More handpicked essays just for you.
Analysis of the allegory of the cave
Analysis of the allegory of the cave
Analysis of the allegory of the cave
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Diana Wong
27th February 2014
English 1A
Professor Hong
Knowledge & Rationality
Is it possible for human beings to rise above the sensory interpretation about the world and become an intellectual? Both Plato’s “The Allegory of the Cave” and René Descartes’ “Cogito, Ergo Sum” examine this issue, and come to the conclusion that it is possible, and from this ascent, to become certain and rational. For each author, though, this is accomplished in different ways. Plato’s allegory points out that we need to look beyond the surface of the knowledge we learn and let the idea of good be our basis in life. Descartes expresses that we need to eliminate doubt in order for us to know certainty and feel comfortable in our knowledge.
It is easy for us to believe that what we experience with our senses is true, including in our dreams, but according to Descartes, we should look beyond our senses and use reasoning to determine what is certain. Descartes’ question, “For how do we now that the thoughts that arise in us while we are dreaming are more false than others, since they are often no less vivid and explicit?” (34), is asked so that we will acknowledge that our senses can easily mislead us. This should then cause us to use reasoning to differentiate between truth and illusion, and both authors agree that reasoning should be the guide to true knowledge. Though he believes in the attainability of certain knowledge through using reasoning, Descartes argues that there are only a few things about which we can be certain. Descartes’s philosophy “Cogito, Ergo Sum,” which means I think, therefore I am proves this. He believes that because our mind acknowledges that we can think and have doubts, we can be sure of our existence; if we stopped th...
... middle of paper ...
...y reached as the individual focuses on good and reaches higher education, which is clearly a parallel to Descartes’ argument.
Plato and Descartes have similarities and differences in their views about the intellectual ascent and the ability to achieve certain knowledge and the extent of rationality. Both authors agree that in order to attain certainty, we must look beyond the surface and have a deeper understanding, but Descartes argues that, even then, only a few things can be certain. Also, Plato and Descartes both acknowledge that a higher power is the source of reasoning. However, Descartes believes that God is the perfect being and that we should depend on him for truth and reason whereas goodness is the basis of reasoning for Plato. If we follow Plato and Descartes’ philosophies, then we can bypass solely relying on our senses and be fulfilled intellectuals.
Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” explains his beliefs on education of one’s soul and the core of the way they shape themselves. The rhetorical devices that Plato represents inside of his story explains how much freedom is worth in this world. The deeper meaning inside of what Plato describes can further be found out once a reader realizes the type of rhetorical devices are being used. For example, Plato portrays prisoners being locked inside of a cave without a way out. These prisoners never got to see the outside world, yet he mentions they “see shadows” which explains they are only able to catch a glimpse of reality from the outside. Plato’s use of imagery gives us a mental picture on the tease we may feel to notice reality but not be able to experience it. In reality, we do not value freedom as much as we are supposed to. We seem to not see the world as he sees it. With the help of personification, Plato uses human like characteristics to describe non-living things to give
In Plato’s “The Allegory of the Cave,” he suggests that there are two different forms of vision, a “mind’s eye” and a “bodily eye.” The “bodily eye” is a metaphor for the senses. While inside the cave, the prisoners function only with this eye. The “mind’s eye” is a higher level of thinking, and is mobilized only when the prisoner is released into the outside world. This eye does not exist within the cave; it only exists in the real, perfect world.
Review of Descartes: An Intellectual Biography and Descartes' Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain
Throughout human existence, scholars have earnestly pursued knowledge and the attainment of truth. Historical figures such as Plato, Descartes, and Emerson sought answers to daunting questions of: ‘What is truth?’; ‘What is reality?’; ‘How is wisdom acquired?’ Many scholars believe these philosophers presented conflicting viewpoints: Plato encouraging skepticism among all previous historical, cultural, and personal perspectives; Descartes questioning definitions of reality and his very existence; Emerson encouraging self-trust and confidence in one’s ideals, opinions, and convictions. Surprisingly, reconciliation can be reached from these three differing hypotheses. Emerson’s thesis merely expounds from Descartes and Plato’s philosophies. He builds from Descartes’ search for self-identity and reconciles Plato’s skepticism with his views of self-trust and unconformity among scholars.
Rene Descartes was a 17th Century mathematician and French Philosopher whose life's work focused on providing a new prospective on the human perception of reality. The definition of this reality is seen as Descartes greatest life goal. Coined as the "Father of Modern Philosophy," (Cunningham & Reich, 2010, p. 385), Descartes laid the groundwork the philosophy and reality as we perceive it today. Descartes autobiography, Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting the Reason and Seeking Truth in the Sciences (Descartes, 2004) shares with the reader a glimpse into the mind of a brilliant, yet frail, man who provided an in depth explanation on the perception of human existence and the reality we live in today. The works, shortened to Discourse on Method for the modern day, outlined in Cunningham & Reich (2010), focuses on Descartes's proof as to the existence of God and is the crux of his argument and stance on the reality of man.
According to Descartes, “because our senses sometimes deceive us, I wanted to suppose that nothing was exactly as they led us to imagine (Descartes 18).” In order to extinguish his uncertainty and find incontrovertible truth, he chooses to “raze everything to the ground and begin again from the original foundations (Descartes 59).” This foundation, which Descartes is certain to be the absolute truth, is “I think, therefore I am (Descartes 18).” Descartes argues that truth and proof of reality lies in the human mind, rather than the senses. In other words, he claims that the existence of material objects are not based on the senses because of human imperfection. In fact, he argues that humans, similarly to Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, are incapable of sensing the true essence or existence of material objects. However, what makes an object real is human thought and the idea of that object, thus paving the way for Descartes’ proof of God’s existence. Because the senses are easily deceived and because Descartes understands that the senses can be deceived, Descartes is aware of his own imperfection. He
In his work, Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes narrates the search for certainty in order to recreate all knowledge. He begins with “radical doubt.” He asks a simple question “Is there any one thing of which we can be absolutely certain?” that provides the main question of his analysis. Proceeding forward, he states that the ground of his foundation is the self – evident knowledge of the “thinking thing,” which he himself is.
Freedom in mind, freedom in nature, and freedom in subjectivity of individual are three kinds of freedoms. However, freedom should be expressed within the limits of reason and morality. Having freedom equals having the power to think, to speak, and to act without externally imposed restrains. As a matter of fact, finding freedom in order to live free is the common idea in Plato with "The Allegory of the Cave"; Henry David Thoreau with " Where I lived and What I lived for"; and Jean Paul Sartre with " Existentialism". Generally, Plato, Thoreau, and Sartre suggested that human life should be free. They differ in what that freedom is. Plato thinks it is found in the world of intellect, Thoreau thinks freedom is found in nature, and Sartre thinks freedom is found in subjectivity of individual.
In the contemporary world , culture refers to something as vast as the distinctive way of life of an entire community. Culture is everywhere and everyone has it; it is the mass of ideas, traditions, habits, stories, beliefs, and perspectives on life passed on to us from generation to generation through literature, language, art, myth, religion, family, and various other social institutions. Plato had many different ideas when it comes to human behavior and philosophy. Some of those things can be applied to today’s society, some of them can’t. Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, which is probably his most famous theory, as well as Krishnamurti’s essay on cultural conditioning of a mind, they both focus on cultural values and living within a culture and can still be seen in today’s society.
Descartes’ first two Meditations are arguably the most widely known philosophical works. Because of this, one can make the error of assuming that Descartes’ method of doubt is self-evident and that its philosophical implications are relatively minor. However, to assume this would be a grave mistake. In this paper, I hope to spread light on exactly what Descartes’ method of doubt is, and how, though it furnishes challenges for the acceptance of the reality of the external world, it nonetheless does not lead to external world skepticism.
In the essay “The Allegory of the Cave,” Plato addresses how humans generally do not pursue knowledge. Most humans are satisfied with what they already know and do not want to expand their knowledge. Plato uses simple examples to help the reader understand his logic on why humans do not expand their knowledge.
The teaching of Descartes has influenced many minds since his writings. Descartes' belief that clear and distinct perceptions come from the intellect and not the senses was critical to his ultimate goal in Meditations on First Philosophy, for now he has successfully created a foundation of true and certain facts on which to base a sold, scientific belief structure. He has proven himself to exist in some form, to think and therefore feel, and explains how he knows objects or concepts to be real.
I contend that, based upon the arguments presented in the Second Meditation, Descartes shows that we can use our senses to help us understand the true nature of things, but the senses alone are inadequate to determine truth (since they are often deceived), and that all that may be known with certainty (truth) are those things we know by our judgment, thinking, and understanding of them in our minds. Descartes' argument does not necessarily reject any role of the senses in the process of understanding.
“We owe the notion of “the mind” as a separate entity in which “processes” occur to the same period, and especially to Descartes” (Rorty, 2008, p. 234). Plato was the first philosopher to argue that there was something beyond our body. Descartes agree with Plato on this theory and explored this idea more in-depth. Stating that these innate ideas exist, but they remain idle in our minds until a significant event awakens them. He arrived at this idea by doubting everything that he was taught was the truth, and he even doubted his own sense saying that they were deceptive, and after using philosophy of doubt he came to the realization of his existence through the logical reasoning. After he established that his senses were not real, he began to doubt his brain, he stated that our dreams are an interpretation of reality, even though they seem so real. He says that it was only thr...
...ll true knowledge is solely knowledge of the self, its existence, and relation to reality. René Descartes' approach to the theory of knowledge plays a prominent role in shaping the agenda of early modern philosophy. It continues to affect (some would say "infect") the way problems in epistemology are conceived today. Students of philosophy (in his own day, and in the history since) have found the distinctive features of his epistemology to be at once attractive and troubling; features such as the emphasis on method, the role of epistemic foundations, the conception of the doubtful as contrasting with the warranted, the skeptical arguments of the First Meditation, and the cogito ergo sum--to mention just a few that we shall consider. Depending on context, Descartes thinks that different standards of warrant are appropriate. The context for which he is most famous, and on which the present treatment will focus, is that of investigating First Philosophy. The first-ness of First Philosophy is (as Descartes conceives it) one of epistemic priority, referring to the matters one must "first" confront if one is to succeed in acquiring systematic and expansive knowledge.