Plato’s Theory of Forms
Plato, one of the greatest philosophers of all time, has had a
profound effect on subsequent ages. He was born into an aristocratic
Athenian family in about 428 BCE, and his are the earliest writings of
philosophical findings that have been recorded. However Plato not only
recorded his own findings, but those of his teacher, Socrates.
Socrates, a man who was known by the Grecians to be a ‘hornet’,
forever hovering around, standing up to things, questioning everything
and generally being a busybody, was not seen like that in the eyes of
Plato. Plato admired Socrates for his teachings, and of his Dialectic
method, which was to question and answer everything to show up mortal
ignorance, and get as close as possible to ‘Real Knowledge’.
However, Socrates never had chance to write down his experiences, he
only taught by word of mouth, forever battling against the Sophists,
in trying to prove that philosophy wasn’t just a profession as they
thought, but a way of life. Socrates career and life came to a bitter
end in 399 BCE, when he was sentenced to death by poison with a charge
of corrupting the young (namely young philosophers like Plato) and of
introducing new Gods. Instead of leaving Athens forever or appealing
for leniency, Socrates decided to give up his life in the name of
philosophy and the search for truth.
Even though the death of Socrates upset and disgusted Plato, he was
filled with enthusiasm and awe at how Socrates had stood up for his
beliefs. Therefore, Plato continued his research into philosophical
findings, and made Socrates live on, through his own writings, which
he named Dialogues. He ...
... middle of paper ...
...the concepts and ideas. The fourth stage in the hierarchy,
or order of importance are physical living objects, e.g. humans, and
after them, the physical inanimate objects, for example a book or a
chair.
Ultimately, the theory of Forms is intended to explain how one comes
to know and also how things have come to be as they are. In
philosophical language, Plato's theory of Forms is both theory of
knowledge and theory of being. The people who have the most knowledge
of this will be philosophers, so they should rule. We can get to gain
‘real knowledge’ – this knowledge is certain, there is a right and
there is a wrong, whereas the knowledge we are normally used to –‘
Empirical knowledge’ is largely based on opinion and is therefore not
accurate. It is a long, painful process to real knowledge, but
extremely worth it.
In this paper I will give an in depth analysis of Socrates argument in Plato’s Republic and in Plato’s Phaedo. First I will begin with the analysis of the Republic, a discussion between Socrates and Glaucon on morality of the human being. The argument first defines morality within a good community and proceeds with the application of this definition in the human person. Then I shall analysis Phaedo, Socrates argument of immortality of the soul. Using his argument of death, reincarnation, change and invisibility, I shall explain Socrates rejoice of death. In conclusion, I will compare Socrates notion of immortality, apply it to his definition of morality and prove a contradiction between the two.
Thrasymachus, Polemarchus, Cleitophon, and Socrates’ heated debate over the nature of justice in Book 1 of The Republic of Plato comes to an intriguing point of argument wherein both parties go back and forth over justice being the “advantage of the stronger”(15). It is clear that Socrates presents a more sound and logical counterargument as he calls upon the duties and abilities of professionals in their fields and how they benefit not only themselves but humanity at large as well. His skill in argument serves him well and the clear victor in the debate as the textual evidence is easily observable both in Plato’s presentation of the squabble and in Thrasymachus’ responses.
A brief history of the death penalty is in order so that one can be aware of this laws nature since that is how one would start to understand how it can be applied most virtuously and to understand its morality. The death penalty can be traced as far back as the Eighteenth Century, B.C.E. where the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon applied the death penalty to be instated as a punishment for 25 different crimes. Also it has been seen in the Fourteenth Century B.C.E in the Hittite Code; in the Seventeenth Century B.C.E’s Draconian Code of Athens (a code which made the only punishment for all crimes death); and in the Fifth Century B.C.E.’s Roman Law of the Twelve Tablets(this law was the start of a formal law which carried out death sentences by means such as crucifixion, drowning, beating to death, burring alive, and impalement)
Plato and Aristotle were both very influential men of there time bringing vast knowledge to the world. I honestly believe that Democracy does a lot of good but it definitely has some common side effects. Out of all of Plato's significant ideas, his best was the idea of democracy opening political decisions to the majority who cannot think on behalf of the community. Aristotle on the other hand is very optimistic when it comes to democracy so it becomes a rather interesting compare and contrast between these to men.
Socrates' ideal city is described through Plato in his work The Republic, some questions pondered through the text could be; How is this an "ideal" city formed, and is justice in the city relative to that of the human soul? I believe Socrates found the true meaning of justice in the larger atmosphere of the city and applied that concept to the human soul. Socrates describes his idea of an "ideal city" as one that has all the necessary parts to function and to show that justice is truly the harmony between the three stages of the city and soul in the human body.
Plato was born around 427 BC, in Athens Greece to rich and politically involved family. Plato's parents spared no expense in educating him; he was taught at the finest schools. He was taught by Socrates and defended Socrates when he was on trial. Plato traveled to Italy and may have even visited Egypt before founding The Academy. Plato also visited Sicily and instructed a young king there before returning to The Academy to teach for twenty years before his death in 347 BC at the age of eighty.
tied down so that they may not move or look backwards. All they see is
Plato’s Republic introduces a multitude of important and interesting concepts, of topics ranging from music, to gender equality, to political regime. For this reason, many philosophers and scholars still look back to The Republic in spite of its age. Yet one part that stands out in particular is Plato’s discussion of the soul in the fourth book of the Republic. Not only is this section interesting, but it was also extremely important for all proceeding moral philosophy, as Plato’s definition has been used ever since as a standard since then. Plato’s confabulation on the soul contains three main portions: defining each of the three parts and explanation of their functions, description of the interaction of the parts, and then how the the parts and their interaction motivate action. This essay will investigate each segment, and seek to explain their importance.
Confusion plagues everyone in the world. Daily people are subject to struggles that involve them being confused and allow them to not fully take in what the world has to offer. Confusion simply put is the "impaired orientation with respect to time, place, or person; a disturbed mental state." With that said it is evident that many things a susceptible to confusion, and being confused. When reading Plato one cannot
Plato widely a respected philosopher and is arguably one of the greatest philosophers of all time. I knew nothing about him or what he stood for before taking this course and I found his theory on human nature very exciting. “Plato’s most fundamental contribution to philosophy was the distinction he drew between the changing physical objects we perceive with our senses and the under changing ideals we can know with our minds.” What Plato means is when we see something that we think is good or bad that there is good strong reasoning behind why we think the way we do. I find this very intriguing because, this it pertains to how I feel about everyday things and big Icons. For example, when hanging out at a friend’s house that is considerably richer
In my opinion, Socrates’ analysis of human nature is very true as it ultimately brings us
Most people have indulged in the perfect wine, made love to the perfect person while possibly wearing the perfect outfit. Or have they? Is there a such thing as perfection, if so can we attain it? No. Nothing in this world is perfect because it is impossible to create perfection. According to Plato's Theory of Forms, perfection cannot exist in the physical world but only the realm of the philosophers; the ones who choose to lurk deeper in the veiled mysteries of metaphysics.
This essay attempts to present a critical analysis of the literary works of Plato. Plato's literary work span is wide containing issues pertaining to justice, social life, specific virtues, good ruler's knowledge, value of justice, love and many others. The philosophical tones of Plato resembled very much with that of Socrates addressing the similar issues in his own Platonic version of dialogues. The Republic and the citizen played an important role in his work in addressing to the various social issues and intricate understanding of the human nature of human responsibilities in a republic. Plato's parents were wealthy and influential Athenian who chose Socrates as a teacher of Plato. After the death of Socrates, Plato undertook travel journeys to Egypt and Italy and analyzed the life specific issues alongside the students of Pythagoras spending several years advising the ruling family of Syracuse. Plato was a literary fellow who had established his own philosophy school trying to convey the teachings of Socrates. His works included Scoratic thinking style and mathematical learning.
body, the mind and the soul. The body is the physical part of the body