It is a well known fact that Plato was interested in education in a profound way. Most of his dialogues are concerned with education in different ways. In one of his essays, the Republic, Plato used a series of images to reinforce his claims on education. Plato claims that there can be no end to political unrest unless our rulers or kings do not practice philosophy or are not philosophers.
In the Parable of the Cave, Plato has not fallen short of his emphasis on education; this fictional dialogue between Plato and his teacher Socrates highlights the importance of education in our society. In the first line of the dialogue, Plato shows in a figurative way how enlightened or unenlightened natural man is. The cave conditions are, therefore, a correlation of mans education or lack of it (Plato ,Para 1)
Plato tells us that if the prisoners were unlocked and forced out of the cave, they would prefer to go back and remain in the comfortable and familiar darkness of their caves. However, if they are forced out of the caves completely, they would gradually adapt to change and learn to appreciate.
This, if analyzed, means that education is not an easy thing, and humans do not always welcome the truth but, when they are forced to be educated, they learn to appreciate the truth and incorporate new knowledge (Plato, para 3).
Plato, in earlier pages of the dialogue, distinguishes the visible realm from the intelligent realm. According to him, visible realms are things grasped by perception while intelligent realms are those grasped by reasoning and intelligence. As the prisoner ascents out of the cave, a person stops perceiving things and stars to acquire the intelligent realm that did not exist in the cave.
The objects outside the cave are more real than those that existed in the cave and which were only the likeliness of the outside form. The outside world brings an end to perception and introduces the creation of reasoning. The human soul is ascending to the intelligent realm.
Plato writes that the bounded prisoners are forced to look straight at the light. There would be a pain in their eyes, this will make him look away and seek refuge in the objects which he can see and which he perceives to be the reality than those that were being shown to him.
In comparing this to education, forcing a person to be educated (education is represented by the light) is a high order which would cause pain to the person at first as he prefers to be in his ignorant comfort zone than venture out there to the unknown. This can also be compared with the well known saying, the roots of education are bitter, but the fruit is sweet .
We also notice that the prisoners are turned in the wrong direction, they cannot turn their heads to look behind as their heads are bound by chains. Upon being released from the shackles, the first impulse of the prisoners is to turn their heads to the familiar shadows behind them. Plato describes this as educational orientation.
The purpose of educators is to introduce this orientation (turning the head) to the uneducated. Plato remarks that educators should find simplified and effective ways to turn souls around. They should not implant sight, but should proceed with aligning the eyes to face the right direction knowing that the organ of sight already exists and has the capacity to see (Plato, para 2).
In the last paragraph, Plato introduces us to the fact that eyes bewilderment are of two kinds, that of going out of light and that of going into the light. Similarly, there exist the mind eye and the bodily eye. Plato described a money-lover in one his dialogues, that his reasoning was to sit on either side of the kings feet calculating and researching on how to start with a little money and multiply it.
This description fits into a person with bodily desires and not mind desires, such people have restricted their ambitions to the acquisition of wealth through any mean.
The theory of forms of Plato portrays to us that abstract non-material forms have the highest kind of fundamental reality as compared to this material world that is known well to us by sensation. The authors show Plato speaking about these entities through Socrates, he sometimes suggests the use of these forms. To him, these are the true and only study objects capable of providing genuine knowledge (Wright, 1966).
Theory of Forms
In the metaphysics of Plato, there exists a timeless essence; forms or as otherwise called entities, of being in a level. This metaphysics asserts the existence of a plane transcending beyond the ordinary general perception employed by us to things. Thus the name transcendental is used (Guthrie, 1986).
Plato wanted to provide an explanation that was rational through the forms of theory on how knowledge becomes possible e.g. physics, chemistry. He was also to identify the knowledges objects (Nails, 2002). He was also to provide a way of knowing if something is true knowledge or just an opinion i.e. identify the wise from the unwise. He does say in Timaeus that something that is gotten through reasoning is in that same state always while one by opinion never is and is ever in the becoming process (Cadame, 1999). This relationship is illustrated through Platos use of the dive line concept in which there are awareness levels from the level of imagination moving to the perception level, level of reasoning to the final level of understanding. A person can thus move through from imagination level to the level of understanding if he were to apply a hierarchical form way of thinking (Kahn, 2004).
Form of Good
Residing at the top is the holistic Form of Forms which is only known through thoughts that are pure hence it is good. To Plato, it is compared to the sun (Soccio, 2007). Therefore, just as vision is enabled by the sun, intelligence and a sense of understanding are enabled by being good.
In the cave, the divide line idea is illustrated. A prisoner breaks from the shackles realizing that it is only perceptible objects producing these images (Bakalis, 2005). However, when someone leaves the cave, an illustration of reasoning is portrayed. The person is said to have realized that the cave that they thought was real was a sense limitation. This person is who makes it out is wise and should be the ruler.
Given an example of a table, it could be said to be not real but rather just variations of the truth table. Therefore representations like shape or color just portray variation of the truth table. To Plato, these physical things were not true. He, therefore, theorizes that we live in a corrupt imperfect world and there exists an illusion free spiritual life of which the earth is just a representation it (Haymond, 2005)
Conclusion
The utopia that Plato fantasies i.e. when philosophers are to rule like kings is possible but inevitably hard to come by. Ideally, this utopia could be a wonderful thing as from Platos description there would be rest from evil if there is a coinciding of philosophy and politics. On the theory of forms, there are many abstract things that Plato talks about that seem to be endless. So could it be possible that according to Plato placing importance on objects that existence which of subjective nature is of less importance? Therefore do we conclude that elements such as hunger or itches are of less importance or do we all together ignore this theory of forms?
References
Bakalis, N. (2005). Handbook of Greek Philosophy: From Thales to the Stoics Analysis and Fragments. Trafford Publishing.
Cadame, C. (1999). Indigenous and Modern Perspectives on Tribal Initiation Rites: Education According to Plato. Padilla : Bucknell University Press.
Guthrie, W. (1986). A History of Greek Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Haymond, B. (2005). A Modern Worldview from Platos Cave. Brigham: Brigham Young University.
Kahn, C. H. (2004). The Framework . Plato and the Socratic Dialogue: The Philosophical Use of a Literary Form. Cambridge University.
Nails, D. (2002). Ariston/Perictione . The People of Plato: A Prosopography of Plato and Other Socratics. Hackett Publishing.
Soccio, D. J. (2007). Archetypes of Wisdom : An Introduction to Philosophy. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.
Wright, J.H. (1966). Harvard Studies in Classical Philology. Harvard: JSTOR.
Plato investigates human consciousness in terms of the social cooperation. The way of the personal improvement and education can be confusing and painful. Platos parable The Allegory of the Cave describes a community people who do not acquainted with the external world. Their life goes around the worlds inside the Cave which are symbolized by the shadows on the wall of the Cave and puppets in fire the offset light these shadows.
People in the Cave do not interact with the worlds outside the Cave, reflected in water, the things themselves, including the stars and the moon in the night sky and the sun. Reflecting about the reasons of accepting or declining the information, Plato consists that a closed mind is inborn, although, there is still a chance to open it. Plato considers the ascent to truth confusing and painful, as the people in the Cave have to rebuild their mind and usual comprehension of the things.
Plato discusses about the way of getting the information, thinking about the reason why people behave like they are prisoners of the Cave. If they are prisoners, they must be released. They will get the freedom to contemplate the whole world and to imagine freely. But the point is that they were not forced to stay in darkness. Now they see only offset shadows, games of fire on the wall in front of the Cave where the puppet-handlers are inseparable part of their life.
The people in the Cave are unable to see something else, their heads are motionless and their legs and necks are fixed. This fire is the pure Knowledge, but people are able to see only its shadows. They chose this way which is more safe and easy. It is better to see only the shadows, not the flame that can burn. The outside world can be dangerous, as the sun in eclipse is dangerous to the eyes. There may be a number of terrible things which can destroy the usual way of life.
The terror of the ascent is obvious: the world can be changed and it is impossible to predict the results of such transformation. If people in the Cave were free, they would start to imagine. Every social phenomenon they would explain from a position of superstitions. Educated in the spirit of ignorance, they would take a lot of things for granted. They would look at the world through the prism, the barrier that stands in their minds.
Imagination plays a big part in our perception of the world. Plato considers this position in a negative way. People would like to stay in darkness, instead of suffer from bright light . Communicating with each other and interacting with the outside worlds, people in the Cave would name the objects, would open the new facilities and different elements. This is the way of the ascent; however, people in the Cave will be in a danger.
Nevertheless, the ascent from the shadows to the sun involves not only terror. The beauty of the outside world is worth to be confused at the beginning. The real knowledge is the most valuable thing that can help people in the Cave to improve their life, to forget all fears and prejudices. This knowledge can be achieved only in a way of interaction with the things outside, including stars, moon and sun.
Therefore, it is necessary to claim that people in the Cave, as well as everyone in this world, should not be afraid of the ascent from one world of things to another. All those worlds can be a part of one common world of consciousness which will be a source of the real knowledge.
Obviously, no one wants to consider oneself as a prisoner of a close mind. However, often, we cannot understand that world is bigger than some cave and, although the ascent from one world to another can be complicated, the final result is worth to be achieved. I have experienced such situation with one of my friends. He came to our city from another part of the country and, at the beginning, he did not want to meet people and to communicate with someone.
He lived in his own separated world, studying at home and trying to spend all his time away from people. Only members of his family could talk with him. I wonder how he could see the outside world. For someone who does not talk with people, the local community may seem dangerous, as people may judge the new member. However, it reality it is not true. My local community is welcoming and friendly.
But how the guy who does not talk with someone can understand this? Although his cave allowed him to study, get knowledge about sciences, he could play sports and different games with the members of family, but surely it is not enough for a modern citizen. As his neighbor, I wanted to meet him and to make the acquaintance with a new person. However, honestly, I had a number of doubts about this guy, as such solitary way of life seems strange, especially in case of the young man.
I was invited to his home and we found that both of us can give so many things to each other. I understood that he is well-educated, friendly and funny person who needs someone to help him to involve in the social life. Although sometimes it seems confusing and dangerous to change the habitual way of live, the consequences of such transformation can be absolutely profitable.
Only one who does not scare to move and ascend will get the positive results. However, most of the time, people need someone who can help them to comprehend the necessity of cooperating with other worlds, communities, people and different things.
As the people in Platos Cave are narrow-minded, they chose the life of prisoners by themselves. This bright allusion is always actual characteristic of society. And even today, in the age of the outstanding technical facilities, people still can be afraid to ascend, as they scared of the possible danger and difficulties. People, who were not forced to live in darkness, choose this way for its demonstrative simplicity.
The real knowledge can be found only in case of cooperation of all worlds. However, due to the peculiarities of human consciousness, people may start comprehending the new things from the position of superstitions and barriers in their minds. Thereby, people need someone who can teach them and show the real meaning of the things, to give them a change to improve their live and to get the knowledge.
Ancient Greece was the home of philosophy, and people such as Plato laid the foundation for future thinkers. Despite the fact that over centuries, new ideas arose and became popular, the concepts, methods, and views promoted by Plato stayed relevant and were incorporated into the philosophical positions of numerous other theorists. Augustine is one of the most notable people in the western tradition who has experienced the impact of Platos ideas on his work. Specifically, Plato and Augustine share a similar view in the field of metaphysics, a branch of philosophy which concerns abstract phenomena such as space and time (BieMiller, 2019). The particular abstract topic in which both Plato and Augustine were interested was the concept of the divine. Plato believed that every object had its abstract and divine form, which constituted its original image (Plato, 2015). Augustine based his ideas on the concept of the divine proposed by Plato and postulated that God was the source of all ideal forms (Saint Augustine, 2002). Thus, Platos perspectives significantly affected the theories proposed by Augustine, yet there were also differences between their views on metaphysics.
Main Ideas
First of all, it is important to offer a more detailed insight into the particular position of the two philosophers on metaphysics and concepts such as the divine. As mentioned above, Platos main idea concerned the theory of forms. Plato believed that there were two realms which existed simultaneously, namely, the physical one and one of the forms (Plato, 2015). The physical realm consists of ordinary objects which people interact with numerous times every day, for instance, vases or tables. Yet, there is also the realm of the forms, which also can be called the realm of ideals and the spiritual realm. Such a realm consists of abstract concepts and ideals which are perfect and are not subject to time and space. The forms constitute the original sources of the objects and phenomena which exist in the physical world. Essentially, a phenomenon such as a just decision is only one instance of the ideal form. Plato believed that the forms were divine, as well as singular, immortal, and not subject to any changes (Plato, 2015). Thus, Plato made a clear division between two worlds and considered forms to be divine.
Augustine was a Christian scholar, yet he is also considered one of the main representatives of the Neoplatonism movement in philosophy. As an Early Christian, Augustine engaged in the creation of the philosophical foundation for his religion. Augustine valued the contribution of Plato to the field of philosophy and, particularly, his school of thought. Augustine believed that Platos ideas were consistent with the Christian beliefs and therefore used some of his ideas in his own theories. Specifically, the primary area of Platos philosophical work on which Augustine focused was metaphysics which ultimately shaped Augustines own view of God. Augustine was confident that God constituted the original source of absolute truth and good which reflected Platos theory of forms. For Augustine, God was the source of all forms, and subsequently, all of the objects and phenomena existing in the physical world were manifestations of the ideals kept in the mind of God (BieMiller, 2019). The Neoplatonic views of Augustine also were, to an extent, consistent with the core Christian belief that all humans are created in the image of God.
Similarities
Based on the information presented above, it is clear that Plato and Augustine shared certain similar ideas. In fact, Augustine, since he was familiar with certain texts of Plato, used the ideas of the Greek philosopher and incorporated them into his own version of metaphysics. The core similarity in the views of Plato and Augustine is the universe or the world, which is divided into parts or branches. Essentially, both thinkers recognized the existence of the realm which was intelligible, which was home to the absolute truth and sensible world which could be understood and perceived through senses such as sight and touch. Although the idea of such a bifurcated world initially belonged to Plato, Augustine adopted it and successfully integrated it into his vision of Christian metaphysics. Moreover, both Plato and Augustine considered the intelligible realm as the original source of the divine. Essentially, both philosophers recognized the supremacy of one realm over the other and claimed that there was a clear division between them.
Another metaphysical element which both Plato and Augustine viewed in a similar fashion was the soul. According to Plato, Of all the things which a man has, next to the gods his soul is the most divine and most truly his own (Plato, 2015, p. 274). Thus, Plato considered the soul to be divine and an inalienable part of every human being. Additionally, both thinkers believed that the ultimate mission for every individual, or rather their soul, was the achievement of the union with the eternal and transcendent realm (Nightingale, 2021). As Augustine wrote, When I seek you, my God, I seek a blessed life. I shall seek you, so that my soul may live (Saint Augustine, 2002, p. 59). Essentially, Augustine states that the only way for him to save his soul was to try to adhere to Gods will. Since Plato and Augustine highlight the significance of the soul, they subsequently draw a line between the soul and body. Thus, Plato and Augustine focused on the importance of the soul as the means to explore the higher realm and denied the value of the body.
Differences
At the same time, since Augustine not only borrowed the ideas first introduced by Plato but also changed them, the perspectives of the philosophers differ to a certain extent. The primary difference lies in the fact that Plato did not recognize God as the source of all forms and subsequently of the intelligible realm. Yet, Augustine, in his turn, considered God to be the entity from whose mind all objects and phenomena in the physical world came. Plato was not Christian since he lived many years before Christ, and therefore his views were not subject to the concept of one God. Augustine used Platos theory of forms and the higher realm and adjusted it to fit the Christian metaphysical narrative. Moreover, Augustine switches the focus from the realm of Forms being the source of the divine to God being the source of the divine. Augustine wrote, it is sacrilegious to imagine that there was something located outside of himself (Saint Augustine, 2002, p. 138). Such an idea shows that Augustine was confident that no form or image could exist outside of God and his divine mind.
Additionally, there is a series of other differences in the perspectives of Plato and Augustine in the field of metaphysics. For instance, according to Plato, the demiurge created the universe from the materials and forms which already existed, while Augustine adhered to the idea that God created the universe from nothing (Nightingale, 2021). Plato states that the world is beautiful because it is its inherent attribute and not because it was made by a deity in such a way. It is clear that such an assumption opposes the perspective of Augustine, who believes that God creates reality. Once again, the difference in the views of the two philosophers stems from their perception of the divine. Augustines perspective that God is the source of the divine does not correlate with that of Plato. Thus, despite the fact that the two thinkers share certain similarities in their metaphysics, they also have considerable differences.
Conclusion
Augustine managed to incorporate the ideas of Plato in the field of metaphysics into his work, yet the two thinkers also shared several differences. When Augustine was exposed to the ideas of Plato, he decided to adjust them to fit the Christian perspective. As a result, Augustine was inspired by the idea of a bifurcated world proposed by Plato. Such a world implied dividing the world into two realms, an intelligible and a physical one. Additionally, both Plato and Augustine drew a line between soul and body and claimed that the former had to seek to explore the higher realm. At the same time, Plato considered that the intelligible realm belonged to the forms, ideals of objects, and phenomena found in the physical world. Augustine believed that the higher realm belonged to God, who was the source of all forms and ideas which eventually manifested themselves in the world inhabited by people.
References
BieMiller, M. (2019). Augustine and Plato: Clarifying misconceptions. Aporia, 29(2), 3343.
Nightingale, A. (2021). Philosophy and religion in Platos dialogues. Cambridge University Press.
Plato. (2015). The Plato collection. Catholic Way Publishing.
Saint Augustine. (2002). The confessions of St. Augustine. Courier Corporation.
Socrates and Plato have left a formidable decisive impression of the relationships of the Western mind. The alleged Dark Ages shone extra luminously credit to the Platonic sun. Nevertheless, in spite of their influence on philosophy in general and Neo-Platonism specifically, their influence on Christianity and the structure of society in the middle ages was enormous (Lane, 16).
Main body
Platos analysis about the world and people in it shows an exact development throughout his life. At the start he adhered to Objectivism, and thought, with Socrates, that the forms are things in the cosmos that decide the way humans are to think and live (Brace, & Kessinger, 121). Although later in his life he twisted to Realism where the forms as customs for living obtain their own means of being and fit into another world outside, past or behind the world we know.
However, he was not as raw as Socrates who supposed that since the World motivation was fundamentally good, all people had to do to obtain virtue triumph over evil was to reflect on this Reason. Plato recognized that the job of creating order was not achieved without a struggle. Therefore, he had the earthly Soul as mediator between the two worlds, too participates in the disarray and instability of the fore world. One element of the Soul, the Nous, or reason, he maintained that has to try to order the irrational part of it by getting it to contribute in the Good (Torchia, 86). Plato is in this way reckoning with the reliant in the world. In support of Plato, human beings as well exist in a foreground world in addition to a background world. They have a soul and a body. The body has all the uniqueness of the foreground world and nothing of the background world (Brace, & Kessinger 148). The body is liable to decay and it consists of matter. It comes into life when we are born and passes out of life when we die.
Platos conception of the human soul is a great deal more complicated than his outlook of the human body (Torchia, 76). Plato pledges to a tripartite soul. Being born in a material body hazes the nous so that it only has indistinct recollections of these forms. But, by consciously focusing ones brains on these forms in the background world, it is possible for human beings to salvage access to these Forms, a process similar to Socrates approach to truth. Through a process of dialectical explanation one ascends in ones reflection until one reaches at the highest form that of the Good. In this development, one makes the things of this world in addition to the other forms to participate in the Good (Lane, 58). Simultaneously this process allows one to flee the limitations of the body and eventually to return to the background world where one began. Thus, this academic process is redemptive in nature.
Socrates considered that philosophy was unlocked to all, and that philosophical ability could be developed by any person who had the power of communication. Platos motivation for building his epistemology was indistinguishable to that of his mentor Socrates (Torchia, 43). Together they wanted to counter the professed relativism of the Sophists. Plato challenged the Sophists as follows: He awarded them the point that all sensory opinion is relative to the status of the observer. Socrates and later Plato made intellectual thought of the eternal verities, once more the supreme worth for Greek life. However, this preoccupation with theoria habitually occurred at the cost of the other aspects of livelihood. Socrates, in the Gorgias, openly rejects hedonism, while the acceptance of a hedonistic position in the Protagoras would stain Platos and Socrates abrupt departure from their deep-seated views on the nature and the connection between virtue and happiness. In contrast, the Socratic thesis beside the possibility of akrasia would perhaps not take off the ground if it did not have its hedonistic premise; then, Socrates has to be taking hedonism seriously (Lane, 62).
Conclusion
Neither Socrates nor Plato would be contented with an austerely quantitative advance to goodness and happiness which at the same time would include highly prejudiced views on what is pleasing. Therefore on what is good.
Works Cited
Brace, Charles L. The Religion of Socrates and Plato. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Pub, 2009. Print.
Lane, M S. Platos Progeny: How Socrates and Plato Still Captivate the Modern Mind. London: Duckworth, 2001. Print.
Torchia, Joseph. Exploring Personhood: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Human Nature. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2008. Print.
Born around 427 BC in Athens, Plato was an ancient Greek philosopher. His father (Ariston) and his mother (Perictione) were members of a noble society of Athens. Despite the fact that he travelled to Italy on several occasions, most of his life was spent in Athens. Being born of a noble family, although much literature does not exist about his early life, Plato acquired the finest education as reflected in his collection of philosophical works reflecting the tragedy and politics of his time.
While Socrates was his teacher, Aristotle was his student. Platos writings explore themes such as equality and beauty coupled with a discussion of aesthetics, cosmology, political philosophy, language philosophy, and political philosophy. He was the founder of one of the oldest philosophy academy in Athens in the western world.
Plato lived in the synthesis age. He had an acquaintance with Socrates (his teacher) between 469 and399 B.C.E. Socrates altered the life of Plato. In this perspective, Kahn reckons, the power that Socrates methods and arguments had over the minds of the youth of Athens gripped Plato as firmly as it did many others, and he became a close associate of Socrates (67). Following the death of his father, Platos mother married Pericles friend.
This move made him connected to both democracy and oligarchy systems of politics. After the Peloponnesian war came to a halt, his uncle and mother persuaded Plato to join the Athens oligarchic rules. However, he objected. He preferred becoming a student of Socrates. In the Socrates academy, he developed his principles of being an opponent to relativisms coupled with Sophists skepticisms.
He dwelled on values as opposed to physical science. While describing the works of Socrates, Aristotle paid immense credits to Socrates emphasis on moral questions coupled with his precise definitions of issues. A careful scrutiny of Platos works evidences that he absorbed these lessons from the Socrates class.
The philosophical positions held by Plato made him neither a friend to thirty tyrants (404-403 BC) nor to Athenian democracy upon its restoration. He deployed critical interrogation methodology to alienate them. As Kahn informs, in the 399 BC, Plato was brought to trial with capital crimes of religious impiety and corruption of youth where he was convicted and sentenced to death (22). One of his friends offered to have him freed through payment of a fine as opposed to the imposition of the death penalty.
Referring to this experience, Kahn writes, Plato tells us in the Seventh Letter after Socrates death that he became disenchanted with all existing political regimes and felt that the only salvation of politics would require that either true or genuine philosophers attain political powers or the rulers of states by some dispensation of providence become genuine philosophers (39).
He founded his school around 387 BC in Athens. In effect, the school served as a higher education institute specializing in philosophy, astronomy, physical science, and mathematics. In this school, Plato delivered lectures. Unfortunately, the lectures were never published.
Dion, Dionysious IIs uncle, invited Plato to Dionysius school thus securing him a voyage to Sicily. He was trapped in the Syracuse until 360 BC. After several misunderstandings between Dion and Dionysius II, Dion entered Syracuse in 357 B.C.E. The move culminated to the overthrow of Dionysius.
In the seventh letter of Plato, he recounts his roles in the death of Dion although, the deepest truths may not be communicated (Kahn 34). When Plato traveled back to Athens, he continued being the president of his academy until his demise in 347 BC. He died at the age of 80 years.
Platos Theory
Plato postulated that people live in an imperfect state. This position was opposed to the position held by Athenians who held that their polis was perfect with regard to cultural and military achievements. His skepticism can perhaps be traced from his role model, Socrates, who taught him to be skeptical about a society, which pays no attention to inclusion of people with political expertise in the running of states.
In the Republic, Plato proposes an ideal state having the capacity to deal with the imperfection in the real state such as corruption. Plato theorizes the realization of the ideal state as encompassing three waves aimed at eroding corruption coupled with bringing about new principles and ideals.
The first wave consists of the ruling class, which, rather than being composed of the perceived most intelligent people, it constituted only philosophers-kings (Jackson 93). Plato defined philosophers as people who have a great love of knowledge believing that knowledge was the key to a successful ruler (Jackson 93). Kings ought to be philosophers while philosophers ought to become kings.
The second wave in the Plato theory for ideal states entangles the guardians who are principally a mix of women and men. Unfortunately, at his time, women were not permitted to engage in political processes. This argument meant that Plato was not only knowledgeable on political issues surrounding the ancient Greek history but also on modernization standards.
Opposed to the prescription of roles for engaging in battles among people belonging to the guardian class, Plato saw such roles as irrelevant in his theory of ideal states since the manner of operation of the third wave gave no room for conflicts.
In the third wave, guardians would have no wealth, would share all they had, had no private property, lived together communally, envy would disappear in theory, and issues of class rankings disappeared. This argument means that disagreements would not arise on issues such as who should have what since all people would have the same things. A perfect society would thus be created.
Allegory of the cave and reasons to mistrust majority
The allegory of the cave can serve in revealing some of the key reasons to mistrust the views of the majority. The allegory of the cave presents a description of a complex philosophical world. Plato described symbolically the predicament in which mankind finds itself and proposes a way of salvation (Kreis 1). The salvation advocated by Plato is influenced by the theory of freedom of mind that was advanced by his teacher, Socrates. According to Plato, the manner in which the world is revealed to us is not a real copy of it.
Unfortunately, majority of people live in the unreal copy, which is characterized by various class systems. Since the world presented to us is not real, it inappropriate to trust the majority of the people living in it with their minds trapped by unreasonable norms of various class systems.
This argument is evidenced by Platos theory that is advanced through the allegory of caves in which he held, the universe ultimately is good, his conviction that enlightened individuals have an obligation to the rest of society, and that a good society must be the one in which the truly wise are the rulers (Kreis 1).
Philosophically, the wise are the people who have freedom of thought and people who do not open their own minds to prejudice in search of what is real and accurate beyond any reasonable doubt. This argument drives at the first reason why people should not trust the majority.
Believing the majority implies contending on a universally acceptable way of thought, which is not acceptable since the world is not real. Hence, everything presented to us by it is open to doubt. The unrealistic nature of the world is perhaps evident by consideration of descriptions of it in the allegory of caves.
In the allegory of the caves, Plato provides an analogy of how people live in the unreal world by describing a situation in which people live around a cave situated underground. An opening is located at the top of the cave. A shadow is casted due to burning fires. The people living in the cave are chained thus making them only be able to see the wall.
Hence, they are not able to turn around. Since people in the cave cannot only see the wall, in case an object passes by the fire, a shadow is cast on the wall. People are not able to see the real object. Hence, the only thing that they comprehend to exist is the shadow of the object (Plato 747). Luckily, one the people in the caves gets off his chains and manages to wander around in the exterior of the cave (Plato 748).
What he sees flabbergasts him. When he reports to the rest of people still chained in the cave about what he saw outside the cave, they (majority) think that he is mad. They indeed plot to murder him (Plato 749). This evidences that the majority has a deeply ingrained fear to come into terms with reality. This primitiveness of the true nature of majority of the people serves to advance and promote ignorance. Thus, it is dogmatic for a rational thinking being to trust the majority.
Plato class system
In the Republic, tantamount to the allegory of caves, Socrates is the central character. However, Republic is less a dialogue than a long discussion by Socrates of justice and what it means to the individual and city state (independent states) (Kahn 51).
According to Plato, class systems comprised three elements. These are guardians, rulers, and workers. These state classes are analogous to the three elements of the soul: rational, impulsive irrational, and less rational. Each of the elements of the state classes has different roles in society. Rulers do not comprise rulers families.
Rather, the class is made up of people who stand out in the society as the most intellectual and gifted. Just as rational component of the soul is the chief decision maker based on reason, the rulers are charged with the roles of giving direction to the rest of the class states. Surprisingly, this class is composed of the fewest number of people in the population.
The class that compares with the less rational components of the soul is the guardians. In the Plato class systems, guardians are charged with the roles of maintaining order in the society and handling governments practical matters such as engagement in battles. While the guardians would make certain decisions in the execution of their roles in the class systems, their actions are in the better part dependent on the decisions made by the rational element of the state (rulers).
The main roles of the workers are engagement in labor to ensure that the whole runs in a smooth manner. This last class of people in class systems comprises the majority. Compared to the elements of the soul, the class is analogous to the impulsive irrational (Kahn 57). Hence, the larger the numbers of people in class systems, the more their roles are less driven by their own rationality.
Borrowing from the argument that people should choose to act in a manner that justifies ones rationality at arriving at a decision to act in particular ways, trusting majority is detrimental to ones capacity to think rationally. This assertion justifies the actions adopted by the majority of the people in the allegory of the cave to kill the person who had information about the reality of the world.
Motivation of Platos philosophy
Various issues including experience motivate the development of philosophies of various people. This section argues that Platos philosophy is relative to his culture and experience. This argument is evidenced by the vivid descriptions of people living in caves in confusion. In his era, people lived in a society where they never questioned the authority.
They did what was required of them without thinking through the appropriateness of what they did. Yet, those who objected to comply were treated as enemies, and were subjected to punishment. This experience is reflected in Platos allegory of caves when he informs that, when one of the people tied in chains in the caves got an opportunity to learn about what the real world was like, the other people planned to kill him.
Considering his personal experience in political systems, it is evident that his allegory of caves reflects the ignorance of ruling class state to incorporate the knowledgeable in the governance of the states. Indeed, philosophers who Plato perceives have incredible knowledge and are able to view issues from true and real dimensions were treated with dismay. In this context, Jackson reckons, Athenians saw Platos kind as rogues and useless individuals who thought themselves as better than the rest of the society (81).
This argument underlies the reason why Plato maintains that kings need to be philosophers and philosophers need to become kings in the Republic. This way, kings would have an understanding of how philosophy would aid in helping them to develop an ideal state: free from conflicts.
Platos philosophies reflect various arguments on the manner in which material distribution should be done to realize an ideal society. His theory on the political society is a depiction of historical materialistic conceptions evident in his society.
In this perspective, Jackson notes that, since Plato was born in a strict social class, his works reflect ideas of Karl Marx that the nature of individuals depends on the material conditions determining their production (99). The argument is evidenced by his argument in the Republic that ideal states would have to be docile as a matter of condition defining when they were born and how they were raised.
According to him, the nature of people in the ideal states would have to be defined by their surroundings- the society. Indeed, he wonders, How can any society that has such a strict social code and classes ever be successful? (Kahn 77). This interrogative is a depiction of well thought ideas about how societies are supposed to be constituted based on Platos cultural experience.
The advocating for people to think rationally and independent from the ill conception of people in the society reflects the contempt held by Plato for a society that delinked his departure of ways of thought based on rational judgment. Now, it is important to retaliate that this same society executed his teacher- Socrates- for his failure to submit his mind and power of reason to prejudice.
As argued before, Plato was born in an era when compliance was vital to fit in a society. This compliance impaired rationality of people. Hence, people could not perceive the reality. This experience is reflected abundantly in the allegory of caves. Readers of the allegory of caves know too well that puppeteers behind the prisoners used wooden and iron objects, which liked reality in the form of shadows.
In the context of Platos cultural experience, this development is critical since what is insinuated as reality from the time he was born was now exposed to doubt since it could be completely false based on our imperfect interpretations of reality and goodness (Kahn 78). The point of argument here is that people use names to describe physical representation of what can only be grasped by the mind since appearance may be deceptive. Hence, the things defined in Platos society and political systems as right may not be right or good.
Drawing from the above argument, in the development of an ideal society, the problem is to define what is good because what one may perceive as good may indeed be an imitation of the reality. Hence, rulers create their own meaning of what is good. With the flawed definition of good, a challenge of doing good emerges.
Deeply ingrained knowledge is required to come up with what is good for the society. Concerning Plato, only philosophers are able to think freely and evaluate various issues far from just in the context of face value. This argument explains perhaps why he says in the Republic that philosophers need to become kings.
Otherwise, good would just remain being a word but not a representation of what is appropriate for the whole society. This argument is congruent with the position held by Jackson, in a society like Athens where society came first, it would not matter if citizens thought they did well because, if they did not do well for the polis, then that good did not matter (101). Based on this assertion, the allegory of caves reflects a society (Athens) whose reality is constructed by other people beyond the reach of the majority.
Only few people who are able to escape from the chains can understand the reality. Unfortunately, the ignorant people who are not able to unveil their reality threaten the lives of those few witty people. Such people who have escaped the wrath of ignorance represent people like Plato and Socrates, his teacher.
Works Cited
Jackson, Roy. Plato: A Beginners Guide. London: Hoder and Stroughton, 2001. Print.
Kahn, Charles. Plato and the Socratic Dialogue: The Philosophical Use of a Literary Form. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Print.
Kreis, Steven. Plato republic, Book VI: the allegory of the cave. London: Routledge, 2000. Print.
Plato. Republic VII. Collected Dialogues of Plato. Ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns. Princeton: Princeton University Publishers, 1982. Print.
Plato hated the Sophists because they were interested in achieving wealth, fame and high social status. Plato noted that the sophists were not philosophers. He claimed that the sophists were selling the wrong education to the rich people. He described them as hunters of the young people and money , traders of false knowledge and athletes in a sport of words .
The methods of teaching that the sophists portrayed in Athens were in conflict with Platos school of thought. According to Platos arguments, the sophists did not teach the true knowledge because their interest was not to build knowledge or share it with others. Instead, they wanted to fill their classes with wealthy students in order to make money. Their teaching was based on opinions of things. Plato thought this method was rhetorical rather than philosophical. According to Plato, the Sophists wanted to make their students believe in public opinion instead of providing them with knowledge.
The rhetoric teachings of the sophists contradicted with Platos philosophy. This issue formed the foundation of Platos hatred for the sophists. For instance, the sophists based their teachings on issues such as power, relationships, truth and manipulation. On the other hand, Platos view was that rhetoric had the potential to cause both good and harm . However, he believed that there was a sense of moral responsibility. He thought that morality was the most important and essential aspect in life. According to him, morality is the universal good that humans must discover through language.
Platos criticism of the sophists is based on three questions that he formulated. First, he questions the identity of rhetoric. Secondly, he argued that rhetoric was misleading the society because it was not based on knowledge. Thirdly, Plato believed that the morals of the society were being destroyed by the persuasions made by the sophists.
To address these questions, Plato noted that the sophists were using a rhetoric approach rather than philosophy. Therefore, they failed to provide the actual and adequate view of justice. For instance, the Sophists taught Doxa or public opinion. However, it is worth noting that Doxa is based on persuasions. Thus, the sophists aim was to persuade rather than find justice. Secondly, the sophists failed to apply episteme or true knowledge. They were interested in persuading their students based on public opinions. Therefore, they failed to discover the epistemic truth, which compromised law and justice. Arguably, a person cannot use public opinion to provide justice. Instead, knowledge must be used to provide justice.
Moreover, Plato hated the sophists because they claimed that they were teaching justice, yet they did not have the required knowledge to teach. According to Plato, justice is knowledge that can only be achieved through dedication and thorough study. For an individual to discover justice, he must employ deep thought, scholarship and virtues. He stated that the Sophists did not consider this aspect of justice. Instead, they fabricated things known as Kairos (any convenient definition relative to the context). Plato further stated that the Sophists were wrong because they did not support justice. Therefore, they were incapable of justice .
Plato further criticized the type of rhetoric art taught by the Sophists. He argued that they were knacks rather than the true art . He stated that the sophist artists applied and taught skills found in nature rather than teaching artistic knowledge based on research.
In the world of philosophy, Plato is one of the most celebrated and studied philosophers. One of his major works is elucidation of Forms which he describes them as supra-sensible entities. According to him, Forms or ideas are none mental entities and do not depend upon human mind.
Platos main point on the Forms is that it is only by studying them genuine knowledge can be obtained. His major work on the Forms came about in his attempt to come up with a concrete solution to worlds problems (Dancy, pp11). Therefore, the main purpose of this paper is to discuss theory of Forms as one of the main contributions of Plato.
Platos Theory of Forms: Summary
To grasp what is all about the theory of forms, he explains various qualities possessed by the forms. Transcendence is one of the characteristics possessed by forms. They are inherently in the nature and they are not limited to space and time. Due to the fact that forms epitomize a single property they are said to be pure. Material objects are impure simply because they combine more than one property such as hardness, redness and circularity just to mention but a few. Another attribute of forms is that they are archetypes.
By this it means that they are perfect examples of that which they stand for He further maintains that all material objects as reflection of forms because forms are ultimate real entities and reality of object forms is derived from the forms themselves. Another characteristic of forms is that they are causes of all things in that they are real source of the being of all things in the world. Lastly, Plato maintains that there is systematical interconnectedness in forms as seen in dialectic process that we acquire from knowledge of forms (Dancy, pp 299).
Plato formulated the theory of forms as a result of major problems in the world which he attempted to solve. The first problem which he attempted to solve was ethical problem. Before then, it was not clear how possible it was for humans to lead a fulfilling life in yet changing world in which those things they attach to them can be deprived from them.
The second problem was the problem of permanence and change. Solution to this problem sought to address the question on how it is possible that the world appear to be both changing and permanent.
As he attempted to provide solution to these grand problems, he first broke up the existence into two realms namely: material realm and transcendent realm of forms. Plato maintains that human beings are able to access the realm of forms by use of their mind through reasoning.
By so doing, this facilitates to have access to unchanging world that is free from pain and changes that are witnessed in material world. However, it calls for detachment of an individual from the material world and from the body as one gets more concerned with forms. He affirms that only through this way we find a value that is neither subject to disintegration nor change (Dancy, pp314).
Similarly, by breaking up existence up into two realms it helps to provide an answer to problem of permanence and change. In regard to this problem, through our mind we perceive a different world which has different objects. This is possible through our senses. However, material world is always changing but the realms of form which are perceived though mind there are permanent. He declares that it is this world which is real and that the world of change is just but imperfect reflection of real world.
Conclusion
Therefore, in regard to Platos theory of Forms, human beings are prone to deception from their senses on how they discern the world around them. Importantly, objects that they perceive using their senses are just but images or even experiences from their mind. So, the more the object is objective, the more the real the object that is being described becomes.
Works Cited
Dancy, M. Russell. Platos introduction of forms. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
In the age of information knowledge is a real valuable power. The famous idea Time is Money got today another formulation Knowledge is Money. Knowledge is your key to the best job and to all opportunities which our life provides. But lets take a look at the opposite side. What if knowledge is not that good? Sometimes it can be fruitful do not get new information, just to stay in a habitual world of knowledge. Descartes and Plato consider that the sense of not knowing is founded in nature of interaction of humans into society.
New information can be fraught with the threats. Moreover, it is difficult to understand, what exactly the truth is. In the first chapter, entitled Concerning Those Things That Can Be Called into Doubt, Descartes formulates a principle of radical doubt of all intellectual processes into mind. The philosopher says, let us assume that we are asleep and all of these particular things such as opening of eyes, head movement, drawing of hands all this is not authentic, and in addition, perhaps, we dont really have such hands, and all over the body. Maybe it is just an illusion (Wilson, p. 12).
Descartes ultimate aims, however, are constructive. And it is not the way of the sceptics, who doubt only for the sake of doubting (Newman). An example of bulldozer to show us a constructive way of the method of Doubt: Bulldozers are typically used for destructive ends, as are sceptical doubts. Descartes methodical innovation is to employ demolition for constructive ends (Newman). In this way Descartes uses sceptical doubts to test the firmness of people to develop the base of Knowledge.
Descartes believes in existence of the God, who created everything, including Descartes, but he cant be sure that everything was created in a way, which Descartes sees. He demands, what if there is no earth, no sky, no length, shape or size, and no place, but all this exists only in imagination.
Plato also discusses a way of getting information, but, vice versa, he thinks about the reason why people behave like they are prisoners of the cave. Who are they? If they are prisoners, they must be released. They will get the freedom to contemplate the whole world and to imagine freely. But the point is that they were not forced to stay in darkness. Now they see only offset shadows, games of fire on the wall in front of the Cave: The partitions puppet-handlers set in front of the human beings and over which they show the puppets (Bloom, p. 193). And they cant see something else, their heads are motionless, their legs and necks are fixed. This fire is the pure Knowledge. But people can see only its shadows. They chose this way because it is more safe and easy to see only the shadows, not the flame. If they were free, they will start to imagine. And every social phenomenon they will explain from a position of superstitions. And again it is also an illusion of knowledge, as Descartes supposed. Educated in the spirit of ignorance, they will take a lot of things for granted. They will look at the world through the prism, the barrier that stands in their minds. If they were able to discuss things with one another, dont you believe they would hold that they are naming these things going by before them that they see? (Bloom, p. 194). From this point of view, both philosophers look into the same way. Imagination plays a big part in our perception of the world. Plato considers this position in a negative way. People would like to stay in darkness, instead of suffer from bright light . Descartes, on the contrary, makes an assumption of existence of some malevolent powerful genius. And this evil genius plays with our beliefs and knowledge, and everything can be just lie. But Descartes accepts this lie. He created an idea of self-consciousness as a main power to get knowledge. Plato, and other antique philosophers, doesnt consider it. Plato investigates human consciousness in terms of its social cooperation.
Descartes supposes that we cant trust so many sciences such as anatomy, chemistry, mathematics, physics, physiology, astronomy. And no one can seriously wish to contribute significantly to all of them (Wilson, p. 13). And only arithmetic, geometry and subjects like these, which deal only with general things, which are abstracted of whether they really exist in nature or not, contain something certain and indubitable. Because, for whether we are awake or asleep, two and three added together are five, and a square has no more than four sides, says Descartes (Wilson, p. 13).
Both philosophers reflect about the reasons of accepting or declining information. Plato consists that a closed mind is inborn, although, there is still a chance to open it. But Descartes thinks about other mystical force, which can confuse people. Well, Plato and Descartes just didnt know about media. Probably, if they lived nowadays, they would change their opinion about knowledge, which is real or illusory, opened or hardly-comprehensible. And a redundancy of information also is a huge power, which confuses people to get the pure Knowledge.
Works Cited
Bloom, Allan. The Republic of Plato. New York: Basic BookBs, 1991. Web.
Newman, Lex. Descartes Epistemology. US: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2010. Web.
The Republic is a philosophical form of Socratic conversation written by Plato around 380 BC and touches on the issues of justice and knowledge. It is a debate based on whether either the just or unjust man is happy. In this section Plato narrates of a prisoner who has spent his childhood and early adulthood chained in a cave.
Plato uses puppets and fire to signify reality and the vague appearances of reality. He states that the worldview of the prisoner who ideally represents a philosopher is centered on the cave, the fire and the silhouettes that are formed when the fire illuminates passing objects (White, p. 194).
The prisoner assigns figures to the passing shadows as his reality since he lacks any other experience. Once the prisoner is released he realizes the real forms of the shadows. Plato uses these forms to signify our illusion of the real world that would not hinder a philosopher from seeking reality. The decision to return to the cave to enlighten the rest of the prisoners is viewed by Plato as the work of philosophers in enlightening the rest of the population to know the truth (Plato, p. 67).
Platos assertion that the forms appear less real than shadows implies that the shadows do not reflect the reality but signify the existence of reality in them. Plato uses the fire symbol to connote the source of knowledge. Being the source of truth or the form of the good the fire intensity frightens because of the reality it reveals. Plato successfully explores the use of metaphors as used in novels and poems to represent certain realities in the world. Metaphorically Plato uses fire, cave and shadows to represent lack of knowledge, philosophers and illusions that cloud our quest for knowledge (White, p. 201).
Augustines confessions
Augustines work shows his drift away from Neo-Platonism and the increasing knowledge he had amassed about God as the Supreme incorruptible being. He bases his argument on the biblical writings of Apostle Paul. Augustines work portrays him as seeing an immutable light that was not earthly and visible to anybody. Like Plato in the Republic Augustine uses the immutable light to represent God who is the creator and the source of truth. Whoever sees the light knows the truth (Plato, p. 46). The light was only visible if one had a helper. Augustine implies that provided an individual knows the truth by seeing and receiving the light then Gods mind has touched his.
Before one sees the light he is like the prisoner referred to by Plato but upon seeing it he receives the truth. Light in this sense represents God who is the source of truth. Light cannot be changed or silenced and so is God. The light referred to by Augustine is not visible to all eyes. It is only seen above the eyes of the soul with the guidance of a helper. Plato also refers to light as the just source of truth (Watt xiv).
Augustine states that the light he saw was higher and it made him. He also asserts that all who know the truth know this light which represents God. The light referred to is not the normal light. It is the source of all beings. This light represents God who is unchangeable. Chastity is the virtue of being pure as well as clean and this is a prerequisite to seeing the light. Chastity therefore knows the light since it has truth which emanates from the light. Augustine equates chastity to love as virtues that are present in beings that have seen the light.
Meditations by Descartes
Descartes Meditations I is based on his past experience with the notion of truth from people who passed it to him. He casts doubts on the notions of truth passed to him and terms them as misleading. Basing his argument on the Deity who is God Descartes states that God is so good that he could not have created him to be deceived. He refrains from arguing about the existence of God and cites that his current form has been attained due to the presence of an overseer who is God. Descartes suggests that God can lead him to the truth and that he will refrain from doubting the existence of truth of the opinions that has been in him for long (Watt xvi).
Like Plato who uses the prisoner to represent lack of knowledge Descartes uses his early age to connote the lack of truth in him. After he matures enough he sets forth in search of truth but using the wrong means that leads him to conclude that he might be his own deceiver. Descartes lack of knowledge in his early age only serves to bring him to know the truth in his later life (Plato, p. 29). Plato uses the illusion of shadows as seen by the prisoner to represent his search for truth and later endurance of hardships to stay in the light.
Unlike Plato who uses the prisoner to represent the philosopher as the ideal person in the society, Descartes states that knowing God makes one the perfect being in the world. Descartes also highlights that seeing the light is not only an individuals initiative but one must have a helper to guide him. Plato on the other hand suggests that only selected individuals and philosophers can see the light. Light according to him means good while according to Descartes the light represents God (White, p. 210).
Works Cited
Plato, Crito. Plato in Twelve Volumes, trans. Harold North Fowler, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1969.
Watt, Stephen. Introduction: The Theory of Forms (Books 5-7). Plato Republic, London: Wordsworth Editions, 1997.
White, Frederick, C. Platos Middle Dialogues and the Independence of Particulars. The Philosophical Quarterly 27.108 (1977): 193-213.