60

CHAPTER II

PLATO (427 B.C. – 347 B.C)

1. Socrates the master of Plato and the Martyr of Philosophy :

Before talking about Plato, necessarily we should mention about

Socrates who is known as the martyr of Philosophy in the history and

who has been the master of Plato. So understanding of Plato without

Socrates is impossible.

Socrates (469 B.C.−399 B.C.) : As already said the martyr of

Philosophy Socrates did not write a single word ; so about Socrates we

must draw information from a limited number of secondary sources, like

the works of Plato (427B.C.−347 B.C), Aristotle (384 B.C.–322 B.C.),

Aristophanes (448 B.C.–380 B.C.) a Greek comic dramatist and

Xenophon (427 B.C–355 B.C.) who is known for his writings on the

history of his own time, the sayings of Socrates, and the life of Greeks.

Socrates’ father was Sophroniscus, a sculptor and his mother was

Phaenarete, a midwife. He was married to Xanthippe who bore him

three sons (Lamprocles, Sophroniscus and Menexenus); all of them were

quite young at the time of Socrates’ death. Xanthippe is traditionally

considered a shrew. Socrates was famous for bravery both physical and

61

intellectual. He did not have any job; he devoted himself only to

discussing Philosophy and he thought this was the most important art or

occupation.

2. Socratic method of Philosophy :

Socrates in his method arranged a series of questions for the

purpose of helping a person to find out his veiled beliefs and

development of his knowledge. His method is a negative method of

hypothesis–elimination in which better hypotheses occur eliminating

those which cause contradictions. Socrates designed it to impel a person

to analyse his own beliefs and check over the validity of such beliefs.

3. Socrates’ beliefs :

Socrates often presented that he is aware of his ignorance. He

believed that wrongdoing was result of the lack of knowledge, that is,

who did wrong action knew no better to do. He always professed that he

loved wisdom means philosophy. He never claimed to be wise, but he

wanted to say that a lover of wisdom always must follow the wisdom.

So according to his idea, Sophists were not capable of Philosophy

because they did not follow the wisdom. Socrates claims that he is not a

teacher but he plays the role of a midwife, explaining that he himself has

62

not any theory but he knows the way how to give birth to the theories of

others and to decide whether they are reliable or not.

According to Socrates opinion, "Virtue is Knowledge", knowledge

of the Good, true Good, unchanging Good in itself. He believed that it

was necessary for a philosopher should spend his life in search of the

Good.

4. The political thought of Socrates :

Socrates believed that the philosopher is a lover of wisdom, and is

not actually wise, and it is said that, this is the philosopher who is

appropriate to govern the people. Plato developed this idea in his

Republic under the title of King – Philosopher. It is said that Socrates

was in opposition to the democracy of Athens and any form of

government unless it did agree with his own ideal of republic

government which governed by philosophers, and Athenian government

was in opposition to that. These beliefs which are attributed to Socrates

are controversial because first of all we know that Socrates always

refused to enter into politics or to take part in government, since he

frequently affirmed that he could not investigate the people’s affair and

tell them how to live when he did not yet know himself. In his point of

view a philosopher was only lover of wisdom and not truly wise, so

63

such opinion of Socrates can support the idea that he did not believe that

a philosopher must rule as a governor. Secondly, Socrates accepted his

death sentence in spite of the fact that he had other options which were

offered by his friends and the acceptance of death sentence by Socrates

may also support the view that he did not refuse democracy because the

death sentence was issued by Athenian government which was based on

democracy. It is also said that probably it was Plato’s disgust on death

sentence given to his master that, caused him to have anti-democracy

tendencies.

5. Background of Humanism in Ancient Greece and Pre-Socratic

thought :

In Ancient Middle East, in all the societies, mythopoeism was the

rule. In mythopoeic view there is no disconnection between myth and

reality. In Sumer and Egypt, between politics and religion there was no

division. Their king was also their chief priest. When Sumerians faced a

lack of rain or any other disasters which killed their king because they

believed that after the king was killed he could take a message to the

gods to help them. Pharoah in Egypt was himself a living god. Priests

were tax collectors. In Ancient Middle East during the war period, if any

side of it lost the battle, they thought that the god of opposite side was

stronger. In the view of common people an idol was not only a

64

representation of a god, it itself became a god. Symbolism and reality

were twisted together. In these societies the gods were in charge of

everything like rain or drought, victory or defeat in battle, health or

disease. Looking for condolence or seeking help from fellow humans

was considered as nonsense. People might be used as agents of the gods,

finally they believed that these were the gods who controlled their life

and provided their motivation. Now at this time the Greeks were the first

who left this world−view, and they developed another viewpoint which

was dominated by humanism, and as we know hermanism is also tied up

with rationalism and secularism.

Humanism as it is explained in the introduction of this thesis, is a

belief that men are in the central concerns of human beings. In

Renaissance period also the scholars had the same humanistic belief

about man, according to their idea the proper study of man was man.

If we compare the Greek civilization with its previous

civilizations from religious point of view, we can see that the Greek

gods were superheroes or supermans on a grand scale ; these gods have

not only the same human physical characteristics but also have the

human emotional structure ; they become furious and hot-tempered, they

fall in love and sometimes fall out of love ; so they behave human−like

65

and involve with humans in combat and love affairs, and in all kinds of

human manners; and in brief, their gods are anthropomorphic; but on the

contrary, in the civilizations previous to Greece we observe the gods are

animal-headed and giants; they are not human−like and it shows that

they had not humanistic beliefs; unlike Greeks who had strong

humanistic imagination and idea about the gods. We can see the

humanistic imagination in Greek sculpture in which human body has the

prominent rule. In Greek plays from one side we see the human

dilemmas are propounded and from another side to some extent little

power of gods is also brought up. Finally it should be mentioned that in

the plays, poetry of the Greeks, the main interest was that how human

individuals responded to the challenging circumstances. Now here the

main stress was on humans and their actions rather than on the gods. So

it shows that the humanistic thought was current in Ancient Greece.

As we know, humanism in modern sense is grafted to Rationalism

and Secularism ; so it seems necessary to pay some attention to these

conceptions.

Rationalism means that humans have the capacity of

understanding everything. Rationalism rejects everything beyond human

understanding. It rejects the phrase like, "That is only for the gods to

66

know". It is a belief that the power to understand the world lies within us

not beyond us. It means that if humans want to know the secrets of the

nature it is better to use their mind and mental power.

The second conception to which humanism is grafted, would be

secularism.

Secularism believes that we as human beings should pay our most

attention to this world and this life. This life means worldly life, and it

should be in the center of our concern. Ofcourse, Greeks were

concerned with the gods, but as it was mentioned before, first of all their

gods were anthropomorphic and secondly the Greeks did not concern

much about afterlife as the Egyptian did, but their most attention was

paid to the living people and their happiness in this world ; so easily we

see that there is very close connection between humanism and

secularism so that we can not separate them from each other.

The humanism, rationalism and secularism of Greece caused

explicitly the Greek philosophers to adopt an opinion about the nature of

the physical world and the place of human in it. Before philosophy

culminated in Socrates and Plato and after in Aristotle, there were many

schools of thought and many philosophers who had founded a long

institution of philosophy.

67

Thales of Miletus (640 BCE) was one of these philosophers who

centered his thought on the physical nature of the world. He claimed that

the primary element of the earth is water and that the whole world must

have taken the root from it by a natural process. He put the problem of

evil under question and contemplated about organic evolution which

Anaximander the assistant of Thales propounded it. In the opinion of

Thales the fishes are the origins of humans. In 580 BCE Xenophanes

critisized the anthropomorphism by saying that if cattle had hands and

drew pictures of Gods, Gods would look like cows, and the conclusion

was that : Gods are made by human beings.

Pythagoras (C.570 – C. 497 BC) was involved in the world and its

evolution ; but he paid less attention to the primary substance from

which the world is made and finally he believed that the organizing

principles for reality can be explained by mathematics. Pythagoras was a

mathematical genius ; he established a society ; his society attempted to

interpret the world according to quantity which we observe somehow in

a kind of humanism today ; but the quantitative estimate of the world

was still relevant to a mystical religion ; we may call it mathematical –

metaphysical philosophy.

68

Heraclitus (C. 540−C. 480 B.C.) took the unchainging reality

under question and propounded his famous world that "one cannot step

into the same river twice", since the water is constantly changing, for

Heraclitus the only constant was "change".

We now consider the development of thought in Parmenides

(515 BCE) who was a rationalist–philosopher. He declared that the real

is rational and the rational is real; Reality is the same thing as thought.

He stated that it is the reason which should control an understanding of

the world and no other measurement should be taken into account. Then

the atomistic school of Democritus (460-370 BCE) and Leucippus

emerged; their school of thought is famous by the name of "Atomism".

They believed that the reality is constituted of very small particles by the

name of atoms and these atoms form the whole world. Democritus

considered two other important philosophical problems : that is, the

problem of knowledge and the problem of human conduct. He was

convinced that observation and reasoning were the origin of knowledge

about the world.

After the above mentioned thinkers Sophists, Socrates and Plato

emerged on the scene of philosophy; all of them were in search of a

correct way of living.

69

Sophists brought a kind of modern humanism to the Greek

society; they believed human life as shapable that can be shaped and

controlled by human beings themselves. They were travelling teachers

and they taught rhetoric to the sons of rich men; they gave training to

the youth of Greece and taught them how to rule the country. Reality for

sophists was sence perception; it was their belief that the only reality

which can exist for humans is what they can grasp by their five senses.

Another characteristic of their thoughts was that they were doubtful

about religion; while a lot of their contemporary Greeks were not

sceptical about it. Sophists believed that the only significant and

noteworthy subject of studying is human and that everything else should

be considered from the outlook of human. Totally they were very

interested in human concerns and the same interest caused them to

expand the concept of "social contract" which had to play an important

role in later political theory.

Protagoras (C.490 – C.420BC) was the first remarkable Sophist

humanist of whom there is a dependable account in Plato’s dialogue. As

Plato says he was a Greek teacher and philosopher. Protagoras has a

famous saying that : “Man is the measure of all things , of things that

are, that they are, and of things that are not, they are not”.1 This is a

statement that modern humanism has founded its central thought on it.

70

Ofcourse Protagoras was accused of impiety by Athenians because of

his famous saying. They announced to collect his works from all who

had copies in their possession and then burnt his books and exiled him.

6. Humanistic elements in Socrates :

Socrates (469-399 BC) disfavoured the Sophists since he thought

them to be wrong morally, because for Socrates they gave training in

rhetorical skills only to overcome the opposite side without considering

that the opposite side might be true. Socrates accused the Sophists that

they think only about how to achieve success in argument against their

opposition. Socrates paid his most attention to truth ; he thought that

truths exist and they are not relative as Sophists said. He believed that

truth is unchanging and absolute for all time. According to Sophists’

opinion, truth was relative and if it is so then something would be true in

one situation and false in another; therefore there is no reasonable proof

for something to be true or false, and it is the matter of faith. Socrates

also said that truth exists, it was his belief and belief is the matter of

faith and we know that the matter of faith cannot be proven. Socrates

had another belief, it was that, people are capable of discovering the

truth by their own attempt, and those who are in search of truth should

not depend on revelation from some supernatural sources. For Socrates

every individual has the ability by his powers of reason and observation

71

to grasp the truth without getting any help from the outside of his

reason. In opinion of Socrates searching the truth was as a duty of

people. We may understand better this belief of Socrates if we consider

his very famous saying, "An unexamined life is not worth living". It

means that the people as human beings should examine the life. Now we

face a question here that, how is it possible to examine the life? It can be

mentioned that he believed that human beings can do it by grasping the

truths of life, and grasping the truths is possible only through

knowledge; and through knowledge they can get truths of life, and it is

the great happiness of man in his life. From above mentioned we can

understand that, knowledge itself is worth having for its own sake,

because knowledge is not separable from truth, knowledge leads to the

truth, reaching the truth is possible only by the channel of knowledge.

His another point of view is that all knowledge is worthwhile and

pleasant. If Socrates said : "he knows that he is ignorant" it was because

he wanted to show to the people that if human being knows that he

himself is ignorant then he will have a motivation to follow the

knowledge ; because knowledge is pleasant and profitable so everybody

desire to seek it ; but if a human individual does not know his ignorance

then will never seek the knowledge ; therefore when Socrates was asked

the question that why he is the wisest man among the others, he replyed

72

that because he knew his ignorance ; so always he loved wisdom, he did

not want to be called wise but lover of wisdom. From the above

mentioned we come to know that the conception of knowledge, truth,

virtue and happiness are all interrelated.

7. Abstract of Socrates’ viewpoints :

Now we can make an abstract of Socrates’ point of view in four

short statements :

1. Truth exists

2. The human’s is intelligence which is possessed by all of them is

the means for discovering the truth.

3. Knowledge is worth having for its own sake.

4. Knowledge is Virtue; Virtue is Knowledge.

8. Charges against Socrates :

If we go deep into accusations from the government of Athens,

clearly it can be understood that Socrates had humanistic elements in his

thought. Charges against him were :

1. He taught the youth to question or examine everything even their

basic religious beliefs, which were most cherished views to

Athenians.

2. Corrupting the youth of Athens.

73

3. His manner irritated many of Athenians by "question and answer

technique". He asked questions for which he often did not have

answers, such as "Why do you believe in the gods?" Or what is

the meaning of life? Such searching questions could make people

very uncomfortable and those who did not want to think about

them wanted Socrates to stop.

At the end as an abstract it can be said that Socrates was not really

a humanist in the modern meaning but we may see humanistic elements

in his philosophy. In spite of that he was religious but he did not believe

that truth comes to us through supernatural or other religious resources,

and it is one of the main elements which we can see in humanistic

thought.

According to Socrates, human values can be understood properly

by a study of them in practice. There are strong humanistic elements in

Socrates who was the intellectual and moral hero of the Dialogues.

The strongest humanistic element in Socrates’ saying is the

aphorism that : "Know yourself" which is the central view point in

humanism, and another saying of Socrates is : "The good individual in

the good society" can be, taken as a humanistic point of view in his

74

thought since it proves that, for Socrates the human society was as much

valuable as the human individual. And we can see the same way of

thinking in the philosophy of humanism today.

9. Plato’s life :

Plato (427 – 347 BC) : He was the son of Ariston and Perictione.

His parents belonged to a very famous wealthy family. Plato in his

younghood lost his father and Perictione remarried and Plato was grown

up in his step father’s house. When he was young he became a friend

and disciple of Socrates. The Ploponnesian War occured between Athen

and Sparta (431 BC – 404 BC). Plato was in military service from 409

BC to 404 BC., but at this time he paid much more attention to a

political issues than military ones. At the end of war Plato joined the

oligarchy of "Thirty Tyrants" in Athens. Charmides the mother’s brother

of Plato was one of its leaders. Plato left it very soon. In 403 BC there

was a restoration of democracy in Athens, Plato had a great desire to

join politics again but for two reasons he gave it up, first because of

immoderation of Athenian political life. Second, the capital punishment

of Socrates impressed him a lot and changed his idea of having to do

with politics in Athens. After the death of Socrates, Plato established his

Academy and managed it until his death. What was the reason of Plato

to establish the Academy is to say that he had already observed the

75

inadequacy of the Athenian government and he was hopeful to instruct

the young people in his Academy and enable them to become statesmen

for leading the cities of Greece.

About his philosophical view it can be said that it is not so easy to

understand. He wrote about thirty dialogues. Plato considered a great

range of philosophical topics like metaphysics, ethics, political

philosophy, music, poetry, ... . The theory of Forms is one of the most

important parts of his philosophy.

10. A brief introduction to Plato’s theory of Forms and the

"Allegory of the Cave" :

Plato continued the way of his dear master Socrates by teaching

and ofcourse he accepted the view points of Socrates but we do not

know how much Plato added to Socrates’ philosophy. If here we pay

briefly to Plato’s philosophy it can be said that one of his main point of

views was the "Ideals" or "Forms". He believed that the real objects are

exposed to decay, but the Ideals they reflect, remain perfect and indeed

the real world is always imperfect. If we want to give an example in this

connection we can say that it is impossible to draw a circle which

absolutely be a perfect circle even if it is drawn by the best instruments

and with great care; but if we want to imagine a perfect circle it would

76

be so easy for us. Therefore Plato was interested in and concerned with

the world of perfection, rather than imperfect, changing material world,

his concentration was about Ideals or abstractions like mathematics. For

Plato the concept was important and the physical material is not to the

point.

We conclude from Plata’s theory of Ideals (Forms) that, truth and

beauty are not relative. The world of Ideals exists and the Ideals or

Forms are absolutely perfect. Truth does not depend on one’s point of

view.

Plato in his famous Allegory of the Cave, depicted the humans

condition of thought, and that, how they can improve that condition.

According to Allegory of the Cave a group of people are chained in the

bottom of a cave and their backsides are towards the mouth of the cave

in such a way that they can see only the back wall (bottom) of the cave,

their knowledge about outside comes from the shadows they see on the

wall as events occur outside the cave. Now if anyone of the prisoners in

the cave be able to escape from the cave and observe the reality that

exists outside he becomes excited and when he returns back to the cave

and explain what he has seen to his fellow prisoners and ask them to

follow him to see the outside, they refuse, because they are comfortable

77

with the life they are used to, this way of life has become a habit for

them and giving up a habit causes indisposition, so they do not want to

upset, their life by something strange even if it is something greatly

superior.

Plato illustrated the situation of human thought and daily life in

Allegory of the Cave. For Plato outside of the cave is the world of Ideals

and abstraction that we may find in mathematics and other "pure"

endeavors.

If we ask a question from ourselves that what could be the

purpose of Plato by using the Allegory of the Cave, such a terrible and

shocking Allegory? It can be mentioned that he might have intended to

encourage people to act rationally and to think about the true aims of

life.

11. Some interpretations of the "Allegory of the Cave" :

There are interpretations of the "Allegory" which are specifically

relevant to our own society and to the present time.

1. “The Allegory of the Cave may be viewed as a devastating

criticism of our everyday lives as being in bondage to

superficialities, to shadow rather than to substance. Truth is taken

78

to be whatever is known by the senses. A good life is taken to be

one in which we satisfy our desires. We are unaware that we are

living with illusion, superficial knowledge, and false and

conflicting ideals. Our lives are dominated by the shadow-play on

the walls of our cave made by newspaper headlines, by radio

broadcasts, by the endlessly moving shadows on the television

screen, by the echoing voices of opinion makers”.2

2. “It is of course a political allegory. The life in the cave is the life

of politics. Both the leaders and the public are ignorant and

corrupt, without true knowledge of themselves or of the world,

motivated by greed, power, and self-gratification. They are

chained in bondage to ignorance and passions, to mob hysteria for

or against fleeting issues, believing in current ideologies which

are the illusions, the shadows of the moment on the walls of the

cave”.3

3. “It is an allegory of the philosopher-king. The liberated one,

having made the ascent to know the truth and the good, has a

mission : to return to the cave, to bring enlightenment, to bring

the good news, even though he may be killed for his services.

Plato was thinking of Socrates; we think of Jesus”.4

79

The most famous work of Plato was The Republic. In this book

his concern was the conception of the perfect state. His concern was

politics and how to establish a government and how to educate a ruler,

philosopher - king, and how to rule.

Plato accepted Socrates’ three theories which was mentioned

previous and expanded his work with three extra theories of his own as

follows :

1. Human individuals who achieve the knowledge of right thinking

can live virtuous lives, 2. and constitute a Nation that is

completely ordered, 3. and If everyone can be organized in such

nations, the world will be entirely ordered.

Now here it is advantageous to be paid little about some other

important theories of Plato in detail.

12. Main Philosophical points of Plato :

Virtue is Knowledge (Theory of knowledge)

Generally can be said that Plato accepted the saying of Socrats

who told that : Virtue is Knowledge. Following what is really good and

useful, is wisdom and obeying what is harmful, is foolishness.

80

Plato supposed that the knowledge is achievable and granted two

characteristics to knowledge, he believed in the knowledge first of all

should be inerrant and secondly it should be about the real subject that

is, the subject of knowledge should be the real, and the true knowledge

should possess both these two characteristics and any state of mind

which could not possess both characteristics, it will not be able to have

true knowledge. For Plato sense perception was not true knowledge,

because it lacks both of the characteristics. He accepted Protagoras’

belief about sense relativity and perception but not general and universal

relativity, on the contrary, knowledge for Plato was absolute and

inerrant and it is achievable. Plato accepted the theory of Heraclitus who

claimed the objects of sense perception i.e. individual, sensible,

particular things are always constantly becoming and changing, so they

are not merited to be the objects of true knowledge. They come to

existence and then disappears, they are infinite in number and are not

clearly definable so they are not capable of being subjects of knowledge.

The subject of true knowledge should be constant and permanent and

also should be comprehended by clear definition which is included

universals as it was for Socrates. We can obtain essentially constant and

permanent knowledge only of those precepts which are about universals,

because it is only the universal that, is unchanging, permanent and

reliable. The goal of knowledge for Plato who accepted it from Socrates

81

was the definition i.e. to crystallize and make steady the knowledge by

clear and unambiguous definition. For example if we want to define

goodness, so we should insert the knowledge about goodness in a

definition by which, the mind expresses the essence of goodness.

Particular essential laws change but, the concept of goodness remains

just the same, therefore definition is involved with the universal and so

the true knowledge is the knowledge of the universal. The knowledge of

the highest universal is the highest type of knowledge, meantime the

knowledge of particular is the lowest type of knowledge.

According to Plato’s theory of knowledge, the concept of

universal is not an abstract form which would be empty of contents or

objective reference, but for each and every true universal concept there

is an objective reality correspond to it so the universal concepts have

objective reference, and the reality which is correspond to them has a

status higher than sense perception. Plato’s theory of knowledge is

described through (1) his Allegory of the Cave, (2) his metaphor of

Divided Line (3) his theory of the Forms.

82

13. The Analogy of the Divided Line :

“Plato offers his theory of knowledge from section 509 to the end

of the Book VI of the Republic”.5 He describes it by giving a diagram

which is known by Divided Line.

“Take a line divided into two unequal parts, one to

represent the visible order, the other the intelligible, and

divide each part again in the same proportion...”.6

Plato presents his theory of knowledge diagramatically by

Divided Line and allegorically by the Allegory of the Cave of which

mention was made before.

Plato for showing the level of knowledge, considered a vertical

line and divided it into four parts, and each part from the lowest to the

highest shows a level of knowledge. The levels of knowledge consist of:

imagining or conjecture, belief, understanding and reason. Each level

corresponds to its own objects and has its own method for knowing

them. He has made the main division between knowledge and opinion.

The objects of knowledge are in the intelligible world and the objects of

opinion are in the visible world.

83

Diagram : The Divided Line

Thought Objects

Reason (Dialectic)

Higher forms

Knowledge Understanding

(Science, Mathematics)

Forms of Science and Mathematics

Intelligible world

Belief (Perception)

Things, objects

Opinion Conjecture (Imaging)

Shadows, Images

Reflections

Visible world

Imaging (conjecture) : The first lowest part on the divided line of

knowledge belongs to the zone of imagining or conjecture and its

objects have the lowest degree of truth. “It is the level of knowledge in

which mental activity is at minimum, as in the awareness of such objects

as shadows, after-images, reflections in water or in mirrors or in smooth,

shiny surfaces”.7 Here Plato seems to refer to artists like painters and

sculptors because for him their works were only images, shadows,

copies. Why did Plato not consider the artists so valuable? “Plato is

suspicious of all forms of communication which use images, such as

painting, poetry, sculpture, drama, religious ritual. These art forms use

images to provide fantasy rather than truth, and Plato feared that the

passions of the public are easily stimulated, influenced and controlled by

their persuasive imagery”.8

84

Perception (belief) : The second level on the divided line of

knowledge is belief, that is sense perception of real objects. At this

level, sense perception (belief) can not still realize the abstract concept

of the object which is perceived, it “does not grasp the botanist’s

concept of the apple, which identifies the unchanging characteristics of

each species of apple”.9

Here Mr. T.Z. Lavine author of the book on which this thesis is

based has taken apple as an example of actual object which can be

perceived by sense perception as an object of belief. “Belief which has

its source in the perception by the senses of actual objects, is thus

insecure. It is not based upon abstract truths or principles which are

unchanging ...”.10

Here Plato wants to direct us to know that by sense perception in

the visible world we can not attain true knowledge because of two

reasons:

1. “What can be known by the senses, he tells us, is only the world

of flux, the world of Heraclitus, the world of particular things that

are in the process of change. ... We only know how things seem to

be, on the basis of our perception of them not how they are. In

85

fact, says Plato we do not have knowledge at this level, but only

opinion. It is, however true opinion, ...”.11

For Plato the level of imagining in comparison with the level of

perception is as false opinion.

2. “Plato is also trying to give us a second reason that sense –

perception can never give us true knowledge. ... Plato is thus

maintaining that sense perception can not give us certainty in

knowledge or unchanging universal truths about reality”.12

Now we can ask that what is true knowledge for Plato? And how

is it possible to grasp true knowledge? In third and forth levels of

Divided Line we can come close to the answer of above mentioned

questions.

On Plato’s opinion, the second level that is the level of belief is

“... the level on which the commonsense mind, the mind of the man-in-

the-street operates. This is the type of mind that never rises above the

level of thinking or talking about concrete things ------- this city, that

politician, this new scandal, the latest gossip. The general, universal

characteristics of cities and their common problems, the universal

characteristics of politics, are never considered by this type of mind”.13

86

Intellect (Rational Understanding) : Leaving behind the world

of the cave, the world of everyday beliefs and of artistic fantasy and the

concrete objects of the visible world, we enter the third level of Divided

Line of knowledge. What sort of objects are we moving to in the

illumination of the sun? And what are the objects that we can know by

our intellect when we go across the line into the intelligible world? Here

Plato gives the answer that “... the objects which we know by intellect or

rational understanding on the third level of knowledge are the true

concepts to which we have already made reference in contrast to the

objects of belief”.14

We came to understand that the objects of sense perception are

concrete, particular things, changeable, in process, in Heraclitian flux

whereas the objects of intellect are abstract, general or universal

concepts, unchanging in Parmenedian eternal immutability.

14. Theory of Forms (Ideas) :

Plato named the objects of intellect as Forms or Ideas. Here there

are some questions that we can propound. How do they ------ Forms or

Ideas ----- give true knowledge? What are their numbers? How is their

relation to the objects of sense perception? How many Forms are there?

And what is the proof for being them eternally true? Whether can we

know them at all or not? And if it is so, then what is the way to know

87

them? We know the Forms belong to the intelligible world of which the

Forms or Ideas are the objects.

“For Plato, concepts such as the concept of a circle, a triangle,

beauty, justice, as well as the concepts that make up our everyday

vocabulary, such as house, yellow, man, have two crucial functions :

The first of these functions is that they make it possible for us to know

the actual world of things as well as the objects of mathematics, the

sciences, and philosophy. Their second function is that they enable us to

evaluate and criticize all these objects”.15

Now how is it possible the abstract concepts of invisible world,

make us able to obtain knowledge of all objects i.e. both of the visible

and intelligible world?

Plato answers to us that “... to think or to communicate at all

requires the use of concepts. Concepts are the means by which the

universe is made intelligible. The simplest statement ------- "there is a

man" ------- uses the concept man ; "there is an apple" uses the concept

apple. Each concept, such as man or apple, refers to the qualities which

a group of particular things ------- every Tom, Dick and Harry or every

McIntosh and Baldwin -------- share”.16

88

According to Plato’s point of view without the above mentioned

general or universal concepts communication would be impossible.

“(Here we can see that Plato’s complex theory of Forms is derived from

Socrates’s simple theory of universally true definitions.)”17

What is the definition of a Form or Idea for Plato? “Forms are the

eternal and immutable, absolutely true definitions of concepts : The

form triangle is the set of all those qualities which define the concept

triangle. These are also the common qualities shared by the entire class

of particular triangles, that is, by all the particular triangles that ever

have been or will be constructed (for example, the quality that the sum

of the internal angles of a triangle equals 180 degrees)”.18

For Plato Forms are as essences i.e. Forms or Ideas are the

essence or essential qualities of particular things. So they are not just

pure Ideas, subjective and merely mental entities kept within the limits

of human minds. They are not particular things of which we think,

something within consciousness. “The forms are real, independently

existing entities ; they are eternal, immutable, intelligible objects in the

intelligible world. They are the essential substance of any object, of

whatever is real enough to be known on any level. Actual particular

things of the visible world are knowable only insofar as we can name or

89

identify them by a form, as a man or an apple, that is, as members of a

class of things which share the same form, the same set of defining

qualities. Particular things, such as men or apples, are real only to the

extent that they measure up to, "copy", "partake of," or embody the

eternal reality and truth of the form”.19

The metaphor of shadow and substance is repeated several times

in Plato’s philosophy. As the mention was made, shadow means

concrete, particular, changing objects ; and the Forms means substance.

Concrete objects of the visible world are for Plato as imperfect copies of

the forms of which they take part in.

Now we turn to the question which was propounded before, that

how do the true knowledge issue from the Forms? In brief answer can

be said that “As we have already discovered, true knowledge must meet

two requirements : (1) it must be immutable, unchanging, and

unchangeable; and (2) it must be about what is real”.20

Second function of the Forms is their evaluative and critical

function. As we came to know the forms set up the objective, universal

and immutable qualities which define the concepts. Now as the second

function of the Forms we can mention that “... they establish standards

90

or ideals by which to evaluate the world of things”.21 So Plato used the

evaluative or normative function of the forms of goodness and justice.

As the mention was made, Plato gave the examples of triangles and

circles and other mathematical objects π, πr2, area of a circle as the

universal concepts. Plato believed that these concepts were not relative

to the cities or kind of personalities.

Still for Plato there are three limitations for mathematical and

scientific knowledge.

(1) they rest upon unexamined first principles; (2) they are tied to

instances, particulars, examples from the visible world ; and (3)

they are piecemeal, fragmentary, since they fail to show the

coordination of the forms which are their objects”.22

In the fourth level of knowledge human mind operates the method

of dialectic. What is dialectic? It is the science of studying the Forms.

“ "We place dialectic", Plato says, "on top of our other studies

like a coping – stone; ... no other study could rightly be put above this."

(Republic, 534C.)”.23 Here the philosopher proceeds to knowledge of the

Forms through the potency of his reason and by employing of dialectical

91

method, “... the method of analyzing the essences or forms of all things

in the universe, and seeing their relationship to one another”.24

In Symposium, one of Plato’s dialogues, he presented that, “... the

philosopher moves toward the eternal forms out of the power of Eros,

love, desire, which leads him from the love of beautiful body to the love

of all beautiful things, and then to the love of the beauty of the mind as

greater than the beauty of the body. "Drawing towards and

contemplating the vast sex of beauty, ... at last the vision is revealed to

him of a single science, which is the science of beauty everywhere".”25

Plato in the Republic shows that the philosopher, applies the

dialectic method to continue the unfinished task of the third level, and

“(1) establishes true first principles for mathematics and the

sciences, (2) without employing diagrams or particular things from the

visible world; (3) dialectic coordinates the forms and unifies

fragmentary, isolated, unrelated sciences and mathematics into a single

totality”.26

If we want to explain little more about Plato’s dialectical method

and make it clear to some extent, we can say : “Dialectic identifies the

entire range and variety of forms ------- from forms of artifacts such as

92

beds and chairs; lowly things such as apples and dogs ; relations such as

equality and similarity; values such as beauty and goodness and justice.

By the power of dialectic the philosopher not only identifies all these

forms and establishes their truth, but also moves toward organizing the

forms into a single structured order of truth and value. The forms tend to

constitute a hierarchical structure, a pyramid, from the many least

universal to the few most universal, from the most concrete to the most

abstract, from the forms of inanimate physical things to the Idea of the

Good”.27

If we ask a question to Plato that how is the possibility of this

knowledge? And how does the philosopher obtain this knowledge by the

method of dialectic? He will give answer that “The philosopher’s ascent

is made possible by the love of truth which enables him finally to reach

the highest reality, the supreme form, the Idea of the Good is the end or

fulfillment or purpose for which all things exist, and thus it alone gives

intelligibility, truth, and goodness to all the other forms, which are

dependent upon it, and it alone provides their coordination and unity.

Seen in the light of the Idea of the Good, the plurality of the many forms

becomes the unity of total reality”.28

93

Plato considers the Idea of the Good in comparison with the sun.

“As the light of the sun makes the concrete things of the world visible

and is the source of their life, growth and value so the Idea of the Good

gives truth which makes the forms intelligible and is the source of their

being and goodness. Plato says of the Idea of the Good that it is "The

universal author of all things beautiful and right, parent of light and of

the lord of light in this world, and the source of truth and reason in the

other." And again the says, "The Good is not essence but far exceeds

essence in dignity and power".”29

Therefore for Plato the Idea of the Good is the headspring of the

intelligibility, truth and value of every other ideas or forms ; the Idea of

the Good is the headspring of the world’s moral end. Author of the

book: From Socrates to Sartre, The Pholosophic Quest, Mr. T.Z. Lavine

believes that there is a connection between Plato’s Idea of Good and

Christian God. “With the ascent to the Idea of the Good, to an absolute

one of truth and goodness, Plato prepared the way for the Christian God.

Like the God of Christianity, the Idea of the Good is the supreme value,

it is the source of all other value. The Idea of the Good is Plato’s

conception of the absolute, the perfect principle of all reality, truth, and

value. For two thousand years, when Christians thought of God they

94

envisioned the divided line and the ascent out of the cave through the

power of reason and the power of love to Plato’s Idea of the Good.”30

15. The Tripartite Soul :

Plato believes that man has not a simple essence or form, but

there are several elements in man that are in accordance with his

different natural capacities or functions. The unequivocal function of

man is the power of speaking i.e. language and reason which make

difference between him and other living things and the other elements

are bodily appetites and spirited element. Out of these three elements

reason, appetite and spirit, the element of reason which acts through the

power of speaking by the language, is the most important capacity in the

essence of man. There is a natural hierarchical structure. The rational

element i.e. reason is a placed at the top by which man can obtain the

truth, in the middle of the soul structure, the spirited element is placed

and at the bottom of the structure the element of bodily appetites is

situated.

16. The concept of justice and happiness of the soul :

What did Plato mean by justice and happiness of the soul? As the

mention was made about the soul, for Plato it consists of three parts.

Pleasure cannot be considered as the highest good for humans because

95

pleasure can satisfy only the bodily appetites but it cannot gratify the

other two parts of the soul. “The human being’s highest good must be

the sense of well-being or happiness which comes from functioning in

accordance with his or her nature, from fulfilling the needs of all three

elements which make up what it is to be a person. Only the fulfilling of

all three needs, with reason governing the spirited element and the

bodily appetites, can satisfy the complex nature of a human being. And

when each element of the self function in this way, in accordance with

its appropriate role in the structured self, the life of such a person may

be said to be just and he experiences this justice of the soul, this

integration of his personality as well-being or happiness”.31

So according to Plato’s view, morality has its base in knowing

and preserving the harmony and balance between the rational and

irrational elements of the soul. “This balance or harmony in the soul is

the justice of the soul, the soul’s morality or virtue or excellence, and its

product is happiness”.32

Plato does not consider the soul only as a hierarchical order or

structure, but he considers it as an organism. We know that in an

organism all of its parts must be in harmony so that, such organism can

be considered as a healthy living organism and each part of the organism

96

in spite of having its own special function, all parts are interdependent

’too, for example in human body which contains the parts of heart,

brain, kidney, ... if any of these parts has disfunctions consequently and

definitely it will have unfavourable effects on other parts. So “For Plato

it is clear that neither a life devoted exclusively to bodily pleasures nor a

life devoted ascetically to the denial of bodily pleasure would be

functional”.33

17. The Status of Women in Plato :

Whether Plato really was an early feminist or not?

Plato believes that women should be able to have the same social

roles as well as men. Plato thinks that women and men have the same

nature in respect to acting as guardians of the state, except that, woman

is weaker and man is stronger.

Ofcourse Plato does not want to say that there are no differences

between two sexes but he says that they are equal in the nature of

human. For Plato in spite of that women are physically weaker than men

but he believes that this is not a sufficient reason to prevent women from

being trained in warfare, and again he believes that even if women are

trained the same as the men, it would be better for them to do the easier

tasks.

97

Plato, however does not see the bearing of children as a problem

in the education of women, nor is it a barrier to their role as guardian.

“The selection of the guardians, then, is from all classes by

natural intellectual capacity of intelligence to become members of the

ruling class. Plato stands out in the history of western philosophy as the

first supporter (along with Socrates) of the intellectual equality of the

sexes. Book V of the Republic has been hailed by the contemporary

women’s movement for its defense of the equality of the sexes. There is

only one difference between men and women, Plato argues, and that is

that males beget and women bear children. But this difference has no

more to do with functioning in the political life of the city than the

difference between being bald–headed or having hair. Women, like men,

have the natural capacities which will fit some for the ruler class, some

to be warriors and auxiliaries, some to be producers. Women in the

Republic will therefore share in the life of all three classes”.34

Supporting the women by Plato can give us a hint that, this idea

of Plato about women is one of the humanistic elements of his thought,

since humanists believe hardly in the equality of men and women’s

rights.

98

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy CD-ROM General Editor.

Edward Craig Consultant Editor Luciano Floridi

2. From Socrates to Sartre : The Philosophic Quest by T.Z. Lavine

Bantam Books March 1984, P. 28-29.

3. Ibid P. 29

4. Ibid P. 29

5. Ibid P. 31

6. Ibid P. 31

7. Ibid P. 32

8. Ibid P. 33

9. Ibid P. 33-34

10. Ibid P. 34

11. Ibid P. 34

12. Ibid P. 34

13. Ibid P. 35

14. Ibid P. 36

15. Ibid P. 37

16. Ibid P. 37

17. Ibid P. 37

18. Ibid P. 38

99

19. Ibid P. 38

20. Ibid P. 39

21. Ibid P. 39

22. Ibid P. 40

23. Ibid P. 40

24. Ibid P. 40

25. Ibid P. 41

26. Ibid P. 41

27. Ibid P. 41

28. Ibid P. 41

29. Ibid P. 41-42

30. Ibid P. 42

31. Ibid P. 50

32. Ibid P. 50

33. Ibid P. 51

34. Ibid P. 60