Plato's Concepts Of Epistemology And Metaphysics

Plato's concepts of epistemology and metaphysics are very closely connected and are directly related to how we come to know things. What separates these two ideas is how each aspect deals with knowledge. There is an important difference between the knower and the known. The knowing aspect is a central focus of epistemology, while the objects that can be known are central to Plato's metaphysics. The divided line allows us to clearly distinguish between the two different disciplines.

Plato's dualistic approach to metaphysics is composed of two different realms of existence. One realm deals with the ever changing physical world while the other, The Forms, deals with world of the unchanging. Plato believed that these two realms could be further divided. The world of Forms is broken up into two concepts, the concept of Mathematical forms and the concept of Ethical forms. The world of sense, the visible world, is broken up into things and images. The concept of things represents ordinary objects that we perceive, just as the concept of images represents shadows, reflections and pictures that we perceive.

As mentioned earlier, Plato's argument of metaphysics has an epistemological counterpart. The way in which we can know the objects of reality is very important for Plato. Much like his concept of metaphysics, Plato breaks down his concept of epistemology into two categories: Knowledge and Belief. According to Plato, knowledge is always true and justifiable while belief can be true or false and can be a matter based on persuasion. Plato uses his Allegory of the Cave to introduce these distinctions of knowledge and belief.

Plato's concept of the soul also takes on a multi-pronged approach. Plato divides the human soul into three Meros...

... middle of paper ...

...t true human nature. It is in our nature to deviate from one another, to disagree, to hold different beliefs. It is also part of our nature to not be perfect. It seems almost impossible to fathom a scenario where citizens are given certain roles and are consistently complacent with those roles. We have no way of determining what drives a person, what their wants and desires are, until that person makes them known. It is that mystery of a person’s true desires that makes it almost illogical to assign someone a role before their true personality comes to fruition. This repressive aristocracy does not let a person’s true potential flourish, barring that person from being the best they can be in a field only they know they are suitable for. That’s why in a free society people can achieve true happiness by making a life that is centered on their passions and talents.