Category Archives: Philosophy

Arts, Philosophy

Philosophy: Plato’s allegory of the cave

UNDERSTANDING PLATO

Intro: In the Republic, Plato presented an allegory to show how our knowledge of reality is restricted by the deceptive information provided by our senses

A world of shadows

PLATO asks us to imagine a cave in which some prisoners are held captive. They are shackled to face the back wall of the cave and are unable to turn their heads. Their field of view is restricted to the wall in front of them, across which they can see images moving.

The captives are unaware that behind them, hidden by a low wall, another group of people are parading a variety of objects in front of a fire. It is the shadows of these objects that the prisoners can see in front of them. Because all the prisoners can see are the shadows, this is the only reality of which they are aware. They know nothing of the objects casting the shadows, and would not believe it if they were told about them. They are literally being kept in the dark about the true nature of the world that they inhabit.

The point that Plato is making is that our own perception of the world is similarly restricted, and that the things we believe to be real are merely “shadows” of the things that exist in the ideal realm of the Forms.

Platonic realms

At the heart of Plato’s philosophy is the notion that the world we live in is deceptive, and that our senses cannot be trusted. For Plato, our world is merely a shadow cast by a higher realm of the Forms.

A world of Forms

Plato, like many philosophers before and since, was an accomplished mathematician, and was fascinated by geometry. He observed that there are many instances of things that are, for example, circular in the world about us, and that we recognise them as instances of a circle. We can do this, he argued, because we have an idea in our minds of what a circle is – what he called the “Idea” or “Form” of a circle – and unlike the particular instances of circular things, this Form is an ideal circle, with no imperfections. Indeed, everything we experience – from horses to acts of justice – are particular things that we recognise by comparing them with their relative Forms in our minds.

What is more, Plato claimed that since we cannot perceive these Forms, they must exist in a realm beyond our senses – one that we recognise with our psyche, or intellect. This process of recognition is largely instinctual, but Plato argued that philosophers are needed to comprehend certain Forms. In Plato’s dualistic universe, the two world’s he describes are perceived in different ways. The earthly realm is experienced by our bodily senses; the ideal realm being understood by the mind or intellect. This is what the concept of Dualism means. In practice, this is why philosophers should be used to organise society and advise on ethical matters, a key tenet that runs throughout Plato’s philosophy.

Innate Knowledge

Plato believed that our knowledge of the Forms is something we are born with, not something we acquire through experience. Rather, we use our reason to access the Forms, in whose realm we lived before we were born. For Plato, philosophers are like midwives: their role is to bring to light what we innately already know.

ONE WORLD ONLY

Plato’s most brilliant student, Aristotle, did not agree with his mentor’s theory of Forms. Instead, he proposed that we learn about the world through experience alone.

Empiricism

Aristotle could not accept the idea of a separate world of ideal Forms. Plato had argued that the Forms – the qualities of being circular, good, or just, for instance – exist in a separate realm. Aristotle believed that there is only one cosmos, which we learn about through our experience of it. Although he accepted that “universal” qualities (such as redness) exist, he did not believe that they do so in a separate dimension. Rather, he said, they exist in each particular instance in this world.

For example, the idea of a “circle” is general: we have in our minds an idea of what constitutes a perfect circle. He explains that this is not because we have innate knowledge of the perfect (Form of a) circle, but because we experience circular things, and then generalise about them, having seen what they have in common.

For Aristotle, we gather information about the world through our senses and make sense of it by using our intellect or reason. In this way we build up ideas, apply labels to them, and make distinctions. As a philosophical stance, this is known as “empiricism”, as opposed to Plato’s “rationalism”.

Essential and Accidental Properties

Aristotle argued that all things have two kinds of properties. An essential property is what makes a thing what it is. Its other properties are “accidental” properties.

. An apple’s accidental properties include its colour, shape, and weight. It is an apple whether it is green or red, round or oval, large or small

. The apple’s essential property is the substance that it is made from

. The essential property of a ball, however, is its shape; the substance it is made of is an accidental property

NEED TO KNOW

> Epistemology is the branch of philosophy concerned with knowledge and the way in which we acquire it.

> Inductive reasoning is the logical process of making a general rule from a number of particular instances.

> Empirical knowledge is knowledge that is acquired by observation or experience rather than through reasoning.

Standard
Asia, Justice, Philosophy, Politics, Society

(Philosophy) Justice

REDISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE

WHAT does justice demand? The basic idea is that people should “get what they deserve,” whether in a court of law (criminals and victims), in broader society (the rich and the poor), or on the global stage (neo-colonial powers and the countries they’ve exploited). But what exactly do people deserve? And what principles can we use to ensure that justice is served, and in a way we might all find reasonable?

Anglo-American philosophy has long been dominated by debates about distributive justice: deciding which principles should determine how goods, opportunities, resources, rights, and freedoms are shared out between the members of a society, or even between different societies.

In A Theory of Justice (1971), John Rawls imagined which principles of justice people would agree to if they were unaware of their position in society and other crucial facts about themselves. He theorised that they would prioritise equality and liberty and would only accept inequalities if they were required to create the greatest benefit to the least well-off in society (the “difference principle”). His colleague Robert Nozick responded in Anarchy, State and Utopia (1974) by suggesting that if people freely did what they wanted with their talents or other resources, this would produce inequalities that would not necessarily benefit the worst-off, but that would be justifiable given the required respect for people’s individual freedoms.

The American political theorist Iris Marion Young argued that the distributive justice paradigm fails to capture important features of public appeals to justice made by women, people of colour, indigenous peoples, and gay and lesbian civil rights movements. These groups are often excluded from political practices of collective evaluation and decision-making about institutional organisation and public policy, and so lack political representation or power. These exclusions constitute injustices, which Young insisted require philosophical analysis. She defined injustice in terms of “five faces” of oppression: exploitation, marginalisation, powerlessness, cultural imperialism, and violence. Justice, through the eradication of its opposite, injustice, can only be achieved via a “politics of recognition” – acknowledging different groups’ experiences and political needs.

Justice in the legal-judicial sense is often understood as corrective or retributive – correcting criminals for their wrongdoing via means of retribution such as fines or imprisonment. The American activist and scholar Angela Davis argues wholesale against prison as a means to justice. She believes that in an age of mass incarceration, the abolishment of prisons is a central requirement for the achievement of justice in a democratic society. There are others, too, who advocate the principle of “restorative judgement” where criminals face their victims to understand the pain and hurt caused. Research suggests that when such an approach is used recidivism and rates of reoffending are dramatically reduced.

Standard
Arts, Christianity, History, Philosophy, Science

Christianity and philosophy

RENAISSANCE

THE doctrines of the Christian Church dominated the philosophy of medieval Europe. Christianity, especially in its early period, placed less emphasis on philosophical reasoning and more on faith and authority. Philosophy was regarded with suspicion, and the ideas of the Greek philosophers were initially considered incompatible with Christian belief.

The Church had a virtual monopoly on scholarship, but some Christian thinkers introduced elements of Greek philosophy, especially that of Plato and Aristotle. After careful examination by the authorities, many of these ideas were gradually integrated into doctrine. From the end of the Roman Empire to the 15th century, a distinct Christian philosophy evolved, starting with Augustine and culminating in the comprehensive philosophy of Thomas Aquinas.

With the Renaissance, however, the authority of the Church in particular, was challenged by a resurgence of humanist views. Scientific discoveries contradicted core beliefs, and the invention of printing meant the Church could no longer control access to information.

The Scientific Revolution

Although the Renaissance was primarily an artistic and cultural movement, its emphasis on free thinking challenged the authority of religion and paved the way for an unprecedented age of scientific discovery.

Tradition undermined

The Scientific Revolution began with the publication in 1543 of Nicolaus Copernicus’s De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres), which presented evidence contradicting the notion of a ‘geocentric universe’. That same year, Andreas Vesalius published De humani corporis fabrica (On the Fabric of the Human Body), which overturned many orthodox ideas in anatomy and medicine. What followed was a profound change in the approach to enquiry into the natural world. Conventional wisdom, including the dogma of the Church, was no longer blindly accepted, but challenged. Even the work of Aristotle, who had initiated the idea of natural philosophy based on methodical observation, was subjected to scientific scrutiny.

At the forefront of this scientific revolution were philosophers such as Francis Bacon, whose Novum Organum (New Instrument) proposed a new method for the study of natural philosophy – systematically gathering evidence through observation, from which the laws of nature could be inferred. But there was also a new class of thinkers and scientists, including Nicolaus Copernicus, Johannes Kepler, and Galileo Galilei. Galileo challenged dogma more than most by proving that the Earth orbits the Sun, and fell foul of the Church for his efforts.

The discoveries made by these scientists, and the methods they used, laid the foundations for the work of Isaac Newton in the following century, and also influenced philosophers such as Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz, who helped to shape the ideas of the Age of Enlightenment.

Standard