plato (427 b.c. – 347 b.c) 1. socrates the master of plato and...
TRANSCRIPT
60
CHAPTER II
PLATO (427 B.C. – 347 B.C)
1. Socrates the master of Plato and the Martyr of Philosophy :
Before talking about Plato, necessarily we should mention about
Socrates who is known as the martyr of Philosophy in the history and
who has been the master of Plato. So understanding of Plato without
Socrates is impossible.
Socrates (469 B.C.−399 B.C.) : As already said the martyr of
Philosophy Socrates did not write a single word ; so about Socrates we
must draw information from a limited number of secondary sources, like
the works of Plato (427B.C.−347 B.C), Aristotle (384 B.C.–322 B.C.),
Aristophanes (448 B.C.–380 B.C.) a Greek comic dramatist and
Xenophon (427 B.C–355 B.C.) who is known for his writings on the
history of his own time, the sayings of Socrates, and the life of Greeks.
Socrates’ father was Sophroniscus, a sculptor and his mother was
Phaenarete, a midwife. He was married to Xanthippe who bore him
three sons (Lamprocles, Sophroniscus and Menexenus); all of them were
quite young at the time of Socrates’ death. Xanthippe is traditionally
considered a shrew. Socrates was famous for bravery both physical and
61
intellectual. He did not have any job; he devoted himself only to
discussing Philosophy and he thought this was the most important art or
occupation.
2. Socratic method of Philosophy :
Socrates in his method arranged a series of questions for the
purpose of helping a person to find out his veiled beliefs and
development of his knowledge. His method is a negative method of
hypothesis–elimination in which better hypotheses occur eliminating
those which cause contradictions. Socrates designed it to impel a person
to analyse his own beliefs and check over the validity of such beliefs.
3. Socrates’ beliefs :
Socrates often presented that he is aware of his ignorance. He
believed that wrongdoing was result of the lack of knowledge, that is,
who did wrong action knew no better to do. He always professed that he
loved wisdom means philosophy. He never claimed to be wise, but he
wanted to say that a lover of wisdom always must follow the wisdom.
So according to his idea, Sophists were not capable of Philosophy
because they did not follow the wisdom. Socrates claims that he is not a
teacher but he plays the role of a midwife, explaining that he himself has
62
not any theory but he knows the way how to give birth to the theories of
others and to decide whether they are reliable or not.
According to Socrates opinion, "Virtue is Knowledge", knowledge
of the Good, true Good, unchanging Good in itself. He believed that it
was necessary for a philosopher should spend his life in search of the
Good.
4. The political thought of Socrates :
Socrates believed that the philosopher is a lover of wisdom, and is
not actually wise, and it is said that, this is the philosopher who is
appropriate to govern the people. Plato developed this idea in his
Republic under the title of King – Philosopher. It is said that Socrates
was in opposition to the democracy of Athens and any form of
government unless it did agree with his own ideal of republic
government which governed by philosophers, and Athenian government
was in opposition to that. These beliefs which are attributed to Socrates
are controversial because first of all we know that Socrates always
refused to enter into politics or to take part in government, since he
frequently affirmed that he could not investigate the people’s affair and
tell them how to live when he did not yet know himself. In his point of
view a philosopher was only lover of wisdom and not truly wise, so
63
such opinion of Socrates can support the idea that he did not believe that
a philosopher must rule as a governor. Secondly, Socrates accepted his
death sentence in spite of the fact that he had other options which were
offered by his friends and the acceptance of death sentence by Socrates
may also support the view that he did not refuse democracy because the
death sentence was issued by Athenian government which was based on
democracy. It is also said that probably it was Plato’s disgust on death
sentence given to his master that, caused him to have anti-democracy
tendencies.
5. Background of Humanism in Ancient Greece and Pre-Socratic
thought :
In Ancient Middle East, in all the societies, mythopoeism was the
rule. In mythopoeic view there is no disconnection between myth and
reality. In Sumer and Egypt, between politics and religion there was no
division. Their king was also their chief priest. When Sumerians faced a
lack of rain or any other disasters which killed their king because they
believed that after the king was killed he could take a message to the
gods to help them. Pharoah in Egypt was himself a living god. Priests
were tax collectors. In Ancient Middle East during the war period, if any
side of it lost the battle, they thought that the god of opposite side was
stronger. In the view of common people an idol was not only a
64
representation of a god, it itself became a god. Symbolism and reality
were twisted together. In these societies the gods were in charge of
everything like rain or drought, victory or defeat in battle, health or
disease. Looking for condolence or seeking help from fellow humans
was considered as nonsense. People might be used as agents of the gods,
finally they believed that these were the gods who controlled their life
and provided their motivation. Now at this time the Greeks were the first
who left this world−view, and they developed another viewpoint which
was dominated by humanism, and as we know hermanism is also tied up
with rationalism and secularism.
Humanism as it is explained in the introduction of this thesis, is a
belief that men are in the central concerns of human beings. In
Renaissance period also the scholars had the same humanistic belief
about man, according to their idea the proper study of man was man.
If we compare the Greek civilization with its previous
civilizations from religious point of view, we can see that the Greek
gods were superheroes or supermans on a grand scale ; these gods have
not only the same human physical characteristics but also have the
human emotional structure ; they become furious and hot-tempered, they
fall in love and sometimes fall out of love ; so they behave human−like
65
and involve with humans in combat and love affairs, and in all kinds of
human manners; and in brief, their gods are anthropomorphic; but on the
contrary, in the civilizations previous to Greece we observe the gods are
animal-headed and giants; they are not human−like and it shows that
they had not humanistic beliefs; unlike Greeks who had strong
humanistic imagination and idea about the gods. We can see the
humanistic imagination in Greek sculpture in which human body has the
prominent rule. In Greek plays from one side we see the human
dilemmas are propounded and from another side to some extent little
power of gods is also brought up. Finally it should be mentioned that in
the plays, poetry of the Greeks, the main interest was that how human
individuals responded to the challenging circumstances. Now here the
main stress was on humans and their actions rather than on the gods. So
it shows that the humanistic thought was current in Ancient Greece.
As we know, humanism in modern sense is grafted to Rationalism
and Secularism ; so it seems necessary to pay some attention to these
conceptions.
Rationalism means that humans have the capacity of
understanding everything. Rationalism rejects everything beyond human
understanding. It rejects the phrase like, "That is only for the gods to
66
know". It is a belief that the power to understand the world lies within us
not beyond us. It means that if humans want to know the secrets of the
nature it is better to use their mind and mental power.
The second conception to which humanism is grafted, would be
secularism.
Secularism believes that we as human beings should pay our most
attention to this world and this life. This life means worldly life, and it
should be in the center of our concern. Ofcourse, Greeks were
concerned with the gods, but as it was mentioned before, first of all their
gods were anthropomorphic and secondly the Greeks did not concern
much about afterlife as the Egyptian did, but their most attention was
paid to the living people and their happiness in this world ; so easily we
see that there is very close connection between humanism and
secularism so that we can not separate them from each other.
The humanism, rationalism and secularism of Greece caused
explicitly the Greek philosophers to adopt an opinion about the nature of
the physical world and the place of human in it. Before philosophy
culminated in Socrates and Plato and after in Aristotle, there were many
schools of thought and many philosophers who had founded a long
institution of philosophy.
67
Thales of Miletus (640 BCE) was one of these philosophers who
centered his thought on the physical nature of the world. He claimed that
the primary element of the earth is water and that the whole world must
have taken the root from it by a natural process. He put the problem of
evil under question and contemplated about organic evolution which
Anaximander the assistant of Thales propounded it. In the opinion of
Thales the fishes are the origins of humans. In 580 BCE Xenophanes
critisized the anthropomorphism by saying that if cattle had hands and
drew pictures of Gods, Gods would look like cows, and the conclusion
was that : Gods are made by human beings.
Pythagoras (C.570 – C. 497 BC) was involved in the world and its
evolution ; but he paid less attention to the primary substance from
which the world is made and finally he believed that the organizing
principles for reality can be explained by mathematics. Pythagoras was a
mathematical genius ; he established a society ; his society attempted to
interpret the world according to quantity which we observe somehow in
a kind of humanism today ; but the quantitative estimate of the world
was still relevant to a mystical religion ; we may call it mathematical –
metaphysical philosophy.
68
Heraclitus (C. 540−C. 480 B.C.) took the unchainging reality
under question and propounded his famous world that "one cannot step
into the same river twice", since the water is constantly changing, for
Heraclitus the only constant was "change".
We now consider the development of thought in Parmenides
(515 BCE) who was a rationalist–philosopher. He declared that the real
is rational and the rational is real; Reality is the same thing as thought.
He stated that it is the reason which should control an understanding of
the world and no other measurement should be taken into account. Then
the atomistic school of Democritus (460-370 BCE) and Leucippus
emerged; their school of thought is famous by the name of "Atomism".
They believed that the reality is constituted of very small particles by the
name of atoms and these atoms form the whole world. Democritus
considered two other important philosophical problems : that is, the
problem of knowledge and the problem of human conduct. He was
convinced that observation and reasoning were the origin of knowledge
about the world.
After the above mentioned thinkers Sophists, Socrates and Plato
emerged on the scene of philosophy; all of them were in search of a
correct way of living.
69
Sophists brought a kind of modern humanism to the Greek
society; they believed human life as shapable that can be shaped and
controlled by human beings themselves. They were travelling teachers
and they taught rhetoric to the sons of rich men; they gave training to
the youth of Greece and taught them how to rule the country. Reality for
sophists was sence perception; it was their belief that the only reality
which can exist for humans is what they can grasp by their five senses.
Another characteristic of their thoughts was that they were doubtful
about religion; while a lot of their contemporary Greeks were not
sceptical about it. Sophists believed that the only significant and
noteworthy subject of studying is human and that everything else should
be considered from the outlook of human. Totally they were very
interested in human concerns and the same interest caused them to
expand the concept of "social contract" which had to play an important
role in later political theory.
Protagoras (C.490 – C.420BC) was the first remarkable Sophist
humanist of whom there is a dependable account in Plato’s dialogue. As
Plato says he was a Greek teacher and philosopher. Protagoras has a
famous saying that : “Man is the measure of all things , of things that
are, that they are, and of things that are not, they are not”.1 This is a
statement that modern humanism has founded its central thought on it.
70
Ofcourse Protagoras was accused of impiety by Athenians because of
his famous saying. They announced to collect his works from all who
had copies in their possession and then burnt his books and exiled him.
6. Humanistic elements in Socrates :
Socrates (469-399 BC) disfavoured the Sophists since he thought
them to be wrong morally, because for Socrates they gave training in
rhetorical skills only to overcome the opposite side without considering
that the opposite side might be true. Socrates accused the Sophists that
they think only about how to achieve success in argument against their
opposition. Socrates paid his most attention to truth ; he thought that
truths exist and they are not relative as Sophists said. He believed that
truth is unchanging and absolute for all time. According to Sophists’
opinion, truth was relative and if it is so then something would be true in
one situation and false in another; therefore there is no reasonable proof
for something to be true or false, and it is the matter of faith. Socrates
also said that truth exists, it was his belief and belief is the matter of
faith and we know that the matter of faith cannot be proven. Socrates
had another belief, it was that, people are capable of discovering the
truth by their own attempt, and those who are in search of truth should
not depend on revelation from some supernatural sources. For Socrates
every individual has the ability by his powers of reason and observation
71
to grasp the truth without getting any help from the outside of his
reason. In opinion of Socrates searching the truth was as a duty of
people. We may understand better this belief of Socrates if we consider
his very famous saying, "An unexamined life is not worth living". It
means that the people as human beings should examine the life. Now we
face a question here that, how is it possible to examine the life? It can be
mentioned that he believed that human beings can do it by grasping the
truths of life, and grasping the truths is possible only through
knowledge; and through knowledge they can get truths of life, and it is
the great happiness of man in his life. From above mentioned we can
understand that, knowledge itself is worth having for its own sake,
because knowledge is not separable from truth, knowledge leads to the
truth, reaching the truth is possible only by the channel of knowledge.
His another point of view is that all knowledge is worthwhile and
pleasant. If Socrates said : "he knows that he is ignorant" it was because
he wanted to show to the people that if human being knows that he
himself is ignorant then he will have a motivation to follow the
knowledge ; because knowledge is pleasant and profitable so everybody
desire to seek it ; but if a human individual does not know his ignorance
then will never seek the knowledge ; therefore when Socrates was asked
the question that why he is the wisest man among the others, he replyed
72
that because he knew his ignorance ; so always he loved wisdom, he did
not want to be called wise but lover of wisdom. From the above
mentioned we come to know that the conception of knowledge, truth,
virtue and happiness are all interrelated.
7. Abstract of Socrates’ viewpoints :
Now we can make an abstract of Socrates’ point of view in four
short statements :
1. Truth exists
2. The human’s is intelligence which is possessed by all of them is
the means for discovering the truth.
3. Knowledge is worth having for its own sake.
4. Knowledge is Virtue; Virtue is Knowledge.
8. Charges against Socrates :
If we go deep into accusations from the government of Athens,
clearly it can be understood that Socrates had humanistic elements in his
thought. Charges against him were :
1. He taught the youth to question or examine everything even their
basic religious beliefs, which were most cherished views to
Athenians.
2. Corrupting the youth of Athens.
73
3. His manner irritated many of Athenians by "question and answer
technique". He asked questions for which he often did not have
answers, such as "Why do you believe in the gods?" Or what is
the meaning of life? Such searching questions could make people
very uncomfortable and those who did not want to think about
them wanted Socrates to stop.
At the end as an abstract it can be said that Socrates was not really
a humanist in the modern meaning but we may see humanistic elements
in his philosophy. In spite of that he was religious but he did not believe
that truth comes to us through supernatural or other religious resources,
and it is one of the main elements which we can see in humanistic
thought.
According to Socrates, human values can be understood properly
by a study of them in practice. There are strong humanistic elements in
Socrates who was the intellectual and moral hero of the Dialogues.
The strongest humanistic element in Socrates’ saying is the
aphorism that : "Know yourself" which is the central view point in
humanism, and another saying of Socrates is : "The good individual in
the good society" can be, taken as a humanistic point of view in his
74
thought since it proves that, for Socrates the human society was as much
valuable as the human individual. And we can see the same way of
thinking in the philosophy of humanism today.
9. Plato’s life :
Plato (427 – 347 BC) : He was the son of Ariston and Perictione.
His parents belonged to a very famous wealthy family. Plato in his
younghood lost his father and Perictione remarried and Plato was grown
up in his step father’s house. When he was young he became a friend
and disciple of Socrates. The Ploponnesian War occured between Athen
and Sparta (431 BC – 404 BC). Plato was in military service from 409
BC to 404 BC., but at this time he paid much more attention to a
political issues than military ones. At the end of war Plato joined the
oligarchy of "Thirty Tyrants" in Athens. Charmides the mother’s brother
of Plato was one of its leaders. Plato left it very soon. In 403 BC there
was a restoration of democracy in Athens, Plato had a great desire to
join politics again but for two reasons he gave it up, first because of
immoderation of Athenian political life. Second, the capital punishment
of Socrates impressed him a lot and changed his idea of having to do
with politics in Athens. After the death of Socrates, Plato established his
Academy and managed it until his death. What was the reason of Plato
to establish the Academy is to say that he had already observed the
75
inadequacy of the Athenian government and he was hopeful to instruct
the young people in his Academy and enable them to become statesmen
for leading the cities of Greece.
About his philosophical view it can be said that it is not so easy to
understand. He wrote about thirty dialogues. Plato considered a great
range of philosophical topics like metaphysics, ethics, political
philosophy, music, poetry, ... . The theory of Forms is one of the most
important parts of his philosophy.
10. A brief introduction to Plato’s theory of Forms and the
"Allegory of the Cave" :
Plato continued the way of his dear master Socrates by teaching
and ofcourse he accepted the view points of Socrates but we do not
know how much Plato added to Socrates’ philosophy. If here we pay
briefly to Plato’s philosophy it can be said that one of his main point of
views was the "Ideals" or "Forms". He believed that the real objects are
exposed to decay, but the Ideals they reflect, remain perfect and indeed
the real world is always imperfect. If we want to give an example in this
connection we can say that it is impossible to draw a circle which
absolutely be a perfect circle even if it is drawn by the best instruments
and with great care; but if we want to imagine a perfect circle it would
76
be so easy for us. Therefore Plato was interested in and concerned with
the world of perfection, rather than imperfect, changing material world,
his concentration was about Ideals or abstractions like mathematics. For
Plato the concept was important and the physical material is not to the
point.
We conclude from Plata’s theory of Ideals (Forms) that, truth and
beauty are not relative. The world of Ideals exists and the Ideals or
Forms are absolutely perfect. Truth does not depend on one’s point of
view.
Plato in his famous Allegory of the Cave, depicted the humans
condition of thought, and that, how they can improve that condition.
According to Allegory of the Cave a group of people are chained in the
bottom of a cave and their backsides are towards the mouth of the cave
in such a way that they can see only the back wall (bottom) of the cave,
their knowledge about outside comes from the shadows they see on the
wall as events occur outside the cave. Now if anyone of the prisoners in
the cave be able to escape from the cave and observe the reality that
exists outside he becomes excited and when he returns back to the cave
and explain what he has seen to his fellow prisoners and ask them to
follow him to see the outside, they refuse, because they are comfortable
77
with the life they are used to, this way of life has become a habit for
them and giving up a habit causes indisposition, so they do not want to
upset, their life by something strange even if it is something greatly
superior.
Plato illustrated the situation of human thought and daily life in
Allegory of the Cave. For Plato outside of the cave is the world of Ideals
and abstraction that we may find in mathematics and other "pure"
endeavors.
If we ask a question from ourselves that what could be the
purpose of Plato by using the Allegory of the Cave, such a terrible and
shocking Allegory? It can be mentioned that he might have intended to
encourage people to act rationally and to think about the true aims of
life.
11. Some interpretations of the "Allegory of the Cave" :
There are interpretations of the "Allegory" which are specifically
relevant to our own society and to the present time.
1. “The Allegory of the Cave may be viewed as a devastating
criticism of our everyday lives as being in bondage to
superficialities, to shadow rather than to substance. Truth is taken
78
to be whatever is known by the senses. A good life is taken to be
one in which we satisfy our desires. We are unaware that we are
living with illusion, superficial knowledge, and false and
conflicting ideals. Our lives are dominated by the shadow-play on
the walls of our cave made by newspaper headlines, by radio
broadcasts, by the endlessly moving shadows on the television
screen, by the echoing voices of opinion makers”.2
2. “It is of course a political allegory. The life in the cave is the life
of politics. Both the leaders and the public are ignorant and
corrupt, without true knowledge of themselves or of the world,
motivated by greed, power, and self-gratification. They are
chained in bondage to ignorance and passions, to mob hysteria for
or against fleeting issues, believing in current ideologies which
are the illusions, the shadows of the moment on the walls of the
cave”.3
3. “It is an allegory of the philosopher-king. The liberated one,
having made the ascent to know the truth and the good, has a
mission : to return to the cave, to bring enlightenment, to bring
the good news, even though he may be killed for his services.
Plato was thinking of Socrates; we think of Jesus”.4
79
The most famous work of Plato was The Republic. In this book
his concern was the conception of the perfect state. His concern was
politics and how to establish a government and how to educate a ruler,
philosopher - king, and how to rule.
Plato accepted Socrates’ three theories which was mentioned
previous and expanded his work with three extra theories of his own as
follows :
1. Human individuals who achieve the knowledge of right thinking
can live virtuous lives, 2. and constitute a Nation that is
completely ordered, 3. and If everyone can be organized in such
nations, the world will be entirely ordered.
Now here it is advantageous to be paid little about some other
important theories of Plato in detail.
12. Main Philosophical points of Plato :
Virtue is Knowledge (Theory of knowledge)
Generally can be said that Plato accepted the saying of Socrats
who told that : Virtue is Knowledge. Following what is really good and
useful, is wisdom and obeying what is harmful, is foolishness.
80
Plato supposed that the knowledge is achievable and granted two
characteristics to knowledge, he believed in the knowledge first of all
should be inerrant and secondly it should be about the real subject that
is, the subject of knowledge should be the real, and the true knowledge
should possess both these two characteristics and any state of mind
which could not possess both characteristics, it will not be able to have
true knowledge. For Plato sense perception was not true knowledge,
because it lacks both of the characteristics. He accepted Protagoras’
belief about sense relativity and perception but not general and universal
relativity, on the contrary, knowledge for Plato was absolute and
inerrant and it is achievable. Plato accepted the theory of Heraclitus who
claimed the objects of sense perception i.e. individual, sensible,
particular things are always constantly becoming and changing, so they
are not merited to be the objects of true knowledge. They come to
existence and then disappears, they are infinite in number and are not
clearly definable so they are not capable of being subjects of knowledge.
The subject of true knowledge should be constant and permanent and
also should be comprehended by clear definition which is included
universals as it was for Socrates. We can obtain essentially constant and
permanent knowledge only of those precepts which are about universals,
because it is only the universal that, is unchanging, permanent and
reliable. The goal of knowledge for Plato who accepted it from Socrates
81
was the definition i.e. to crystallize and make steady the knowledge by
clear and unambiguous definition. For example if we want to define
goodness, so we should insert the knowledge about goodness in a
definition by which, the mind expresses the essence of goodness.
Particular essential laws change but, the concept of goodness remains
just the same, therefore definition is involved with the universal and so
the true knowledge is the knowledge of the universal. The knowledge of
the highest universal is the highest type of knowledge, meantime the
knowledge of particular is the lowest type of knowledge.
According to Plato’s theory of knowledge, the concept of
universal is not an abstract form which would be empty of contents or
objective reference, but for each and every true universal concept there
is an objective reality correspond to it so the universal concepts have
objective reference, and the reality which is correspond to them has a
status higher than sense perception. Plato’s theory of knowledge is
described through (1) his Allegory of the Cave, (2) his metaphor of
Divided Line (3) his theory of the Forms.
82
13. The Analogy of the Divided Line :
“Plato offers his theory of knowledge from section 509 to the end
of the Book VI of the Republic”.5 He describes it by giving a diagram
which is known by Divided Line.
“Take a line divided into two unequal parts, one to
represent the visible order, the other the intelligible, and
divide each part again in the same proportion...”.6
Plato presents his theory of knowledge diagramatically by
Divided Line and allegorically by the Allegory of the Cave of which
mention was made before.
Plato for showing the level of knowledge, considered a vertical
line and divided it into four parts, and each part from the lowest to the
highest shows a level of knowledge. The levels of knowledge consist of:
imagining or conjecture, belief, understanding and reason. Each level
corresponds to its own objects and has its own method for knowing
them. He has made the main division between knowledge and opinion.
The objects of knowledge are in the intelligible world and the objects of
opinion are in the visible world.
83
Diagram : The Divided Line
Thought Objects
Reason (Dialectic)
Higher forms
Knowledge Understanding
(Science, Mathematics)
Forms of Science and Mathematics
Intelligible world
Belief (Perception)
Things, objects
Opinion Conjecture (Imaging)
Shadows, Images
Reflections
Visible world
Imaging (conjecture) : The first lowest part on the divided line of
knowledge belongs to the zone of imagining or conjecture and its
objects have the lowest degree of truth. “It is the level of knowledge in
which mental activity is at minimum, as in the awareness of such objects
as shadows, after-images, reflections in water or in mirrors or in smooth,
shiny surfaces”.7 Here Plato seems to refer to artists like painters and
sculptors because for him their works were only images, shadows,
copies. Why did Plato not consider the artists so valuable? “Plato is
suspicious of all forms of communication which use images, such as
painting, poetry, sculpture, drama, religious ritual. These art forms use
images to provide fantasy rather than truth, and Plato feared that the
passions of the public are easily stimulated, influenced and controlled by
their persuasive imagery”.8
84
Perception (belief) : The second level on the divided line of
knowledge is belief, that is sense perception of real objects. At this
level, sense perception (belief) can not still realize the abstract concept
of the object which is perceived, it “does not grasp the botanist’s
concept of the apple, which identifies the unchanging characteristics of
each species of apple”.9
Here Mr. T.Z. Lavine author of the book on which this thesis is
based has taken apple as an example of actual object which can be
perceived by sense perception as an object of belief. “Belief which has
its source in the perception by the senses of actual objects, is thus
insecure. It is not based upon abstract truths or principles which are
unchanging ...”.10
Here Plato wants to direct us to know that by sense perception in
the visible world we can not attain true knowledge because of two
reasons:
1. “What can be known by the senses, he tells us, is only the world
of flux, the world of Heraclitus, the world of particular things that
are in the process of change. ... We only know how things seem to
be, on the basis of our perception of them not how they are. In
85
fact, says Plato we do not have knowledge at this level, but only
opinion. It is, however true opinion, ...”.11
For Plato the level of imagining in comparison with the level of
perception is as false opinion.
2. “Plato is also trying to give us a second reason that sense –
perception can never give us true knowledge. ... Plato is thus
maintaining that sense perception can not give us certainty in
knowledge or unchanging universal truths about reality”.12
Now we can ask that what is true knowledge for Plato? And how
is it possible to grasp true knowledge? In third and forth levels of
Divided Line we can come close to the answer of above mentioned
questions.
On Plato’s opinion, the second level that is the level of belief is
“... the level on which the commonsense mind, the mind of the man-in-
the-street operates. This is the type of mind that never rises above the
level of thinking or talking about concrete things ------- this city, that
politician, this new scandal, the latest gossip. The general, universal
characteristics of cities and their common problems, the universal
characteristics of politics, are never considered by this type of mind”.13
86
Intellect (Rational Understanding) : Leaving behind the world
of the cave, the world of everyday beliefs and of artistic fantasy and the
concrete objects of the visible world, we enter the third level of Divided
Line of knowledge. What sort of objects are we moving to in the
illumination of the sun? And what are the objects that we can know by
our intellect when we go across the line into the intelligible world? Here
Plato gives the answer that “... the objects which we know by intellect or
rational understanding on the third level of knowledge are the true
concepts to which we have already made reference in contrast to the
objects of belief”.14
We came to understand that the objects of sense perception are
concrete, particular things, changeable, in process, in Heraclitian flux
whereas the objects of intellect are abstract, general or universal
concepts, unchanging in Parmenedian eternal immutability.
14. Theory of Forms (Ideas) :
Plato named the objects of intellect as Forms or Ideas. Here there
are some questions that we can propound. How do they ------ Forms or
Ideas ----- give true knowledge? What are their numbers? How is their
relation to the objects of sense perception? How many Forms are there?
And what is the proof for being them eternally true? Whether can we
know them at all or not? And if it is so, then what is the way to know
87
them? We know the Forms belong to the intelligible world of which the
Forms or Ideas are the objects.
“For Plato, concepts such as the concept of a circle, a triangle,
beauty, justice, as well as the concepts that make up our everyday
vocabulary, such as house, yellow, man, have two crucial functions :
The first of these functions is that they make it possible for us to know
the actual world of things as well as the objects of mathematics, the
sciences, and philosophy. Their second function is that they enable us to
evaluate and criticize all these objects”.15
Now how is it possible the abstract concepts of invisible world,
make us able to obtain knowledge of all objects i.e. both of the visible
and intelligible world?
Plato answers to us that “... to think or to communicate at all
requires the use of concepts. Concepts are the means by which the
universe is made intelligible. The simplest statement ------- "there is a
man" ------- uses the concept man ; "there is an apple" uses the concept
apple. Each concept, such as man or apple, refers to the qualities which
a group of particular things ------- every Tom, Dick and Harry or every
McIntosh and Baldwin -------- share”.16
88
According to Plato’s point of view without the above mentioned
general or universal concepts communication would be impossible.
“(Here we can see that Plato’s complex theory of Forms is derived from
Socrates’s simple theory of universally true definitions.)”17
What is the definition of a Form or Idea for Plato? “Forms are the
eternal and immutable, absolutely true definitions of concepts : The
form triangle is the set of all those qualities which define the concept
triangle. These are also the common qualities shared by the entire class
of particular triangles, that is, by all the particular triangles that ever
have been or will be constructed (for example, the quality that the sum
of the internal angles of a triangle equals 180 degrees)”.18
For Plato Forms are as essences i.e. Forms or Ideas are the
essence or essential qualities of particular things. So they are not just
pure Ideas, subjective and merely mental entities kept within the limits
of human minds. They are not particular things of which we think,
something within consciousness. “The forms are real, independently
existing entities ; they are eternal, immutable, intelligible objects in the
intelligible world. They are the essential substance of any object, of
whatever is real enough to be known on any level. Actual particular
things of the visible world are knowable only insofar as we can name or
89
identify them by a form, as a man or an apple, that is, as members of a
class of things which share the same form, the same set of defining
qualities. Particular things, such as men or apples, are real only to the
extent that they measure up to, "copy", "partake of," or embody the
eternal reality and truth of the form”.19
The metaphor of shadow and substance is repeated several times
in Plato’s philosophy. As the mention was made, shadow means
concrete, particular, changing objects ; and the Forms means substance.
Concrete objects of the visible world are for Plato as imperfect copies of
the forms of which they take part in.
Now we turn to the question which was propounded before, that
how do the true knowledge issue from the Forms? In brief answer can
be said that “As we have already discovered, true knowledge must meet
two requirements : (1) it must be immutable, unchanging, and
unchangeable; and (2) it must be about what is real”.20
Second function of the Forms is their evaluative and critical
function. As we came to know the forms set up the objective, universal
and immutable qualities which define the concepts. Now as the second
function of the Forms we can mention that “... they establish standards
90
or ideals by which to evaluate the world of things”.21 So Plato used the
evaluative or normative function of the forms of goodness and justice.
As the mention was made, Plato gave the examples of triangles and
circles and other mathematical objects π, πr2, area of a circle as the
universal concepts. Plato believed that these concepts were not relative
to the cities or kind of personalities.
Still for Plato there are three limitations for mathematical and
scientific knowledge.
(1) they rest upon unexamined first principles; (2) they are tied to
instances, particulars, examples from the visible world ; and (3)
they are piecemeal, fragmentary, since they fail to show the
coordination of the forms which are their objects”.22
In the fourth level of knowledge human mind operates the method
of dialectic. What is dialectic? It is the science of studying the Forms.
“ "We place dialectic", Plato says, "on top of our other studies
like a coping – stone; ... no other study could rightly be put above this."
(Republic, 534C.)”.23 Here the philosopher proceeds to knowledge of the
Forms through the potency of his reason and by employing of dialectical
91
method, “... the method of analyzing the essences or forms of all things
in the universe, and seeing their relationship to one another”.24
In Symposium, one of Plato’s dialogues, he presented that, “... the
philosopher moves toward the eternal forms out of the power of Eros,
love, desire, which leads him from the love of beautiful body to the love
of all beautiful things, and then to the love of the beauty of the mind as
greater than the beauty of the body. "Drawing towards and
contemplating the vast sex of beauty, ... at last the vision is revealed to
him of a single science, which is the science of beauty everywhere".”25
Plato in the Republic shows that the philosopher, applies the
dialectic method to continue the unfinished task of the third level, and
“(1) establishes true first principles for mathematics and the
sciences, (2) without employing diagrams or particular things from the
visible world; (3) dialectic coordinates the forms and unifies
fragmentary, isolated, unrelated sciences and mathematics into a single
totality”.26
If we want to explain little more about Plato’s dialectical method
and make it clear to some extent, we can say : “Dialectic identifies the
entire range and variety of forms ------- from forms of artifacts such as
92
beds and chairs; lowly things such as apples and dogs ; relations such as
equality and similarity; values such as beauty and goodness and justice.
By the power of dialectic the philosopher not only identifies all these
forms and establishes their truth, but also moves toward organizing the
forms into a single structured order of truth and value. The forms tend to
constitute a hierarchical structure, a pyramid, from the many least
universal to the few most universal, from the most concrete to the most
abstract, from the forms of inanimate physical things to the Idea of the
Good”.27
If we ask a question to Plato that how is the possibility of this
knowledge? And how does the philosopher obtain this knowledge by the
method of dialectic? He will give answer that “The philosopher’s ascent
is made possible by the love of truth which enables him finally to reach
the highest reality, the supreme form, the Idea of the Good is the end or
fulfillment or purpose for which all things exist, and thus it alone gives
intelligibility, truth, and goodness to all the other forms, which are
dependent upon it, and it alone provides their coordination and unity.
Seen in the light of the Idea of the Good, the plurality of the many forms
becomes the unity of total reality”.28
93
Plato considers the Idea of the Good in comparison with the sun.
“As the light of the sun makes the concrete things of the world visible
and is the source of their life, growth and value so the Idea of the Good
gives truth which makes the forms intelligible and is the source of their
being and goodness. Plato says of the Idea of the Good that it is "The
universal author of all things beautiful and right, parent of light and of
the lord of light in this world, and the source of truth and reason in the
other." And again the says, "The Good is not essence but far exceeds
essence in dignity and power".”29
Therefore for Plato the Idea of the Good is the headspring of the
intelligibility, truth and value of every other ideas or forms ; the Idea of
the Good is the headspring of the world’s moral end. Author of the
book: From Socrates to Sartre, The Pholosophic Quest, Mr. T.Z. Lavine
believes that there is a connection between Plato’s Idea of Good and
Christian God. “With the ascent to the Idea of the Good, to an absolute
one of truth and goodness, Plato prepared the way for the Christian God.
Like the God of Christianity, the Idea of the Good is the supreme value,
it is the source of all other value. The Idea of the Good is Plato’s
conception of the absolute, the perfect principle of all reality, truth, and
value. For two thousand years, when Christians thought of God they
94
envisioned the divided line and the ascent out of the cave through the
power of reason and the power of love to Plato’s Idea of the Good.”30
15. The Tripartite Soul :
Plato believes that man has not a simple essence or form, but
there are several elements in man that are in accordance with his
different natural capacities or functions. The unequivocal function of
man is the power of speaking i.e. language and reason which make
difference between him and other living things and the other elements
are bodily appetites and spirited element. Out of these three elements
reason, appetite and spirit, the element of reason which acts through the
power of speaking by the language, is the most important capacity in the
essence of man. There is a natural hierarchical structure. The rational
element i.e. reason is a placed at the top by which man can obtain the
truth, in the middle of the soul structure, the spirited element is placed
and at the bottom of the structure the element of bodily appetites is
situated.
16. The concept of justice and happiness of the soul :
What did Plato mean by justice and happiness of the soul? As the
mention was made about the soul, for Plato it consists of three parts.
Pleasure cannot be considered as the highest good for humans because
95
pleasure can satisfy only the bodily appetites but it cannot gratify the
other two parts of the soul. “The human being’s highest good must be
the sense of well-being or happiness which comes from functioning in
accordance with his or her nature, from fulfilling the needs of all three
elements which make up what it is to be a person. Only the fulfilling of
all three needs, with reason governing the spirited element and the
bodily appetites, can satisfy the complex nature of a human being. And
when each element of the self function in this way, in accordance with
its appropriate role in the structured self, the life of such a person may
be said to be just and he experiences this justice of the soul, this
integration of his personality as well-being or happiness”.31
So according to Plato’s view, morality has its base in knowing
and preserving the harmony and balance between the rational and
irrational elements of the soul. “This balance or harmony in the soul is
the justice of the soul, the soul’s morality or virtue or excellence, and its
product is happiness”.32
Plato does not consider the soul only as a hierarchical order or
structure, but he considers it as an organism. We know that in an
organism all of its parts must be in harmony so that, such organism can
be considered as a healthy living organism and each part of the organism
96
in spite of having its own special function, all parts are interdependent
’too, for example in human body which contains the parts of heart,
brain, kidney, ... if any of these parts has disfunctions consequently and
definitely it will have unfavourable effects on other parts. So “For Plato
it is clear that neither a life devoted exclusively to bodily pleasures nor a
life devoted ascetically to the denial of bodily pleasure would be
functional”.33
17. The Status of Women in Plato :
Whether Plato really was an early feminist or not?
Plato believes that women should be able to have the same social
roles as well as men. Plato thinks that women and men have the same
nature in respect to acting as guardians of the state, except that, woman
is weaker and man is stronger.
Ofcourse Plato does not want to say that there are no differences
between two sexes but he says that they are equal in the nature of
human. For Plato in spite of that women are physically weaker than men
but he believes that this is not a sufficient reason to prevent women from
being trained in warfare, and again he believes that even if women are
trained the same as the men, it would be better for them to do the easier
tasks.
97
Plato, however does not see the bearing of children as a problem
in the education of women, nor is it a barrier to their role as guardian.
“The selection of the guardians, then, is from all classes by
natural intellectual capacity of intelligence to become members of the
ruling class. Plato stands out in the history of western philosophy as the
first supporter (along with Socrates) of the intellectual equality of the
sexes. Book V of the Republic has been hailed by the contemporary
women’s movement for its defense of the equality of the sexes. There is
only one difference between men and women, Plato argues, and that is
that males beget and women bear children. But this difference has no
more to do with functioning in the political life of the city than the
difference between being bald–headed or having hair. Women, like men,
have the natural capacities which will fit some for the ruler class, some
to be warriors and auxiliaries, some to be producers. Women in the
Republic will therefore share in the life of all three classes”.34
Supporting the women by Plato can give us a hint that, this idea
of Plato about women is one of the humanistic elements of his thought,
since humanists believe hardly in the equality of men and women’s
rights.
98
NOTES AND REFERENCES
1. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy CD-ROM General Editor.
Edward Craig Consultant Editor Luciano Floridi
2. From Socrates to Sartre : The Philosophic Quest by T.Z. Lavine
Bantam Books March 1984, P. 28-29.
3. Ibid P. 29
4. Ibid P. 29
5. Ibid P. 31
6. Ibid P. 31
7. Ibid P. 32
8. Ibid P. 33
9. Ibid P. 33-34
10. Ibid P. 34
11. Ibid P. 34
12. Ibid P. 34
13. Ibid P. 35
14. Ibid P. 36
15. Ibid P. 37
16. Ibid P. 37
17. Ibid P. 37
18. Ibid P. 38
99
19. Ibid P. 38
20. Ibid P. 39
21. Ibid P. 39
22. Ibid P. 40
23. Ibid P. 40
24. Ibid P. 40
25. Ibid P. 41
26. Ibid P. 41
27. Ibid P. 41
28. Ibid P. 41
29. Ibid P. 41-42
30. Ibid P. 42
31. Ibid P. 50
32. Ibid P. 50
33. Ibid P. 51
34. Ibid P. 60