.g.the good in military strategy is how to efficiently kill ppl, whereas the good in medicine is how to keep people alive
Aristotle concludes there cannot be one unified form of ‘goodness’.
Criticism of Plato’s theory of the forms
The third man argument
Plato claims if there’s a group of things tht share characteristics, e.g. a group of trees, they must all be partaking in a form of treeness.
-> Aristotle argues this creates a new group of things which share characteristics: the trees and the form of treeness, +according to Plato’s logic they must have a form tht they partake, yet tht simply creates a new group of things which share characteristics which require another form-> leads to an infinite regress.
-> undermines idea of the forms tht there’s a particular single form of a quality that explains the multiple particular instances of that quality experienced in the world of appearances.
Plato (response) forms can’t partake of anything but themselves. Since things share characteristics by partaking in a form, yet forms themselves cannot partake in another form, forms can’t share characteristics with particulars
So The third man argument rests on a misunderstanding of the relationship between forms and particulars
Plato’s argument of recollection
Copy and paste from soul body and mind word doc
Rationalism
The belief that knowledge can be gained through reason a priori
Aligns with Plato
Empiricism
The belief that knowledge can be gained through experience-> a posteriori
Aligns with aristotle
Aristotle’s 4 causes
Actuality- the way something is in its current state.
Potentiality- the way actual things could become given certain conditions
If certain conditions r met, potentiality will become its actuality.
E.g. a seed has the potential to become a tree only if certain conditions r met
To go from cause—effect something must change by going through 4 causes.
Material cause: what a thing is made of. E.g. the material cause of a chair is whatever it is made from, e.g. wood
Formal cause: what the defining characteristic of a thing is. E.g. formal cause of a chair is its shape.
Efficient cause: what brings the being into existence. E.g. efficient cause of a chair is whoever made it.
Final cause – telos (purpose): the end goal of a thing. E.g. the final cause of a chair is to be sat on.
Different from Plato bc he rejects idea of the form being separate from the thing
Criticism of Aristotle’s 4 causes
Purpose is unscientific Bacon criticised Aristotle, claiming that final causation (telos/purpose) has no place in empirical science but is a metaphysical issue, as purpose is a divine matter.
McGrath- modern Christian philosophers (e.g. Swinburne) have argued science can answer the what but not why
-> Science can tell us what the universe is like, but it can’t explain its purpose so can’t be used to disregard the existence of purpose.
Response to criticism on 4 causes
Dawkins- when we ask ‘why’ about purpose it becomes ‘a silly question’. Just bc a question can be phrased using the English language, that doesn’t make it valid.
Uses analogy: ‘what is the color of jealousy?’ -> question assuming jealousy has a color.
questions of purpose also assume existence has a purpose beyond scientific explanation, when there’s no evidence for that.
Criticism of telos (final cause)
Humans r scared of having no purpose
Sartre- no objective telos bc “existence precedes essence” -> humans exist before they have a defined purpose so have to subjectively define their purpose for themselves.
-Aristotle idea of a ‘final telos’ stems from the human fear of having no purpose+ scared of the intensity of the freedom that comes from having to create their own purpose
Sartre- this led to feelings of abandonment (by God/objective reality), anguish (over weight of being completely responsible for our actions) and despair (over our inability to act exactly as we’d like due to the constraints of the world).
Counter of criticism of telos
doesn’t provide metaphysical grounds for rejecting telos so is arguably committing the genetic fallacy- assuming that the way in which someone creates a theory is relevant to whether it’s true or false.
Just bc ppl have a psychological need to believe in objective purpose, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
Why counter of criticism of telos fails
misunderstanding of his argument.
Sartre’s starting premise= there’s nothing in our experience of our own mind which suggests we have a telos. All that we experience is ‘radical freedom’ – every choice we make is completely up to us bc we don’t experience things like God or telos
Tht could influence or guide that choice.
Aristotle on form and understanding of soul
Form means essence (defining charcteristic)
claimed the essence of a human being is the ability to reason.
claimed that the soul was the formal cause of the body.
Criticism of aristotle on form and understanding of soul
Bacon- claimed formal causation is a metaphysical matter beyond empiricial study. Uses illustration of the ‘whiteness’ of snow explaining how science answers how snow results from air and water,-> efficient cause, not its colour, the form of ‘whiteness’, which is beyond scientific investigation.
Science can’t explain form
Aristotle’s theory of the Prime Mover
