Plato's Theory of Knowledge
What appears to be so to me is true for me, and what appears to be so to you is true for you. It follows that everyone’s perceptions are equally true. This of course is the extreme form of relativism that Protagoras claims when he asserts that man is the measure of all things in regards to truth. It seems that if all perceptions (e.g. judgments and beliefs) are equally true, there can be no room for expertise. But what is Protagoras to say of our natural inclination that such things as wisdom and the wise really do exist among individuals? If Protagoras’ relativism is to be accepted, he must explain how expertise is possible. Protagoras does not deny that some men are wiser than others, but he disagrees that
…show more content…
In this picture we do not say that the new state of mind (healthy Socrates) once the drugs have been administered is truer or wiser than the original state of mind (sick Socrates), rather we say it is better. It is our common misconception of equating good states with true things, rather than equating good states as better (not truer); as Socrates puts it in behalf of Protagoras, “…The [good] things which appear to [one] are what some people, who are still at a primitive stage, call ‘true’; my position however, is that the one kind are better than the others, but in no way truer” (167b). It seems that we are able to allow expertise in light of the Measure Doctrine simply by arguing that the doctor’s wisdom does not have any command of objective truth, rather what he is doing is simply affecting change for the better or good with respect to the perceiver. This is controversial, and we will see why later when Socrates brings up the kind of role expertise plays in emergency situations and judgments about the future. But for now, we will look at another example that is meant to bolster Protagoras’ defense.
The wise politician is said to be the one who affects change by making wholesome things seem just and instead of pernicious. “Whatever in any city is regarded as just and admirable is just and admirable,
In these, he tested to see how wise so-called wise men were and each and every time he claimed that these men were not wise at all. Socrates went and tested all sorts of men from poets, politicians, and artisans. He claimed that all were inferior to him because they claimed to know much when they knew not much at all. And that, although he did not know all the tings these men knew, he was still wiser. He went so far as to tell these men what he thought, and even stated all these feelings in the court. This, no doubt, led to his general hatred more than any other act. But I wonder, had anyone ever questioned Socrates? And on what basis did he judge wisdom? Socrates claimed that a man who thought themselves the wisest were the least, but that is exactly what he was, a man who thought himself the wisest. Maybe he was the type of person to dislike any man who’s intellect challenged his own. “Is there not here conceit of knowledge, which is a disgraceful sort of ignorance? And this is the point in which, as I think, I am superior to men in general.”
Plato’s Theaetetus starts off with Euclid of Megara by speaking with his friend Terpsion about a dialogue he has between Socrates and Theaetetus. He says, that the dialogue was from when Theaetetus was young. Euclid of Megara’s conversation with Terpsion acts as the structure for the dialogue itself. The other participants of the dialogue are Socrates, Theodorus, and Theaetetus. The question that the participants are asking is “what is knowledge?” Theaetetus gives four definitions to the question “what is knowledge?” The first being that knowledge is arts and sciences, the second being knowledge is sense-perception, the third that knowledge is true judgment, and the fourth being knowledge is true judgment with an account. But Socrates was
In Apology, Socrates is confronted with questioning of why he thinks people slander him the way they do. To answer, Socrates brings up the term of “human wisdom.” This is a type of wisdom that is not godly, and Socrates expresses that he is not wise at all. Human wisdom composes the notion that having great wisdom is having the ability to not think he knows what he does not know. In order to support his claim, Socrates brings up the Oracle story. Here, Chaerephon asked the Oracle if anyone was wiser then Socrates and “Pythian replied that no one was wiser.” In Socrates understanding of how he was most wiser, he told a story about going to three different types of people: politicians, poets, and craftsmen. Out of these three, it was understood that the hierarchy is reversed and the craftsmen are truly wise in their craft but felt this made them speak in other fields, when if fact they knew nothing about. These cases bring up the human wisdom and why Socrates is exploited as very wise, because he does not try to think and speak on something he does not know. The oracle brings up the “form” of what human wisdom is and uses Socrates as an example. In the end, the person who is wisest knows that his wisdom is worthless.
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.
In Book VII of the Republic, Plato intimates that someone “returning from a mode of existence which involves greater lucidity” (63-4) would “much prefer, as Homer describes it, ‘being a slave labouring for someone else – someone without property’ […] than share [the] beliefs and [the] life” of ignorant “people who [have, by virtue of being (born) astute, managed to accrue a great deal of] status and power” for themselves despite the sizeable odds stacked against them (62).
J. Patrick Dobel, in Public Integrity, argues that political prudence provides a basic ethical resource for public officials. Prudence means to see ahead and the ability to think clearly before one acts. An individual needs to think about the short and long-term consequences of their actions. Political prudence is attached to excellent achievement in politics, which consists of outcomes that “gain legitimacy, endure over time, strengthen the political community, unleash minimum unforeseen consequences, require reasonable use of power resources and do not require great violence or coercion to enforce the outcome,” (Dobel p. 199). In addition, a prudent leader needs to be open to experience and knowledge, (Dobel p. 211).
“If the truth of all things always existed in the soul, then the soul is immortal” (The Philosophical Journey 89). This states that since the soul has all knowledge integrated, one recollects this knowledge through situations in an individual’s life and use one’s reasoning. With the dialogues of the Meno and Phaedo, Plato discusses the ideas of recollection and immortality of the soul in general. As well, the Republic, through the three different situations shown, Plato shows the ideas of the forms and what is real and what is not.
When one says that this elderly person has wisdom from various life experiences, he/she is not saying that the elderly person knows much about books and their profession. Instead, one would be speaking about the elderly person’s vast knowledge about what is important in life due to their multitude of experiences. While the elderly person may not be completely wise in the most encompassing form of wisdom, the elderly person does appear to have a more expansive understanding of what is important in life. Simply knowing what matters in life, however, does not satisfy the ultimate form of wisdom, for the wise must know why these things matter in life. That is, a truly wise person must have insight beyond the theoretical, into the practical. Beyond this, a wise person, in this view, must also know how to achieve what matters most, and, in knowing so, do what matters most. I say this because a truly wise person would be able to act upon what they know to be the most important thing in life. It is wiser for a person to act than to merely conceptualize what is most essential in life.
The discussion of true belief and knowledge in the Meno develops in the analogy of the traveling men; one who knows the correct path to Larissa and the other who has a true belief of the correct path to Larissa (Meno 97a-c). Socrates tells Meno that if both men led to the same result, then true belief is no more useful than knowledge and both beneficial (Meno 97c). This comparison changes in book five of the Republic when Socrates says an ideal state must have a philosopher-king as a ruler (Republic 473d-e).
“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.
The theory of the Ideas is the base of Plato’s philosophy: the Ideas are not only the real objects ontologically speaking, but they are the authentically objects of knowledge epistemologically speaking. From the point of view of ethics and politics, they are the foundation of the right behaviour, and anthropologically speaking they are the base of Plato’s dualism and they even allow him demonstrate the immortality of the soul.
Socrates, in skepticism, began a search for those with a reputation of wisdom. After studying men and their knowledge, he reasoned that the only true wisdom consists in knowing that you know nothing. Although one may have extensive understanding in one area, there is way too much knowledge in the world to be contained by one man. Socrates stated, “I found that the men most in repute were all but the most foolish, and that some inferior men were really wiser and better” (Plato, 23). Those who believed that they knew it all could not be more ignorant, and those who admitted ignorance achieved the highest wisdom attainable on earth. Socrates accepted the idea that he, just like all men, contained very little or no wisdom at all. He was content with knowing this, and upon meeting others that lacked this philosophy, felt he was superior to them. He was unsure of the limitations the afterlife had on wisdom, but he was aware of it’s constraints on earth. This self awareness is what gifted him with the highest sense of enlightenment.
The physical world only has one constant - change. The human senses give an idea of the present reality. However, seeing is not believing. The perception we develop through the senses (seeing, smelling, tasting, touching, and hearing) does not consist of real truth. Real truth is not what is in front of us, but of absolute concepts and unchanging truths. Plato encouraged looking past what is directly visible in order to find truths that exist independent of the physical world. The understanding of the idea of reality through the discussion of the Divided Line and the allegory of the cave directly contributes and proves his theory of Forms and lie at the heart of his philosophy, which I think is convincing because of the extent of his discussions through experimental-based and direct evidence.
With the notion of philosophy and the studying of philosophy it is well known that it is powerful and dangerous. Philosophy has many reasons for its importance such as how to understand your ideas, the origin of your ideas, how to contrast arguments. Philosophy can also help you defend arguments, read it, build your position and understand it. Philosophy is used for the betterment of the world, gender, race, civilization, town, state, country, etc. But in order to practice philosophy you need parrhesia and you need philosophy to practice parrhesia, they come hand in hand with each other. There have been many imperative philosophers that gave us the knowledge and foundation for our study of
A perpetual conflict emanating throughout all mankind questions the significance of knowledge to human nature, regarding knowledge’s definition, acquisition, branches, and value. Major role models in the foundation of philosophy - specifically, in this essay, Plato and Aristotle - obsess over the significance of knowledge and its importance to and relationship with the development of human beings and their mindsets. Although Plato’s view on knowledge describes the internal predisposed essence of all Forms and the need for a superior being to extract them from the student, Aristotle’s outlook resides as more reliable and realistic due to his beliefs in the premise of knowledge in the sensation and perception, with continuing development in memory, experience, art and science, and, ultimately, true wisdom.