Date post: | 18-Jan-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | jayson-stephen-norman |
View: | 245 times |
Download: | 2 times |
Plato on KnowledgePlato on Knowledge
PlatoPlato 429-347 BC429-347 BC Student of Socrates (469-399)Student of Socrates (469-399) Teacher of Aristotle (384-322)Teacher of Aristotle (384-322) Founded ‘Academy’Founded ‘Academy’ Wrote DialoguesWrote Dialogues
TheaetetusTheaetetus RepublicRepublic MenoMeno
TheaetetusTheaetetus A late treatment of knowledgeA late treatment of knowledge Dismisses two possibilities for knowledgeDismisses two possibilities for knowledge
PerceptionPerception True beliefTrue belief
Proposes: True Belief with an AccountProposes: True Belief with an Account To know X is to truly believe X To know X is to truly believe X andand to have an to have an
account of Xaccount of X But what is an account? Justification for the But what is an account? Justification for the
belief?belief?
TheaetetusTheaetetus First possibility: an account is an First possibility: an account is an
analysis of how X is composed of analysis of how X is composed of simpler partssimpler parts So no simple thing can be known?So no simple thing can be known?
Reject this ideaReject this idea
TheaetetusTheaetetus Second possibility: an account is a Second possibility: an account is a
catalogue of the component parts catalogue of the component parts But you can list the parts of a chariot But you can list the parts of a chariot
without having an understanding of the without having an understanding of the chariot itself.chariot itself. Reject this ideaReject this idea
TheaetetusTheaetetus Third possibility: an account is an Third possibility: an account is an
identification of the distinguishing identification of the distinguishing characteristiccharacteristic To know X about the sun is for X to be a To know X about the sun is for X to be a
true belief and you can identify the sun true belief and you can identify the sun as, say, the brightest object in the skyas, say, the brightest object in the sky
But this means there is always something But this means there is always something else to know before you can know any Xelse to know before you can know any X
Reject this ideaReject this idea
TheaetetusTheaetetus All possibilities are eliminated.All possibilities are eliminated.
AporiaAporia again? again? Plato has another theory from previous Plato has another theory from previous
dialoguesdialogues
The Theory of the FormsThe Theory of the Forms There is a realm of real things that are There is a realm of real things that are
both non-physical and non-mentalboth non-physical and non-mental Things in this realm are the ‘Forms’ (Things in this realm are the ‘Forms’ (ideaideas s
in Greek) of things in the physical realmin Greek) of things in the physical realm Things in the physical realm are what they Things in the physical realm are what they
are because they are in some way are because they are in some way connected to their Formsconnected to their Forms
We can know things only through We can know things only through ‘acquaintance’ with their Forms‘acquaintance’ with their Forms
The Theory of the FormsThe Theory of the Forms Forms explain the possibility of general Forms explain the possibility of general
termsterms We can call many things by one nameWe can call many things by one name
All things which are dogs we can call All things which are dogs we can call a doga dog. . There must be something which is:There must be something which is:
1.1.Common to all things called by a general termCommon to all things called by a general term2.2.Distinctive of all those thingsDistinctive of all those things
This thing isThis thing is1.1.Not physical – not all dogs have any physical traitNot physical – not all dogs have any physical trait2.2.Recognisable by us – but Recognisable by us – but not not by our sensesby our senses
The Theory of the FormsThe Theory of the Forms Forms explain the possibility of Forms explain the possibility of
judgementjudgement All judgement is a type of comparingAll judgement is a type of comparing ‘‘This is a dog’ means I am comparing ‘this’ This is a dog’ means I am comparing ‘this’
to some standard of dogginessto some standard of dogginess The standard can’t be another dog – else I have The standard can’t be another dog – else I have
to first judge that that is a dog, and so onto first judge that that is a dog, and so on The standard can’t be my The standard can’t be my idea idea of a dog – it is the of a dog – it is the
idea of a dog only because it is judged to idea of a dog only because it is judged to represent dogs accurately. So I still need to represent dogs accurately. So I still need to judge judge itsits dogginess; and so on. dogginess; and so on.
The Theory of the FormsThe Theory of the Forms Forms explain the possibility of judgementForms explain the possibility of judgement
The standard of ‘dog’ can’t be physical or The standard of ‘dog’ can’t be physical or mentalmental
It is It is metaphysicalmetaphysical It is that It is that in virtue of whichin virtue of which
1.1. All things properly called ‘dog’ are properly so All things properly called ‘dog’ are properly so calledcalled
2.2. Only things properly called ‘dog’ are properly so Only things properly called ‘dog’ are properly so calledcalled
We call it the Form of dog, or dog-in-itself, …We call it the Form of dog, or dog-in-itself, …
The Theory of the FormsThe Theory of the Forms How do Forms relate to their How do Forms relate to their
particulars?particulars?1. Transcendence: there is far more to
the Forms than the particular things which fall under them
2. Immanence: the Forms are present in their particulars, but not in a way that we can perceive through our senses
The Theory of the FormsThe Theory of the Forms How do we come to know of them?How do we come to know of them?
1.1. Not Not by our external senses by our external senses (perception)(perception)
2.2. NotNot by our internal sense (awareness) by our internal sense (awareness)3.3. But by But by intellectual perception intellectual perception or or
awareness of the awareness of the understandingunderstanding(Whatever those might be)(Whatever those might be)
The Theory of the FormsThe Theory of the Forms Who is capable of knowing them?Who is capable of knowing them?
We are all able to use the term ‘dog’ We are all able to use the term ‘dog’ correctly,correctly, So we are all ‘intellectually aware’ of the Form of So we are all ‘intellectually aware’ of the Form of
DogDog Dog is the Form of a mundane thing – it is a Dog is the Form of a mundane thing – it is a
‘lower’ Form‘lower’ Form ‘‘Higher’ Forms are of things such as Higher’ Forms are of things such as
Triangle, Courage, Equal, Noble, …Triangle, Courage, Equal, Noble, … Only those trained as intellectuals can ‘perceive Only those trained as intellectuals can ‘perceive
these in their understanding’these in their understanding’
How we KnowHow we Know How do we come to know the higher Forms?How do we come to know the higher Forms?
Plato gives an example in the Plato gives an example in the MenoMeno A slave is taught to double a squareA slave is taught to double a square
Slave thinks he knows but gives the wrong answer Slave thinks he knows but gives the wrong answer at first before Socrates begins to question himat first before Socrates begins to question him
This also shows the value of This also shows the value of elenchuselenchus Socrates then gets the slave to give the right Socrates then gets the slave to give the right
answer answer Since the slave only answered questions, he must Since the slave only answered questions, he must
have have knownknown how to double a square already how to double a square already
The Allegory of the CaveThe Allegory of the Cave What is the difference between how What is the difference between how
normal people see the world and normal people see the world and how philosophers see it?how philosophers see it?
The Objects of The Objects of KnowledgeKnowledge
Only the Forms are objects of real knowledgeOnly the Forms are objects of real knowledge They are permanent, unchanging, always trueThey are permanent, unchanging, always true
What is learnt through the senses is ‘opinion’What is learnt through the senses is ‘opinion’ It is impermanent, changeable, sometimes true It is impermanent, changeable, sometimes true
and sometimes notand sometimes not
Plato is contradicted by Aristotle, as we shall Plato is contradicted by Aristotle, as we shall seesee