Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
comparison of plato and aristotle in view of knowledge
comparison of plato and aristotle in view of knowledge
comparison of plato and aristotle in view of knowledge
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Although Plato and Aristotle lived during the same time period, both philosophers developed two divergent theories of knowledge.
In order to define knowledge, Plato utilizes his dialogue Theaetetus, specifically a conversation had between Socrates and Theaetetus about knowledge, the divided line diagram, and the Allegory of the Cave. In the dialogue Theaetetus, Plato introduces the three definitions of knowledge as proposed by Theaetetus. He, Theaetetus, states at the prodding of Socrates that knowledge is perception [Aistheta ] or as expressed by Protagoras that “ man is the measure of all things”. Socrates rejects the first proposal stating that if man is the true measure of all things and his perception is infallible; thus making man the sole judge of what is right and wrong. If man is the sole judge, then there is no need for the teacher who claims that man is the measure of all things.
Theaetetus states that knowledge is true opinion. However, Socrates refutes this statement as well, affirming that to distinguish true from false opinion is impossible, if it is the opinion itself that is being used as the distinguishing factor. Theaetetus, then suggests that knowledge is true opinion with explanation. This definition is also rejected by Socrates, who argues that if the explanation is what makes the opinion true, then there is no need for the opinion .
With these rejected definitions in mind, Plato’s theory of knowledge, one that is grounded in idealism , calls for the separation of form and matter as well the existence of two worlds: the world of appearances and the world of intelligibly. The Platonic theory of knowledge states that knowledge is achieved through the ascension of, what Plato calls, the Plateaus of Kno...
... middle of paper ...
...be subjects whereas accidental things are limited to being only predicates . Substances are the “category proper to unqualified science” and answer the question “What is the thing in question?” .The nine accidents: Quantity, Quality, Relation, Place, Time, Situation, State, Action, and Passion, are used to classify the knowledge, basically the propositions about the aspects of things, provided first by experience and then by art.
Plato and Aristotle propose theories of knowledge in which they both agree that the knower is measure by the known and that knowledge is an exchange within the world. However, their respective theories may be considered polar opposites of one another especially when considering that Aristotle rejects Plato’s theory and admits that ‘informed opinion’, is a form of knowledge whereas Plato rejects opinion as a form of knowledge.
Plato's best-known distinction between knowledge and opinion occurs in the Meno. The distinction rests on an analogy that compares the acquisition and retention of knowledge to the acquisition and retention of valuable material goods. But Plato saw the limitations of the analogy and took pains to warn against learning the wrong lessons from it. In the next few pages I will revisit this familiar analogy with a view to seeing how Plato both uses and distances himself from it.
The Theaetetus is composed of three main parts, each part being allotted to a different definition of what constitutes as knowledge. While the Theaetetus is focused primarily on how to define knowledge, the arguments faced by Socrates and Theaetetus greatly resemble arguments made by different later theories of knowledge and justification. I will argue in this essay that due to the failure faced by Socrates and Theaetetus in their attempt at defining knowledge, the conclusion that would be best fit for their analysis would be that of skepticism. In doing this I will review the three main theses, the arguments within their exploration that resemble more modern theories of knowledge and justification, and how the reason for the failure of the theories presented in the Theaetetus are strikingly similar to those that cause later theories of epistemology to fail.
In Plato's The Republic he discuses the idea that there is first knowledge at the first degree. In the second degree there is opinion which is neither proven to be true or false. In the last degree is falsehood. He argues that opinion is not pure knowledge and therefore can not be pure truth. Plato goes on to say, "But surely when a man is deceived in his own mind we can fairly call his ignorance of the truth "true falsehood". For a false statement is merely some kind of representation of a state of mind, an expression consequent on it, and not the original unadulterated falsehood." This is also true for pure knowledge. The truth we believe in our own mind is true to us; it's called our opinion. This shows that in order to form pure knowledge we have to voice the truth that is in our mi...
What began as Socrates’ process of inquiry, the impression that one cannot obtain knowledge about something without having a definition for it first, led to Meno’s Paradox, a seemingly intelligent argument that mindlessly concludes that knowledge of something can never actually and fully be obtained. Seeing that the paradox had this visibly defective conclusion, Plato disproves Meno’s third premise, and by its fault, premise four is restated as, you can, actually, discover something, which corresponds with Plato’s view of how a person obtains knowledge.
The paradox arises due to a number of assumptions concerning knowledge, inquiry and definition made by both Socrates and Meno. The assumptions of Socrates are:
“And how will you inquire, (Plato), into that of which you are totally ignorant? What sort of thing, among those things which you know not, will you put forth as the object of your seeking? And even if you should chance upon it, how will you ever know that it is the thing which you not know?” &...
Plato’s expression about his analogy of levels of knowledge, and the nature of certainty that he called the divided line. Plato then spread this mode of awareness into four different categories. These four different categories were then separated in two. Then he expresses the objects, which characterize the different modes of knowledge. In addition, the two groups of four were separated again. Nevertheless, these objects of awareness were dividing sandwiched between knowledge and opinion. In everything, Plato confirms that in order to move on to the next level a person must truly be aware of each mode of awareness. I believe this is the center for Plato’s divided line analogy.
In The Allegory of the Cave by Plato, a controversial issue has been whether “pouring in of knowledge” is not education or whether it is education. On one hand, some argue that education is the process of receiving or giving logical instruction. From this perception, education is all about learning and teaching from one generation to another. On the other hand, however, others argue that education is not all about “pouring in of knowledge.” In the words of Plato, “education isn’t what some people declare it to be, naming, putting knowledge into souls that lack it, like putting sight into blind eyes (5). The issue is what is the true meaning of education. Though some may say that education is the process of receiving or giving knowledge, I will
One of the main points of Plato’s philosophy was that he believed that people should not so easily trust their senses. In “The Allegory of the Cave”, Plato argues that what we perceive of the world through our sense does not give us the entire picture of what is really there. He states that what we can see is only shadows of what is true, but since we are born believing what we see, we don’t know that there is anything missing at all. Plato believed that in the “knowable realm”, the form of the good, the ultimate truth, is the last thing that we can see, which requires more effort that simply perceiving it. This ultimate truth can only be found through being able to not only perceive, but to be dragged out of the cave, or to be able to think. He likely believed this because through education, he felt that there was an ordering occurring in the mind that allowed for thoughts to become more focused, and clearer. As these thoughts became clearer, s...
In Plato’s Theaetetus, Socrates examines the first definition of knowledge that theaetetus gives that knowledge is perception. Socrates gives us many example that both supports and refutes that knowledge is perception. The basic claim from Protagoras is that truth is based on the perception of every man. This means that things are to any person as they seem to that person. Socrates explains to us Protagoras’s view with the cold wind example. He say that through Protagoras theory, the wind is cold to the person that feels cold, and the wind is warm to the person that feels warm. Both “the wind is cold” and “the wind is war” is true according to Protagoras and it is based on the perception of the person. Then we learn from Socrates that if knowledge and truth is based on perception then everything that has perception has his own set of knowledge and truth. Also sense Protagoras not considering himself to be a god, and is on the same level of us then wouldn’t the truth and knowledge he definite in his doctrine only be his own set truth and knowledge for he only knows his own perspective.
Thirdly, Plato and Aristotle hold contrasting views on the mechanism of finding the truth. Plato relied on the ability to reason in his attempt to explain the world. He produced his ideal world based on reason since such a world lies beyond the realm of the five senses. Plato ignored his senses because he believed his senses only revealed the imperfect forms of the ordinary world.
We have two great philosophers, Plato and Aristotle. These are great men, whose ideas have not been forgotten over years. Although their thoughts of politics were similar, we find some discrepancies in their teachings. The ideas stem from Socrates to Plato to Aristotle. Plato based moral knowledge on abstract reason, while Aristotle grounded it on experience and tried to apply it more to concrete living. Both ways of life are well respected by many people today.
Aristotle and Plato were both great thinkers but their views on realty were different. Plato viewed realty as taking place in the mind but Aristotle viewed realty is tangible. Even though Aristotle termed reality as concrete, he stated that reality does not make sense or exist until the mind process it. Therefore truth is dependent upon a person’s mind and external factors.
...ver changing and so is the world we live in. Plato: What it comes down to is that true knowledge is that of which is truly real. This is because objects that are of the true knowledge are just forms and that is because objects of a person's sense perception are only real to a certain extent and that certain extent is only because they participate in the Forms. Plato: Well class that is all we have for today. Thank you for listening to our theories, and we hope that it gave you something to think about. Class dismissed! The side I believe with most would be based on Plato's Theory of Knowledge. The reason I chose his theory is because I do truly feel knowledge is a true belief of one's own perception. The way I view things is different than how someone else views them. For example; an very old wilted tree would look beautiful to me but someone else may see it as ugly
Greek philosophers Aristotle and Plato were two of the most influential and knowledgeable ancients in our history. Their contributions and dedication to science, language and politics are immensely valued centuries later. But while the two are highly praised for their works, they viewed several subjects entirely differently, particularly education practices, and human ethics and virtue.