Plato Flashcards
(13 cards)
Never step same river twice
Heraclitus greek philosopher question possibility gaining knowledge man never steps into the same river twice”.
both man river change. world in state of ‘flux’ So moment we know something, it changes
how do we get knowledge?
Both Plato Aristotle trying to answer this
Plato rationalism theory forms+ cave
Rationalism -epistemological theory knowledge can only be gained a priori, not from experience.
Plato’s cave showes rationalism+theory of forms.
Prisoners trapped in cave all their life think shadows see on wall are real world. One day prisoner escapes (philosopher) sees actual real world.
think world we see is real world, butisn’t (that’s why we can’t gain knowledge from experience).
true world-WOF
forms perfect, eternal, unchanging forms of the everyday things we experience.
we experience imperfect versions of real form those things partake in. E.g. if we look at a beautiful sunset, we are looking at form of beauty, but because our minds are trapped in ignorance, we see particular imperfectly beautiful thing that will change.
Plato is accepting Heraclitus’ issue that we can’t gain knowledge from experience, but is proposing another method – pure a priori reason.
Counter
is no empirical evidence for forms
However, Plato wouldn’t think this is a criticism.thinks evidence from experience just shadows on wall of cave. So Plato thinks it’s good there is no evidence for forms!
To criticise Plato must show that he’s wrong to discount evidence.
Aristotle has a better upgraded critique of Plato – says we can gain knowledge from experience/evidence – through studying causal processes responsible for change we observe.
Aristotle argues this makes theory of forms unnecessary- can explain world without them.
Evaluation
Aristotle’s approach successful it led to modern science.
prisoners in Plato’s cave observing illusions might work against Aristotle’s early version of scientific method which only had observation.
Modern science combines observation with experiment. This has allowed us to control, transform predict world. This active dynamic relationship with experience cant be reduced to prisoners passively observing shadows.
the success of modern science escapes Plato’s critique.
Plato is wrong to disregard the value of evidence.
Hierarchy forms+ form of good
- form of good illustrated by Plato in analogy of cave by sun
- the first thing escaped prisoner (philosopher) sees.
- form of good is like sun-allows us to know WOF -is responsible for all existence of other forms. This makes it highest form.
- Anyone who understands form of , good becomes morally perfect person – it makes it impossible for you to do wrong and so a philosopher with this understanding should be called a ‘philosopher king’.
- Below form good are the higher forms like justice and beauty.
- Below are perfect mathematical forms.
- Below forms of the things we see in our experience, e.g. the form of tableness.
Counter
- Criticism form of good
- Aristotle adds that there can’t be one unified form of good which captures all diverse+contextual forms of goodness in this world.
- E.g. in military strategy ‘good’ is efficiently killing people
- But, in medicine ‘good’ is efficiently keeping people alive
- Aristotle points out being good person, i.e., being virtuous, is required to do good, not merely knowing what goodness is.
- Plato is being too optimistic or just inventing the form of the good because he wanted philosophers to rule society.
- Nietzsche called form of good a ‘dangerous error’ claimed philosophers tend to invent ideas to justify their emotional prejudices, such as a desire for power.
Evaluation
Aristotle & Nietzsche’s arguments are successful because:
- Nietzsche has a point that human reason is susceptible to influence from our desires. Hume argued similarly, that reason is a ‘slave’ of the passions.
- Plato’s rationalism based on an overly-optimistic view of human reason, that it could in principle break free of influence from our desires.
- clearest evidence for this point against Plato is that a morally perfect person has never been observed in history. So Plato’s form of the good is unrealistic.
- Plato tried to dismiss empiricism as invalid due to its potential to be mistaken, however he has overlooked that reason alone can also be mistaken and even corrupted.
- Nietzsche’s suspicion of Plato’s motives does seem warranted because of the way Plato uses the form of the good to justify dictatorship.
Aristotle 4 causes
- knowledge = experience
- forms what we observe immanent realism
- material objects hylomorphic combo matter form
- knowledge needs understanding of why the thing exists
- work out how the process of change happened which is responsible for what we experience observe why exists
- so Aristotle says can get knowledge while we are in state of change
- 4 causes material what made of wood , formal essence defining characteristics shape , efficient who did it carpenter, final end of gaol built into its nature telos exactly how science works
Counter
- Francis Bacon =concept telos’ unscientific
- modern scientific view universe just atoms+energy in fields of force is no space in our scientific understanding of universe for anything like telos
- Physicist Sean Carroll purpose is not built into architecture’ of universe.
- Telos looks like outdated unscientific concept which people mentally project onto reality but doesn’t actually exist.
Evaluation
- modern science critique of Aristotle is successful because is improved version of his own empiricist epistemology.
- Aristotle thinks acorn growing into oak tree must be explained by final cause but modern science can explain it through material+efficient causation of acorn’s DNA environment.
- change Aristotle thought telos required to explain can actually be explained by non-teleological causation.
- So, final cause unnecessary unscientific concept.
- Modern science does show some details of Aristotle’s theory are not all correct, though material and efficient causation are still valid.
- Modern science isn’t attacking Aristotle’s method though, in fact it uses his empirical method but an updated version.
So Aristotle’s general approach was right, even if it was underdeveloped and got some details wrong as a result.
Aristotle PM
- explain ultimate source of change we observe, Aristotle argued PM
- For Aristotle motion involves all the change we experience.
- thought universe always existed, but thought that nonetheless the continual motion within it needed an explanation.
- Observation suggests this, e.g. if you roll a ball, it will stop.
- stars+planets have not stopped moving, however.
- So must be a PM eternally sustaining motion of stars, as well as the terrestrial motion +change we experience.
- This ultimate source of motion could not derive its motion from something else so must be unmovable, with no potentiality to change, a being of pure actuality.
- can’t be physical, since material beings can change decay. It is an eternal immaterial mind.
- If thought about anything changeable, it would itself change. So never thinking of anything else.
- thought immaterial beings couldn’t directly push or pull physical beings.
- so PM issnt the efficient cause of the universe or the motion in the universe.
- It is the final cause of the universe. It causes motion through attraction of things to its perfection. Imperfect things oriented towards their good end are thereby attracted to the perfect actuality of the prime mover.
This is what explains the motion that we observe – it is the transition of things from potential to actual through four causes due to attraction to the final cause of the prime mover.
Counter
- Modern science since Newton has rejected Aristotle’s views on motion.
- Newton’s concept of inertia says if you move something, it will continue to move unless met by an equal+opposite reaction. A rolling ball will stop because of transfer of kinetic energy into friction energy, not because motion runs out.
- Inertia shows that continuous motion doesn’t need a special explanation like a PM
- Anthony Kenny concludes Newton’s law “wrecks” Aristotle’s argument.
E.g. if you throw a ball in space – it will just keep going, because there’s no friction. So that’s why the stars and planets are still moving.
So, according to modern science there is no need for the prime mover.
Evaluation
- concept of PM seems outdated, though Aristotle’s attempt to find an explanation for motion was a valid empirical project.
So, Aristotle had many outdated beliefs about world, but his underlying method for knowing reality was valid. In fact that is the method Newton himself developed and used.
Science is always progressing and updating, but Aristotle was right to use and pioneer the scientific method.
