API !!!!!

Plato’s rationalism: theory of forms & Allegory of cave- AO1

• Rationalism is the epistemological theory that knowledge can only be gained a priori, not from experience

• alegory of cave- Prisoners are trapped in a cave all their life. They think shadows they see on the wall are the real world. One day a prisoner escapes (philosopher) and sees the actual real world

• We think the world we see is the real world- but its not as no empiricism- true world is the world of forms

• forms are the objects of intelligence but not of sight

evidence of forms

• cycle of opposites

• argument of recollection- salve boy - world forms- perfection

• universals

• forms are transcendent, archetype, pure, real, cause, hierarchy, permanent, perfect

Plato is accepting Heraclitus’ issue that we can’t gain knowledge from experience, but is proposing another method – pure a priori reason

Plato’s rationalism: theory of forms & Allegory of cave counter

• There is no empirical evidence for the forms- Plato wouldn’t think this is a criticism. He thinks evidence from experience is just shadows on the wall of the cave. So Plato thinks it’s good there is no evidence for the forms!

• Aristotle says we can gain knowledge from experience/evidence – through studying the causal processes responsible for the change/flux we observe.

• Aristotle argues this makes the theory of forms an unnecessary hypothesis – we can explain the world without them. 

• Richard Dawkins along with other scientists argues that it is nonsense to talk about a world beyond the physical (The World of Forms).

• Karl Popper argues that Plato wants to find certainty and absolutes in an uncertain world of change. This leads to the assumption that it must exist in another world, but this does not make it so.

• Philosophers including AJ Ayer have pointed out that Plato assumes that nouns such as ‘Beauty’ and ‘Truth’ must have something corresponding to them in reality (ie the Form). However, they are not names of particular things but qualities of other things.

eval

• Plato is wrong to disregard the value of evidence.

• Aristotle’s approach is successful because it led to modern science.

The hierarchy of forms & form of the good AO1

• Part of Plato’s rationalism and view of reality is the theory of forms, which includes a hierarchy in it

• highest form form of good (sun)- allows us to know the world of the forms and is responsible for all the existence of the other forms

• Anyone who understands the form of the good- morally perfect person- ‘philosopher king’

• Below the form of the good are the higher forms like justice and beauty. 

• Below those are perfect mathematical forms. 

• Below those are the forms of the things we see in our experience, e.g. the form of tableness.

The hierarchy of forms & form of the good counter and eval

counter

• Criticism of the form of the good- cannot be one unified form of the good which captures all the diverse and contextual forms of goodness in this world

• no universal goods- military strategy good if death but medicine good if save lives

• Nietzsche- form of the good a ‘dangerous error’

• virtue is required to do good not only knowing what good is

• history has never shown us in a perfectly moral people

• Hume claims slave boy had knowledge by experiencing the problem

evaluation

• Aristotle & Nietzsche’s arguments are successful

• NIETSCHE human reason is susceptible to influence from our desires

• HUME reason is a ‘slave’ of the passions

• Plato’s rationalism is based on an overly-optimistic view of human reason

• Plato tried to dismiss empiricism- overlooked that reason alone can also be mistaken and even corrupted

Aristotle’s four causes AO1

• Aristotle’s empiricism claims we can gain knowledge from experience

• Material objects are thus hylomorphic, a combination of matter and form

• to have knowledge of a thing requires understanding why it exists- thus gain knowledge despite the world being in flux, is Aristotle’s response to Heraclitus

• 4 TYPES OF CAUSATION

  • material – what something’s made of – e.g. the ‘wood’ of a chair

  • formal – a thing’s essence or defining characteristic, – e.g. the shape of a chair – a chair essentially has the shape of a thing that can be sat on.

  • efficient – what brought it into being – e.g. a carpenter 

  • final – end goal of the thing built into its nature – telos – e.g. for a chair, to be sat on

• early version of the scientific method- look for patterns in the world and try to gain general knowledge from them

Aristotle’s four causes counter

counter

• material cause - Not that informative, lots of objects made of the same thing

• formal cause- living things are far more complex doesnt work - can be lots of different forms for one 'thing'- plato Form is about the essence of an object, not the shape

• efficient cause- multiple causes

• final cause -

  • bacon telos unscientific

  • modern science views - universe just atoms and energy

  • carroll- purpose not built into architecture universe

  • -Multiple purposes for things -existence preceedes essence (exist pre purpose) people cling to a telos as they’re afraid to choose own purpose - Jean-Paul Sartre

  • inanimate objects don’t have a purpose except those that people impose on them

evaluation

• modern science critique of Aristotle is successful

• acorn growing into an oak tree must be explained by final causation, but modern science- DNA

• final causation is an unnecessary unscientific concept

• material and efficient cause can be valid

• What about those things in the world that appear to have no purpose? Or a 'negative' purpose? E.g. what purpose does cancer serve?

• Aristotle’s general approach was right, even if it was underdeveloped and got some details wrong as a result

Aristotle’s prime mover AO1

• Aristotle argued that all observed change (motion) requires an ultimate source: the prime mover.

• He believed the universe is eternal, but continuous motion within it demands an explanation.

• Everyday observation (e.g., a ball stopping when rolled) shows that motion doesn't continue without a cause.

• Celestial bodies, however, continue moving eternally.

• Therefore, a prime mover must exist to sustain this motion.

• The prime mover:

  • Does not derive motion from anything else.

  • Is unmovable and possesses no potentiality—only pure actuality.

  • Is not physical, as physical things change and decay.

  • Is an eternal, immaterial mind.

  • Must engage in pure, unchanging contemplation to remain unchanged.

• The prime mover is not an efficient cause (does not push or pull).

• It is the final cause—it draws things toward it by their desire for perfection.

• Motion in the universe is explained by things moving from potentiality to actuality, driven by attraction to the perfection of the prime mover.

Aristotle’s prime mover counter

counter

• Newton has rejected Aristotle’s views on motion- concept of intertia- continuous motion does not need a special explanation like a prime mover.

• Anthony Kenny concludes Newton’s law “wrecks” Aristotle’s argument

• modern science there is no need for the prime mover

• russell brute fact- no need for cause

• Prime Mover is transcendent and disinterested, it does not interact with the world, this conflicts with religious ideas of God

• What moved the prime mover

evaluation

• The concept of a prime mover seems outdated, though Aristotle’s attempt to find an explanation for motion was a valid empirical project.

• So, Aristotle had many outdated beliefs about the world, but his underlying method for knowing reality was valid. In fact that is the method Newton himself developed and used.

• Science is always progressing and updating, but Aristotle was right to use and pioneer the scientific method.