Comparison Between Plato And Plato

Plato’s, the Divided Line, separates the known from the unknown, visually and intellectually. It acts as a method for understanding different states of minds. First, the line is divided into unequal parts and then again two more times. The bottom section of the line represents the visual, while the upper, bigger portion of the line represents the intelligible. The goal for every human being is to take the images and learn to identify the objects from it. Only then can one reach the intellectual stage. The Divided Line Diagram is both objective and subjective levels of knowing and Being.

Aristotle argues that in order for a polis to emerge, a union between man and women must convene. Later a household must be introduced which unites with other households to form a village, villages come together to form city-states. This theory is Aristotle’s natural view that an individual can not be self sufficient Plato argues that, in order to achieve absolute justice, a city-state is needed.

Plato encouraged in his writings that the view that sophists were concerned with was “the manipulative aspects of how humans acquire knowledge.” (Lecture) Sophists believed that only provisional or probable knowledge was available to humans but both Plato and Isocrates did not agree with a lot of what the Sophists had to say. They both believed in wisdom and having a connection with rhetoric but vary in defining wisdom in itself. Wisdom for Socrates and Plato is having an understanding of speech, knowledge of truth and being able to question the speaker in order to seek and reveal truth. Isocrates defined wisdom as having a sense of integrity and character along with the ambition and ability to speak well with others.

ABSTRACT: This paper discusses the viability of certain aspects (the sex lottery) of Plato's Republic, book V. It is college level 'A' paper.

Excellence is a function which renders excellent the thing of which it is a function is Plato’s definition of virtue. What does this definition really mean though? Plato and Aristotle both had their own unique arguments devoted to the topic at hand, and their own ways of describing what virtue really is. Defining virtue may seem to be an easy taste, but to truly understand the arguments behind the definition can prove to be very challenging.

In ancient Greece two great written philosophers lived. First there was Plato and then Aristotle. Aristotle was a pupil of Plato. Despite being taught by Plato they had different theories and views. Their ethics were very typical and traditional of ancient Greece but Aristotle detailed virtue ethics and the path to happiness. Plato’s political theories for a utopian society varied from Aristotle’s view of ‘best state for each society’. Their metaphysical theories are complete opposites and very contradicting. Even though Plato and Aristotle came from the same era and were closely linked they had very different philosophies.

Compare and contrast Thucydides’ and Socrates’ analyses of the fate of Athenian democracy in war, of why the Athenians went to war, and of how and why they failed.

The philosophical thought is that the mind and body are two separate things; with one being able to exist without the other has caused much discussion and debate among philosophers and theologians over the years. René Descartes and Plato, two well-known philosophers, argue that people have a mind or soul, which is somehow connected with the body, but the mind or soul can exist independently from our body. Descartes introduces the mind-body argument while Plato presents the soul-body argument. Although the arguments differ in some ways, Descartes and Plato also have similar opinions on the issue. As a person of faith, there is some difficulty in explaining to a non-believer that when a person dies, the soul does not perish with the body. While siding with Descartes and his belief in a perfect God, this essay seeks to review the issues of dualism and meditation, through the eyes of Descartes and Plato.

An extension of the Sun simile where Plato attempts to explain ‘goodness’ and the nature of reality and knowledge, the ‘Divided Line’ extrapolates on the relationship between the two realities and their corresponding knowledge. The line is divided into two unequal parts – the smaller part would be the ‘Visible Realm’ while the larger part would be the ‘Intelligible realm’. The two parts are then divided into two unequal parts again of the same ratio – the smaller part of the ‘Visible realm’ is labelled ‘Shadows and Images’ while

Plato’s Gorgias is a discussion of debate among Socrates and his fellow sophists concerning the natures of topics such as art, rhetoric, justice, pleasure, good, and evil. In one section of the dialogue between Callicles and Socrates, the former argues that the good life is the equivalent of a life focused on experiencing pleasure. However, Socrates refutes Callicles’ conclusion with two arguments fueled with detailed logic, both of which inevitably arrive at the conclusion that good and pleasant are not interchangeable with one another. ​To begin with, Socrates confirms Callicles’ assumption that good and pleasant are equals (495d). He follows this by employing an ongoing metaphor in order to generate a relatable circumstance to swing the argument to his favor: a comparison of states of good and pleasure versus bad and pain to health and sickness.

Even though Deo had seen many tragedies, he tried to see the past as a way to help him become even stronger and move forward in life. Deo tried looking at the bright side of things, believing that the people who did harm to their own kind were not themselves. He wanted to continue believing in God because He had given people intelligence. Deo wanted to trust humanity, since mankind had destroyed nature; however, nature could not really be deteriorated by man, it is always fluctuating. Deo was beginning to learn how to cope with his past, just how Socrates had said that humans are able to learn once they have a recovery of their own knowledge, which is called recollection (125). Deo did not want to despise the leaders who had helped plan the

Plato argued that true knowledge was not obtained through the knowledge of the physical world around us, but from these unchanging ideas. Plato’s theory of knowledge is well explained through his discussion of the Divided Line; a line divided into two unequal parts. One section represents the visible order and the other intelligible order, relating to opinion and knowledge, respectively. The stages of cognition flow upwards: imagining, belief, thinking, and intelligence. The visible, changing world of opinion begins with the awareness of images through perception. Awareness of images can include

Plato was interested in how we can apply a single word or concept to many words or things. For example how can the word house be used for all the individual dwellings that are houses? Plato answered that various things can be called by the same name because they have something in common. He called this common factor the thing’s form or idea. Plato insisted that the forms differ greatly from the ordinary things that we see around us. Ordinary things change but their forms do not. A particular triangle may be altered in size or shape but the form of a triangle can never change. Plato concluded that forms exist neither in space or time. They can be known not only by the intellect but also by the senses. Because of their stability and perfection, the forms have greater reality than ordinary objects observed by the senses. Thus true knowledge is knowledge of the forms.

In many of Plato’s works, he discusses Socrates’ lessons and quarrels with questions of the immaterial and fascinating, specifically those of knowledge in The Republic and in the Meno. Plato begins his description of knowledge in The Republic with the definition of the divided line as a means of coming to know the Forms. Visually, Plato seeks to divide the metaphorical line “in the same ratio as the line” and then “in terms of relativity and clarity,” so the simplest steps have the largest section of the line and subsequently difficult topics have smaller sections of the line (Plato, The Republic, 509d). The steps to this enlightenment follows the path of imagination,

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.