plato and aristotle philosophy notes

7/30/2019 Plato and Aristotle Philosophy Notes

1/3

Plato

Lived from 427BC 347BC

Developed theory of forms

Plato was a student of Socrates

Wrote in dialogues in which various characters discuss philosophical issues

Best known work is The Republic, contains Analogy of the Cave Was a dualist believed soul and body were separate entities

Said soul is a substance which cannot be destroyed

Said soul always is, never perishes

Different to Christian belief; soul comes from M.O.C

Plato's theory of forms

Plato said that things around us in the physical world are always changing therefore they

can never be the object of completely true knowledge. He said different realities must

exist from which we can gain true knowledge

According to Plato, the forms were in a hierarchy with the Form of the Good being at the

top. Wisdom, Justice etc are below the Form of the Good.

Plato's analogy of the Cave

The simile of Plato's cave represents many things

Theory of forms

His reasons for thinking philosophers were most fitted for leader roles

Knowing reality as it is

Graphically demonstrating nature of philosophy and enlightenment

What different parts of Platos analogy of the Cave mean Cave Realm of appearances, world we live in

Shadows on the wall Paintings and illusions

Fire Sun, which gives light to this world

Objects carried on poles Things we see around us in this world

Criticisms of the Analogy of the Cave

Good comes in many different varieties, there cannot be one single Form of good

Goodness of a person may be different to a goodness of a sofa

Plato says there are only forms for opposites e.g. good and bad and beautiful and

ugly. In the Republic he talks about a form for everything

Theory of Forms can encourage an infinite regress. Different colours of paper clips would have

different forms. Adding a layer of forms


2/3

Aristotle

384BC - 322 BC

Described as great thinker

At 17, became a student at Platos Academy

Became teacher at the Academy and remained for 20 years

Opened own school of philosophy called the Lyceum During 13 years spent at Lyceum composed most of writings

Four causes

Better word to describe cause is aitia - reason behind something

Began by noticing the world was in a constant stae of motion (change from potential to

an actual state). Eg: firewood to fire

Transition from potential to actual state lead Aristotle to believe that there are four

causes which cause this transition to occur:

Material Cause: What something is made from. Without this cause the object would not

exist.

Statue is made from bronze

Chair is made from wood and metal

Efficient Cause: What brings the object about, without this the object would not exist.

Can be a natural (clouds becoming heavy) agent for natural phenomenon(rain)

Statue is made by scultor

Chair is made by carpenter

Formal Cause: What form the object is in, without this particular form the object would

not be the certain object. Statue is in the form of a statue

Chair is in the form of a chair

Final Cause: The purpose for which a thing exists; what purpose it is providing

A statue exists to be admired

A chair exists to provide a person with somewhere to comfortably sit

Formal Cause is more important than Final Cause as material can change over time

but the object will still be the same object

Statute would still be statute even if eroded by rain

Chair will still be a be a chair even if the wood has decayed

The 4 causesarent independent but depend on each other and operate at the same

time. E.g. a house would not just be a bricks and other building material - this would just

be the matter of the house

There is a close connection between the Formal and Final cause as everything exists to

make fully its actual form.

The acrons Final cause is to become an oak tree


3/3

It can change from an acron to an oak tree to realise its potential

The Prime Mover

One of the questions which troubled Aristotle was the existence of the universe as whole

Aristole believed that nature does not act without purpose, something must have initiated

the change. Aristotle links the Final cause to the Prime Mover - the reason for being The Prime Mover must cause be a cause that actualises potential in everything

Criticisms:

Aristotle completely rejects the reason as a source of knowledge. This view on God are

based on rational deduction rather than wholly empirical evidence.

Does everything have an ultimate purpose(final cause)? Perhaps the universe and life

came about by chance and obey the laws of science

Idea of uncaused cause is self-defeating. If nothing can come about by itself, then how

can there be an uncaused God?

If God has no physical interaction with the universe and is pure thought, then how and

why is everything drawn to him. How can he cause matter to act if he is immortal ?

plato and aristotle philosophy notes

Documents