Comparing Hume And Aristotle's Conception Of Empiricism

I believe this analogy relates to several of Plato’s teachings on philosophical ideas. The theories that I mention are mainly the concepts of “The Theory of forms”, “The Divided line” and “The Form of the Good”. The initial understanding of the allegory is that human kind can identify and speak on their perceptions without being aware of the truth or his realm of Forms. The Theory of forms is basically the notion that “conceptions” and not the change in conceptions we experience through senses is the most fundamental kind of reality. This model also goes along with the belief that the more objective a concept is the more real it is and apparently since the forms are more objective than material objects they are more real.

In the ‘The Allegory of the Cave’, Plato uses a philosophical situation to help us as the reader to examine our perception of life by what is around us. Plato uses such an abstract situation to show that we can mistake the information that we gain due to our position in a situation for truth.

Imagery used by Plato as part of his writing style of allegory examines the shadows of the cave as ideas offered at surface level. Plato is showing people are there to believe what is given to them because they do not know anything else to be true. The shadows are explained, as “truth would be literally nothing but the shadows of the images” (Plato 450). Shadows are a brilliant use of imagery because they resemble something dark, indescribable, and hard to recognize. This helps support Plato’s argument because the truth can only be seen at the basic level without any complex details; it is just known to be true. His philosophy is that people can only see beyond the surface if they have to capability to do so and believe, what others think is crazy.

John Locke and David Hume, both great empiricist philosophers who radically changed the way people view ideas and how they come about. Although similar in their beliefs, the two have some quite key differences in the way they view empiricism. Locke believed in causality, and used the example of the mental observation of thinking to raise your arm, and then your arm raising, whereas Hume believed that causality is not something that can be known, as a direct experience of cause, cannot be sensed. Locke believed that all knowledge is derived from our senses, which produce impressions on the mind which turn to ideas, whereas Hume's believed that all knowledge is derived from experiences,

The "Allegory of the Cave" by Plato represents an extended metaphor that is to contrast the way in which we perceive and believe in what is reality. The thesis behind his allegory is the basic opinion that all we perceive are imperfect "reflections" of the ultimate Forms, which subsequently represent truth and reality. In his story, Plato establishes a cave in which prisoners are chained down and forced to look upon the front wall of the cave. In "Allegory of the Cave" there there are two elements to the story; the fictional metaphor of the prisoners, and the philosophical opinion in that the allegory is supposed to represent, hence presenting us with the allegory itself.

The drawings that appear repeatedly as you research into the many interpretations of Plato’s words create a signified representation based on the signifiers Plato escribed in his writings – the words he used. The existence of such a variety of images, from different times, drawn in different ways, for different reasons, all depicting the same scenario but with different views on the cave Plato describes in his dialogue with Socrates, is testament the existence of the metaphysical world. All the images are different, yet all have a certain caveness, atmosphere of a cave, which makes them undoubtedly the visual depictions of Plato’s theory of

In the story The Allegory of the Cave, Plato describes the perception of reality. He explains how to interpret ideas or objects in different perspectives. The story he tells about the cave could have influenced different modern day ideas. Some ideal examples might include religion, abuse, and imprisonment. Plato’s cave theory applies to all of these ideas and can show many different perspectives.

Hume’s notion of causation is his regularity theory. Hume explains his regularity theory in two ways: (1) “we may define a cause to be an object, followed by another, and where all the objects similar to the first are followed by objects similar to the second” (2) “if the first object had not been, the second never had existed.”

In Plato’s essay, “Allegory of The Cave” Plato creates a story about three prisoners in a cave, through this he further makes his point that without knowledge our view of the truth is askew. Plato explains that the three hostages have been shackled in the dark cave their whole lives unable to see the real world. The only piece of actuality they can see are shadows of people crossing in front of the opening of the cave. These figures can drive anyone insane without having any real truth to what the images could be. Without any awareness of the real world just outside of the cave they are forced to adapt and therefore accept their own reality. Plato goes on to say that, “the truth would be literally nothing but the shadows of the images” (122). The obscurities are significant because they are the only apprehension the prisoners have, they have nothing to compare it to. The actuality of it to the captives is something other than the truth would be outside of the cave. The forms on the wall are only just shadows, but to them that is everything they have ever known. Plato through his legend portrays

     Hume analyzed the idea of causality by emphasizing the three demands that can be verified through observation. First he argued the aspect of constant conjunction. In this aspect, the cause and effect must be spatially and constantly existent. Secondly, he

David Hume wrote Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding in 1748, right in the middle of the Enlightenment and on the eve of the Industrial and Scientific Revolution. So it only makes sense that some of the ideas and comparisons used are slightly outdated, but science, if anything, helps his argument regarding causality. Hume is ultimately concerned with the origins of causality, how we are able to gain knowledge from causality, and if we can even call the knowledge derived from causality real knowledge. This is essentially the problem of induction, and is a central pillar of Hume's overall philosophy. There are some significant objections to Hume's ideas concerning causality, but they do not hold much clout and are no match for his

Plato, being a Socratic apprentice, followed and transcribed the experiences Socrates had in his teachings and search of understanding. In Plato’s first work, The Allegory of the Cave, Socrates forms the understanding between appearance vs. reality and the deceptions we are subject to by the use of forms. In the cave, the prisoners’ experiences are limited to what their senses can tell them, the shadows on the walls, and their shackles; these appearances are all that they have to form their ideas. When one of the prisoners begins to question his reality he makes his way out of the cave and into the day light. This prisoners understanding of his reality has now expanded, thus the theory of forms; when he returns to the cave to spread the news, the others do not believe him. They have been deceived by their reality and what

Plato's "Allegory of the Cave" is a story that conveys his theory of how we come to know, or how we attain true knowledge. It is also an introduction into his metaphysical and ethical system. In short, it is a symbolic explanation of his "Theory of the Forms" (or eidos).

There are two significant empiricists I’m going to focus on, Aristotle and David Hume. Specifically, the focus is on their ethics: what those ethics are, how they differ from each other, and which is superior. Superiority will be determined by the philosophy’s usefulness—whether the epitome of a philosophy’s virtue is attainable by man; and how conducive the philosophy is to human happiness. In both of these respects, Aristotle is superior to Hume.

‘The Allegory of the Cave’ is a dialogue between Socrates and Glaucon in Plato’s The Republic (Solomon, et al., 2012). ‘The Allegory of the Cave’ tells the story of people who are chained facing a wall in a cave, where they cannot turn around. There is a fire on a ledge behind them and people on the ledge. A person walks behind the chained people, along the ledge holding a figure of a horse on a stick above his head so that the fire can reflect the image of the horse as a shadow on the cave wall for the chained people to see. The chained people are to guess what the figure is. One person is freed from the chain of people and made to leave the cave, where they see the forms of what was reflected on the wall. This individual comes back to the cave to tell the people that are chained the difference and what they have not seen, however they do not believe him and for this reason wish that if they could, they would kill him (Solomon, et al., 2012). This allegory provides an example of appearance and reality. According to Plato’s theory of the Forms, the shadow on the wall of the cave is the appearance of the horse. It is there, it can be seen however it cannot exist without the actual figure of the horse, the reality. Because the shadow cannot exist without the actual figure, this analogy shows the distinction and relationship between reality and appearance according to Plato’s theory. However,