Plato, in the “Republic “, ambitiously sets out to prove that art imitates reality by distracting us from the truth and appeals to socially destructive emotions. He continued his statement by referring that art provides no real knowledge, and that it undermines personal and social well being. In this paper, I will argue that Plato makes an invalid implicit assumption that the representation of life through arts is dangerous and doesn’t define the truth since it uses imitation. I will demonstrate that art might be misleading and can indeed influence the development of one’s moral character; however, it can be beneficial as it purges the tragic emotions. Moreover, art, as a philosophical branch, is using the same emotive and rational methods as philosophy not only to represent the forms, but also to find the truth.
While the world of physical appearances is variable and irrational, and it only bears reality to the extent that it succeeds in capturing the idea. To live the best life that you can and to be happy and do good, as a person you have to strive to understand and imitate the ideas as best as you can. So, with this philosophy in mind we can understand why Plato considered art as just a mindless pleasure. He viewed art as just an imitation.
Plato took it up as a principle of Being. “If the concept represents all the reality of things, the reality must be something in the ideal order, not necessarily in the things themselves, but rather above them, in a world by itself” (Chaput, C. p.2). For the concept,therefore, Plato substitutes the Idea. He completes the work of Socrates by teaching that the objectively real Ideas are the foundation and justification of scientific knowledge. At the same time he has in mind a problem which claimed much attention from pre-Socratic thinkers, the problem of change.
The act of coming to truth must be done from the basis of a humans own life. Though philosophy itself is a basis of truth, philosophy functions in poetry, for instance the poets philosophy on a topic, which inherently makes poetry able to be a means of truth as well. An example of this is seen in the Plato’s [book] Phaedrus when in Diot... ... middle of paper ... ...ose its purpose by being put through a filter, though. Poetry actually gains more purpose due to being more widely understood. Consequently, though Plato makes a good argument pertaining to poetry, the role of the poet, and the role of the individual who choose to recite poetry, Plato forgets to include how poetry fits into our ultimately sense of humanity.
In Poetics, Aristotle examines poetry based on three aspects: the medium, objects, and mode of imitation. According to Aristotle, poetry has a natural rhythm and language that is used to convey various ideas. The maker or the poet creates the meter, which is either original or an imitation of previous works. It is part of human nature to imitate. While Aristotle does caution against imitation, he acknowledges that imitation can have value.
When the recipient feels more pleasure, they would be deeply infected by the artist. But if the artist fail to transmit the feelings they lived through, the recipient would repel. Tolstoy emphasizes that “the presence in various degrees of these three conditions: individuality, clearness, and sincerity, decides the merit of a work of art, as art, apart from which they fulfill the first, the second, and the third of these conditions” (Tolstoy 181). Tolstoy states that when we successful transmit our emotions to another individual, it brings people together as one. He concludes that art is extremely important to human life because it teaches us how to communicate our thoughts clearly and sincerely.
The prisoner's ability to realize the truth or the being makes the "others" misunderstand him because they are only seeing the shadowy representation of reality. As a result, a re-reading of Plato's work might prove the idea that both philosophy and theatre are asking the same question concerning the nature of existence and the search for meaning in a world without absolutes. Plato's view of art in The Republic was to inform his society that art serves to shape character and educate it. Hence, art must be strictly under control. Furthermore, Plato believed that art is a copy of a copy, and that art work imitates the real while the real thing is only an imitation of an idea which is what Plato called "the really real."
For him, the notion of ‘form’ was present in all of matter and the dissimilarity between it and the actual material that constituted an object was merely an intellectual one. This bears a relation to art since, for both, Plato and Aristotle, art is an imitation. However, the two philosophers interpret the nature... ... middle of paper ... ...uld have banned, instead of recommend music and stories for the young in the Republic. Plato was more wary of art’s seductive shadow potential than the was aware of its positive potential. Therefore, Plato would most likely have advocated that Antigone only be played in front of an audience well in control of its faculties and prone to little or no emotional reactions.
According to the philosopher, Art and Tragedy are copies of copies, the copies of the sensible world. He argues that there is a crisis on moral grounds: Art encourages and stimulates passions inducing human beings' to approach them. For Aristotle on the contrary, the creation of an Artwork allows for the materialization of an idea and then its manifestation. According to the philosopher, beauty is order and symmetry and Art represents its imitation, not limited just to the reproduction of the sensible world. There then came a complete revaluation of the concept of Art that Plato despised, with new ideas explaining Art as not representing the imitation of the sensible world, but of ideas themselves.
What then is the meaning of existence in philosophy? In order to answer this question we shall examine how philosophers have used the term in their various works. Our attention shall focus on Plato and Sartre. Plato’s view on existence Plato’s view on existence can be understood by discussing his theory of Forms. The theory of Forms or Ideas is about the existence of ideas in higher form of reality, the existence of a reality inhabited by forms of all things and concepts.