PLATO’S REPUBLIC: There are a variety of major distinctions that people always use to describe the Plato's Republic section we have read. The distinctions are:
- The appearances vs. reality
- One vs. the many
- Forms/ideals vs. physical objects
After doing the reading, describe how you understand these distinctions. Do you agree with the basic claim, that appearances can be deceiving? Why or why not?
Another way to understand the Allegory of the Cave and the Divided Line is to use one particular example and take it through all the different levels of the Divided Line. Here's some examples like that:
- A picture of a dog in a dog magazine/ An actual physical dog//A diagram of a dog used to train a dog show judge at Westminster Dog Show/The idea of the perfect dog - Less "real"//More "real"
- A picture of a beauty pageant participant/Meeting the actual beauty pageant participant//A description of the ideal "Miss America"/The concept or ideal Miss America in someone's imagination - Again, the more perfect it is, the more real it is, even if it's just an idea.
Would you agree with the way Plato connects knowledge and reality? Why or why not?
The basic claim that appearances can be deceiving is a meritorious one, illustrated well by the Allegory of the Cave. Consider examples from our own reality, the misconceptions of our people; history is rife with them. The common myth that Vikings wore horns on their helmets, for instance, is a belief held by many individuals. They have witnessed illustrations of Vikings with horned helmets, consumed media of Vikings adorned with such attire, and have spoken with likeminded individuals and have agreed to term such horned-helmet-wearing warriors to be Vikings. That is an illusion, when the reality was that Vikings looked much different, with simple helmets or caps and leather, fur, or chainmail attire. A better example in support of the Allegory of the Cave that utilizes the Divided Line is with computers. For the less technically literate, ‘CPU’ might mean to them a desktop computer tower; that is area ‘D’ of the Divided Line, appearance. Area ‘C’ is the understanding that the CPU is a discrete component attached by some means to the main logic or motherboard of the computer, inside of it, the reality of the object. Area ‘B’ is intellectual understanding of the logic that goes into the CPU, the mathematics of all those binary transistors operating in order to accomplish another task. Area ‘A’ is the ‘perfect’ ideal of a CPU, embodying what a central processing unit is with all its logic and operations and components, the Form of CPU. “Appearances can be deceiving” is often applied in our present culture to judgements of individuals, but taking into account the many misconceptions of our age, deception can occur simply because of how we develop our understandings of the world. The Allegory of the Cave is meant to highlight the role of the philosopher in freeing humanity of the chains of unyielding ‘understandings’ limited solely to perception.
Plato connection of knowledge and reality is known as ‘epistemology,’ describing his views that knowledge of ‘ideal forms’ and ‘Platonic ideas’ are innate in the soul of humans, and that learning is recalling. Furthermore, in this view, knowledge is that which is certain, and ‘truth’ or ‘true opinion’ is uncertain as consequence of it being derived from sensation. Sensation is unreliable, as the Allegory of the Cave shows; when limited by sensation, in that case, auditory and visual sensation in one direction, ‘truth’ was established, but certain ‘knowledge’ was not learned or recalled, as those who were bound by chains were wrong in their assertions of what the shadows were. Now, I don’t necessarily agree with Platonic epistemology as it pertains to all knowledge of the Forms being innate, at least only up to a certain degree, but he is right in that sensation can only give us truth, and not certainty. Even as sure as scientific research can be, observing results through experimentation and deriving a conclusion with 99% certainty, we cannot be 100% certain through sensation alone. I agree, then, that there is some merit to the idea that knowledge must be derived from Forms and Essences, but I’m unsure as to how those are made innate in our souls.