Greek Philosophy A02 Flashcards
1
Q
how are Aristotle and Plato similar in terms of how they understand God
A
- (P) form of the Good and (A) ideas about prime mover have both been profoundly influential on the Christian understanding of God
- (P) form of good gives concept of good as perfect source of goodness - what goodness fundamentally means with an ultimate reality which is unchanging unlike the physical world/human goodness
- (A) prime mover gives understanding of god who is ultimate cause of all that exists but is himself not caused by anything
2
Q
how are Aristotle and Plato similar in terms of giving answers
A
- both form of good and prime mover give an answer to question of why things exist all
- form of good is top of hierarchy illuminating everything else - physical things just imitations of the forms and so without the forms nothing else exists
- prime mover is primary cause of existence - the reason everything is in motion and the first cause of all cause and effect in this world
3
Q
how are Aristotle and Plato similar in terms of the existence of God
A
- both form of the good and the prime mover like the God of Christianity have an independent necessary existence
- not brought into being by anything outside of themselves
- do not depend on anything else in order to continue their existence
4
Q
what is the form of good and prime mover unconcerned with
A
- like God of Christianity, neither take an interest in the moral affairs of humanity
- form of good does not have a mind with which to take an interest in anything
- the Prime Mover cannot interact with the world otherwise it would be changed
- although both understood as perfect neither cares or is capable of noticing whether humans behave morally
5
Q
what are the differences between the form of the good and the prime mover
A
- form of good has no activity - no intentions or emotions or a mind
- prime mover draws things towards itself by attraction making them move or change
- prime mover thinks of itself and own perfect nature whereas FofG does not have a mind to think with
- FofG is solely goodness whereas PM is to do with motion cause and change rather than morality
- FofG is something humans might be able to encounter once they have left this physical life but there is no suggestions humans could gain further knowledge of the PM after death
- neither created or personally concerned with the world
- FofG is not conscious, PM is
- FofG is a hypothesis to explain what things like goodness really is to find a permanent in world of change while PM provides its own explanation of change the problem that had worried plato in first place
- FofG is a refuge from change - PM explains it
6
Q
discuss Plato’s rationalism
A
- presents view that reason is the ultimate way to gain knowledge
- advocates it as the physical world of constant change cannot give us the certainty we need to gain knowledge
- reason gives us answers where there is no room for doubt
- truths arrived at through reason seem to have an unshakeable and enduring quality e.g. never wont be a straight line between two points that isn’t the shortest distance
- for a rationalist a wise person is one who has spent time in contemplation perhaps living withdrawn from the everyday world
7
Q
discuss Aristotle’s empiricism
A
- primary source of all our knowledge is experience
- according to the empiricist we encounter the world through our senses first and then use sense experience to form our concepts
- we can’t picture colours we have never seen
- even when we make up fantasy worlds as children we use sense experience as a basis
- mind can reach knowledge by reflecting on sense - sense has to come first
- a wise person is one who has travelled widely and lived through different situations
8
Q
why do people argue we need both empiricism and rationalism
A
- no need to choose
- in some areas of knowledge reason is more important like in maths
- but in other areas like the arts sense experience is more important
- but in all areas of knowledge we need both to reach understanding
- but this leaves open question of which comes first
- do we start with concepts and then recognise beauty
- or do we see things and follow this with concept they’re beautiful
9
Q
how would a rationalist argue reason is superior
A
- because our senses can often mislead us whereas when we use the logical processes of reason we can be much more certain of our conclusions
- reason can override what our senses tell us
- pencils look bent in water but reason tells us they are not
10
Q
how would an empiricist argue experience is superior
A
- reason is limited unless it has sense experiences to provide it with information
- i can’t tell using reason whether it’s starting to rain on my washing outside I need to look
11
Q
general strengths of Aristotle’s theory
A
- thinking based on cause and effect - basis of much scientific understanding and thus theory is based on reality at least as we know and experience it
- more believable/reliable as based on studies of natural world and we have empirical evidence for it/can test it
- (A) thinking been more influential than Plato - indication that it is more compelling, convincing, successful and plausible etc..
- his focus on the natural world reminds us of the importance of studying and discovering this world - this world is interesting and we have much to discover we don’t need World of the Forms
12
Q
what are the weaknesses of Aristotle’s theory
A
- PM doesn’t interact with the world - different to Christian God
- science proven there is a set beginning to universe - refutes (A) idea that universe is eternal and undermines PM as final cause (a first efficient cause would make more sense)
- as if (A) had to create PM to make his 4 causes logical esp with regard to efficient and final causes it seems unnecessary construct
- final cause may be difficult to pinpoint
- his ideas are complex esp PM as final not efficient cause - says contingent matter requires a necessary being to create things but science shows matter can be created spontaneously
13
Q
discuss nihilism as a weakness of Aristotle’s theory
A
- concept of final cause as the weakest of 4 causes
- nihilism suggests that nothing has an ultimate cause surely we ascribe our own purposes to things depending on our own needs
- flour e.g. has no purpose till we give it one
- therefore things may have extrinsic purposes but how can be be sure things have an intrinsic one
- universe could just be result of chance
14
Q
strengths of Aristotle’s four causes theory
A
- material/formal cause is a strong concept - can be tested/verified with empirical evidence and so reliable and convincing
- 4 causes is grounded in empirical evidence and experiences - clearly everything does have a material and formal cause and we can easily identify the efficient cause
15
Q
what are the general strengths of Plato’s theory
A
- theory of forms/analogy requires us to look beyond our everyday experience and ask important questions about truth and reality
- may not make sense to think about everyday objects as forms many philosophers agree we have intuitive sense of goodness - makes more sense when applied to big concepts like truth and beauty - no need to stretch it to logical extremes
- makes more sense from a world view that includes belief in God - forms in mind of god before creation in physical world
- help us understand why imperfects in the world - this world imperfect compared to World of Forms
- can’t disprove idea of innate knowledge as we learn to speak we will already have had experience
- analogy of cave - can be fooled by those around us who shape our view - need to question assumptions about world and not take everything at face value - important lesson
- process of realising truth is painful - refute those who criticise it as too hard to believe - its not supposed to be easy!
