Plato's Parmenides

According to this allegory, which is related to Plato's Theory of Forms", the "Forms" (or Ideas"), own the highest and most fundamental kind of reality, and not the material world of change known to us through sensation. Real knowledge composes of knowledge of the Forms only. It is an attempt to explain the philosopher's place in society and to attempt to impart knowledge to the "prisoners".

Plato's final argument in Phaedo for the immortality of the soul is one of the most interesting topics of all time. It goes hand to hand with the application of the theory of forms to the question of the soul's immortality, as Plato constantly reminds us, the theory of forms is the most certain of all his theories. The Phaedo is Plato’s attempt to convince us of the immortality of the soul by using several main arguments. These include the argument of forms and the law of opposites. In the final passage of the Phaedo, Plato provides his final proof, although it may be his last attempt to give his reasoning, it is not very convincing. Plato has some good points and reasoning to believe in the immortality of the soul, but his arguments often

In the book, Phaedo by Plato, he discusses the immortality and divinity of the soul, and uses the philosophical theoria to prove that such a thing exists. Plato spends a lot of time trying to prove the idea to his fellow philosophers the divinity of the soul. Yet, in the book In Defense of Philosophy by Josef Pieper, he talks about how philosophy is not about finding an exact truth, but merely seeking to get close enough to it. This shows a clear contradiction between Plato’s belief that a soul is divine and continues to live on and Pieper’s thoughts on what true philosophy is, because he creates dialogue that clearly shows influence of his religious background that takes away from the philosophical discourse. It is due to this, Pieper would not agree with Plato in his interpretation on the divinity of the human soul.

Plato is remembered as one of the worlds best known philosophers who along with his writings are widely studied. Plato was a student of the great Greek philosopher Socrates and later went on to be the teacher of Aristotle. Plato’s writings such as “The Republic”, “Apology” and “Symposium” reveal a great amount of insight on what was central to his worldview. He was a true philosopher as he was constantly searching for wisdom and believed questioning every aspect of life would lead him to the knowledge he sought. He was disgusted with the common occurrence of Greeks not thinking for themselves but simply accepting the popular opinion also known as doxa. Plato believed that we ought to search for and meditate on the ideal versions of beauty, justice, wisdom, and other concepts which he referred to as the forms. His hostility towards doxa, theory of the forms, and perspective on reality were the central ideas that shaped Plato’s worldview and led him to be the great philosopher who is still revered today.

Within this essay, I am going to argue that the simple soul is a more plausible conception than the idea of multiplicity within the soul within Plato’s work. This is due to the multiplicity of the soul resting on a circular argument of Plato’s ideal city which in turn rests back upon his idea of the tripartite soul. However, it can also be argued that neither conceptions of the soul are plausible due to them both relying on Plato’s theory of the Forms. Throughout Plato’s works of the Phaedo and the Republic, his account for the soul is conflicting as Plato’s two accounts cannot be reconciled. I will also refer to Plato’s work in the Phaedrus to aid my explanation of the multiplicity within the soul.

Plato was a philosopher who was born in Athens (470-390 BCE), and was also a student of Socrates. He felt that intelligence and one’s perception belonged to completely independent realms or realities. He believed that general concepts of knowledge were predestined, or placed in the soul before birth even occurred in living things. Plato believed that the cosmos was intelligible, and the the universe was mathematically understandable. He believes that mathematical objects could be seen as perfect forms. Forms, a doctoral of Plato, can be understood as an everyday object or idea, which does not, exists in the everyday realm, but merely is existent in the hypothetical realm or reality.

To introduce the argument, Socrates explains the theory of Forms. Forms are the intangible and visible components of anything that exists. They are the larger ideas that compose the reasons for why something exists. This being said, these are merely concepts that cannot be changed but rather they stand concrete in their meanings and ideals. An example of a Form is beauty. We can only recognize things that are beautiful because “all beautiful things are beautiful by the Beautiful” and they belong to the Form of beauty (Plato, pg. 138). Beauty only exists because it is an idea in which things fall into a category. Something can be recognized as beautiful, and it is therefore placed under the Form of beauty, and therefore, all things beautiful share the same meaning. The meaning of beauty will never be changed because it is a permanent idea that holds to be true. This issue stems into the idea that forms can change between each other, while still possessing individual meanings. Take the forms of tallness and smallness for example:

We are introduced to the Forms in Plato’s dialogue the Phaedo. The Theory of Forms says that

Plato fails to set out his theory clearly and allow the reader to realise it is a theory. Nowhere in his dialogues does he state that he is describing a theory of forms, and so people may have misunderstood his writing s and he may not have meant it to be a theory at all. He has elements of his theory in many different dialogues and is inconsistent. In Book I of the Metaphysics Aristotle claims that Plato had a "system" to the effect that "the many sensibles which have the same name exist by participating in the corresponding Forms." This quote from Aristotle's work suggests that Plato did have a theory of forms but this is not believed by all people.

It is interesting to notice that this Platonic form can be seen in various ways in both the human on a micro scale and in Jesus or God on a higher level. The human body, for instance, (as Plato noted) serves as garb for the soul. We can assume certain gestures, paint our faced, mask our mannerisms and looks; we can play around with our externals, but there is a soul that emanates from within, and this soul emerges through appearances such as looks, tears, or speech.

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, arguably one of the most famous philosophers in history is known for his dialogues and theory of Forms. The theory of Forms argues that ideas (non-physical forms) are more real than tangible objects or what our senses perceive. According to Plato, there is the visible realm and intelligible realm. Reality could be divided into three different levels; the level of appearances, the real level, and the ideal level which he explains through the analogy of the ‘Divided Line’ in The Republic.

Plato's "Allegory of The Cave" and "Theory of Forms" are two very important concepts when analyzing Heraclitus's and Parmenides's positions on the world. Though the two had conflicts of interest in their views, there is a margin where both their views can be reconciled through Plato's concepts.

“Everything which exist in this world and all things that we see around us are not as they appear to us” this is the core idea behind plato’s theory of forms.From this idea only he moves towards explaining his world of forms or ideas.

Plato’s ideas regarding the body and the soul relates to his Theory of Forms/Ideas because he explains that the body is just a mere obstacle for the soul. IT makes it sound like when your soul is living its life within the body, its just an illusion, and when your